Help Protect
Ironwood Forest from wildcat shooting
and reckless off-road vehicle use
The Sierra Club and other groups are hosting
two open houses on the plan: 5/16 in Tucson
and 5/17 in Phoenix. Stop by for more information on BLM’s
plan for managing the Monument and for help in writing comments.
BACKGROUND
The
Ironwood Forest National
Monument was established by Presidential
Proclamation in June 2000. The 129,000-acre Monument, located about 25
miles northwest of Tucson, encompasses
several desert mountain ranges including the Silver Bell, Waterman, and
Sawtooth ranges, and possesses one of the richest stands of ironwood
trees in the Sonoran
Desert. The Monument
contains several archaeological districts and a significant system of
cultural and historical sites covering a 5,000-year period. The Monument
also features a wide diversity of vegetation and wildlife. The ironwood
system provides roosts for hawks and owls, burrows for desert tortoise,
forage for desert bighorns, nests for white-winged doves and other birds.
The
Resource Management Plan is supposed to provide guidelines for protecting
these resources and limit impacts in the Monument. However, the BLM’s
preferred alternative does not go far enough to provide adequate
protection for wildlife, native plants, cultural resources, or primitive
areas.
The
public has an opportunity to comment on this draft plan until May 30-
please do! Comments
may be submitted in writing to: Mark Lambert, IFNM Planner, BLM, 12661
East Broadway, Tucson
AZ 85748
or may be submitted via e-mail at AZ_IFNM_RMP@blm.gov.
THREATS TO THE MONUMENT
The
proximity of the monument to Tucson and Phoenix has also
made it attractive to off-road vehicle use. Unchecked cross-country travel
destroys fragile desert soils, inhibiting vegetation recruitment and
harming wildlife species. Recreational shooting takes its toll on the
visual resources and harms vegetation. Livestock grazing may be having
long-term ecological consequences, eroding soils, spreading invasive
species, and impairing wildlife habitats. In addition, Ironwood Forest
National Monument
has become a corridor for illegal activities, from undocumented
immigrants and drug smugglers to a growing number of so-called
"wildcat" roads used and created by law enforcement. Below are
some talking points and a sample letter to send to the BLM.
For
more information, contact Scott Jones at 602-254-9330 or scott.jones@sierraclub.org.
OPEN HOUSES
The Friends of
Ironwood Forest, in conjunction with the Sierra Club and other groups, is
sponsoring two open houses in order to create a friendly, informative
atmosphere and to assist in writing comments. Refreshments, maps, and talking
points will be provided. This is
your best opportunity to learn more about the plan, the changes BLM
should make, and to get help with your comments.
Wed, May 16th, 6
– 8 pm
Pima County Parks and Recreation
3500 West River Road, Tucson
Thu, May 17th , 6
– 8 pm
The Phoenix Zoo
(Pavilion)
455 N. Galvin Parkway, Phoenix
If you can’t
attend one of the open houses, please consider submitting your own
comments. Additional information,
including talking points and a sample letter, is included below.
In addition, the BLM is hosting another
public meeting specifically for people to provide verbal comments. This
meeting is scheduled for May 19, from 10 a.m. to noon, at Pima
Community College West Campus, 2202 W. Anklam Road, Tucson, in the Proscenium
Theater, located on the east side of the campus. Sign in for speakers will begin at 9:30
a.m. The meeting will be a question-and-answer format with a
panel of BLM specialists. Each
person will be given up to two minutes to ask a question or provide a
comment, which will be recorded by a note taker.
TALKING POINTS
Protection
of monument resources is the paramount purpose of Monument designation
and multiple uses should only be allowed where they do not conflict with
this overarching directive. The BLM should specifically commit to
monitoring the resources to ensure no harm to the monument.
Off-road
vehicles (ORVs) must stay on 71-miles of existing designated routes. Restrict
the repeated use of illegal routes by implementing a "signed
open" policy, meaning that roads are not open unless specifically
posted as such.
The
BLM should use recent road surveys to immediately close illegal spurs,
duplicate roads, and roads into unsafe areas. The BLM should also provide
periods of active enforcement to ensure compliance from road users.
Target-shooting
is not an appropriate use for the Monument. We support the BLM’s plan to
ban this practice within the Monument. There are plenty of lands outside
the Monument for this activity.
Protect
the full 36,990 of wilderness-quality lands in the Monument. The Monument
lands offer the opportunity to protect large areas of roadless, scenic
landscapes and the BLM should act to maintain these areas, as it provides
the best protection for Monument resources.
Desert
bighorn habitat should remain unfragmented and undisturbed. Wildlife
waters should be kept to a minimum within the Monument.
The BLM
must be aggressive in preventing non-native weed infestations in the
Monument, since these plants can bring fire, displace native vegetation,
and impact wildlife populations. The best way to prevent them is by
preventing disturbance from off-road travel, livestock, and development.
The BLM should also mandate that only local genotypes of native species
will be used in restoration activities.
Livestock
grazing leases should be actively considered for retirement and the BLM
should allow voluntary compensated relinquishment. Many of these
allotments aren’t consistently monitored, leaving too many unknowns about
the status of the Monument resources. Allotments that aren’t meeting
baseline standards for rangeland health should be closed.
SAMPLE LETTER
Mark Lambert
IFNM
Planning Lead
Bureau of
Land Management, Tucson Field Office
12661 East
Broadway
Tucson, AZ 85748-7208
Dear Mark,
Thank you
for providing an opportunity to comment on the draft resource management
plan for the Ironwood
Forest National
Monument. I support the National
Environmental Policy Act and appreciate the public participation that it
affords. I care about the Ironwood
Forest National
Monument and I am concerned with and
affected by the management of monument resources.
The
Presidential Proclamation that established the Ironwood Forest NM
recognized the unique values of this special place, including biologic,
geologic, and cultural resources. These irreplaceable values must not be
destroyed by extractive uses, and the BLM is charged with protecting them
above all else.
I applaud
the BLM for choosing to limit recreational target shooting in the
Monument and strongly agree that this is not an appropriate place for
target shooting. Target shooting
on the Monument is closely associated with trash dumping and has had
clear effects on the native flora. I also support the removal of Area of
Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) designations within the Monument
because I believe the entire area should be treated like an ACEC.
I am
particularly concerned that the BLM’s preferred alternative does not
provide adequate protection for the precious natural resources found on
the Monument. In many cases, Alternative B would be better for protecting
natural resources. For example, I support the provision in Alternative B
to only use native species in revegetation efforts. Non-native species
should not be intentionally introduced in the desert southwest since weed
invasions are already a problem. Additionally, I do not believe that
terming this alternative “the most restrictive” alternative provides an
unbiased description of this management style. Instead, I believe the BLM
should emphasize that it is the best alternative for wildlife and
vegetation, but still provides appropriate levels of use.
I support
Alternative B’s provision to manage 36,990 acres of land within the
Monument to preserve wilderness characteristics. This represents less
than a third of all land within the Monument, but would provide higher
quality habitat for wildlife and more opportunities for quiet recreation,
which, the BLM notes in the analysis, is the most frequent visitor use.
I support
Alternative B’s plan to remove livestock from the Monument at the conclusion
of the current leases. The Ironwood
Forest is no place
to sustain cattle operations without serious and long-term consequences.
Given the lack of monitoring data to show that livestock is not harming the land in any way
(soils, biological crusts, vegetation-type conversions, Monument resources),
the BLM should err on the side of common sense and caution and
administratively close the grazing allotments. The RMP should allow for
voluntary and/or compensated permanent relinquishment of these permits
and should set some firm science-based ecological parameters for
administrative closure.
I strongly
disagree with the preferred alternative’s provision to allow off-road
vehicle travel on 142 miles of routes through 117,530 acres. Alternative
B, which allows for 71 miles of roads through 90,360 acres is more than
enough area to manage for off-road vehicle travel. In addition to
minimizing the total miles of routes open to ORV travel, the BLM also has
the responsibility to ensure that routes and trails avoid and/or do not
cause disturbance to sensitive wildlife habitats and riparian areas. These
noisy, polluting machines disturb wildlife, degrade air quality, spread
non-native species, crush vegetation, destroy cultural resources, accelerate
erosion and are generally not compatible with the preservation of
Monument resources or values. The BLM must not cave to political pressure
to allow ORV users broad access to this national treasure. Imposing
strong limits on motorized vehicle travel will also help prevent
the further proliferation of illegal, user-created wildcat
routes that so clearly impact the monument’s resources.
Thank you
for considering my comments and please keep me informed when the final
plan comes out.
Sincerely,
