Drumwagon HOT TOPICS!

> For years we have enjoyed off-road vehicular travel in one of our nations
> most beautiful and pristine barrier island national parks.  We have also put
> forth great effort (in concert with the National Park Service) to prevent
> negative impact of vehicles in the park by assisting with signage, vehicle
> barriers, and education.
>
> We would like to find out more about your efforts and what we might do to
> assist our visitors in their efforts to prevent any ban that would curtail
> access to this haven.
>

Mr. Dunaway.  I would like to send you some information about the seriousness of the
petition and what the recreation community can do in response to it.  I will be out of the
office this Thurs. and Fri. on business, but I'll try to get some information to you next
week.

Thank you for your patience and for contacting me.

Very truly yours,

Carla Boucher, Esq.
United Four Wheel Drive Associations
P.O. Box 15696
Chesapeake, VA  23328
(757) 482-4474
ccboucher@home.com

Hi.  You're certainly not being pesky.  It's just taking us some time to get a strategy
developed and implemented for dealing with these Green Advocacy Group (GAG) petitions.
Not only has the NPS been the recipient of the petition but so has the Bureau of Land
Management and the US Forest Service (both by different GAG groups).

We are still developing a response to these petitions.  The method will be the same for
all three agencies, but the facts we give to each one will be different.  I'm still in the
process of drafting the statistics for the NPS.
I also have had others from your area requesting help, as well as some of the folks at
Hatteras, NC.  In the meantime, I've included a fact-sheet (at the end of this message)
that you may find helpful in educating the public in your area about the truth of OHV use
on NPS lands.  Your local papers are a good place to start to get the correct information
out.

While we're working on a national response though, I want to assure you that something is
being done.  Congress will be holding an information hearing this week into the source of
funding for groups such as Bluewater Network who drove the petition to ban OHV on NPS
lands.  Although Bluewater was the front group for the NPS petition, they were likely
funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts or other similar major foundations.  It's not 92
smaller environmental groups driving this policy, its just one of two foundations using
the smaller environmental groups to push a national agenda.

Please don't hesitate to contact me any time.  I'm happy to help.  I apologize for the
time it's taking to get this response together.

Thanks
Carla

*******
The website for the Bluewater Network, regarding the petition to ban OHV use on NPS lands,
is:
http://www.earthisland.org/bw/

1)  Bluewater states, "ORVs are being used in more than half of all possible park units,
or a total of 59 units (55%).

In fact, there are 378 NPS units (see www.nps.gov/legacy/index.htm and click on Parks).
59 units have OHV use on them, which equals 16% of NPS units (not 55% as Bluewater would
have you believe).

2)  Bluewater states, "38 parks (35%) acknowledge serious damage to resources..."

In fact, there are 378 NPS units.  38 units equals 10% of NPS units (not 35% as Bluewater
would have you believe).

3)  Bluewater states, "Over 30,434 miles of four-wheel drive routes are legally open to
off-road vehicles".

In fact, roads comprise less than one-half of one percent of the total NPS acres (0.46%).
30,434 miles of four-wheel drive routes (approximately 100 feet in width) are equal to, or
compromise, 368,860 acres of land.  The NPS total acreage equals 80.7 million acres.
Therefore, roads comprise less than one-half of one percent of the total NPS acres
(0.46%).

If Bluewater Network and 96 other environmental organizations are truly concerned with
preventing destructive and illegal OHV use on the less than one-half of one percent of
areas where OHV use occurs on NPS lands, they should contact the leaders in four wheel
drive recreation - United Four Wheel Drive Associations. United has not been approached by
any of these groups to work cooperatively to stop destructive OHV practices!  As a charter
member of TreadLightly!, United endorses and teaches conservation practices for motorized
recreationists.  Although the alleged problem with OHV use occurs on a very, very small
percentage of NPS units, United is extremely interested in working cooperatively with
other conservation organizations and our public land management agencies to find solutions
to site-specific problems.

It may appear that Bluewater Network and its environmental partners are concerned with
park ecology, but they are addressing use on less than one-half of one percent of all our
National Parks.  There is not one instance on the Bluewater Network website where they
educate the public on proper practices when visiting our National Parks.  No link to
TreadLightly!, no information on how to "Pack it in-Pack it out", no Keep America
Beautiful education.  This lack of educational information should lead one to question the
validity of anything published by Bluewater Network, including their claims of OHV damage.

NOTE:  Some of you may never have been four wheeling on National Park Service managed
lands.  Areas which are jeopardized by this threat are not only traditional four wheel
drive roads and routes, but the beaches that our friends and members who sportfish on NPS
seashores use.  We need everyone's help.  Please send this form letter if you would!

MEMO TO:  United Four Wheel Drive Associations
FROM:  Carla Boucher
RE:  Legislative Advocate Special Report (3-00)
DATE:  February 25, 2000

As always, this form letter is available at www.wi4wda.org/carlaboucher.html

WHAT:  The Bluewater Network, along with 67 other environmental groups, petitioned the
National Park Service to completely ban OHV use in National Parks.  Information about the
petition is available at the Bluewater Network website at:
http://www.earthisland.org/bw/ (click on "Bluewater petitions Park Service to ban off-road
vehicles" - prs.release and report).

HOW IT EFFECTS UFWDA:   The petition is full of inaccurate accusations to entice the
public into believing that OHV use is a major problem within the National Park Service.
However, statistics from the NPS show that OHV use occurs on less than one-half of one
percent
of the total NPS lands.

I have prepared a form letter to educate the NPS and the public regarding the truth
surrounding OHV use in National Parks.  Please send this letter to the Washington, D.C.
Office as indicated on the form letter, but also please send it to NPS offices in your
area.

As always, please send the letter by U.S. Post if possible rather than via e-mail.  I
believe that we make more of an impact with letters than with e-mail.

WHO TO WRITE:
Robert Stanton, Director
National Park Service
1849 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20240
e-mail:  Bob_Stanton@nps.gov

Robert Stanton, Director
National Park Service
1849 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20240

February 22, 2000

Dear Mr. Stanton,

 The National Park Service received a petition by Bluewater Network and other
environmental organizations calling for a complete ban to OHV use on National Park Service
units.  I am writing to request that the National Park Service continue to permit OHV use
within our park units.

- There are 378 NPS units (see www.nps.gov/legacy/index.htm and click on parks).  59 units
have OHV use on them, which equals 16% of NPS units.  The Bluewater petition stated, "ORVs
are being used in more than half of all possible park units, or a total of 59 units (55%)"
.  They use this statistic to try to make you and the public believe that OHV use is at a
some critical level when in fact, use occurs on only 16% of NPS units, not 55% as
Bluewater would have you believe.

- There are 378 NPS units.  38 units equals 10% of NPS units.  The Bluewater petition
stated, "38 parks (35%) acknowledge serious damage to resources..".  They use this
statistic to try to make you believe that OHV use is at a critical level, when in fact
serious damage is alleged to occur on 10% of NPS units, not 35% as Bluewater would have
you believe.

-  The Bluewater petition stated, "Over 30,434 miles of four-wheel drive routes are
legally
open to off-road vehicles".  This statement is intended to lead you to believe that OHV
use occurs at an alarming level. In fact, 30,434 miles of four-wheel drive routes
(approximately 100 feet wide) are equal to, or comprise 368,860 acres of land.  The NPS
total acreage equals 80.7 million acres.  Therefore, roads comprise less than one-half of
one percent of the total NPS acreage (0.46%).

It may appear that Bluewater Network and its environmentalists partners are concerned with
park ecology, however they are addressing use on less than one-half of one percent of all
our National Parks and are doing nothing to educate users on proper land use techniques.
I could not find one instance on Bluewater Network's website (www.earthisland.org/bw/)
where they educated the public on proper practices when visiting our National Parks.  No
link to TreadLightly!, no information on how to "pack it in, pack it out", no Keep America
Beautiful education.  This lack of educational information should lead you to question
their sincerity in protecting ecological sustainability of our National Parks.  This,
coupled with their failure to provide accurate statistical information, should lead you to
question the validity of anything Bluewater Network publishes, including their claims of
OHV damage.

Although the alleged problem with OHV use occurs on a very, very small percentage of NPS
units, I am interested in working cooperatively with the National Park Service to find
solutions to site-specific problems.

Please continue to permit OHV use on National Park Service units.  I look forward to
hearing from you in the coming weeks regarding this important issue and your response to
the inaccuracies of the Bluewater Network petition.

Sincerely,