By WESLIE STRATTON
Moapa Valley Progress
The Moapa Valley Town Advisory Board discussed the Bureau of Land Management draft Resource Management Plan (RMP) in its regular meeting on Wednesday Dec. 10 in Overton.
A BLM brochure made available at the meeting described the RMP as a means to provide guidance for managing the use of BLM-managed public lands and to provide a framework for future land management actions within the planning area.
“Land-use plan decisions cover a broad scale and guide subsequent site-specific implementation decisions,” the brochure states.
Partners in Conservation Administrator Elise McAllister told the board that the proposed RMP will become the BLM’s bible for the next 20 years or so and that there are several issues that directly affect the Moapa Valley area. Public comment on the document ends on Jan. 7, 2015. Informative comments are needed for the BLM to consider possible changes and alterations in the proposed alternative management plans, she said.
“Public comment is not a voting contest,” McAllister said. “Comments that simply state, ‘I don’t like it,’ will not be considered.”
McAllister encouraged comments providing reasons behind one’s opinion. This includes information proving that research has been done, she said.
“Flawed information won’t be accepted,” she said.
MVTAB members concurred that they would like to submit a letter as part of RMP public comment.
“It does affect us a bunch,” MVTAB Chair Gene Houston said.
Unfortunately, it was determined that a board letter could not be drafted and approved prior to the closing of the public comment period. The next meeting of the MVTAB will not be held until after that time.
“I am still encouraging people to make comments, even if it’s after the end period,” McAllister said.
Houston said that the BLM took four to five years in researching and creating the RMP.
“And they are giving us 60 to 90 days to read through and learn it all,” he said. He felt that more time is necessary to go through the large document.
McAllister agreed that the allotted time for public comment is not long enough and that the public needs more time to be able to adequately study the RMP and do research on the proposed changes.
Houston said that he thinks the BLM should be looking for ways to benefit the public and that he thinks they seem to be restricting them through the designations being proposed in the RMP.
“It seems backwards to me,” he said.
McAllister said that the BLM compartmentalizes public lands for individual purposes while the average user of public lands sees multiple uses.
“There are resources for all things with public lands,” she said, adding that the RMP brings up a lot of big picture issues that each bring up a lot of little issues.
MVTAB Member Ann Markle said that she doesn’t approve of any of the proposed alternatives in the new RMP.
“It’s a situation to make it so we have no use at all,” she said. “And it’s by specific design.”
Houston agreed that the four proposed RMP alternatives provide one status quo option that is far from desirable and three worse options.
“We need bigger voices,” he said.
Board members agreed to send individual letters to the BLM within the designated public comment period and then draft an official MVTAB letter to approve at the next regular meeting on Jan. 14.
