BLM - Bishop Field Office
Each time I read a BLM grant request, for restoration and especially LE, I feel the OHV community in CA is paying more than our share. the BLM has a finite budget. By getting grant money in CA, this gives them more funds to spend in other states. If CA gets benefits from the BLM because of the grant money that other states don't get who don't have a grant program, I would feel differently.
Beyond that, this request is particularly egregious as it is having the OHV community pay for their own trail/road closures! Oh, come on guys.
G12-01-05-L0 Law Enforcement,I can't figure out why replacing signs belongs in a LE capacity, I would think lower paid personnel could handle this task.
G12-01-05-R01, Restoration Protection, Seems to be all about paying personnel to monitor closed roads to prevent incursions. Although reference is made to encouraging sustainable OHV opportunity, I don't know why the OHV community in CA should pay for this.
G12-01-05-R02, Restoration volcanic Tableland, NO, please, NO. Using OHV grant dollars to "to permanently close motorized roads.." makes no sense. Should the grant request truly be for "restoration", there would be an option for future OHV opportunity.
G12-01-05-R03, Restoration Planning, Don't we already pay for a BLM office, strike out $5500 and I question as well the cost of redundant personnel hours and equipment that should already be on the premises, purchased with taxpayer dollars.
G12-01-05-R04,Restoration Wild Willies,SAME comment as "RESTORATION of Volcanic Tableland. NO, please, NO
G12-01-05-R05 Restoration Travertine and play it again… without a plan to regaining OHV opportunity, there is no sense in our paying to close off current opportunity. [Diana Mead, CORVA N Director - 3/28/13]