| More on the Roadhead Flap | Friday September 11, 1992 |
Dale Van Dalsem has good reason to be dissatisfied with the Desert Bill, because timely DPS input to the bill was ignored. The argument about Dale's testimony on the Desert Bill shows that the DPS is not running its conservation activities in a smart way.
Some years ago, when the Sierra Club was helping Senator Cranston draft the bill, I asked Elden Hughes if the DPS had been consulted about roadheads and such. He agreed that we should be, and the DPS did review the bill. Dale did this review, as I recall, and he published an article in the Sage about it. Elden told me later that the drafters of the bill had no objection to keeping the suggested roads open; they are not in sensitive areas. We all thought that the problem had been handled.
For one reason or another, the changes did not get into the bill. One could be paranoid and say somebody stabbed the DPS in the back; more likely the reason was typical Sierra Club administrative inefficiency. If the DPS had followed up and pressed the matter, supplying appropriate language to the drafters, the changes Dale suggests could have been put into the bill. They can still be put into the bill. They do no harm. I think it would be appropriate if the DPS Management Committee took a position on the roadhead issue; do we want them or not? More generally, are there other roads that are being arbitrarily dosed that could be left open, and hence improve the chances for the bill's passage?
The DPS needs to change conservation focus (so does the SPS). The areas the DPS is interested in are not within Angeles Chapter domain, and so they do not tend to be discussed adequately in the Angeles Chapter Conservation Committee. The DPS needs to send representatives of the DPS Management Committee to the Southern California RCC and the Desert Committee. Now that I live in Mono County, I hear about all sorts of stuff of interest to both the DPS and SPS that never gets mentioned down south.
These roadheads can be added to the bill in the final negotiations; if the DPS is smart it can even make them appear as concessions to the off-road folks.
Owen Maloy
I am sorry that such intemperate letters were written in response to Dale Van Dalsem's carefully worded one minute testimony on 5-21 which appeared in the May SAGE. As the editor notes, explaining the decision to publish the testimony and Hoover's comment upon it, Van Dalsem testified as a private individual. He is perfectly entitled to mention his Sierra Club membership and leadership positions in the Desert Peaks section while speaking about the bill; these facts about