Cycle World Roundup
ROUNDUP
CYCLE WORLD
A ROAD IS A ROAD IS A ROAD— EXCEPT FOR BLM ROADS
The Federal Bureau of Land Manage ment (BLM) is a government agency that administers some 447 million acres of public land, most of it in the Western states. Already well known to hard core dirt riders and desert racers, it is on the point of becoming a household word— epithet?—with any biker who ever had a yen for the wide open spaces. Why? Because if the BLM persists in certain policies and operating attitudes, there may not be any more wide open spaces, not for dirt riding at any rate.
Here’s what’s happening. First there was the Wilderness Act of 1964, which acquired an executive companion piece in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA, which has come to be known as Flipma to bureau insiders) of 1976. One of the directives of this act is that the BLM (which wasn’t mentioned in the Wilderness Act) inventory all the lands it administers, cataloguing them on a basis of their wilderness characteristics. The intent is to single out areas suitable for inclusion in the national wilderness system and exclusion of off road vehicle recreation.
The 1964 Wilderness o Act identifies wilderness as “. . . an JL area where the earth and its community life
are untrammeled> by man. . . . land retaining its primeval character and influence without permanent improvements or human habitation. . . .” Of itself, this isn’t really too ominous. There are undoubtedly areas of the country, particularly in some of the more remote regions of the West, where the country is exactly as it was before Coronado or Father Serra or anyone else came around to usher in the European era. They are clearly wilderness areas—“untrammeled and primeval.” How are we to distinguish untrammeled from those areas where man has left his mark? One of the surest distinctions is the presence of roads.
Therein lies the rub. In its apparent zeal to provide as strong an inventory of potential wilderness areas as possible, the BLM has abandoned its former idea of a road— “public ways habitually travelled by vehicles . . . which may or may not be maintained by the government and which are clearly visible and have evidence of previous use”—in favor of one more compatible with the production of instant wilderness. The new BLM road concept is limited to ways that are “. . . improved and maintained by using hand or powered machinery or tools to insure relatively regular and continuous use; a way maintained solely by the passage of vehicles does not constitute a road.”
It’s clear that to the BLM the qualities of roadness are situational.
It’s also clear that this new working definition is aimed directly at further restriction of ORV activity.
Another clue to the attitudes of the BLM administrators regarding ORV activity lies in the survey priorities. The first region to be inventoried was the 25 million acres of BLM lands in the southern California desert areas. The region, designated by the BLM as the California Desert Conservation Area, is currently being inventoried on a basis of its wilderness characteristics (roadlessness being a significant consideration, of course). Areas of 5000 acres or more deemed to have sufficient wilderness characteristics will be set aside as Wilderness Study areas for further review. Whether they actually become wilderness areas is academic in the interim because they will be closed to anything other than foot traffic.
It can’t be an accident that the BLM began its inventory in the southern California area, which is easily the most active ORV area in the country. And it’s quite conceivable, given this new definition of the word road, that all but the tiniest little smidgins of California’s BLM lands—public lands, remember—could be closed to the public. AMA legislative analysts estimate as much as 98 percent of the survey region could be closed.
The problem is plain. At least partially influenced by the hardcore naturalist element that views any concession or compromise in the realm of undeveloped lands as irretrievable loss, the BLM movers and shakers see their duty as protecting public lands from the citizens—bikers and other ORV enthusiasts—who use them most. Backpackers and other pedestrian recreationists, of course, will be able to come and go as they please. But how many backpackers have you seen in the desert?
As partial justification for its collective anti-ORV attitude, the BLM offers the results of a survey on “California Public Opinion and Behavior Regarding the California Desert” conducted by the Field Research Corporation. The BLM reports that the statewide survey (based on a sample group of 1058 Californians) indicated, among other things, that “the things which most people object to in the desert include, in order of descending importance: motorcycle riding, dunebuggying, target shooting, hunting and four-wheel driving.” The bureau obviously attaches importance to these opinions, even though only 35 percent of the interviewees had taken part in any recent California Desert recreation and only 27 percent had done so on BLM lands.
None of this sounds very promising, but there is something we can do to keep the chain link from sprouting like spring flowers. FLPMA very specifically orders that in formulating its review procedures and policies the BLM provide “. . . opportunity for participation by affected citizens in rulemaking, decision-making and planning with respect to the public lands, including public meetings or hearings. . . .” The series of public meetings, which drew phalanxes of alarmed and angry desert riders, was drawing to a close as we went to press, so that portion of the feedback mechanism is history. We have no way of gauging the impact of the meetings on the BLM policymakers; our primary impression, drawn from one of the first meetings, was of several politely polysyllabic government flak catchers maintaining their cool in the face of a hostile audience. They were there largely because they had to be, and it's doubtful that serving as a kind of official complaint department on behalf of their bureau softened any of their attitudes about the plight of California desert riders or dirt bikers in general. And as far as that goes, we’ve already seen what a salutory effect public meetings have produced in some other threatened land closure actions. A good case in point is southern California’s Cleveland National Forest. Bikers turned out in substantial numbers for the scheduled meetings, but the end result was three token areas open to dirt bikes—tiny, difficult to reach and widely separated from one another.
This doesn’t mean that BLM Director Frank R. Gregg (Bureau of Land Management. Washington, D.C. 20240) shouldn't hear your views concerning the specious definition of a road his bureau has adopted to pad the wilderness inventory (at a projected cost to taxpayers of $340,000). But it’s important to bring this inequitous project to the attention of the executive and legislative branches of government as well. Since these are composed of elected representatives and their appointees your correspondence is likely to command more attention. President Carter (The White House. Washington, D.C. 20500) should top your list, followed by Secretary of the Interior Cecil Andrus (Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240); Representative Morris K. Udall, Chairman of the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee (Washington, D.C. 20515); and your congressmen and home state senators. (California senators Alan Cranston and Sam I. Hayakawa may be reached at the U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510.)
For detailed information on the BLM Wilderness Inventory and Study Program, contact either the BLM’s Riverside or Bakersfield district managers. The former is located at 1695 Spruce Street, Riverside 92507, telephone 714/787-1465, the latter at 800 Truxtun Avenue, Room 311, Bakersfield 93301, 805/861-4191. District 37 of the American Motorcyclist Association is a good rallying point for bikers who want to keep at least some portions of the desert— and other public lands—open. District 37 headquarters is 10238 Chaney Avenue, Downey, California 90241.
A little over a year ago, we were celebrating—guardedly—President Carter’s refusal to accept a public lands closure amendment to pending energy legislation. In large measure, the amendment attempt was headed off by a letter storm from bikers and other ORV enthusiasts. Our bottom line in reporting that battle (July 1977 Roundup) was cautionary: “We’ll go through this again and again,” we said, “until the land closure people either decide we’re too strong—or prove we’re too weak.”
We can look upon this episode as the first of the agains. Tony Swan
THE KING GETS A BOOST
Turbocharging, for several years a speed secret available only to riders with the skill to adapt a kit to their engines for themselves, is about to become semiproduction, in the form of the Kawasaki Zl-Rtc, as shown.
Turbocharging is of course supercharging, with the power for the blower supplied by the exhaust system. The expanding exhaust gases spin an impeller, the other side of the impeller compresses the incoming charge and there you are, as much power as you dare to pack into the engine.
In this case, the makers say a turbo Kawasaki will develop 103 bhp or better at the rear wheel, with the engine’s relief valve set to limit boost to 10 psi above atmospheric.
The semi aspect of production is because the Z 1-Rtc is being built with factory knowledge but not by the factory. An outside firm is buying stock Zl-Rs, fitting a Ray-Jay turbocharger as developed by American Turbo Pak and then selling the complete bike through participating Kawasaki dealers. The men behind the project say it’s been tested for three years, to be sure the engine and kit would live together.
Price is $4995 complete and we’re told the for-sale versions will be on display at participating dealerships by the time this issue is in print. In case there are dealers who haven’t heard of the project, a list of those who should be selling the model can be obtained from Turbo Cycle Corp., CW7, 17972-J Sky Park Circle, P.O. Box 11001, Santa Ana, Calif. 92711.
LID LAWS AND LOGIC
The following is excerpted complete from the AMA’s Government Report newsletter: “During committee hearings on mandatory helmet legislation in Missouri, Representative Glen Binger (D-Independence) put his feet up on the table and said, ‘I wear these boots to protect me from snakebite. Do you suppose they ought to be mandatory?’ ”
MORE THUMPER REVIVAL
Informed rumor-mongers continue to talk about the arrival of a new 500cc four-stroke Single from Honda in the nottoo-distant future. Early reports from inside Honda say the new machine will be a four-valve ohc setup like the XL250S. There is also talk that Honda may bolt together a GP version of the bike, similar to Bengt Aberg’s Yamaha TT500.
DAVIDSON NEW AMA PRESIDENT
The American Motorcyclist Association has elected Harley-Davidson board chairman John Davidson to the presidency of the Association. Davidson becomes the first Harley-Davidson representative to head the Association since the tenure of his great uncle, Arthur Davidson, who served from 1944 until his death in 1950. The new president succeeds Bob Rudolph, of Bates Industries. Californian Jim Wells will be Davidson’s vice president.E9
