[roc-chat] Re: Launch site.
- From: Wedge Oldham <wedgeoldham@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: roc-chat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 18:54:00 -0700
Just seems odd to me that after 17 years; and at least 175 launches that
"this" has become a problem. Why now?
On May 9, 2012 6:49 PM, "David Erbas-White" <derbas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 5/9/2012 5:05 PM, Allen H Farrington wrote:
>
> Allen, first off, thanks to you (and the rest of the Board) for all the
> great effort and work that you put forth on behalf of ROC. The following
> rant is in no way directed at anyone in ROC, or associated with ROC, I just
> have to get this off my chest...
>
> In looking at your attached maps, it appears that three of the four
> 'squares' that make up Lucerne Dry Lake have been purchased by private
> parties. WTF??? This area has been held by BLM, in trust for the public,
> for decades, and has been used for recreational purposes for as long as I
> can remember. When, and how, did the BLM get it in their heads that they
> could/should sell these lands to private parties? When/where were any
> hearings held for interested public members to comment about how keeping
> these lands public serves a PUBLIC benefit?
>
> I've been pissing/moaning for years about how the decline of the
> educational system has been degrading our culture. I've been equally
> pissing/moaning about how governmental regulation has been doing the same.
> But now, on top of this, we see this type of handling of public lands?
>
> I'm so made I could... I could... well, I was going to say "spit," which
> is what my grandmother would have said, but somehow it just doesn't seem
> harsh enough...
>
> David Erbas-White
>
>
> For everyone interested, here is the actual plot of where the traditional
>> ROC range head is. We will issue more later but rest assured that we're
>> trying hard to minimize the change to the membership. This change was
>> prompted to keep most of our recovery area on the BLM "square" of land
>> (#26) thus limiting our incursions into privately held land. We're trying
>> to minimize our incursions on the private land in order to prevent the need
>> for insurance certificates, permission, etc… (per NFPA& CA law, not BLM
>> rules) for launching operations.
>>
>> Based on what we're planning, other than getting to the range head, there
>> should be no changes to our camping or OHV policies.
>>
>>
>
> --
> ROC-Chat mailing list
> roc-chat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> //www.freelists.org/list/**roc-chat<//www.freelists.org/list/roc-chat>
>
>
Other related posts:
