The BLM has released a draft with four separate alternative management plans for the area including detailed analyses and assessments. The agency is asking the public to digest more than 1,000 pages of data, make their own evaluations and respond in writing to the BLM before Nov. 30.

That's not enough time. Individuals who live or do business there, or hike, cycle, float or ride this spectacular area, can't hope to present an educated comment in the 90-day comment period. Advocacy groups - both those who favor motorized recreation and those who support quiet use - want more time to study the reports, get feedback from their members and formulate a response. Time is especially critical since the BLM is releasing a number of other management plans elsewhere in Utah during the same time period and all deserve a thorough review by the people they will affect.

A 180-day extension of the comment period is reasonable, and the BLM should grant that extension.

The report addresses the following topics: recreation use and off-highway vehicles, minerals, special designations, ecosystem resources, range management, riparian and wetland areas, cultural and paleontological resources, land tenure adjustments and withdrawals, fire management, non-wilderness study area lands with wilderness characteristics.

Whew.

The public will want to review individual areas within the huge land mass of the management plan with an eye to the potential impact of various uses, including OHV travel, grazing, mineral extraction, gas and oil development and all types of recreation. Each involves many people who deserve a chance to respond.

There are potential conflicts: how oil wells affect wildlife, how OHV use affects streams and ancient pictographs, how far-flung "destination" campgrounds affect outfitters and other businesses.

The BLM needed years to produce these reports. It should not expect people with fewer resources to make critical evaluation of them in just 90 days.