Surprizing I haven't seen something like this here in awhile, I saw this on TT.com and thought I'd pass it along. Orginal post is below:
I have been riding the Little Pend Oreille trail system for about 10 years now and have noticed changes taking place over the years. The granolas are winning the battle in the Colville NF!!! Originally we could ride from campgrounds and use the roads to access trails. Now we are restricted and told to transport our bikes a half mile to the staging area.
When in a Spokane bookstore last week I picked up a camping book and the author slammed ORVs in the Little Pend Oreille area. The Little Pend Oreille trail system was built in the 1980's for dirt bikes and horses, but now the greenies are trying to overtake the trails. The Colville NF is giving us the opportunity to speak out for our trails and will use attendance/interest in determining the fate of OUR trails.
The negative side is that the Kettle Range Conservation group is coming to the next meeting in force. We need as many TT'ers as we can get at the next user interest meeting. Here is the latest information from PANTRA on the next meeting. Check out the up to date info at www.pantra.org and the Yahoo group site.
Scroll down to read info!
Ryan
The 2nd OHV Strategy Meeting is scheduled for July 30, 2003 at 6:30
PM.
It will again be around the Cusick area but the actual location has
yet to be determined, I will pass the info on as soon as I receive it.
There were about 20 people in attendance for the first meeting
representing dirtbiker, ATV, 4x4, equestrian, snowmobile and
environmental interests. It was just the beginning of what will be a
long process.
We are expecting substantially more attendance at this next meeting,
especially since the environmentalists said they will be coming out in
force.
If you can attend any of these meetings, I urge you to do so. The FS
is giving us a chance to have a voice in how the Colville will be
managed so if you aren't there, don't complain about it later.
Feel free to pass this info onto anyone that may be interested in
attending the meetings.
Thanks,
Lori Jordan
Also included what the greenies are saying about us!
-------------------------------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:OUT OF BOUNDS
A Kettle Range Conservation Group report on the state of ORV
management on the Colville and Okanogan National Forests
Introduction
The "reach" of off-road vehicles (ORVs)?the ability of the machines
to penetrate wilderness?has increased dramatically in the last
decade. Modern ORVs can move at speeds in excess of 70 miles per
hour, and easily travel more than 100 miles in a single day. Even
where their use is prohibited, such as in federally designated parks,
monuments and wilderness areas, regular violations occur. Today's
machines are fast and agile, easily overcoming barriers that would
have blocked them only a few years ago.
As the popularity of off-road motorized recreation continues to grow,
more and more ORV enthusiasts are looking to the forests of Eastern
Washington for places to operate their machines. Forest monitoring
reports attest to the rapid rise in ORV use in the region, the
increasing impacts on forest resources, and the need for a
consistent, effective forest-wide policy to regulate ORV use and
minimize the associated impacts. An increasing number of newspaper
articles and letters to the editor attest to the growing public
controversy regarding ORV use on our local national forests.
It is our hope that this report will serve as a wake-up call to
federal and state agencies to address a problem that, barring
immediate action, will only get worse. Eastern Washington has yet to
experience the magnitude of ORV problems now facing other parts of
the country. Taking immediate action to prevent such problems from
occurring will avoid user-outrage and preserve the solitude of
Washington's last wild public forests.
Impacts of ORVs
A 1976 study offers an insightful explanation for the enormous
potential of ORVs to disrupt the environment in which they operate:
"The magnitude of the off-road recreational vehicle problem lies in
the fact that the off-road vehicle user can extend himself so
pervasively into the physical and attitudinal space of virtually all
other outdoor recreationists. He does this by his mobility, by the
conspicuous sights and sounds he generates, and by the physical
impacts or traces his vehicle so often leaves behind. The off-road
vehicle is, in effect, a multiplier of man. An individual equipped
with an off-road vehicle may equal the physical and aesthetic impact
of many traditional users in an area." (Badaracco 1976).
ORVs have the potential to adversely impact the environment in a
number of ways:
pollutants emitted by ORVs affect the quality of the air, soil, snow,
and water, and adversely affect human health grasses and shrubs can
be destroyed by even moderate ORV use ORVs contribute to the spread
of invasive weed species ORVs cause soils to become compacted, which
results in erosion, stream sediment, alteration of hydrological
flows, and other problems the noise created by ORV motors,
particularly the two-cycle variety, can travel for miles in the quiet
of the wilderness, stressing wildlife and humans alike persistent ORV
use can lead to changes in plant density and species composition and
retard forest maturity ORV use amplifies past, present, and future
effects, increasing the cumulative impacts on the environment ORV
traffic have the potential to harass wildlife, interfering with
migration, reproduction, and other life cycles by creating new roads
and trails, ORVs are finding their way deeper and deeper into wild
areas, reducing suitable habitat for old-growth species and other
solitude-dependent species.
Threatened and endangered species are particularly vulnerable to the
impacts of ORVs. Lynx are adversely affected by snowmobile trails and
roads maintained for winter recreation and forest management
activities, which enable coyotes and bobcats to access their winter
habitat. Woodland caribou are physically displaced by ORV activity,
moving them from key habitats and pushing them into the same remote
areas occupied by their predators. Grizzly bears are affected by
physical fragmentation of and alienation from their habitat, often
avoiding an ecological zone-of-influence, generally considered to be
approximately 500 meters, in the vicinity of roads and areas of
motorized activity.
In addition to environmental effects, ORVs have enormous potential
for adverse impacts on non-motorized recreation such as cross-country
skiing, hiking, showshoeing, wildlife photography and other
activities where solitude or at least a low level of human
disturbance is a prerequisite to the experience.
More powerful engines, wider tires, and other advances in technology
have increased ORVs' capability to travel off road and into the
wilderness, exponentially adding to the cumulative impacts on the
air, soil, water, wildlife, and solitude of public lands.
Rising Sales of ORVs
During the last three decades, the sale and use of ORVs has
skyrocketed:
between 1991 and 1997, annual sales of ATVs climbed from 150,000 to
343,000, while snowmobile sales more than doubled, increasing from
80,000 to 174,000 the estimated number of ORVs in use rose from 5
million in 1972 to over 38 million in 1993 snowmobile registrations
in Washington State have increased 10-fold since 1972.
The recreation industry has achieved a high level of effectiveness
and cooperation through organizations such as the American Recreation
Coalition (ARC) and the Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC). These industry
organizations are largely comprised of manufacturers of motor boats,
jet-skis, RVs, motorcycles, ATVs, snowmobiles, and sporting
equipment. Membership also includes public land concessionaires,
campground associations, sporting equipment manufacturers, tour
associations, and petroleum companies.
The ARC makes no bones about its involvement in national policy
decision-making, stating that the ARC "provides a unified voice for
recreation interests to ensure their full and active participation in
government policy making." Furthermore, the federal government sees
no problem with ARC's role in such policy making.
The BRC is perhaps best known for its recent lawsuit to keep
Yellowstone National Park open to snowmobiles. Like the ARC, the BRC
has opposed recent EPA proposals to adopt tougher standards that
would more significantly reduce air pollution and better protect
public health, arguing that pollution from ORVs does not adversely
affect public lands.
Lack of Compliance with Laws and Regulations
A number of legal statues and regulations guide the development and
management of ORV policy on National Forests, ranging from Executive
Orders (EO's) signed by presidents to Land and Resource Management
Plans (LRMP) developed by each individual National Forest. Keys
provisions of these regulations require federal land manager to do
the following:
designate specific areas and trails on public lands on which the use
of off-road vehicles may be permitted, and areas in which the use of
off-road vehicles may not be permitted, based upon the protection of
the resources of the public lands, promotion of the safety of all
users of those lands, and minimization of conflicts among the various
uses of those lands, and located so as to minimize conflicts between
off-road vehicle use and other existing or proposed recreational
uses. In designation of routes, damage to soils, watershed,
vegetation, and other land resources; wildlife harassment and impacts
to wildlife habitat; and conflicts between ORV use and other uses of
the land must be minimized.
ensure that areas and trails where off-road vehicle use is permitted
are well marked.
prescribe appropriate penalties for violation of regulations and
establish procedures for the enforcement of those regulations.
monitor ORV use and its impacts; if it is determined that ORV
use "will cause or is causing considerable adverse effects on the
soil, vegetation, wildlife, wildlife habitat or cultural or historic
resources of particular areas or trails of the public lands," land
managers must "immediately close such areas or trails to the type of
off-road vehicle causing such effects, until such time as he
determines that such adverse effects have been eliminated and that
measures have been implemented to prevent future recurrence.
Based on records obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, KRCG
has concluded that both the Colville and Okanogan National Forests
have failed to adequately analyze impacts to forest resources in
designating ORV-use areas, have not clearly marked areas open to
ORVs, have not enforced a "closed unless marked open" policy, have
failed to monitor the impacts of ORVs in areas where they are
permitted, and have not adequately enforced existing regulations.
Examples of Conflict and Impact
In the Kettle River Range, located in the Colville National Forest
(CNF), non-motorized and motorized recreation areas are highly
interspersed: valley bottoms are mostly roaded and open to motorized
use while high alpine ridgelines are designated non-motorized. Near
the summit of Sherman Pass, Albian Hill Road (FS 2030), Sherman Creek
Road (FS 2020), Hall Creek Road (FS 2054-100) and Twin Sisters, semi-
primitive motorized recreation-use zones are located downhill and
within direct line-of-sight and earshot of semi-primitive non-
motorized zones, significantly degrading the non-motorized experience
for hikers, snowshoers and cross-country skiers.
Monitoring of this conflict by the Forest Service is completely
absent, despite complaints registered by Kettle Range Conservation
Group (KRCG) and others.
In the Okanogan National Forest (ONF), helicopter-skiing reaches deep
into secluded backcountry, affecting areas otherwise closed to
motorized vehicles year round.
Though helicopter-skiing use occurs in mountain goat habitat that was
designated "to optimize habitat condition and perpetuate a healthy
mountain goat population," and in spite of the fact that numerous
studies have concluded that helicopters have a negative impact on
mountain goat populations, there exists no meaningful monitoring of
the mountain goat population.
Without monitoring and inventory data, it is not possible to
determine if there has been adverse disturbance to this unique
indicator species for mountain habitat.
Conclusion and Recommendations
The known effects of ORVs on natural resources, wildlife, threatened
and endangered species, non-motorized recreation, water quality and
air quality are substantial. Over two decades ago, Executive Orders
were signed by two presidents demanding that these effects be taken
into account in the management of public lands. Numerous sections of
the Code of Federal Regulations make specific requirements of land
managers in meeting the objectives of the Executive Orders.
Since these laws went into effect, the population of Eastern
Washington has grown considerably. Use of ORVs for recreational
purposes has risen dramatically. ORVs are more powerful and user-
friendly, rendering them far more capable of reaching into the rugged
wildlands than their counterparts of the 1970's. Native species
especially sensitive to the impacts of ORVs have been added to the
threatened and endangered lists. ORV incursions into roadless
wildlands have increased.
The importance of compliance with federal law and policy regarding
ORVs is much greater today than it was twenty-five years ago.
Likewise, compliance with the requirements of local Forest Plans to
effectively manage recreation is more critical today than ever
before. And yet these legal requirements have been largely ignored.
Many National Forests in more populated areas waited too long to take
the ORV situation seriously and have discovered that after an area
becomes a major attraction for ORV operators, it is very difficult to
restrict or regulate use. The old saying, "possession is nine-tenths
of the law," seems particularly applicable to ORV-use areas. Whenever
restrictions are imposed in a specific area, the primary complaint
from the motorized-recreation community is that federal land managers
are denying users access to areas in which they have traditionally
operated for years. The fact that the intensity of the use, and
therefore the impact of the use, has increased exponentially over
those same years is almost never acknowledged.
To bring recreation management into compliance with applicable laws
and regulations, and in order to protect the Okanogan and Colville
National Forests from the consequences of inadequately managed
motorized recreation, KRCG asks that the Forests take the following
actions:
begin a process of developing a comprehensive, consistent, forest-
wide policy regarding the use of ORVs
designate ORV-use areas only after meaningful analysis of impacts to
forest resources
adopt a "closed unless marked open" policy, clearly mark all trails
designated for ORV use, and initiate a campaign to inform the public
that all areas of the Forest are closed to ORVs use unless otherwise
marked
promulgate rules and regulations regarding use of ORVs in designated
areas and strictly enforce the regulations
develop a meaningful monitoring program that includes the use of
scientific methodology to determine if impacts not predicted during
planning and designation of ORV-use areas have reached the threshold
of "significance."
In short, we are asking nothing more than what the laws and
regulations written and promulgated twenty-five years ago promised
the public: a consistent, forest-wide policy regarding the use of
ORVs on the National Forests, based on scientific analysis of the
potential and existing impacts to forest resources form ORVs,
enforced by law, and monitored for its effectiveness in preventing
adverse effects from ORVs.
Back to Main ORV Report page
http://www.kettlerange.org/orvreport/index.htm
Executive Summary of report
http://www.kettlerange.org/orvreport/ExecSummary.htm
Abridged Report in pdf format (437k)
http://www.kettlerange.org/orvreport/abridgedrecreport
I have been riding the Little Pend Oreille trail system for about 10 years now and have noticed changes taking place over the years. The granolas are winning the battle in the Colville NF!!! Originally we could ride from campgrounds and use the roads to access trails. Now we are restricted and told to transport our bikes a half mile to the staging area.
When in a Spokane bookstore last week I picked up a camping book and the author slammed ORVs in the Little Pend Oreille area. The Little Pend Oreille trail system was built in the 1980's for dirt bikes and horses, but now the greenies are trying to overtake the trails. The Colville NF is giving us the opportunity to speak out for our trails and will use attendance/interest in determining the fate of OUR trails.
The negative side is that the Kettle Range Conservation group is coming to the next meeting in force. We need as many TT'ers as we can get at the next user interest meeting. Here is the latest information from PANTRA on the next meeting. Check out the up to date info at www.pantra.org and the Yahoo group site.
Scroll down to read info!
Ryan
The 2nd OHV Strategy Meeting is scheduled for July 30, 2003 at 6:30
PM.
It will again be around the Cusick area but the actual location has
yet to be determined, I will pass the info on as soon as I receive it.
There were about 20 people in attendance for the first meeting
representing dirtbiker, ATV, 4x4, equestrian, snowmobile and
environmental interests. It was just the beginning of what will be a
long process.
We are expecting substantially more attendance at this next meeting,
especially since the environmentalists said they will be coming out in
force.
If you can attend any of these meetings, I urge you to do so. The FS
is giving us a chance to have a voice in how the Colville will be
managed so if you aren't there, don't complain about it later.
Feel free to pass this info onto anyone that may be interested in
attending the meetings.
Thanks,
Lori Jordan
Also included what the greenies are saying about us!
-------------------------------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:OUT OF BOUNDS
A Kettle Range Conservation Group report on the state of ORV
management on the Colville and Okanogan National Forests
Introduction
The "reach" of off-road vehicles (ORVs)?the ability of the machines
to penetrate wilderness?has increased dramatically in the last
decade. Modern ORVs can move at speeds in excess of 70 miles per
hour, and easily travel more than 100 miles in a single day. Even
where their use is prohibited, such as in federally designated parks,
monuments and wilderness areas, regular violations occur. Today's
machines are fast and agile, easily overcoming barriers that would
have blocked them only a few years ago.
As the popularity of off-road motorized recreation continues to grow,
more and more ORV enthusiasts are looking to the forests of Eastern
Washington for places to operate their machines. Forest monitoring
reports attest to the rapid rise in ORV use in the region, the
increasing impacts on forest resources, and the need for a
consistent, effective forest-wide policy to regulate ORV use and
minimize the associated impacts. An increasing number of newspaper
articles and letters to the editor attest to the growing public
controversy regarding ORV use on our local national forests.
It is our hope that this report will serve as a wake-up call to
federal and state agencies to address a problem that, barring
immediate action, will only get worse. Eastern Washington has yet to
experience the magnitude of ORV problems now facing other parts of
the country. Taking immediate action to prevent such problems from
occurring will avoid user-outrage and preserve the solitude of
Washington's last wild public forests.
Impacts of ORVs
A 1976 study offers an insightful explanation for the enormous
potential of ORVs to disrupt the environment in which they operate:
"The magnitude of the off-road recreational vehicle problem lies in
the fact that the off-road vehicle user can extend himself so
pervasively into the physical and attitudinal space of virtually all
other outdoor recreationists. He does this by his mobility, by the
conspicuous sights and sounds he generates, and by the physical
impacts or traces his vehicle so often leaves behind. The off-road
vehicle is, in effect, a multiplier of man. An individual equipped
with an off-road vehicle may equal the physical and aesthetic impact
of many traditional users in an area." (Badaracco 1976).
ORVs have the potential to adversely impact the environment in a
number of ways:
pollutants emitted by ORVs affect the quality of the air, soil, snow,
and water, and adversely affect human health grasses and shrubs can
be destroyed by even moderate ORV use ORVs contribute to the spread
of invasive weed species ORVs cause soils to become compacted, which
results in erosion, stream sediment, alteration of hydrological
flows, and other problems the noise created by ORV motors,
particularly the two-cycle variety, can travel for miles in the quiet
of the wilderness, stressing wildlife and humans alike persistent ORV
use can lead to changes in plant density and species composition and
retard forest maturity ORV use amplifies past, present, and future
effects, increasing the cumulative impacts on the environment ORV
traffic have the potential to harass wildlife, interfering with
migration, reproduction, and other life cycles by creating new roads
and trails, ORVs are finding their way deeper and deeper into wild
areas, reducing suitable habitat for old-growth species and other
solitude-dependent species.
Threatened and endangered species are particularly vulnerable to the
impacts of ORVs. Lynx are adversely affected by snowmobile trails and
roads maintained for winter recreation and forest management
activities, which enable coyotes and bobcats to access their winter
habitat. Woodland caribou are physically displaced by ORV activity,
moving them from key habitats and pushing them into the same remote
areas occupied by their predators. Grizzly bears are affected by
physical fragmentation of and alienation from their habitat, often
avoiding an ecological zone-of-influence, generally considered to be
approximately 500 meters, in the vicinity of roads and areas of
motorized activity.
In addition to environmental effects, ORVs have enormous potential
for adverse impacts on non-motorized recreation such as cross-country
skiing, hiking, showshoeing, wildlife photography and other
activities where solitude or at least a low level of human
disturbance is a prerequisite to the experience.
More powerful engines, wider tires, and other advances in technology
have increased ORVs' capability to travel off road and into the
wilderness, exponentially adding to the cumulative impacts on the
air, soil, water, wildlife, and solitude of public lands.
Rising Sales of ORVs
During the last three decades, the sale and use of ORVs has
skyrocketed:
between 1991 and 1997, annual sales of ATVs climbed from 150,000 to
343,000, while snowmobile sales more than doubled, increasing from
80,000 to 174,000 the estimated number of ORVs in use rose from 5
million in 1972 to over 38 million in 1993 snowmobile registrations
in Washington State have increased 10-fold since 1972.
The recreation industry has achieved a high level of effectiveness
and cooperation through organizations such as the American Recreation
Coalition (ARC) and the Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC). These industry
organizations are largely comprised of manufacturers of motor boats,
jet-skis, RVs, motorcycles, ATVs, snowmobiles, and sporting
equipment. Membership also includes public land concessionaires,
campground associations, sporting equipment manufacturers, tour
associations, and petroleum companies.
The ARC makes no bones about its involvement in national policy
decision-making, stating that the ARC "provides a unified voice for
recreation interests to ensure their full and active participation in
government policy making." Furthermore, the federal government sees
no problem with ARC's role in such policy making.
The BRC is perhaps best known for its recent lawsuit to keep
Yellowstone National Park open to snowmobiles. Like the ARC, the BRC
has opposed recent EPA proposals to adopt tougher standards that
would more significantly reduce air pollution and better protect
public health, arguing that pollution from ORVs does not adversely
affect public lands.
Lack of Compliance with Laws and Regulations
A number of legal statues and regulations guide the development and
management of ORV policy on National Forests, ranging from Executive
Orders (EO's) signed by presidents to Land and Resource Management
Plans (LRMP) developed by each individual National Forest. Keys
provisions of these regulations require federal land manager to do
the following:
designate specific areas and trails on public lands on which the use
of off-road vehicles may be permitted, and areas in which the use of
off-road vehicles may not be permitted, based upon the protection of
the resources of the public lands, promotion of the safety of all
users of those lands, and minimization of conflicts among the various
uses of those lands, and located so as to minimize conflicts between
off-road vehicle use and other existing or proposed recreational
uses. In designation of routes, damage to soils, watershed,
vegetation, and other land resources; wildlife harassment and impacts
to wildlife habitat; and conflicts between ORV use and other uses of
the land must be minimized.
ensure that areas and trails where off-road vehicle use is permitted
are well marked.
prescribe appropriate penalties for violation of regulations and
establish procedures for the enforcement of those regulations.
monitor ORV use and its impacts; if it is determined that ORV
use "will cause or is causing considerable adverse effects on the
soil, vegetation, wildlife, wildlife habitat or cultural or historic
resources of particular areas or trails of the public lands," land
managers must "immediately close such areas or trails to the type of
off-road vehicle causing such effects, until such time as he
determines that such adverse effects have been eliminated and that
measures have been implemented to prevent future recurrence.
Based on records obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, KRCG
has concluded that both the Colville and Okanogan National Forests
have failed to adequately analyze impacts to forest resources in
designating ORV-use areas, have not clearly marked areas open to
ORVs, have not enforced a "closed unless marked open" policy, have
failed to monitor the impacts of ORVs in areas where they are
permitted, and have not adequately enforced existing regulations.
Examples of Conflict and Impact
In the Kettle River Range, located in the Colville National Forest
(CNF), non-motorized and motorized recreation areas are highly
interspersed: valley bottoms are mostly roaded and open to motorized
use while high alpine ridgelines are designated non-motorized. Near
the summit of Sherman Pass, Albian Hill Road (FS 2030), Sherman Creek
Road (FS 2020), Hall Creek Road (FS 2054-100) and Twin Sisters, semi-
primitive motorized recreation-use zones are located downhill and
within direct line-of-sight and earshot of semi-primitive non-
motorized zones, significantly degrading the non-motorized experience
for hikers, snowshoers and cross-country skiers.
Monitoring of this conflict by the Forest Service is completely
absent, despite complaints registered by Kettle Range Conservation
Group (KRCG) and others.
In the Okanogan National Forest (ONF), helicopter-skiing reaches deep
into secluded backcountry, affecting areas otherwise closed to
motorized vehicles year round.
Though helicopter-skiing use occurs in mountain goat habitat that was
designated "to optimize habitat condition and perpetuate a healthy
mountain goat population," and in spite of the fact that numerous
studies have concluded that helicopters have a negative impact on
mountain goat populations, there exists no meaningful monitoring of
the mountain goat population.
Without monitoring and inventory data, it is not possible to
determine if there has been adverse disturbance to this unique
indicator species for mountain habitat.
Conclusion and Recommendations
The known effects of ORVs on natural resources, wildlife, threatened
and endangered species, non-motorized recreation, water quality and
air quality are substantial. Over two decades ago, Executive Orders
were signed by two presidents demanding that these effects be taken
into account in the management of public lands. Numerous sections of
the Code of Federal Regulations make specific requirements of land
managers in meeting the objectives of the Executive Orders.
Since these laws went into effect, the population of Eastern
Washington has grown considerably. Use of ORVs for recreational
purposes has risen dramatically. ORVs are more powerful and user-
friendly, rendering them far more capable of reaching into the rugged
wildlands than their counterparts of the 1970's. Native species
especially sensitive to the impacts of ORVs have been added to the
threatened and endangered lists. ORV incursions into roadless
wildlands have increased.
The importance of compliance with federal law and policy regarding
ORVs is much greater today than it was twenty-five years ago.
Likewise, compliance with the requirements of local Forest Plans to
effectively manage recreation is more critical today than ever
before. And yet these legal requirements have been largely ignored.
Many National Forests in more populated areas waited too long to take
the ORV situation seriously and have discovered that after an area
becomes a major attraction for ORV operators, it is very difficult to
restrict or regulate use. The old saying, "possession is nine-tenths
of the law," seems particularly applicable to ORV-use areas. Whenever
restrictions are imposed in a specific area, the primary complaint
from the motorized-recreation community is that federal land managers
are denying users access to areas in which they have traditionally
operated for years. The fact that the intensity of the use, and
therefore the impact of the use, has increased exponentially over
those same years is almost never acknowledged.
To bring recreation management into compliance with applicable laws
and regulations, and in order to protect the Okanogan and Colville
National Forests from the consequences of inadequately managed
motorized recreation, KRCG asks that the Forests take the following
actions:
begin a process of developing a comprehensive, consistent, forest-
wide policy regarding the use of ORVs
designate ORV-use areas only after meaningful analysis of impacts to
forest resources
adopt a "closed unless marked open" policy, clearly mark all trails
designated for ORV use, and initiate a campaign to inform the public
that all areas of the Forest are closed to ORVs use unless otherwise
marked
promulgate rules and regulations regarding use of ORVs in designated
areas and strictly enforce the regulations
develop a meaningful monitoring program that includes the use of
scientific methodology to determine if impacts not predicted during
planning and designation of ORV-use areas have reached the threshold
of "significance."
In short, we are asking nothing more than what the laws and
regulations written and promulgated twenty-five years ago promised
the public: a consistent, forest-wide policy regarding the use of
ORVs on the National Forests, based on scientific analysis of the
potential and existing impacts to forest resources form ORVs,
enforced by law, and monitored for its effectiveness in preventing
adverse effects from ORVs.
Back to Main ORV Report page
http://www.kettlerange.org/orvreport/index.htm
Executive Summary of report
http://www.kettlerange.org/orvreport/ExecSummary.htm
Abridged Report in pdf format (437k)
http://www.kettlerange.org/orvreport/abridgedrecreport