PUBLIC LANDS: Wilderness Society report urges tighter controls on OHVs
Phil Taylor, E&E reporter
Greenwire: Friday, May 6, 2016
The Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management are failing to minimize the impacts of off-highway vehicles on public lands, leading to soil erosion, stream impairment, and conflicts with quiet trail users like hikers and campers, according to a report released yesterday by the Wilderness Society.
In particular, the agencies have flouted executive orders by Presidents Nixon and Carter that require they minimize impacts and conflicts caused by dirt bikes, snowmobiles and all-terrain vehicles, the report argues.
It urges agencies to pass new guidance to help field staff decide where and what types of motorized recreation are appropriate. That guidance should be clear: OHV decisions should "actually minimize impacts -- not just identify or consider them."
Doing so could help keep the agencies out of the courtroom, where federal judges have handed them a series of defeats for failing to minimize OHV impacts, the Wilderness Society said.
"It's really important that the Forest Service and BLM stand up for the forests, deserts, critters and majority of public land visitors who enjoy quiet forms of recreation, and make sure that off-road vehicles don't cause unnecessary harm," said Alison Flint, counsel and planning specialist for the Wilderness Society in Denver. "It's now 44 years after President Nixon directed the agencies to do this, and still we are seeing widespread disregard of this responsibility."
Nixon's order in 1972 requires agencies to manage OHV access so as to "minimize conflicts among the various uses" of public lands. Trails should be located to minimize impacts to soil, watersheds, plants, wildlife and other recreation users, it said.
BLM and the Forest Service must "apply a transparent and common-sense methodology for meaningful application of the minimization criteria that provides opportunities for public participation, incorporates the best available scientific information and best management practices, addresses site-specific and larger-scale impacts and accounts for monitoring and enforcement needs and available resources," said the Wilderness Society report.
Agencies should "get out on the ground" to gauge resources and "ground-truth desk-top analyses," it said.
The report highlights several case studies where the Wilderness Society feels federal management of OHVs fell short. One is BLM's OHV management in Southern California's Mojave Desert, an area Congress in the 1970s recognized as "extremely fragile, easily scarred, and slowly healed."
"BLM, however, has continued to sanction rampant and irresponsible [off-road vehicle] use and associated resource damage, leading to a 2009 court order requiring the agency to go back and designate ORV routes in a way that satisfies its legal obligation to minimize impacts," the report said. "Unfortunately, the agency's 2015 proposal to double the mileage of its route network to over 10,000 miles utterly fails to satisfy that obligation and blatantly disregards the court's order."
Don Amador, the Western representative for the BlueRibbon Coalition, which advocates on behalf of motorized users, said the Wilderness Society's report "brings up a number of good points" about the need for the agencies to enhance their trail management efforts.
But its emphasis on trail closures ignores other strategies for mitigating OHV impacts that do not turn away users, he said.
"I believe the report should have included examples of units that are addressing OHV resource impacts via substantive minimization-related management prescriptions, which include engineered trails, soil erosion control structures, trail armoring, signing, education, maps and law enforcement," Amador said.
The Forest Service has recognized the need for a "trail management culture," Amador said, citing the agency's newly released draft "National Strategy for a Sustainable Trail System."
Paul Turcke, who has represented the OHV coalition in federal court cases, said he is encouraged that the Wilderness Society "appears willing to invest in a solution that will allow us to better collaboratively manage vehicle access rather than solely seeking closures through the courts."
