Wildlands CPR, The Wilderness Society, et al. 1999. Petition to enhance and expand regulations governing the administration of recreational off-road vehicle use on National Forests. Published by Wildlands CPR, Missoula, MT 188 p. http://www.wildlandscpr.org/orvs/ORVpetition.doc

RELEVANT TO: ROADS/OFF-ROAD VEHICLES

INVASIVE SPECIES

VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE

MONITORING/ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT

DESCRIPTION

This is a petition to the National Forest Service to enhance and expand regulations governing recreational off-road vehicle use filed by Wildlands CPR, The Wilderness Society, and dozens of other organizations and individuals, representing a combined membership of over 1.5 million members.

This petition requests that the Forest Service adopt five basic changes to their current ORV management framework:

  1. ORV use shall be allowed only on system roads and trails designated and posted as open for ORVs. Cross-country ORV travel shall be prohibited.
  1. Designation of ORV routes shall only occur on Forest Service system roads and trails where the agency demonstrates in a public process that use of the route by ORVs will not cause adverse environmental impacts.
  1. Designation of ORV routes, construction of new ORV routes, upgrading of existing routes to accommodate new or additional ORV use, and the construction or upgrading of facilities for ORV use must be fully analyzed under the National Environmental Policy Act.
  1. ORV use shall be prohibited unless adequate monitoring and enforcement of the use and impacts are fully funded and implemented.
  1. ORV use shall be prohibited in legislatively or administratively proposed wilderness areas, inventoried roadless areas, and other areas with roadless values except on roads for which their use has been formally designated.

The Petitioners seek the following relief:

  1. Motorized vehicle use shall be restricted to federal, state, and dedicated county roads and to those routes designated and posted by the Forest Service as open to specific vehicle types after completion of environmental impact analysis, including public notice and involvement, and consistent with the management provisions requested in this petition. The use of motorized vehicles off roads or designated routes shall be prohibited.
  1. The Forest Service must demonstrate that any existing or proposed off‑road vehicle use will not result in adverse environmental impacts before such use will be allowed to continue or commence. To this end, the designation of off‑road vehicle routes must be based on specific criteria, including, but not limited to, prohibiting the designation of such routes in sensitive habitat areas and the siting of such routes in order to minimize erosion.
  1. The designation of travel routes for motorized vehicle use; the construction of ORV routes and facilities intended to support such use; the upgrading, widening, or other modification of existing facilities or routes; the issuance or reissuance of ORV-related Special Use Permits; and similar projects shall not be categorically excluded from environmental analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act.
  1. The use of motorized vehicles on Forest Service lands will be permitted only to the extent that monitoring of the impacts and enforcement of restrictions on that use are funded and implemented. No new motorized routes may be designated, upgraded, or constructed until and unless all existing routes have been subject to appropriate environmental impact analysis and monitoring plans have been prepared and approved.
  1. The use of motorized vehicles shall be prohibited on National Forest lands in legislatively or administratively proposed wilderness areas and other wilderness quality lands, including inventoried roadless areas and other areas with roadless values.

This petition clearly sets forth parameters under which ORV use is legally permissible, and the changes it suggests ensure that ORV use will only occur to the extent that it occurs within these parameters. These changes will make it easier for the Forest Service to make ORV management decisions to ensure that unacceptable and illegal ORV impacts do not occur.

MAJOR FINDINGS

This petition documents many examples of how the current National Forest Service regulations governing recreational off-road vehicle use are not preventing, or even addressing the escalating problem of resource damage caused be this activity. It cites dozens of scientific studies and internal memos that show the current regulations are not protecting the resources. It clearly sets forth suggestions that can address these issues immediately.

Utah specific examples:

From pages 116-117

"Utah -- Fishlake National Forest

USFS study concludes that many ORV riders are uneducated about trail etiquette, regulations, safety, and the potential for inflicting serious resource damage. In addition, the study indicates that there is no contingency plan to impose ceilings on ATV use, should the system become overused. Even if the trails were to become overused, the study concedes that it would be hard to ascertain such overuse due to the inadequate monitoring efforts.

Utah -- Wasatch-Cache National Forest

In the Wasatch-Cache National Forest in Utah, conflict between motorized and non-motorized users as well as soil and vegetation damage attributable to ORV use has been documented. Cross-country skiers are in conflict with snowmobilers and non-motorized recreationists have expressed concerns over the preservation of the watershed and scenic values of the canyon.

In addition, the USFS concedes that illegal ATV use of Noblett's Canyon on the Kamas Ranger District in violation of the 1988 Travel Plan (which designated the area as open only to non-motorized use) has not been addressed and enforcement has been minimal ( See, Noblett's Access Project Environmental Assessment -- August 1996). Instead of augmenting law enforcement activities in this area, the USFS elected to officially open the area to ORV use. This illegal use was determined to detrimentally impact soil, water, vegetation, and wildlife. Indeed, based on a survey of the area, a forest soil scientist declared that "the present design and location of the stream crossings (prior to opening the area to ORV use) in middle Nobletts canyon is unacceptable for any wheeled vehicle traffic and will have significant detrimental effects on stream condition and water quality." ( See, August 28, 1995 memorandum from Paul K. Flood to District Ranger, Kamas Ranger District, re: Field Assistance Trip - Nobletts Canyon)."

QUESTIONS RAISED FOR THE THREE FORESTS

  1. What documentation have these three Forests compiled regarding enforcement of OHV use?
  2. Has there been any documentation regarding resource damage?
  3. What regulations currently exist to limit resource damage from OHV use?

RELEVANCE TO FOREST MANAGEMENT

The SMU Alternative will include the provisions of the petition, as they are clearly linked to long-term sustainability of native biodiversity and ecosystem integrity on these Forests.