The General believes it is helpful to occasionally go back in time and review a specific land-use event that may give riders insight into an agency action and what the OHV community’s response was or should have been and if that response was effective.
The case-study for today is the post-Angora-fire decision by the Tahoe National Forest to ban OHV use on their trail network during the summer of 2007 because of critical fire danger.
FS 2007 News Release with OHV Restrictions
http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/tahoe/news/07_news_releases/07_jun_29_addl_fire_rest.shtml
The case-study for today is the post-Angora-fire decision by the Tahoe National Forest to ban OHV use on their trail network during the summer of 2007 because of critical fire danger.
FS 2007 News Release with OHV Restrictions
http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/tahoe/news/07_news_releases/07_jun_29_addl_fire_rest.shtml
*
*
*
*
*
*
As the western representative for the BlueRibbon Coalition, I was shocked by the Forest’s rather unprecedented action to ban OHV use even on designated trails. Historically, most Forests allow OHV use on their trail and road networks – even through times of critical fire danger – since OHVs operating with legal spark arresters on trails are not considered a fire danger.
The closure was met with fierce opposition by many riders who wanted OHV groups to file a lawsuit or raise hell in some form or fashion. However, another tactic was employed by The General and several other organizational leaders and that effort included us voicing our strong objection to the unwarranted closure while also stating our equally strong feelings and understanding about the devastating impacts of the recent Angora Fire on the local community and Forest Service staff.
I believe our message of objection and concern about the unprecedented temporary trail closure combined with a thread of understanding and support including our request that the agency keep OHV trails open in future orders related to critical fire conditions resulted in OHV trails remaining open in this year’s Fire Closure Order
*
*
*
As the western representative for the BlueRibbon Coalition, I was shocked by the Forest’s rather unprecedented action to ban OHV use even on designated trails. Historically, most Forests allow OHV use on their trail and road networks – even through times of critical fire danger – since OHVs operating with legal spark arresters on trails are not considered a fire danger.
The closure was met with fierce opposition by many riders who wanted OHV groups to file a lawsuit or raise hell in some form or fashion. However, another tactic was employed by The General and several other organizational leaders and that effort included us voicing our strong objection to the unwarranted closure while also stating our equally strong feelings and understanding about the devastating impacts of the recent Angora Fire on the local community and Forest Service staff.
I believe our message of objection and concern about the unprecedented temporary trail closure combined with a thread of understanding and support including our request that the agency keep OHV trails open in future orders related to critical fire conditions resulted in OHV trails remaining open in this year’s Fire Closure Order
*
*
FS 2009 News Release with OHV restricted to trails and roads
http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/tahoe/news/09_news_releases/news-2009-07-27-fire-restrictions-begin.shtml
FS 2009 News Release with OHV restricted to trails and roads
http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/tahoe/news/09_news_releases/news-2009-07-27-fire-restrictions-begin.shtml
*
*
Many times in land-use advocacy the easy way would be to throw red meat to the masses by making undeliverable promises of revenge, litigation, and retribution on agency staff that do not do our bidding. While taking the agency to task on policy issues is legitimate and sometimes necessary, there will come an occasion where you have to blend advocacy, policy, access, effectiveness, and statesmanship into a position that looks at the big picture and considers the human element. Is making the right call easy? Not always, but it should be.
# # #
Many times in land-use advocacy the easy way would be to throw red meat to the masses by making undeliverable promises of revenge, litigation, and retribution on agency staff that do not do our bidding. While taking the agency to task on policy issues is legitimate and sometimes necessary, there will come an occasion where you have to blend advocacy, policy, access, effectiveness, and statesmanship into a position that looks at the big picture and considers the human element. Is making the right call easy? Not always, but it should be.
# # #
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment