Tuesday, August 31, 2010

BREAKING NEWS - FS Puts Hold on Launch of Subpart A Travel Planning

The Recreation HQ wants to share some breaking news regarding the potential launch of Subpart A of Travel Management in Region 5 and elsewhere.
PHOTO: First person to guess where The General is in this photo gets an Official QWR T-Shirt
CONTEST UPDATE: Karl Hankins of the Redding Dirt Riders correctly IDd the trail - congrats to Karl - T-Shirt on the way.

Yesterday, The General received a tip from one of his OHV colleagues that the Washington Office of the FS was placing a temporary hold on the launch of new Subpart A travel planning at the Forest level.

That rumor was just confirmed to be true according to an update to the Subpart A Focus Group from the Center for Collaborative Policy that states the FS has indeed postponed the launch of Subpart A planning pending further review.

Subpart A Focus Group Info

This is huge news! HQ believes the many phone calls and comments you have made to FS officials -- cautioning them against launching a new planning effort that had not been fully vetted – played a major role in this decision to hold back the launch of Subpart A.

Also, HQ believes the recent “Subpart A” lawsuit filed by anti-OHV groups against the Stanislaus NF’s Subpart B Travel Plan may have had the unintended effect of showing the FS their “lawsuit cards.” The General likes to call this “premature litigation”

Blog on the Stanislaus NF’s Lawsuit and the Green’s Lust for Closures

HQ will continue to follow this breaking story. But for now, let us celebrate the fact that the agency appears to be reevaluating the wisdom of launching an ill-advised effort that only guarantees that the FS will be hit with an endless parade of green lawsuits if a unit does not close enough routes to satisfy the enviro’s insatiable appetite for trail restrictions.

This reminds me of the old parable of the Scorpion (greens) and the Frog (FS) where the Stanislaus lawsuit clearly shows what the scorpion intends to do when the frog is piggy backing it across the Subpart A planning pond.

Thanks for your service and vigilance!

Monday, August 30, 2010

"Designate the D#@& Trail" - Next Steps in TMR

During the recent Gulf Oil Crisis, many of us remember when President Obama issued the order to BP to, “Plug the D$%# Hole.” In a similar vein, The General is urging the Forest Service to, “Plan for and Designate the Darn Trail.”
PHOTO: One of the Historic (and signed) OHV Routes closed in Shasta T ROD.

The agency has boldly proclaimed at public meetings and in most TMR Subpart B planning efforts that the Record of Decision’s route network was only the foundation of its OHV trail system and that more planning and designations would take place.

Even if you have disagreed with your local Forest’s recent TMR ROD, you should be asking the District Ranger or Forest Supervisor if they will live up to their promise to do subsequent project-level trail planning.

Right now, each Forest is planning their work schedule for FY2011 which starts October 1, 2010. Here is an outline of that effort.

1 - The Forest Leadership Team (FLT) should be in the process of making a decision if a trail planning project(s) will be included in the FY2011 Program of Work (POW). That decision will be finalized in a preliminary format in the next week or two.

2 - If the FLT approves a trail planning POW, the Forest Supervisor must make the final decision to adopt the project (the Regional Office will have to concur). If adopted they should establish the prioritization and expectations for attainment of the project and how it balances with other the Forest POW. The trail projects should be hard targets. If identified as soft targets (i.e. not very important) – they won’t get done.

3 - If a trail project is adopted and prioritized it must be identified in a Forest Program Work Plan (PWP).

4 - Fiscal and Performance Accountability - this is where the plan must identify the necessary fiscal and staff resources for accomplishment.

Should a Forest decide to go forward with trail planning projects, the agency will take the appropriate NEPA procedural steps (such as issuing a SOPA) so that it can be prepared to submit a trail planning grant to a relevant state OHV grant program (various states such as CA, ID, OR, CO, etc. have a grant program).

OHV organizations and The General were assured by FS leadership back in 2002 that the CA RID Process (and the subsequent 2005 TMR) was not going to be used by the agency to effect landscape level closures to non-street legal OHVs. Tragically on many Forests throughout the country, that was a false promise.

Let’s see if the agency attempts to regain its credibility with the public by keeping the ROD’s promise of doing subsequent project-level trail planning. You will know in the next few weeks.

Friday, August 27, 2010

MENDOCINO NF ALERT - Road Gated at Crabtree Hot Springs and The Manson Family

Just when the Recreation HQ thinks it has seen everything regarding road and trail closures in Northern California, something beyond bizarre is brought to The General’s attention.
PHOTO: Start of Private Property on NE Corner of Hot Springs Property
Several days ago, HQ was alerted to the fact that the family which owns Crabtree Hot Springs has installed locked gates blocking 17N04, a major public transportation route (often referred to as the “OHV corridor” that links up the Upper Lake and Grindstone Ranger Districts) on the Mendocino National Forest.

After learning about this issue, HQ (on behalf of BRC) contacted the Mendocino National Forest’s Leadership Team and brought this to their attention. Based on those conversations, HQ believes the Forest is giving this “access crisis” its full attention and expects to have an update shortly.

In the meantime, a member of the public wrote a story in a local newspaper about the closure. Unfortunately, the writer wrongly identifies the county sheriff, Rodney Mitchell, as the point person for folks to send their grievances to.

Local Story/Letter to Editor on Crabtree Closure (Uncanny resemblance to the Manson info below)

Manson Family Picnic Website with Crabtree Issue

Manson Family Picnic Missive Wrongly Directing Folks to the County Sheriff

While this issue is being addressed by the Forest, HQ urges riders not to use the portion of 17N04 that transects the private property. Rather, OHVers should allow the Forest to work with the county sheriff and others to find a long-term solution to this issue.

If you have concerns, HQ requests that you correctly address those notes to the lead agency (the FS) and the proper staff. For now, send those concerns to:

Mike Burmann
OHV Manager
Upper Lake Ranger District
Email: mburmann@fs.fed.us

Be assured, The General will work to see that a solution is found in either the collaborative, administrative, or legal arenas.

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Loss of Freedom at Independence Lake - A Sierra Tragedy

The Recreation HQ has mostly focused on the current battle to protect historic access to motorized trails on public lands. Those efforts include; TMR, Obamuments, eco-lawsuits, and new Wilderness or other restrictive land proposals.
PHOTO: Map of Independence Lake (click on map for expanded view to see roads, boat ramp, and campground)

Today, HQ wants to direct your attention to a small albeit important water-based access fight currently taking place at Independence Lake near the Little Truckee Summit OHV/OSV staging area.

Aug. 25 Article on Lake Fight

This hugely popular lake was managed by Sierra Pacific Power and was open for use by campers, power boaters, fisherman, and the general public. Recently, The Nature Conservancy “bought” the 2,300 acres that surrounded the lake from the power company.
Of the $15 million dollar purchase about $13 million dollars were public funds.

TNC Project Overview

What makes this story important is that there are a small yet grimly determined group (several are BRC members) of local users who think they got the raw end of the deal (they did!) when TNC closed the campground, roads, and boat ramp (click on the above map to see the ramp, campground icons and the roads) to the public and banned the use of even small fishing boats with trolling motors on the lake.

HQ believes that with the current trend of power companies divesting themselves of land surrounding water projects that riders (and water users) should be engaged in any public process surrounding these land purchases.

The General will be watching this issue as the loss of public access to lakes in California via “less than honest or transparent” land deals is just as important as losing historic access to motorized trails. This also begs the question, “Should public monies be used to buy lands and then close them to local users?” HQ believes the answer is a big NO.

Rather, these lands that often sit in the middle of our National Forests should be transferred to the adjacent federal land agency that has a multiple-use mandate vs. a green land trust with a mission to restrict or ban historic public use on lands or waters they acquire.

Thanks for your interest in this story!

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

OHV Legal Fundraising Fatigue

As part of his work for BRC, The General is often given the lead regarding fundraising for legal efforts in his district. What has always been a difficult job has now become even more troublesome given the ongoing economic crisis in the country.
PHOTO: The General on a Designated Trail in Six Rivers NF

First, HQ wants to thank all of you (and you know who you are) who have donated to BRC’s legal efforts in CA including Six Rivers, Eldorado 2, So Cal Roadless, Clear Creek, and CDCA WEMO-NECO.

Link to Page 16 of Current BRC Online Magazine’s Legal Update

Second, HQ wants to encourage all riders -- who have promised to support BRC legal efforts but have not yet donated funds -- to go online and make that donation now.

HQ understands the difficult economic situation faced by many OHV families and businesses. If you are able to fulfill that commitment (a promise that TG is counting on), please go online and make that legal donation today at:

BRC Online Donations

HQ thanks you in advance for your review of this request. Your fiscal support – or lack thereof - for these cases will be used as a decision metric for OHV involvement in future litigation. A special salute to those who have and are continuing to make fiscal donations to our legal efforts.

Contact info for The Recreation HQ

Recreation HQ
555 Honey Lane
Oakley, CA 94561
Email: damador@cwo.com

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Prop. 21 - New Tax, Slush Fund, or Good Idea?

The Recreation HQ wants to remind riders that we are heading into the heat of the 2010 political election season. There will be many issues and candidates for OHVers to review and consider.
PHOTO: HQ's trusty 2001 Montero (with 136K miles)
One such issue is the California State Parks Initiative (Prop 21). On several occasions The General has shared his views on that plan to create a $500,000 dollar/yr. slush fund that will be used, among other things, as a way to shunt monies to environmental groups and green agencies (that have nothing to do with state parks) such as the Ocean Protection Council.

HQ’s March 10 Overview of Prop. 21

As HQ told the Sac Bee reporter when he called for info (info that was left out of the “crime in state parks” article) regarding TG’s view on state parks, OHV, and Prop. 21… “OHVers have several ways to look at this issue. For those who use SVRAs, it might be a fiscal wash since they won’t have to pay entry fees. For those who only ride on federal lands, they might feel it is a double or triple tax since their green sticker funds already go to support those units. But the real question for the proponents of Prop. 21 is if the 60-80 percent of Californians who don’t use state parks will want to pay another tax for something they don’t use?”

It looks like The General is not the only one questioning the fiscal wisdom of Prop. 21. In the link below, Michelle Steele gives an excellent overview from her perspective.

Michelle Steele’s take on Prop 21 as a new car tax

HQ loves state parks and its concerns should not to be taken as a lack of support for either motorized or non-motorized units. Rather, The General questions the wisdom of asking taxpayers to cough up scarce monies in this current economic downturn to fund a program that in large part simply creates yet another slush fund in Sacramento.

Thursday, August 19, 2010

New Green Subpart A Lawsuit Shows Lust for Closures

The Recreation HQ was not surprised today when it opened its email to find that CBD, The Wilderness Society, and other green groups filed a “Subpart A” based lawsuit against the Stanislaus National Forest’s recent ROD for TMR.
PHOTO: The General on Field Tour with Recreation Outdoor Coalition

The General along with many pro-access Forest Service employees have known that the original 2002 “Farrington Triangle” and the subsequent 2005 TMR were developed by closure advocates within the agency and lobbyists on K Street to effect landscape level closures or to set up the agency to be targets of anti-access groups and their lawsuits.

Most of us knew the Forest Service would never be able to develop lawsuit-proof TMR plans that could withstand the much anticipated and never ending parade of nuisance lawsuits filed by green groups to force the agency to close tens of thousands of miles of roads, trails, and areas to motorized use.

What is new about this lawsuit is that it largely bases its flawed legal merit on the “minimum road network,” fiscal restraints, and forest-wide travel analysis found in Subpart A.

It is The General’s belief that no amount of planning that treats the OHV community in a fair manner will satisfy the anti-motorized community’s lust for landscape level closures.

All this suit does is substantiate HQ’s working thesis that today’s TMR is being used to close the Forest to public use. In the rare case where a Forest tries to strike a balance, the enviros have shown they will club that unit into submission until they get the desired amount of trails and roads closed to motorized access.

This suit should give pause to the agency as it prepares to launch Subpart A planning in Region 5. The question for the agency is, “Do we have enough resources to craft fair-mined plans that can withstand green lawsuits or should we continue to bow at the alter of the environmental movement to avoid those suits?” I can guarantee you the agency does not have the resources to fight lawsuits on every Forest. Hence, it is my fear the agency will continue to offer the public plans that close historic roads and trails on an unprecedented scale to motorized use.

It may be a good agency strategy to recognize they don’t have the resources at this time to fight these battles. Rather they should simply stick with the current Subpart B plans and allow various Forests to complete the much promised subsequent “trail plans” that were promised to the OHV community in many a ROD’s narrative.

What is for certain is if the agency continues with Subpart A planning, they WILL be sued by anti-access groups if said plans don’t close thousands of miles of roads and trails.

Folks we are in what I call the “OHV Dark Ages” where common sense management and fairness are being replaced by dark lawsuits designed to make riders an endangered species. We should be asking our elected officials to help with NEPA and EAJA reform to counter this onslaught. Some of them already are!

Do we give up? NO! We continue to fight back and stay the course. These times call for a strong heart and will. The HQ thanks you for your efforts and support.

Monday, August 16, 2010

HQ Closed Aug 16-18

The General will be in the field at meetings Aug 16-18. The HQ will reopen on Aug. 19.

QWR Features Ed Santin's "Quiet" 2001 YZ250F

The Recreation HQ will be posting the sound levels reported to QWR from other “Quiet Warriors” out there in riding land who also work hard to promote a responsible “exhaust note” ethic.
PHOTO: Specialed on on his quiet 2001 YZ250F

On such individual is AMA District 36’s own Ed “specialed” Santin who remains a major national force in the field of sound education. Ed, a member of the Dirt Diggers North MC, has carried his message to the AMA, elected officials, state parks, and most importantly the riding community.

QWR is proud to feature Ed’s 2001 Yamaha YZ250F. with a Big Gun exhaust system with two quiet cores installed. The bike tests at 91.5 dBA and will run with any other 250F.

Specialed notes the bike is 10 years old and has only required one piston change and some valve shims. One of his goals is to have “sound cards” produced so that they can be handed out to riders by groups such as AMA, BRC, D36, and QWR.

Thanks Ed for all you do and for being part of the Quiet Warrior Team. It is only fitting that your bike is the first “quiet bike” to be featured here at the HQ.

If you are a quiet warrior, please feel free to send in a short description and photo of your bike with its most current sound level reading as detected by a certified OHV sound tester.

Thanks for your service!
Email submissions to: damador@quietwarriorracing.com

Friday, August 13, 2010

Quiet Warrior Racing Announces Official Sound Bike for 2010

The General is proud to announce that Quiet Warrior Racing has selected (actually it was donated) its official sound education bike for 2010. As some of you know, The General has been on the forefront of advocating for the use of sound compliant exhaust systems on off-highway motorcycles. QWR is now supporting that same ethic for street bikes using SAE J -2825.

Over the years as a land use consultant to the BRC, he has promoted 96dBA on public lands using the SAE J-1287 20 inch sound test for OHVs. Since 1996, TG has also helped as a volunteer sound tester at various OHV events held on public and private lands.

Recently, he renamed his consulting business to Quiet Warrior Racing. QWR is a recreation and natural resource-based land use firm that specializes in a number of venues including; event support, field research, public land policy analysis, legal research, political consulting, product evaluation, government/media affairs, and public relations. It will also offer some gear with official QWR logo.

QWR will allow TG to continue his efforts to champion a responsible on and off-road land use ethic for BRC and other interests. To make that work fun, QWR will be campaigning for the rest of 2010 on a well-used (and in need of few upgrades) 1994 Suzuki RMX 250. With a repacked 90s era FMF ISDE Spark Arrester it tests at 92 dBA at 3750 rpm.

If you are interested in sponsoring the efforts of QWR or the RMX feel free to drop TG a note at:

Don Amador, Owner
Quiet Warrior Racing
555 Honey Lane
Oakley, CA 94561
Email: damador@quietwarriorracing.com
Office: 925.625.5309

If you want to support QWR by bidding on an official T-Shirt go to:

Thanks to those who are already supporting QWR -- it means more than you really can ever know.

Congressman Herger Sends Letter to Sec. Harris Sherman Regarding TMR

The Recreation HQ wants to give riders an update regarding the fight for OHV access in Region 5. As you know, the Shasta Trinity National Forest and many other units under guidance from Region 5 (head office of the FS in CA) have closed thousands of miles of historic trails and logging roads to both street legal and green sticker vehicles.
PHOTO: Jeep road (marked as open on current Forest Map) to a cool lookout was closed to all vehicles in Shasta Trinity ROD.

A lot of OHV groups and county officials have protested these unfair closures and were joined by Congressman Wally Herger. Congressman Herger has again weighed into this battle with an August 11 letter to Harris Sherman, an Undersecretary of Agriculture.

Herger’s June 9 and11 Letters to Region 5

The General has shared his frustration with Region 5 on many occasions about the unprecedented steps it took to misuse TMR to close roads, trails, and areas to legitimate OHV use.

With Subpart A waiting in the wings to be launched in September by Region 5, the question for them is if they will take a step back from hard deadlines and put some flexibility in Subpart A to allow for units to do important trail planning projects, etc.

See Blog on Recent Subpart A Focus Group Meeting

Stay tuned for more updates on the never ending TMR saga in Region 5.

Thursday, August 12, 2010

An NCA or Monument is Coming to a Riding Area Near You

The Recreation HQ has been very busy over the last few days dealing with a number of access issues and wants to share its thoughts with you regarding the ARRA news release on August 6 about the rest of DOI’s “secret documents” related to the creation of National Monuments by the Obama administration.

ARRA link to DOI Documents

News Article on Document Find

As you know, The General is a veteran of many battles in OHV Wars starting with Clinton’s War on the West in the mid 1990s. Those fights included the Clinton/Gore unholy triad of Forest “Rules.”

Planning Rule – This rule birthed the subsequent Bush-era planning rules that were successfully challenged by environmental groups and the new Obama planning effort that excludes the topic of recreation from the proposal.

Transportation/Roads Rule – This rule spawned the Bush-era TMR that has been perverted on many Forests to close thousands of miles of OHV routes.

Roadless Rule - This rule continues to be litigated. BRC and others are still in court on this issue.

The simple lesson learned from those battles is when the environmental/political industrial complex fronts such proposals that you as a rider will see some manifestation of those plans enacted into law or created by presidential fiat.

What is interesting - albeit very disturbing - about the newly acquired documents is that DOI is recommending to the White House that if local NCA or National Monument proposals are not worked out with the local users that the president should bypass the collaborative process and designate the project area as a National Monument.

While it is commendable and certainly appropriate to object in principle to a NCA designation in areas that are already “protected” by federal land use laws and regulations, The General believes that OHV should be involved in any local stakeholder process regarding proposed NCA or National Monument legislation.

BRC Support of the Collaborative Process in S. 2921

Should riders and clubs continue to object to the misuse of the Antiquities Act by the president to make restrictive land designations? The General believes the answer is a solid yes.

However, when OHV is given the opportunity to participate in a stakeholder group - regarding upcoming legislation - we should. That is the current political paradigm - like it or not.

A big salute to all of you who remain engaged during these very difficult times.

Friday, August 6, 2010

Access State of Emergency Declared in Northern California Forest?

Recently, the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors reviewed the possibility of declaring a state of emergency on lands managed by the Mendocino National Forest because of the threat to public safety by illegal dope growers.

Aug 5 Article on State of Emergency

On June 21, HQ blogged about the closure and signs posted in AZ warning the public of criminal activity on the border including drug smuggling and human trafficking.
In that post, The General suggested the Forest Service take a break from travel management to focus its resources on real issues such as illegal dope growing vs. the faux issue of a grave environmental crisis posed by OHV use.

Actually, it is well known that the best defense against illegal dope growers is to have a managed and well-used OHV trail system (criminals don’t like to be in areas where there are a lot of people). Dope growers mostly practice their trade in areas where motorized public access has been restricted or banned.

Blog on Illegal Activity and Request to Push the TMR Reset Button

For those of you who ride in the Mendocino NF, the threat to public safety because of increased marijuana growing is nothing new. Many of us remember that last year, the agency basically banned its law enforcement officers from patrolling federal land in the Covelo area.

Rather than starting Subpart A’s TAP process in September, HQ urges the agency to focus LE efforts on protecting the public. In addition, R5 should postpone TAP on Forests where there is a need to do post Subpart B project level trail plans in fulfillment of the agency’s promise that Subpart B was “just the beginning.”

Again, things are 180 degrees backwards in the country. Trail riders are being banned from historic routes while criminal activity is being ignored. HQ suggests the federal government spend more time addressing real crime vs. trying to make criminals out of law abiding citizens who like to ride a dirt-bike or drive a jeep.

Thanks for your service!

Thursday, August 5, 2010

Update on Subpart A - Focus Group Meets for R5 Program

Yesterday, The General (on behalf of BRC) participated in a Region 5 focus group hosted by the Center for Collaborative Policy. The meeting was related to the September rollout of the Forest Service’s Subpart A Travel Analysis Process (TAP).

The following groups (a lot of heavy hitters) were invited to attend the meeting in Sacramento. Here is the list; American Hiking Society, Backcountry Horsemen Association, Blue Ribbon Coalition, California State Parks OHV Division, California State Water Resources Control Board, California Association of 4-Wheel Drive Clubs, California Equestrian Trails and Lands Coalition, California Off-Road Vehicle Association, California Outdoor Heritage Alliance, Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation, Great Old Broads for Wilderness, International Mountain Bike Association, National Forest Recreation Association, Pacific Crest Trail Association, Recreation Outdoors Coalition, Regional Council of Rural Counties, The Wilderness Society, Trout Unlimited, and the Wildlands CPR/ Natural Trails & Water Coalition.

Six Steps of TAP

The FS said the main focus of TAP in Region 5 is to analyze level 1 and 2 roads. Remember that level 2 roads are the roughly graded roads that are open to green sticker vehicles. TAP will also look at level 3-5 roads and some trails although the agency spokesman said that system trails are not part of this process.

HQ has several initial concerns with this process. First, TAP (a non-NEPA process) is replacing the Roads Analysis Process (a NEPA process). Although the agency said TAP is not a decision document, it will in fact be used to influence or drive subsequent site-specific (road ripping/decommissioning, road closures, trail closures) and programmatic (Forest Plans) NEPA processes.

Historically, anti-OHV groups advocate for NEPA to be used on all planning efforts (with a special focus for OHV) because it allows them to gum up any trail project with appeals, lawsuits, and objections. However, when The General and CAL4WD articulated our concerns about TAP not being a NEPA process… the hard-core green groups sat in stone cold silence with Cheshire cat grins on their faces. That silence spoke volumes.

Secondly, the past history of Region 5 creating special and unique access restrictions (i.e. 3 mile limit on mixed-use roads, little or no designation of unauthorized routes, etc.) because of threats of lawsuits or the actual filing a lawsuits could mean that the game is rigged where the greens bury the agency with an avalanche of “environmental concerns” thereby creating controversy… thus closures. Many of us witnessed that paradigm in Subpart B of TMR in Region 5 and it could rear its ugly head in TAP.

Third, R5 has set a hard deadline of January 2012 for completion by all Forests in CA. HQ has concerns about arbitrary deadlines that preclude a quality product such as was evidenced in Subpart B.

The “trust factor” was also brought up for discussion by the spokesperson for Rural Counties.

The representative from the California Outdoor Heritage Alliance made the point that the historic use of the Forest (hunter camps, fishing access, OHV use, equestrian trails, etc.) is already well known by the Forest since much of that use has been going on for decades. And, the fact that the public is using the Forest should be a key foundation in TAP.

HQ believes that historic and current use should be just as important if not more so than the soon to be released data dump by enviro groups citing pending environmental disasters if most of the roads used by OHVs are not closed.

Be assured, HQ will continue to give input into TAP and will review it when rolled out in September. Will TAP be simply a continuation of a process that disenfranchises the public and local governments or will it be a new start? That question will have to be answered by Region 5.

Thanks for your service and thanks to the pro-access groups for being there!

PS – It was disappointing and embarrassing to see IMBA carrying the water for the anti-OHV groups at this meeting.

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

New Anti-OHV Lawsuit to Stop Bridges and Toilets

By now, many riders that follow the Recreation HQ are aware of another anti-OHV lawsuit filed on July 30 by the Center for Biological Diversity and the Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation against OHMVR and the Eldorado National Forest.
Photo: The General on a trail in the Rock Creek Area

The filing of this new lawsuit in state court (yet another example in the long line of anti-OHV lawsuits filed by the aforementioned antagonists) seeks to establish a new regulatory “high bar” for grants awarded for trail projects on federal lands. The suit actually is complaining about many of the trail improvements that these plaintiffs have been demanding over the years to address dirt bikes crossing the steam and sanitation at the campgrounds.

The suit complains about new bridges being installed to keep OHVs out of the water crossings, new trail construction, and new toilets being installed where people camp. That’s right… complain about dirt bikes crossing the creek and sanitation and then when the FS/OHMVR works to address those concerns… sue them!

Again, the suit fails to acknowledge those details as well as the fact that OHV recreation has been an “authorized” and approved use of the area via the Forest Plan and the Rock Creek EIS.

The General knows OHMVR and the FS are reviewing this case and believes they too are troubled by the Center’s ongoing and unrelenting efforts to close the area for both casual riding and permitted AMA sanctioned events.

Make no mistake; this suit is a direct attack on users, the FS, and the OHV Division’s grant program. OHV legal interests should be watching this case and intervene at the appropriate time should the need arise.

HQ thanks the followers of this blog who are just as, if not more so, committed to defending our preferred form of recreation from unjust legal action by extreme environmental groups.

Thanks for your service!