OHV Cost Recovery Fight on Eldorado NF

The Recreation HQ has been working with AMA D36 and others to address the issue of exorbitant fees being charged to clubs for permitted events by some FS units under the guise of “cost recovery.”

*

PHOTO: The General riding one of the event trails for the 2006 Fools Gold Enduro

*

Overview of 2006 FS Cost Recovery Program
http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/caribbean/passes/cr-communication-plan_feb06.doc

The Eldorado Fight was recently highlighted in this Sac Bee article
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/07/18/2897662/canceled-forest-recreation-events.html

Also, HQ’s friend Jon Crowley wrote an opinion piece
http://sxsnews.com/index.php/2010/07/the-public-pays-extortionary-fees-to-use-public-land/

The public process for the 2006 Cost Recovery Rule actually started back in 1999. BRC urged its members to comment as well as submitting its own formal comments.

2000 BRC Cost Recovery Article and Concerns
http://www.sharetrails.org/magazine/article/?id=1222

As some of you know, the focus of the aforementioned cancelled permitted OHV events is on the Eldorado National Forest. The General along with leaders of CERA and AMA D36 met with the Forest Supervisor to express our strong concerns and objections to the unit’s misuse of cost recovery to essentially bankrupt several OHV clubs.

The Forest did not really have an answer to our questions about why their cost recovery charges are so extreme when other federal units (Mendocino NF, Cow Mountain, Chappie-Shasta, and CCMA when it was open, etc.) with AMA-sanctioned permitted events have more reasonable charges.

The General will say what the Forest was afraid to state. HQ believes the high cost being charged to clubs is because there is a nationally-recognized anti-OHV leader who is a vexatious litigant. She lives on the Forest and uses her green legal clout as a club to beat the Forest Service into submission with legal action or threats of legal action unless the agency uses cost recovery to put the clubs out-of-business.

Description of Vexatious Litigant
http://www.gillhams.com/dictionary/145.cfm

The issue of cost recovery is complex. Riders must understand that the issuance of permits for most recreational events is totally discretionary. At the end of the day, the FS does not have to issue a permit if it does not want to. HQ does not believe that litigation regarding the Eldorado issue has judicial merit at this time. Rather, OHVers should look to resolve this issue via regulatory reform or political pressure.

Here are several suggestions.

1 – AMA, BRC, and other national groups should seek amendments or revisions to the cost recovery rule that might allow the agency more flexibility when faced with a vexatious litigant or other adverse circumstance.

2 – Congress might have a role in passing legislation to address exorbitant fees

3 – Congress should pass EAJA reform to discourage and not reward vexatious litigants
with taxpayer funded awards.

HQ is certain there are answers - albeit not easy ones - to this issue. OHV clubs that use the Eldorado NF are seeing the ugly side of OHV Wars. Enviros have perfected the fine art of green litigation to stop OHV recreation (and other uses such as farming in the Central Valley, logging on federal lands, etc.).

BRC working with other OHV partners have been and will continue to fight back. One recent victory regarding TMR is noted in the MIC press release below:

MIC News Release on recent TMR victory where trails and campgrounds were reopened
http://www.mic.org/news070210.cfm

Just how the Eldorado NF cost recovery issue is resolved is yet to be determined. One thing for sure is that the OHV community cannot give up and let the extreme enviros succeed in kicking us out of the Forest.

Thanks for your commitment and service!

S. 2921, Wilderness, and Land Use in the 21st Century

The Recreation HQ wants to expand a bit regarding BRC’s support for S. 2921 - the California Desert Protection Act of 2010 as highlighted in The General’s blog regarding the Obama Outdoor Event in LA.

Blog on Obama LA Event with CWC Mention of BRC Support for S. 2921
http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/2010/07/ohvers-attend-obama-outdoor-event-in-la.html

BRC Testimony/Support for S. 2921
http://www.sharetrails.org/uploads/BRC_Written_Testimony_on_S.2921_05.25.10_FINAL.pdf

At the LA event, HQ talked with a number of OHVers and other public land access interests about S. 2921. There were a lot of OHVers who support the bill as it is currently written. Other OHV groups might have supported it but were concerned the bill language would change in committee (a valid concern). Several access groups were adamantly opposed to the bill. Good news it that most of us respect the other group’s opinion and when at odds – we can respectfully agree to disagree.

HQ knows the bill is not perfect and that it is a compromise piece of legislation. If this was 1975 would OHV be supporting this bill? I don’t think so. However, a lot has changed since the old days of 1960-1980s era Big Gulp Wilderness Bills where enviros would push through land use bills that did not have consensus nor support from local stakeholders, county officials, and users.

That old Wilderness paradigm was changed in the 2006 Northern California Coastal Wild Heritage Wilderness Act. (HR 233). Just as in HR 233, proponents of S. 2921 held endless meetings with local stakeholders, participated in numerous field trips to ground-truth routes, and although it designated a lot of new Wilderness…not one legal OHV route was closed in HR 233.

HQ believes S. 2921 captured HR 233’s spirit of collaboration by designating OHV use in a number of OHV areas similar to the 2006 Cow Mountain Recreation Area where OHV use was codified.

A great read on the efforts of BRC and others to make sure OHV and access were included in HR 233 is archived at MTB Action
http://www.mbaction.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=news&mod=News&mid=9A02E3B96F2A415ABC72CB5F516B4C10&tier=3&nid=8B813024BC72495897FB8773FBFD174A

Just as with Obama’s Great Outdoor Initiative, OHV must be actively engaged in the political process. S. 2921, HR 233, and Obama’s GOA prove The General’s now famous axiom that “All land use decisions (and associated processes) are political decisions” and is a cornerstone of modern OHV advocacy.

Is S. 2921 perfect? No. Compromise bills never are. However, the other option of staying home is not viable either. Will green groups continue to push for new Wilderness and NCAs after S. 2921 is signed into law? Yes. To counter that, OHV must be just as committed to champion our access rights to public land and to stay engaged.

Thanks for your service regardless of if you support S. 2921 or not.

BRC and Shasta County to File Appeals on Shasta Trinity NF Travel Plan

The Trinity Journal got one thing right… that BRC, Shasta County and other groups will be filing appeals on a travel plan that functionally closes almost 100% of the single track motorcycle and ATV trails less than 50 inches in width that are currently in use on the Forest.

*

PHOTO: The General on a trail closed in the travel plan

*

April 14 TJ Article Where You Can Also Post Comments
http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2010-04-14/Front_Page/Forest_road_rules_draw_fire.html

Blog on BRC Appeal and Info on Shasta Trinity Travel Plan
http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/2010/04/writing-appeal-on-earth-day-right-or.html

The General is not quite sure what Trinity County Supervisor means when she said that, “There was not much input from off-highway vehicle riders in this area as the proposals were being considered.”

On the contrary, The Recreation HQ is aware that groups like the Redding Dirt Riders and the Recreation Outdoor Coalition submitted maps with over 800 miles of premier single track trails and mixed use roads recommended for designation but those comments were purposely ignored by the Shasta Trinity National Forest.

As the May 10 deadline for filing an appeal draws closer, The General believes the Forest has created a fatally flawed document that does not meet the spirit and intent of the Travel Management Rule. The Recreation HQ hopes that local counties will file an appeal and stand up for the access rights of their local citizens. At the end of the day when the federal government rules against the people the county government is our best hope to find resolution.

CA OHV Commissioner Wins Appeal and Closes Routes on Modoc Forest

In late February, the Shasta County Board of Supervisors praised the Modoc National Forest’s Travel Management Record of Decision because the plan added 331 miles of unauthorized routes as Forest Service System Trails and designated 513 miles of Level 3 Roads as available for use by non-street legal dirt-bikes, ATVs, and side-by-sides. In contrast, the BOC criticized the Shasta Trinity National Forest’s plan to close almost 100% of its currently legal dirt-bike and ATV trails less than 50 inches in width. The article also noted an appeal filed by the Wilderness Society against the Modoc plan.

See Article about BOS Praise for Modoc Decision and Threat of Appeal
http://www.redding.com/news/2010/feb/25/modoc-travels-a-different-path-on-road-closures/

Well folks, the Recreation HQ was not surprised to learn yesterday about the Regional Forest’s decision to uphold the recommendation of the Appeal Reviewing Officer to CLOSE all unauthorized routes and to BAN use of non-street legal OHVs on 513 miles of level 3 roads.

See March 11, 2010 Regional Office Decision to Uphold Appeal and CLOSE routes
http://www.sharetrails.org/uploads/Modoc-Appeal-Resol-March-11.2010.pdf

*Stan Van Velsor – who wrote the appeal for The Wilderness Society is also an OHV Commissioner at CA State Parks – Gee, thanks Stan!
Here are the OHV Commission Policies -- see if you think Stan lived up to the spirit and intent of these policies of SB742

http://www.sharetrails.org/uploads/OHMVR-Commission-Policies-SB742.pdf

The General and his legal staff are reviewing the appeal decision as it is the first time that the HQ is aware of an appeal decision overturning a ROD decision without requiring the ROD to be withdrawn and a reset button pushed to start the planning process all over again.

Historically, the NEPA appeal process does not allow for substantive changes to a ROD. Generally only technical or non-substantive changes are allowed.

What the Regional Office has done is take a plan that was crafted with local involvement and decision-making and replaced it with a heavy-handed top-down decision that is an affront to that local process.

As the General told many riders at the Carnegie Rally…”2010 will be a very challenging year regarding OHV access.” This decision sadly fulfills that gloomy albeit realistic prediction.

The Recreation HQ thanks you for your support and for staying engaged.

Riders Want Back In at Clear Creek

The Recreation HQ wanted to share this article that appeared on a NPR website regarding
BLM’s San Jose DEIS public hearing.

PHOTO: The General at a "Warning Sign" at the BLM's Samoa Dunes Recreation Area (OHV, fishing, surfing, equestrian) near Eureka, CA

NPR Story
http://www.scpr.org/news/2010/03/26/atv-sidebar/

The reporter did a pretty good job of capturing the OHV community’s frustration with the continued closure of CCMA. However by focusing on the personal attacks on Rick Cooper (the reporter does capture that BRC did not support hostility or threats) did not detail the fact that the closure is based on Cooper’s fear of a disease that is non-existent in the OHV community..

Rather the reporter could have shown, as BRC and others have requested, that the BLM failed to analyze how the agency or sister land agencies deal with public access and health/safety issues including naturally occurring asbestos. Cooper told me at the San Jose meeting that he did not do that analysis as requested by BRC et al..

If he had done some research he would have found that the Department of Interior does use signing and education as a tool to address NOA and other dangers such as fishermen being washed out to sea, children being drowned at the beach or river, etc.

For example, the US Forest Service addresses NOA through the use of signs, education/outreach, soil treatments, and speed limits vs. an unwarranted and massive land closure.

Forest Service NOA Program/Educational Outreach
http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/noa/pdfs/NOAVisitorInformationPaper.pdf

The article also misses the point about riders being “worried” about NOA. It’s not that riders are not worried about health issues (heck, we wear riding gear, keep our bikes in good condition, and avoid driving off cliffs, etc.) but rather we don’t worry about politically-driven faux issues that are used arbitrarily to make the Hollister Field Office an “OHV Free Zone.”

Thanks for your continued vigilance in the fight for CCMA.

*

Congressman Jim Costa Weighs into Clear Creek Fight

The unexplainable gritty determination of BLM to kick OHV and the public out of Clear Creek is bizarre and does not pass the smell test.

The size and scope of the CCMA closure is unparalleled in the history of the USA. I am not aware of any recreation/access-based federal land closure that even remotely comes close to matching CCMA.

As we approach the March 5 deadline for the public comment period, The General believes we will know what BLM’s intent is for the future of OHV at CCMA.

If BLM does not grant an extension as requested now by two Congressmen, it will signal their intention is to permanently close CCMA to OHV use. It’s just that simple.

See Link to Congressman Jim Costa’s Letter
http://www.sharetrails.org/uploads/CCMA_DEIS_Costa_Letter.pdf

A failure to grant an extension will mean the public process is tainted and that access interests will have to either seek a political or legal remedy to this unwarranted closure. The land-use ball is in BLM’s court.

Light at End of Tunnel in Region 5?

As my readers know, The General continues to have serious concerns about how the Travel Management Rule (TMR) is being used or misused in Region 5 by some Forests as a closure tool. Often times, TMR proposals have very little to do with addressing “cross-country use/travel” as articulated in the Chief’s famous “4-Threats” Speech.

2004 Four Threats Speech
http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2004/speeches/01/idaho-four-threats.shtml

OHVers in many cases are seeing their comments, route submissions, and suggestions apparently ignored by some Forests particularly the Shasta Trinity National Forest. The S-T’s DEIS proposes to close almost 100% of currently legal motorcycle trails and ATV trails less than 50 inches in width.

However, in the case of the Sequoia National Forest’s FEIS is does appear on first read that the Forest did listen to suggestions made by BRC, Stewards of the Sequoia, and others in the development of the modified alternative 3 – the preferred alternative.

SUMMARY OF FEIS (note on pages 76-80 where the Forest responds to suggestions made by BRC, Stewards, and others)
http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/sequoia/projects/travel-management-eis/summary_chapters_1_2.pdf

Although we are not out of the woods yet when it comes to TMR in Region 5 and elsewhere, the Sequoia NF may be an example of where the agency did take to heart some of the public comments and suggestions.

The General urges his followers to stay involved and he salutes those who are!

*

Hunting with OHVs on Public Lands

This last weekend The General was up at tech for the Jackhammer Enduro on the Mendocino National Forest as lead for the BRC/FMF Sound Testing Program for OHVs.

*

*Photo of The General quail hunting in the Southern Sierra
*
Seeing a number of hunters staging from the popular OHV campgrounds in the Fouts Springs area, I was reminded of the need for sportsmen to remember that OHV laws also apply to their activity. Historically, some hunters don’t view themselves as “OHV users.” Rather, they think of themselves as different and that OHV laws don’t apply to them.

The challenge for OHV organizations and agencies has been to improve their outreach to the hunting community regarding the use of ATVs and UTVs on roads and trails. One such effort that includes an instructional video comes from the State of Idaho.


IDAHO’S STAY ON TRAILS HOMEPAGE
http://www.stayontrails.com/

*
HUNTING WITH ATVs VIDEO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3wnd4cXpBE

While watching the video, I had to give credit to both the law enforcement officer and the user who were trying to read a MVUM. Most of the MVUM’s I have seen are hard to decipher… even if you are familiar with the area.

Kudos to the agencies and other folks in Idaho who put this together. Lot’s of good information for the OHV and hunting community.

*

CPSC Hollow Promise?

The General talked with CPSC spokesperson Sonia Hayes-Pleasant today regarding recent reports in some media stories that the CPSC was going to address the ban on youth OHVs in a “few” weeks.

As more local motorcycle shop owners cry foul and motocross/trail-bike moms voice their strong objections to the “ban,” the General agrees with his good friends at the AMA, BRC, ARRA, MIC, SVIA, ORBA -- Keep the pressure on the CPSC by sending letters, making phone calls, AND take a dealer to the local office of your own Member of Congress!!! Be sure and let The General know what your representative said.

See “Kid Chewing on Dirt Bikes?” Article from Today
http://www.wqad.com/news/wqad-cpsia-motorcycles-lead-law-22309,0,6451441.story

BRC Alert

http://www.sharetrails.org/releases/media/?story=633

________________________________________________________
See AMA National Action Alert from Today

Add Your Voice to the Fight Against the Ban on Youth Motorcycles and ATVs!

The American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) continues to ask all riders to protest the recent ban on certain youth motorcycles and ATVs by contacting their Members of Congress

On Feb. 10, 2009, the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA) effectively outlawed the sale of off-highway vehicles (OHVs) intended for youth riders 12-years-old and under. Since that time efforts by the AMA, its sister organization the All-Terrain Vehicle Association (ATVA), the Motorcycle Industry Council, the Specialty Vehicle Industry Association, the Blue Ribbon Coalition, the Off-Road Business Association and others have spurred an outpouring of letters and phone calls to the CPSC and federal legislators.

AMA and ATVA members, racers, riders and fans across the country have responded strongly to the collective calls for action so far, but our work is not over. The current ban on the sale of youth motorcycles and ATVs still threatens the very future of off-highway recreation in America.

Members of Congress and the Chairmen of the CPSC must continue to hear from everyone in the motorcycling community if we are to reverse this ban. You can quickly read more about the issue and gain some useful tools by clicking here.

To send a message to your Senators and Representatives, please click here.
-- End of Alert --

________________________________________________________________
Being familiar with government “bureaucrat speak” – the promise to address our issue in a few weeks could be nothing more than a hollow statement meant to “get the heat” off the agency while it is in the rulemaking process (this often takes up to two years). The General
hopes the agency is sincere about finding a solution.

In addition, The General is awaiting a call from the CPSC’s Executive Director – Patsy Semple – to explain why the agency cannot cut some red tape and provide immediate relief on this issue.

Stay tuned as the national off-road community's temperature continues to rise on this issue. See previous blogs for more information. Keep up the pressure!!!

What Can I Do To Protect Trail Access

As President-elect Obama prepares to take office, I often get asked by trail enthusiasts, “What can I do to preserve my riding opportunities?”

My first response is to remind folks of two old adages; most politics are local and all land-use decisions are political decisions. Based on those realties, I have always believed that engaging your local elected officials and building relationships with them is critically important.

As some of you already know, pro-access county supervisors or city councils can pass resolutions in support of quality trail programs on federal and state lands. Those resolutions and/or letters of support carry weight with the Forest Service, BLM, or state parks.

Also, building relationships with local land managers and their recreation staff is equally important. Helping as a trail volunteer, doing cleanups, etc. is a good way of getting to know your agency decision-maker.

I think we will have to wait and see just what direction the Obama administration takes on land-use. However, we don’t have to wait to start - or continue with – relationship building with local decision-makers.

In the end, all land-use decisions are political decisions. Building relationships with county supervisors, district rangers, area field managers, town council members, park superintendents, and forest supervisors is always a good strategy regardless of who is in the White House.

# # #