Site search
sponsored by
News
ENLARGE
Scott Rabeneau and Kyra are local off-road bikers. Such vehicle use in the Tahoe National Forest is under review by the Forest Service.
A lengthy and complicated draft environmental plan for off-road vehicle use in the Tahoe National Forest is being fiercely debated during a public comment period that ends Nov. 26.
The voluminous document, released in September, numbers more than 1,000 pages and weighs almost 12 pounds.
“This is an unreasonable amount of information for people to digest and comment on in a short period of time,” said Kyra, a member of the Nevada County Woods Riders. “We need more time.”
Forest Service officials are unlikely to grant an extension, however, citing the need to meet a deadline for a final plan in March. The agency already has extended the public coment period by 16 days for a total of two months of review.
Disillusioned off-road vehicle users contend the plan omits significant trails used by locals and doesn’t take into account the economic contributions the group provides to the county’s restaurants, motels and gas stations.
Environmental groups argue that additional trails should not be added when the existing ones are poorly managed and impacts to water quality, wildlife and quiet recreationists are not being thoroughly enough addressed. The Forest Service counters they were addressed.
So far, about 3,000 letters have been submitted, with a majority coming as form letters from the San Francisco-based Wilderness Society, said Tahoe National Forest spokeswoman Ann Westling.
“There’s interest nationally, because a lot of people who don’t live in California visit the Sierra Nevada,” said Stan Van Velsor of The Wilderness Society.
The group is keeping close tabs on eight national forests in the state that will release similar documents in coming months. The Tahoe National Forest is the second after Eldorado to release its draft environmental plan.
“We’re concerned this one be done right,” because it could become a templet for the others, Van Velsor said.
In the works for five years, the off-highway vehicle (OHV) route designation process was begun to respond to the growing number of people who drive motorcycles, quads and vehicles criss-crossing the backcountry.
“It is important to remember this proposal is just a draft,” Forest Supervisor Tom Quinn wrote in a letter. “Your comments will be critical in refining this draft proposal prior to my final decision in March.”
Between 1972 and 2000, off-highway vehicle use grew from about 5 million to almost 36 million users, according to the Tahoe National Forest.
Interest in the route designation process has been strong, with more than 200 people attending an informational workshop in Nevada City last month.
On Oct. 28, about 25 people attended a meeting at the South Yuba River Citizen League’s Nevada City office to map out areas of concern and draft letters.
The purpose of the plan is to protect natural resources while providing challenging and diverse trails for a variety of recreation. About 2,800 miles of roads and non-motorized trails wind throughout the Tahoe National Forest, as well as an additional 1,400 miles of unauthorized trails that off-roaders have used for years.
Seven alternatives to the existing trail network have been identified in the draft plan. The preferred alternative would prohibit cross-country travel, establish seasons of use and add 70 miles of trails to the network.
"No one is really happy with the draft environmental plan. It has a considerable number of omissions,” said Kyra. “Many of those trails are not in there or not analyzed.”
Deer Creek and Diamond Springs, two created trails in the Bulington Ridge area, are noticeably missing, said motorcyclist Joseph Cochran.
“Some of the roads and trails we use are going to be closed forever,” said Cochran.
A coalition of environmental groups such as SYRCL, the Wilderness Society and the Sierra Club voiced concern that the Forest Service focused undue attention on a minority group while failing to sufficiently consider hikers and anglers who go to the forest for a more quiet form of recreation.
“The OHV interests are well organized and well funded. They are a vocal minority in the watershed, for sure,” said Jason Rainey of SYRCL.
When the final environmental impact statement is completed by March 2009, a final map listing all authorized roads and trails is expected to come out in the fall. Each year, Forest Service staff will update the map. “This is not the end. It’s a continuation of the process,” Westling said.
The voluminous document, released in September, numbers more than 1,000 pages and weighs almost 12 pounds.
“This is an unreasonable amount of information for people to digest and comment on in a short period of time,” said Kyra, a member of the Nevada County Woods Riders. “We need more time.”
Forest Service officials are unlikely to grant an extension, however, citing the need to meet a deadline for a final plan in March. The agency already has extended the public coment period by 16 days for a total of two months of review.
Disillusioned off-road vehicle users contend the plan omits significant trails used by locals and doesn’t take into account the economic contributions the group provides to the county’s restaurants, motels and gas stations.
Environmental groups argue that additional trails should not be added when the existing ones are poorly managed and impacts to water quality, wildlife and quiet recreationists are not being thoroughly enough addressed. The Forest Service counters they were addressed.
So far, about 3,000 letters have been submitted, with a majority coming as form letters from the San Francisco-based Wilderness Society, said Tahoe National Forest spokeswoman Ann Westling.
“There’s interest nationally, because a lot of people who don’t live in California visit the Sierra Nevada,” said Stan Van Velsor of The Wilderness Society.
The group is keeping close tabs on eight national forests in the state that will release similar documents in coming months. The Tahoe National Forest is the second after Eldorado to release its draft environmental plan.
“We’re concerned this one be done right,” because it could become a templet for the others, Van Velsor said.
In the works for five years, the off-highway vehicle (OHV) route designation process was begun to respond to the growing number of people who drive motorcycles, quads and vehicles criss-crossing the backcountry.
“It is important to remember this proposal is just a draft,” Forest Supervisor Tom Quinn wrote in a letter. “Your comments will be critical in refining this draft proposal prior to my final decision in March.”
Between 1972 and 2000, off-highway vehicle use grew from about 5 million to almost 36 million users, according to the Tahoe National Forest.
Interest in the route designation process has been strong, with more than 200 people attending an informational workshop in Nevada City last month.
On Oct. 28, about 25 people attended a meeting at the South Yuba River Citizen League’s Nevada City office to map out areas of concern and draft letters.
The purpose of the plan is to protect natural resources while providing challenging and diverse trails for a variety of recreation. About 2,800 miles of roads and non-motorized trails wind throughout the Tahoe National Forest, as well as an additional 1,400 miles of unauthorized trails that off-roaders have used for years.
Seven alternatives to the existing trail network have been identified in the draft plan. The preferred alternative would prohibit cross-country travel, establish seasons of use and add 70 miles of trails to the network.
"No one is really happy with the draft environmental plan. It has a considerable number of omissions,” said Kyra. “Many of those trails are not in there or not analyzed.”
Deer Creek and Diamond Springs, two created trails in the Bulington Ridge area, are noticeably missing, said motorcyclist Joseph Cochran.
“Some of the roads and trails we use are going to be closed forever,” said Cochran.
A coalition of environmental groups such as SYRCL, the Wilderness Society and the Sierra Club voiced concern that the Forest Service focused undue attention on a minority group while failing to sufficiently consider hikers and anglers who go to the forest for a more quiet form of recreation.
“The OHV interests are well organized and well funded. They are a vocal minority in the watershed, for sure,” said Jason Rainey of SYRCL.
When the final environmental impact statement is completed by March 2009, a final map listing all authorized roads and trails is expected to come out in the fall. Each year, Forest Service staff will update the map. “This is not the end. It’s a continuation of the process,” Westling said.
