Long Term OHV Defense Strategy

[RangerDan 0]

Dear All,

I'm new to your site, but not to land use issues or the constant attack on OHV use that seems to come from every section of our society. Consumer protection laws say our vehicles are unsafe, or they have lead, and so on. Local governments try to apply unrealistic sound restrictions and even prohibit you from using your OHV on your own private property. State officials use emissions laws or "puppet" commissions to restrict more and more lands from OHV use. Federal authorities will eventually find something threatened or endangered "everywhere" (did you know that just within the National Park system they discover over 400 new species every year...). I am positive that you can go into any area at 10 mile measurements and find "something" unique to that area. Thus, eventually, the Endangered Species Act will provide a means to close off ALL PUBLIC LANDS...it really will be the "King's Forest" situation just like in old England where all "citizens" were prohibited entry and only the government could enter. If that wasn't enough...stand by for the next attack..."DUST". Arizona has already put in restrictions on OHV use based upon "particulate levels" within designated air basins.

For too long OHV users have been fighting a defensive battle...suffering the assaults and then trying to solidify "what's left". With no threat of "loosing lands" themselves, the Sierra Club, CBD, and politicians have been reinforced by our lack of counter effort to continue with their lawsuits, legislation, and management policies that lock out OHV's from more and more areas. We, the OHV users have no one to blame for this but ourselves. When the Sierra Club wants to close off a trail, they go to meetings, they hold protests, they even chain themselves to trees. When's the last time you chained yourself to an OHV trail entrance they were trying to close? That's the level of effort it is going to take to win this modern day "range war".

We are out of time. Look around at how few areas are left to OHV use. Consider our past approaches...and how they have consistently failed to protect our access rights. We have to move this fight from a defensive one to a major offensive one if you don't want to see OHV riders as the next "endangered species". So how do we bring the fight to our adversaries (and make no mistake they see this as a fight...so we need to see it that way also), the following a just a few approaches:

The first is lawsuits, doesn't matter if you can win...just the shear number of upcoming legal battles can change the position of a land management agency. They only have a certain amount of funds for such lawsuits and will be forced to negotiate if they can't defend against them all (my agency is constantly have to determine policy as a result of such threatened litigation). This is the strategy our adversaries have repeatedly used...I guess we are just "slow learners" on this, but we need to learn it.

The second is we need to win back public opinion. Honestly friends, we need to get rid of the term "off-road". Think about it, how often are you really riding where there is no road or trail at all? Maybe the dunes? But usually you are "dirt roading" on a fire road or a trail. When the general public hears the term "off-road", they think we are blasting through the 10ft tall chaparral, through boulder fields, and destroying every plant and feature on every hill side. Using the term "dirt roading" generates a totally different response from the layperson.

The third is we need get some laws on our side, to counter the Endangered Species Act and other State and Local attempts to restrict OHV use. Having Degrees in Outdoor Recreation and Parks and Recreation Management, I can tell you that "RECREATION" is a form of expression...similar to speech or freedom of religion. It is a form of "human maintenance" that even the founding fathers of our nation recognized when the included the phrase "...life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..." within our founding documents. Thus, I have considered contacting the ACLU to try to get them to file a Federal lawsuit that restriction of recreation choice is a civil rights violation. Think about it. Recreation is a human renewal activity...just like going to church. Can the government tell you which church you can go to? What about our population in which more and more folks don't practice any religion at all...to them "renewal" activities other than religion is all there is...this would then be by definition "RE-CREATIONAL" activities. How then can the government restrict this "non-religious" form of renewal. If Recreational choice could be so protected, it would become a civil rights violation for a land management agency to restrict such a recreational choice. This could even defend against the Endangered Species Act whereby a civil rights violation could pre-empt a recreational restriction.

The fourth is revised OHV use management. Currently, to my knowledge, OHV use is the only outdoor activity that is managed by banning the activity. Even if you agree with the critics that OHV activity is a "consumptive use"...so is hunting, fishing, logging, mining, and even hiking if too many folks are on a given trail. The difference is that hunting and fishing are managed by seasons and limits, permits regulate logging and mining, even wilderness permits can regulate the number of hikers in a given area...but OHV's are just banned. Properly targeted legal action should be able to undermine this "policy" by demonstrating it is inconsistent with other land use policies. Thus, a carrying limit should be determined for OHV use and then permits issued to prevent "excessive" levels of damage. Think about it, what would damage a meadow trail more...a couple of thousand hikers or say 50 motorcycles? Both could cause damage...however only one is banned. That is inconsistent land use policy and maybe even a breach of duty for the particular agency.

Lastly, consider that currently land use agencies only provide "active" recreational OHV sites. This is an area where the primary focus of participants is on "the activity". This brings the mental image of kids spinning their ATV's in a circle at camp. They are doing it only for the enjoyment of the activity itself. But agencies must also provide "reflective" recreational opportunities, which are activities that are "reflective" of the resource. An example here is a dualsport rider who travels on a trail to reach a particular view point or other natural feature. The primary activity here is experiencing the resource, and the motorcycle is only the means of conveyance. Another way to look at this is, image if the Forest Service issued permits for downhill skiing resorts...but refused to put in any cross county ski trails. It is the same situation when an agency opens an "OHV area" for active OHV use...but then restricts OHV use on reflective use trails. Thus, in this case, the land management agency has not considered or provided for equal recreation opportunity on its lands. We must not let our use of OHV's be "defined" to rated trails (black diamond anyone?) and other restrictions that would imply we are just an activity like baseball, downhill skiing, or similar.

Sorry for the book here...but hopefully I have established my opinions on this matter. This way you have a better understanding of who I am and what I stand for. I look forward to doing my part with your group to help protect our rights.

Thanks

[tntmo 912]

Bravo! Well written, now it's going to take a lot of work to get everyone involved and put plans into action.

[dirt dame 561]

Really puts it in a much more clear and well defined perspective.

[PastaPilot 17]

Very well written piece here. I do appreciate your perspective on the recreational mismanagement of lands. There is a lot to think about here.

While I ponder the rest of it I'm going to go chain myself to an OHV trailhead sign.

Thanks Dan,

Jon

[dirt dame 561]

While I ponder the rest of it I'm going to go chain myself to an OHV trailhead sign.

I have so much time on my hands, I may as well, too. It would be using down time for a worthy cause, at least.

[mctrails 38]

Hi RangerDan, and welcome to the group. I like your way of thinking. You have a lot of great ideas. I think you are one of the few in the agencies that feel this way and one of even fewer that are willing to go on pubic record sharing those feelings. I just hope the "powers that be" are not reading these posts or else you may be looking for new employment soon. I have a feeling most of the management in the agencies may not agree with your writings. I know the anti's don't and they seem to be driving the agendas for the agencies these days which is why I say this. So much for the disclaimers...

As for your thoughts, I agree totally and have thought about a lot of that stuff in the past. I spent a lot of time and effort trying to make most of it happen but mostly to no avail. I was very active in SDORC from the beginning and spent about 20+ years fighting the fight for our side. Even spent a year as SDORC president '03-'04. What I learned from all that was most people in this sport don't care enough to even spend $20 a year to be a member in ANY of the organizations dedicated to the fight to save our sport let alone be involved in any thing else to help. Sad but very true.

With all this in mind I decided it was time to quit wasting my time fighting the fight and get out and ride before its too late. I figure I better get out there and enjoy the few opportunities we have left before they go away or before I can't do it anymore. I'm not getting any younger.

OK, sorry to be such a downer but them is the facts in my opinion. I do truely wish all the things you say could happen but I don't really see how. Too much bad water has passed under this bridge. I hope I'm proved wrong but I don't think so. If someone has a magic wand and can make it all better then all the power to you.

[dirt dame 561]

With all this in mind I decided it was time to quit wasting my time fighting the fight and get out and ride before its too late. I figure I better get out there and enjoy the few opportunities we have left before they go away or before I can't do it anymore.

I think that is why we don't get all "activist"; we spend our time doing the things that we love, where as most activists (the "anti's") don't seem to have any passion other for than going around trying to get other people to stop doing what they love.

[racerbill 0]

I gave memberships in the BRC for Christmas gifts to many of my off roader (SANDDUNERS) friends one year and had the disappointing experiance that MCTrails was talking about, many did not stay members. Get off your ass and donate money to an Off Road rights group or quit complaining. We need to fight the antis in court and that takes money. AHGGGG#!*##!!!!. I'm done.

[RangerDan 0]

Hi RangerDan, and welcome to the group. I like your way of thinking. You have a lot of great ideas. I think you are one of the few in the agencies that feel this way and one of even fewer that are willing to go on pubic record sharing those feelings. I just hope the "powers that be" are not reading these posts or else you may be looking for new employment soon. I have a feeling most of the management in the agencies may not agree with your writings. I know the anti's don't and they seem to be driving the agendas for the agencies these days which is why I say this. So much for the disclaimers...

As for your thoughts, I agree totally and have thought about a lot of that stuff in the past. I spent a lot of time and effort trying to make most of it happen but mostly to no avail. I was very active in SDORC from the beginning and spent about 20+ years fighting the fight for our side. Even spent a year as SDORC president '03-'04. What I learned from all that was most people in this sport don't care enough to even spend $20 a year to be a member in ANY of the organizations dedicated to the fight to save our sport let alone be involved in any thing else to help. Sad but very true.

With all this in mind I decided it was time to quit wasting my time fighting the fight and get out and ride before its too late. I figure I better get out there and enjoy the few opportunities we have left before they go away or before I can't do it anymore. I'm not getting any younger.

OK, sorry to be such a downer but them is the facts in my opinion. I do truely wish all the things you say could happen but I don't really see how. Too much bad water has passed under this bridge. I hope I'm proved wrong but I don't think so. If someone has a magic wand and can make it all better then all the power to you.

I fully understand your position and feelings...I share them also. But what I've been privileged with is working within the inner circle of groups and those who everyday close lands, you can Google my name: Dan Tholund and you will find a lot of hits with public agencies I have been involved with. Within parks you learn about "stewardship" and to "give back" to the land or activities that you enjoy. Nearing my own retirement, I now want to give back to the OHV effort and hopefully deploy some of the same strategies I have learned "from the best".

We actually have a lot of laws on our side, for example, CA State Park's own policies state that they must maintain roads to "highway standards" or it is not to be assigned highway status. Thus, the "Highway Legal Vehicle" signs on their dirt roads (which are not maintained or signed to highway standards) can be challenged on them violating their own policy. Does this mean you could file suit to get the routes back open to OHV use...probably. More likely however, with the threat of multiple legal actions against them, we could negotiate that at least a few routes be opened as a compromise. The alternative is they might threaten to close all park roads...but then the rest of the visiting public would be in an uproar (what do you mean we can't take our Expulsionator SUV and the kids to the campsite!!!!!). A negotiated settlement would be the most probable outcome.

There are many similar laws on the books for every land management agency out there. We just use their own "ammunition" against them...

Sounds simple. It's not. It takes time and money and hard work. But, the legal foundations are there and just waiting to be be built upon.

[RangerDan 0]

I gave memberships in the BRC for Christmas gifts to many of my off roader (SANDDUNERS) friends one year and had the disappointing experiance that MCTrails was talking about, many did not stay members. Get off your ass and donate money to an Off Road rights group or quit complaining. We need to fight the antis in court and that takes money. AHGGGG#!*##!!!!. I'm done.

If all OHV riders had your energy and resolve...we probably wouldn't be in this mess. Unfortunately, we now find ourselves having to fight against an adversary with a 30 year "head start". But, look at the recent changes in gun laws...with DC's restriction against handgun ownership being struck down. That law was in place for decades, but it got changed. OHV's are not as controversial as "handguns", so we should he able to accomplish similar goals...even if these restrictions have been in place for decades.

[mctrails 38]

I fully understand your position and feelings...I share them also. But what I've been privileged with is working within the inner circle of groups and those who everyday close lands, you can Google my name: Dan Tholund and you will find a lot of hits with public agencies I have been involved with. Within parks you learn about "stewardship" and to "give back" to the land or activities that you enjoy. Nearing my own retirement, I now want to give back to the OHV effort and hopefully deploy some of the same strategies I have learned "from the best".

We actually have a lot of laws on our side, for example, CA State Park's own policies state that they must maintain roads to "highway standards" or it is not to be assigned highway status. Thus, the "Highway Legal Vehicle" signs on their dirt roads (which are not maintained or signed to highway standards) can be challenged on them violating their own policy. Does this mean you could file suit to get the routes back open to OHV use...probably. More likely however, with the threat of multiple legal actions against them, we could negotiate that at least a few routes be opened as a compromise. The alternative is they might threaten to close all park roads...but then the rest of the visiting public would be in an uproar (what do you mean we can't take our Expulsionator SUV and the kids to the campsite!!!!!). A negotiated settlement would be the most probable outcome.

There are many similar laws on the books for every land management agency out there. We just use their own "ammunition" against them...

Sounds simple. It's not. It takes time and money and hard work. But, the legal foundations are there and just waiting to be be built upon.

I applaud your efforts and have all the respect in the world for what you are doing, Dan. I hope you are more successful than I ever was. It wouldn't take much to be. I spent a lot of time working with the folks on the inner circles too. Only wish I could have seen more postive results for all my efforts. After so many years I got burned out and had to step aside.

Time and money is something our side does not seem to be willing to spend. Without those the laws we on our side have are useless.

I hope I'm not turning anyone off with my negative views. That is not my intention. Just expressing my opinions as a result of my experiences. I encourage everyone to do all that you can to help the cause. I'll still be willing to jump in and help out once in a while when a worthwhile project presents its self. Otherwise, I'll spend most of my time enjoying the riding opportunities we still have.

[Kevin 0]

Since all the current ways to keep riding area's open have failed, I believe it is time for Anarchy. If you look at the history in regards to Prohibition of alcohol, the government could not control it, thus they abandoned their efforts. And because of this, we have the freedom to consume alcohol. It may be time for this tactic in regards to access of our public lands.

[RangerDan 0]

Since all the current ways to keep riding area's open have failed, I believe it is time for Anarchy. If you look at the history in regards to Prohibition of alcohol, the government could not control it, thus they abandoned their efforts. And because of this, we have the freedom to consume alcohol. It may be time for this tactic in regards to access of our public lands.

The term is "civil disobedience" and it is a long tested and effective method of "protest". The way enviros chain themselves to trees is a classic example. The KEY is to keep it non-violent, gain the hearts & minds of the public, and to make the effort last long enough that officials can't afford (politically or funds wise) to not negotiate a settlement.

[SDlineman 0]

I am glad you are on our side, Dan. I wouldn't want to go up against you in a debate over public land usage. A couple of people have already mentioned it, but OHV users as a whole seem to lack the passion of the environmental groups have. You obviously do have that passion, as well as an educated, articulate way of presenting it. So what does it take to get John and Jane "dirt roader" to get fired up about closures? I would bet that the number of occasional OHV voters is much larger than the politicians realize, mainly because of the lack of passion and organization. I know there are several organizations trying to band everyone together, but I think we need one to step up and really unify everybody. I would join an organization who I feel can produce results and help create a more positive image for us, but I really don't know which way to turn right now. The Stewards of the Sequoia seem to have a very active volunteer program, and seem to produce some positive results, maybe something like that on a national or at least state level is the answer? I hope my thoughts aren't too disorganized for everybody, I'm basically just typing what I am thinking.

[dirt dame 561]

I just wanted to add here, that a lot of those environmental activists who get out there and have people sign petitions and protest are sometimes backed by money. Last summer, when I was looking for a job, I called some place about a phone room position that turned out to be some kind of environmentalist group and they paid about 12 bucks an hour for the job. How often is the "our side" backed by any bucks?

[RangerDan 0]

I am glad you are on our side, Dan. I wouldn't want to go up against you in a debate over public land usage. A couple of people have already mentioned it, but OHV users as a whole seem to lack the passion of the environmental groups have. You obviously do have that passion, as well as an educated, articulate way of presenting it. So what does it take to get John and Jane "dirt roader" to get fired up about closures? I would bet that the number of occasional OHV voters is much larger than the politicians realize, mainly because of the lack of passion and organization. I know there are several organizations trying to band everyone together, but I think we need one to step up and really unify everybody. I would join an organization who I feel can produce results and help create a more positive image for us, but I really don't know which way to turn right now. The Stewards of the Sequoia seem to have a very active volunteer program, and seem to produce some positive results, maybe something like that on a national or at least state level is the answer? I hope my thoughts aren't too disorganized for everybody, I'm basically just typing what I am thinking.

By raising these "questions" you have already started on the path to change. I really do believe that OHV users are more family oriented and "law abiding" than our enviro adversaries. I seldom see families grouping together out on the backpacking trails...in fact these folks avoid social gathering in the outdoors.

OHV users, today, are mostly families and friends that don't mind sharing an area and being "social" with their camping neighbors. Again, OHV users tend not to engage in social disobedience because they support law and order and teach their kids the same values. Unfortunately, our politicians are not as "moral" and have sold out to high paid lobby's for the Sierra Club and other "special interests". Thus to win, we have to "play the game". Just like recent changes in gun laws and right to own firearms issues, I think we are on the verge of a public opinion change regarding use of our public lands. There have been too many closures effecting not only OHV use...but general public access as well. It just takes a certain amount of time for these issues to reach a political "boiling point".

The basic process is as follows:'

1. If you think a closure is unjustified (by hard, recent, and independent scientific research), then you should write a letter (as an individual or a group) asking for an explanation as to why the area is closed to OHV use.

2. When they reply, you should challenge every statement they make regarding any studies performed. Such as: Was there an independent study conducted? When was the last such study performed and are conditions STILL present that warranted the original closure? What efforts did they take to involve the OHV community in these decisions?

3. Follow this up with a FIOR (Freedom of Information Act Request). There is standard request language you can download off the internet. Request that they provide documentation of all the above items. They can charge you a "reasonable amount for copies and administrative time"...

4. Review the agencies own policies...many times they get "tripped up" by their own regulations and procedures.

5. Have an attorney friend (or pool some money to hire one) write a letter to the agency specifying any breeches with their own policies you discover, any gaps with FIOR information, or any questionable procedures with the studies of the area. Inform them that based upon their responses and the FIOR information that you believe the closure is in violation of:

*Their own internal policies

*Browns Act or other public meeting procedures

*A violation of their agencies mandate to provide equal access and opportunity

*A violation of your civil rights regarding freedom of expression and recreational choice

6. Contact the press and issue a press release regarding this issue. Use this air time to "encourage other concerned OHV users to contact the agency and their representatives regarding this issue.

Hopefully others will follow your lead...with enough public pressure and threats of multiple lawsuits, the agency will reopen the matter with all concerned parties and attempt to negotiate a settlement. Yes, the enviros will threaten counter lawsuits...but they have been doing that all along. The OHV users are the ones that have usually not been involved with this process.