MotoUtah: Motocross and Off-Road Riding in Utah

With the increased popularity of UTV (side by side) vehicles and their increased use on trails & roads, the land managers have a whole new can of worms to deal with. I felt that the conversation below was worth posting here on MU because of the good information found in Wade Allinson's response to the question.....why can't we use a Side by Side on ATV trails?
AJP


On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 5:25 AM, UTV Enthusiast wrote:

Hello Mr. Broadbear. I am writing to you to express my dissatisfaction with some of the so-called "improvements" that have been made to some of the ATV trails in the Six Mile Canyon, specifically the decision to plant steel poles in the ground on certain trails to keep out the side-by-side style of ATV's. This practice is at best confusing, and at worst could be dangerous. For example, on the lower entrance to the Harmon's trail (which commences about 6 miles up the canyon), there is a steel pole set in the ground opposite a large boulder which prevents passage of any vehicle wider than about 4 feet. Yet the upper entrance to the same trail can easily accommodate much wider vehicles, including side-by-sides. What this means is that a wider vehicle can enter at the top and proceed 3 miles down to within 20' of the lower entrance, only to be stopped and--without warning--forced to turn around and go back out the way it came in. Not only is this a senseless inconvenience, but it may end up getting somebody killed. In severe weather conditions, with downed trees or deep snow, it may be impossible to make it back up to the top entrance, leaving a person who is unfamiliar with the trail stranded. And, in the event that they also need medical care of some sort, it could end up costing someone their life.

I consider the decision to close some roads to side-by-sides to be shortsighted at best. After all, since they haul more people than standard-style ATV's, they in fact cut down on the number of machines that are traversing the trail, thereby greatly lessening the amount of damage done. I fear that the decision to exclude them was made without fully thinking of all of the ramifications, and I would respectfully ask that you reconsider it.

P.S.: just so you know, I myself ride a Yamaha Kodiak, which is a smaller, standard-style ATV. Even so, I believe it is not fair (nor is it wise) to exclude side-by-sides. As a longtime Six Mile Canyon hunter and recreational user as well as a recent Sanpete county landowner, I know that this is not the direction that I would like the Forest Service to take. I thank you for your time.
Sincerely,

UTV Enthusiast

Taylorsville, UT 84118
(and) Sterling, UT 84665

******************************************************************************************
Wade Allinson's GREAT response:

UTV Enthusiast,
My name is Wade Allinson. I am a member of the Arapeen Trail Council. As a member of the council, I assist the Forest Service in OHV management issues. I volunteer hundreds of hours on the ground each year in protecting our privilege to recreate on public lands. I have been enjoying motorized and non-motorized recreational activities on the Manti Forest for over 35 years. I remember being seven or eight years old riding on the back of my dad who was riding a Yamaha DT175 going fishing on the Manti. I am an active land use activist on both forest and BLM lands. I am a member of the Sage Riders Motorcycle Club, the Utah Trail Machine Association, Utah Shared Access Alliance and the Blue Ribbon Coalition. Each year I volunteer my hours on the Fish Lake, Unita and Manti Forests, with a majority of my time being focused on the Manti. I actively raced motorcycles for 25 years and now considered myself to be retired. I have three children and each of the ride motorcycles as well as my wife.
I have a couple of comments for you to consider. The improvements made in Six Mile Canyon have been ongoing for a couple of years. This summer you actually could see the work on the ground. The public was given the opportunity to comment concerning these improvements and specifically with the Harmon Trail. In fact, very few written comments were received. I am not exactly sure, I believe less than 20 comments were made during the scoping and decision phases of this process. It makes me wonder why we could not have generated hundreds of comment letters. This was the time for concerns like yours to be heard. I can see that you have an interest in Six Mile and I would encourage you to get involved on the ground and take an active role in the decision making process. During this process several miles of trail was opened up. When this is all said and done, six mile will have more miles of trail then previously.
The 50 inch rule is kind of confusing at times. You need to consider that the Forest Service is operating from a travel plan that was placed in to effect in 1986. Find a green travel map, there are still some floating around. The green travel map is the BIBLE and the final word despite what is on the ground. Everything with a green dashed line is a 50 inch trail or a single track 24 inch trail regardless of what is on the ground. That map is the management document. In order to change this map, the travel management plan needs to be changed. I was in six mile riding a couple of weeks ago. A 50 inch trail that we rode was wide enough to accommodate full size use and a full size road we went on looked more like a 50 inch trail. This does not make sense, but you need to go back to the travel management plan, for better or for worse. This plan can’t be arbitrarily changed without going through an extensive NEPA process. This is the good, bad and ugly of federal land use. In many ways this protects the users. What this means is when a land manager comes in that is not pro-motorized they can’t change the travel management plan to fit their personal agendas without going through an extensive public process which includes NEPA. It gives us some protection. The bad is that sometimes what is on the ground may be slightly different than what is on the map and it is very difficult to change and when a possible change comes to play the travel plan is opened up and we actually run the risk of having the entire trail closed because the anti motorized community will also get the opportunity to comment and voice opposition to any modifications.
Some would say, lets open the travel plan back up and redo it. I say no. I have participated in three of these processes within the last five years, two on the San Rafael Swell and one in Moab and when the final plans came out, we lost thousands of miles of trail. I will guarantee you if the full plan is opened up, the Environmental Congress will gather more letters and political support than the off road community despite us having more numbers. The off road community is flat out lazy when it comes to land use and volunteering their time, money and resources. We are lazy in submitted letters and and getting involved in public comments.
I agree that the 50 inch rule is confusing. Under forest service rules on the Manti, trails under 50 inch fall within the recreation department and trails over 50 inch are considered to be roads. Trails must be maintained. Lack of maintenance is always a major reason for closure. Trails must be maintained in order to protect the integrity of the trail system and to protect our watersheds. Yes, in Ferron ALL of our drinking water comes from the Ferron Mountain Drainage. The Sweco trail cat is only 50 inches and is not designed to maintain trails over that threshold.
When do we stop? At what point will the trails become roads? I have no desire to ride my motorcycle on dirt roads. I have a motorcycle so I can ride single track trails. Over the years many of the motorcycle single track trails on the Manti have turned into ATV trails (illegally and legally). A good example of this would be the Rock Canyon Trail and the Hole Trail, both of which are in Emery County. I have a very big challenge trying to keep the ATVs off the single track trails. The same can be said with the 50 inch trails, when to we stop? Do we accommodate 54 inches this year and then 60 inches five years from now, leaving us with a road instead of a trail? Each year manufactures go wider and wider and we buy the machines they produce. We are at the point that many ATVs/UTVs are nearing the size of jeeps. At some point in time, consumers and manufactures need to realize what we are doing.
Last week my friends and I spent 15 hours working on a non-motorized single track trail that was poached by several ATVs. This was a prestine single track trail leading to the only non-motorized area on Ferron Mountain. What a disappointment. These users cut out the trees and flat out made a beautiful trail wide to 50 inches.
I would encourage you to get involved on the ground. The Forest Service has three recreation staff for approximately 900,000 acres. Without our help on the ground, the OHV use can never be successfully managed and will result in closures.
Bill Broadbear is very inspired in his OHV management. I have worked with many land managers over the years and have found Bill to be proactive in his management style. This is very unique when most land managers have a reactive approach which ALWAYS results in closures. Through Bill’s leadership we have not lost an inch of motorized trail. That says a lot about how he is doing with the resources that he has.
I would give you an invitation to become a member of the Arapeen OHV Council. We meet every other month, alternating between Sanpete, Emery and Carbon Counties.
It will take some time before Bill will be able to respond to your e-mail. On Sunday Bill blacked out and fell at his residence and hit his head. He was life flighted to an intensive care unit.
In closing, join, participate and donate. Join an OHV club. Join USA-ALL. Participate in land use on the ground and donate your time and money.
Regards,
Wade Allinson
Ferron, Utah

UTV Enthusiast wrote:


Thanks for posting Alan!

I wish that I had the opportunity to speak with this 'UTV Enthusiast' face to face, and inform him of the ironic practices that UTV & full size off-road vehicle operators use...that almost cost my grandpa his life a few years back on the Arapeen trail system. I can't remember the official trail number designation, but the ATV trail that runs from "Duck Fork Res." through the bottom of "George's Fork" and onwards up to "Skyline Drive"...is the particular trail I'm refering to. Quite a few years ago, my grandpa (who is a frequent user of the trails & member of the Arapeen Council) was riding his ATV on this trail, when his ride came to an abrupt & sudden end...by a Jeep Wrangler that had been abandoned & parked in the middle of the trail when it was hindered by these Steel width restriction poles. Nearing the end of the trail ride/destination and not wanting to turn around and take a very long detour at the hands of the Jeep and it's owner, my grandpa was essentially left with no choice than to try and navigate around the ILLEGAL vehicle...and negotiate the steep angle of the hill by going around the Jeep. Granted it was a bad decision on my granpa's behalf, yet an even worse & costly decision of the Jeep owner to try and drive up this trail...as what happened next could've very easily cost my granpa his life. The combintaion of the steep angle of the hill, a large & top-heavy 650cc ATV and the road block "a.k.a JEEP"...caused my grandpa's machine to roll. The ATV cart-wheeled & bounced over and over all the way to the bottom of the canyon...destroying the ATV and inflicting injuries to my grandpa. Had this Jeep owner obeyed the rules & regultaions and used some common sense, this event would not have happened.

Anyway, sorry to rant...I just wanted to share a personal story related to the topic.

Wow, good post. now I know why there is no single track down there. 50" wide trails or bigger are just beat out, huge ruts, mud holes, etc. It's not fun to ride these or dirt roads on my four wheeler or dirt bike. Example: In Manti where the Patton #3 meets the #31 (just after the steel poles) is a complete mess now and not very attractive looking. Or how about Forest Lake up AF, used to be nice, now it's ghetto. I could keep going. Everyone has a right to recreate the way they please. But it makes me think of "good roads bring bad people & bad roads bring good people" well if all it takes is no more than getting in a truck or jeep to go up into the hill's, who do you think it brings? UTV'S maybe a little different, but are falling into that category just the same, because of size. And NO! let it lie, do not bring up revised plans for the trails, because he's right SUWA will pounce on that and we will be sorry to ever open that can of worms. Pretty long rant I know, but I really love this area and hope it never changes.

The bollards, set at 50" width, are just placed to prevent intrusion on trails that are already closed to UTVs over 50" width. Most OHV users don't yet understand how Forest Service trails & roads are now managed. Almost all areas on National Forests are either "closed" to motorized vehicles or are "limited to designated roads & trails." The are almost no "open, cross-country" areas on FS lands following implementation of the 2005 Travel Management Rule on management units (Ranger Districts or Forests). "Closed" doesn't need explanation. "Limited to designated roads & trails" means motor vehicles are only allowed on roads & trails shown on the "Motor Vehicle Use Map" as open to that vehicle type.

It's NOT "closed unless posted open", "open unless posted closed", or "open unless there's a gate to prevent vehicles over a certain width". Posted means there's a sign on the ground, and it doesn't even matter if there's a sign per the 2005 Rule. This was done because some people thought they could "open" trails by removing closed signs (incorrectly believed it was "open unless posted closed"), others thought they could "close" trails by removing open signs (incorrectly believed it was "closed unless posted open"). I've seen instances of both, as well as sticker tampering to either "open" or "close" trails.

What users need to know is this. It's "closed unless designated open on the MVUM". The MVUM also shows class-of-motorized-vehicle; motorcycle, 50" or less, full-sized, street-legal, or other as well as seasonal closures. MVUMs often also show where dispersed camping and/or game retrieval can occur, and how far it can be from the designated route.

So to "know before you go" on FS lands, the first thing you'll need is the MVUM for the Ranger Districts where you plan to ride. That's the "official map" that signs like this are referring to:

Adding a few things...

MVUMs work best with good route numbering on the ground. If it doesn't exist, there's an opportunity for volunteer projects to help the Ranger District get route numbering on the ground that matches system / MVUM numbering.

Some FS units use the "map booklet" format of MVUM, other use a fold-up 24" x 34" format. I find the map booklet format is very difficult to use, since planning a loop or ride can cross several pages. If you don't like it, make suggestions to the Forest or Ranger District.

The UWCNF MVUMs are available on-line, go to: UWCNF Home Page, then click on "Maps & Publications" in the left frame.

FS employees usually say "em-vum" when talking about the MVUM.

The S.O.P for opening your own trail: First shoot the carsonite marker with #8 shot about five times, then run over it with your 33" tires about ten times until it has the consistency to weave a pick nick basket out of it. Then rip it out of the ground and throw it at least five feet away from original location. And before you leave, be sure to throw your Natty light cans in the general location of marker as to distract anyone who may be looking for it.

That's a decent reply. I think some of that info could have been left out (does he REALLY need to know that Bill hit his head and is in ICU unless it was a personal friend?) also, I think he should have not mentioned so much that him, his family, friends, relatives, etc all ride motorcycles...it started to sound as if he just doesn't want ATVs on the trail. The underlying message was great though and I completely agree that trails need to be limited to certain travel (single track needs to stay single track, 50" stays 50", etc). That will be the only way we will be able to keep trails open.

bbently, I'm sorry to hear about your g-pa, but to blame his choice on the stuck Jeep in the trail is irresponsible. He made the choice to ILLEGALLY drive around the Jeep that was ILLEGALLY on that trail...two wrongs don't make either one more wrong or more right than the other. This, IMO, is a HUGE problem between motorized groups. Why are the different groups so quick to point the finger at the next motorized group...you do realize that a closed trail is a closed trail. Trying to make the fullsize users look bad, or the ATVers look bad, or...you get the point just makes the two wheelers look just as bad. To the enviros, we're all one group (the group they want to shut down)...we need to start acting as a single group. UTMA and U4WDA have recently teamed up on a clean-up, which is great to see. We need to all start acting as a single group.

Hikers complain about mountain bikers....mountain bikers complain about dirt bikers...dirt bikers complain about quads...quads complain about UTV's...UTV's complain about Jeeps....it's the nature of the beast.

The problem with that is that SUWA considers us all the same group (from mountain bikers to Jeeps), and want all of US banned! If we don't unite (it seems mountain bikers are the most difficult to convince because most assume they are allowed in Wilderness areas. Even the IMBA-international mountain bike associate-the largest peddler group in the nation told me they'd likely end up supporting ARRWA) we'll lose.

I get the lack of unity...as a dirt bike rider, I'd be pissed if someone on a quad (or wider) road my favorite single track in Hobble Creek (and one did last summer). And I get why mountain bikers don't like dirt bikes (or wider) on their trails (which is all the more reason why dirt bikers need to be courteous to mountain bikers and hikers we encounter on the trail). But we need to put our personal differences aside and fight this thing.

djgardner2003 wrote:


A couple weeks ago I ran into a Mountain bikers that argued with me about a trail being open to motorcycles. I explained to him which were open and which were not. After a simply conversation he agreed with me and we continued riding, while coming down the hill he had a flat. He did not have a cell phone but I did. I let him use it and he appreciated the help. Its all about being friendly and calm. I will pull over for most hikers and bikers and let them pass me I think that goes a long ways on the trails.

YZ head wrote:


Agree 100%. I was just down in Moab after a two year hiatus and shocked to see the damage done by jeeps at Behind the Rocks. Every year the damage increases as a number of users seek easier ways to navigate trails or bring larger vehicles into the area. I can only imagine the damage done in higher mountain areas. In my opinion, if the trail is designated less than 50", all the better. If the trail is designated "extreme difficulty", don't allow tourists or inexperienced users to cut new trails around obstacles!!

450Thumper wrote:


I don't think that you can just blame jeeps for that damage. I have seen alot of areas in Moab where ATV's have made bypasses because they are not able to get up an obstacle that a Jeep can. There are so many uneducated users out there that all the laws and regulations are not going to keep them from doing damage to our sport. You cannot legislate responsibility....it has to be learned. It is learned by others users educating them on what is right and why doing something wrong will kill our sport. I would venture to guess that 95% of the people who are not responsible users are 1. Not a member of a club 2. Not a member of USA-All or BRC 3. A member of a forum like Motoutah, Rocky Mountain Extreme, Adventure Rider, etc. It is up to responsible users to educate the idiots out there.

I don’t ride ATVs or UTVs, and I don’t drive Jeeps or Rock Crawlers. I just ride motorcycles. I do believe that all OHV users need to band together. As a board member of Take Back Utah, I saw first hand how involved the ATV and 4x4 people are in keeping Public Land open. Those guys plan, participate, and donate time and money to the cause. If we are going to make an impression on the politicians and the law makers we will need a louder voice than just the single track motorcycle riders can make. At the Take Back Utah parade and rally the 4x4 and ATV people far outnumbered the dirt bike people. Now, I don’t want ATVs or UTVs on my favorite single track trails anymore than most of you do, but, I do think that we all have to work together to keep land open for OHVs.

Very Well said Mike!
I suggest that EACH one of you reading this thread do one simple thing....instead of worrying about stuff that you have no control over, such as what the other group is doing, or what the other person is doing....just worry about what the guy in the mirror is doing. If EACH of us concentrates our efforts on JOINING, DONATING AND PARTICIPATING, soon we will ALL be working together...literally.
Kudos to Mike and all that put together Take Back Utah. Kudos to all that are members of a club and/or organization.
The challenge is for the rest of you to do the same. PLEASE Help pull the cart, 'cuz it gets heavy and the strong horses get tired.
AJP

Anderson750 wrote:


I agree that the problem is multi factorial and that education is key. I am just saddened by the large footprint that has been left in areas like Behind the Rocks and Steel Bender. It is a shame and will obviously take years to repair the damage. Hopefully groups like USA-ALL and BRC can make a difference.

Just curious if any of you know what is being done with the $2.00 donation I check for each vehicle I register??