FINAL

Notes from Informal Resolution Meeting, Ochoco Summit

June 17, 2014

Forest Service Attendees: Maureen Hyzer, Debbie Anderson, Shoni Pilip-Florea, Kate Klein, Slater Turner, Yewah Lau, Patrick Lair, Dede Steele, Jennifer Mickelson, Anne Trapanese, Janet Hollister, Marcy Anderson

Public Attendees: See sign-in sheets (attached)

Debbie Anderson: Welcome, introductions, explanation of meeting’s purpose and ground rules; Debbie asked that people listen respectfully, adhere to their time (approximately 7 minutes per speaker), and were advised that Debbie would let them know when their time had expired.

Gayle Hunt, Central Oregon Wild Horse Coalition – showed a slideshow of wild horses:

• Summarized her history as a Forest Service employee and wild horse advocate. • Noted that she has seen many changes on the Ochoco landscape due to the advent of OHVs. • Read excerpt from the Wild and Free Roaming Horse and Burro Act. • Discussed creation of the Herd Management Area (HMA) on the Ochoco.

o Noted that Coalition has requested that the HMA boundary be expanded; the expansion area would be to the North, where OHV trails are proposed.

• The proposed trail system is not within the HMA, but using Walton Sno-Park as a staging area could increase traffic in the HMA, thereby increasing risk to wild horses both from noise and direct mortality.

• Contends that cumulative effects were not adequately assessed in the Ochoco Summit FEIS. o Noise impact analysis was not adequate because research has never been done on how

wild horses react to noise; there is no hard data on this so it can’t be addressed with current science.

o Believes that equestrian recreation will be displaced into the HMA, increasing disturbance.

o Sheep herders will avoid OHV trails and thus impact the wild horses. • Designating OHV trails will not stop illegal OHV use. • Ginger Kathrens who does specials on OPB, will be proposing to list wild horses as Threatened

or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), so the Ochoco should get out ahead of that and manage wild horses appropriately.

Charles Engel, representing Connie Baker

• Nobody wants to deny any responsible user group. • Proposed trail system is in the wrong place, and will create resource damage in a fragile area. • OHV users are attracted to meadows, hills and other and other sensitive areas. • What used to be single track trails are now 10 foot wide ATV trails. • OHV users ride through the Forest quickly. • Self-policing (OHV users reporting violations) won’t work; they will go where they want to go

and not report one another.

Page 1 of 11

• There will not be money for enforcement. • User conflicts are obvious because users don’t stay on trails; both research and history has shown

this to be true. • Specific concern regarding tie-through road and trails at Indian Butte – Indian Prairie will become

de facto OHV camp. • Concern related to loss of peace and quiet for other forest visitors; OHV trail will push quiet

recreation into the wild horse HMA. • Area around Corral Flat has been destroyed by OHV users. • RESOLUTION POTENTIAL - Propose dropping the entire west section of the trail system and

develop a new plan in the low, rocky areas to the east.

Susie Isaacson, Road 2620 Private Land Owner

• Doesn’t want to rant. • Feels that she and other residents are keepers of the forest; she owns horses, ATVs, a “mule”

which is a 4wd type vehicle, and uses these on adjacent Forest System land. • Concerned about degradation on the Ochoco. • Has witnessed people chasing elk on ATVs, cutting cookies in meadows, poachers and dead

cows. • Concerned about Hamilton Butte being a staging area.

o They ride their quads to Hamilton Butte to pick up bottles & other garbage by the bag full and have filled their mules with garbage.

• There needs to be more enforcement; have been poachers in the area. • Wild horses moved after a recent timber sale. • RESOLUTION POTENTIAL - OHV use should be limited to existing roads and there should be

more enforcement. • RESOLUTION POTENTIAL - There needs to be more enforcement.

EJ Honton and Deborah Krause – showed powerpoint

• (EJ): Ochoco’s are a special place; hydrology, soils, water, wildlife make it special. • (DK): Wet meadows have thin topsoil with clay underneath; there is a short growing season. • Snow can happen in June, so season of OHV use starting June 1 is not appropriate; trails are still

boggy and muddy and in some years, there is still snow on the ground as of June 17th, where trails are proposed.

• Fire season can begin as early as 2 weeks after the end of wet season. • OHV riders often won’t stay on trails – bridges and culverts are proposed at stream crossings, but

the thrill of crossing wet meadows is too tempting; often choose to go through streams for thrill. • A well-driller drove his drilling rig across their property 25 years ago and road is still evident –

landscape recovers very slowly. • OHV riders harass cows, then cows create new trails; cows will be harassed because road density

is too high; trails go through some grazing allotments, creating the potential for negative encounters and accidents between OHVs and cows.

Page 2 of 11

• Noxious weed issue: OHV riders don’t have to follow same standard as equestrians and boaters, who must adhere to regulations regarding spread of noxious and invasive species, such as using weed-free hay and straw on public lands; OHV riders should be held to same standard of care.

• (EJ): Concerned about fire risk because of tall grasses and hot engines. Enforcement will be critical, yet they are deeply concerned and doubtful that the OHV riders will be policed and monitored.

• RESOLUTION POTENTIAL - Should require tire checks for mud and weed wash station for OHVs to mitigate risk of invasive species dispersion.

• RESOLUTION POTENTIAL - Thinks OHV riders should “pay to play” and use sno-park or NW Forest Pass year round to gather revenue for maintenance and upkeep.

• Road closures are not enforced consistently, gates are frequently vandalized and propped open. Many roads are frequently used, but weren’t included as part of the baseline road density calculations in the FEIS because they aren’t shown on the Travel Management map.

• Forest has a 37 million dollar backlog on road maintenance; this casts doubt on the ability to maintain a new trail network.

• Objectors were frustrated that the remote didn’t work with the computer and felt shortchanged in their presentation, which meant that they didn’t have the opportunity to summarize or present proposed remedies.

• Please see their powerpoint presentation for additional concerns and proposed remedies.

Craig Woodward

• Has been opposed to the trail system since its inception; hopes someone is listening. • Wishes FS administrators would start and end careers in the same place; turnover leads to

inconsistency in management. • Cattle don’t react to OHVs (on his property), but OHVs cause elk to scatter and take out fences. • Public areas should be open to the public; anybody can use public areas. • Issue is with the Travel Management decision, which limited off-road use to within 300’ of open

roads – limits people’s ability to see the forest & prevents use of dispersed camping areas. • Concentrating use is worse than dispersed use. • Trailering OHVs to the trailheads will be an issue. • Witnessed lots of law enforcement of motorized use over Memorial Day. • A large OHV area exists at the Badlands, 20 miles from Prineville.

o Area is less sensitive than the Ochoco’s. o Big Summit Prairie is the “crown jewel” of the Ochoco’s.

• East Fort Rock trail system provides the old growth experience riders want without stream crossings.

• Concentrating recreation in a destination trail system will cause irreparable damage. • Why not use the McKay area for OHV trail system as it is beyond rehabilitation from past

damage? • Why not use all existing roads for OHVs, and increase enforcement (prosecute violators).

o Counter-productive to close roads and build trails. o Trails are too narrow to use for FS administrative purposes (fire suppression).

Page 3 of 11

Art Waugh, Wolfpack 4x4, PNW 4WD, John Day/Snake RAC

• There is only one designated Class II trail system east of the Cascade crest, which is Edison Butte in Bend.

• Requested implementation of the Class II trail system from Alternative 4; did part of it in modification, but not all of it because of sediment issues, according to Forest.

• While he understands dropping the perennial crossing, he objects to dropping Class II trail segments that cross intermittent streams

o Crossings can be hardened/armored to avoid sedimentation. o Season of use can be adjusted to use these segments when streams are not running.

• More Class II trails would benefit all riders, because all OHV classes can use them. • OHV groups have a long history of volunteering and contributing and would in this case as well. • Funding is available through the State ATV committee. • Willing to put boots on the ground and make it work for the users and the resources.

Slim Stout

• Proposed decision does not meet the stated Purpose and Need because it all but ignores Class II OHVs. His concern can be addressed by providing that class of trail system.

Diane Cross, Marks Creek resident

• Trail system skirts private land with 28 families. • If trail system is created, there will be no way for residents/equestrians from private land to cross

the OHV trails safely to Forest System lands they want to ride on that are heavily used during the summer.

• The project is inconsistent with Executive Orders that provide for reduced user conflict (EO 11644 and 11989 – these Eos are spelled out in her objection).

• The ground is too muddy for OHVs until mid-June, and then we go straight into the dry season and fire risk increases.

• Horses and OHVs are incompatible shared uses during both scheduled equestrian events, as well as general horse camping trail riders who use the area during summer months.

• FEIS did not include an economic plan for enforcement and maintenance, which is required by law.

Tim VanDomlen (for John Crofton, Redmond OHA)

• Moving a trail 0.5 mile won’t make a difference in effects to wildlife. • Starkey research says that OHVs are 12 times more likely to spook game. • This is prime wildlife habitat and the trail is in the middle of it. • Designation of trails will not eliminate illegal use, but may reduce it, but he wants proof of this. • Enforcement of the trails has to be 24/7. • RESOLUTION POTENTIAL – Give Redmond OHA $2 million in financial compensation for

lost hunting opportunity and to replace habitat.

Page 4 of 11

Susie Isaacson, representing Mike Templeton

• Has no problem with ATVs on roads, but doesn’t want them on designated trails or going cross-country.

• Wants dispersed recreation back; does not want designated recreation areas as concentrated use is disrupting users.

• Walden’s bill will scatter people – need to wait for result of that. • Wants all roads open to OHVs to spread the use across the landscape. • Does not want the Ochoco to be like the Deschutes – wants it to be like the Malheur or the W-W. • OHV trail system would increase disruption to wildlife and hunting. • Agrees with ODFW that there will be deleterious effects on the elk, antelope and mule deer

populations due to the presence of OHVs in the proposed West Side trail network.

Mike Gerdes (also representing Amy Stuart and Geoff Gerdes).

• NEPA concerns – lack of full disclosure and access during the process: o Lack of clear language supported by evidence in FEIS. o Scabland amendment was not disclosed in the DEIS, which did not give the public the

opportunity to comment on it. o Alt. 3 Modified was not given the same rigor of analysis as the other alternatives. o New OHV routes (segments in Alt. 3 Modified) were not in the DEIS, which also denied

public participation and the opportunity to comment. o Recreation Niche Analysis was only partially disclosed and had a clear bias towards

OHVs and neglected to disclose the principle focus of the Niche analysis; Recreation Facilities Analysis not disclosed.

o There were no site-specific surveys (for sensitive plants, cultural resources, or noxious weeds), which could result in changes upon implementation (public could not have ability to review).

o Did not disclose information or misrepresented information about streams and fish, and also elk, mule deer and antelope with regard to summer range and fawning/kidding habitat.

o Wildlife effects were not adequately addressed. o Did not adequately account for open roads (open on the ground but not in GIS).

• There are already 800-1000 miles of OHV trails in Central Oregon. • There is a lack of law enforcement. • Overall, object to OHV use on the Ochoco.

o It’s the wrong place for an OHV trail; there are many opportunities in Central Oregon on the Deschutes and Prineville BLM.

o Ochoco is currently low recreation use and should stay that way – quiet area of self-discovery which would avoid conflicts.

• RESOLUTION POTENTIAL - They are fine with expanding use at existing OHV locations on the Deschutes NF and Prineville BLM where appropriate (no environmental damage).

Randell Drake (PNW 4x4)

• The ONF has discriminated against 4WD recreationists, particularly Class II users.

Page 5 of 11

• OHV users are the only ones who are given a season of use on the ONF. o Other forests don’t have use season for OHVs. o They want use season to be the same as other forests, which is year-round.

• All other users are allowed to disturb wildlife. o Hikers disturb wildlife more than OHVs do. o In other OHV areas (that are also non-shooting areas like Mt. Emily), deer and elk lie

under the trees and watch OHVs go by. o Game has increased in the East Ft. Rock OHV area.

• Does not believe the wildlife-related concerns. • Suggests that the trail system area be made a non-shooting area as a test to see if game species

return. • OHV riders want early spring and late fall opportunity – proposed season of use is not adequate

and will be dusty, which isn’t when they want to ride and that time of year is also fire season. • Twelve miles of Class II trail are not sufficient for the people who want to use them and he wants

to know the rationale for why the Forest didn’t designate more Class II trails. • Stream crossings can be reinforced to reduce effects.

Mona Drake (Deschutes Co. 4WD)

• Class II vehicles are motorized vehicles that use 4wd to propel motion; reduce tire pressure to 2 pounds psi for over snow & early spring driving.

• Want to have over-snow options. • When the Travel Management Plan was developed, believes the Ochoco was overlooked by the

Deschutes. • When the Travel Management Plan was implemented, Class II users lost about 99% of their

recreational opportunity. • Class II users don’t like to use roads, even ML 1 roads, which are dusty. • Motor vehicles are a legitimate and appropriate way for people to enjoy their public lands. • Properly managed OHV areas exist: Tillamook State Forest, Cline Butte, Edison, Moab, Rubicon. • Unmanaged OHV use can be a problem. • There are lots of volunteers available and willing to help the ONF identify good 4x4 areas within

the project area. • There are lots of grants available for enforcement, restoration and education. • OHV recreationists DO enjoy nature and DON’T want to tear everything up. • Horses are not native to Oregon, but many of our children are – limiting use by the latter in favor

of the former is wrong. • FEIS did not address Class IV vehicles; they should be grouped with Class II. • The ONF was “late in the game” with Travel Management; did not allow enough input from

Class II users and did not retain enough opportunity. • Class II users don’t put a drain on the resources like people have said. • Chief Bosworth created publication regarding how to work with OHV clubs. • OHV users share trails without conflict; if there is conflict, look at the people who are pointing

fingers for the source. • Can require spill kits, law enforcement, signage and education.

Page 6 of 11

• Her family uses Class II vehicles, ATVs and horses and she wants to be able to camp and recreate together with all users.

Wayne Elmore (representing Friends of McKay) – showed pictures of damaged areas

• There is a long history of OHV damage in the McKay watershed from irresponsible users. • They are trying to reintroduce Chinook salmon to McKay Creek. • User-created trails are adding sediment to McKay Creek. • Irresponsible use is the problem, not jeeps, not OHVs, not motorcycles; the problems are on 2%

of the land base, but they are big problems. • In McKay, every year they have to fix what’s already been fixed. • Extra patrols haven’t helped. • Efforts of multiple user groups haven’t helped. • OHV users are focusing use in wet areas. • Hill trails turn into tributaries to streams, deliver sediment to streams; basically become an

extension of the stream network. • Wet meadows in McKay (& other areas) have been damaged by unmanaged OHV use.

Paul Dewey (representing Central Oregon LandWatch - COLW)

• In 30 years, this is only the 2nd OHV project Central Oregon LandWatch has objected to. o The other one was on the back side of Green Ridge. o OHV groups withdrew interest from that site because they recognized it was important

wildlife habitat. o Central Oregon LandWatch hopes that would happen here too.

• Project area is spectacular elk habitat. • Ochoco Summit analysis does not have adequate baseline established (specifically existing road

system) and in Central Oregon LandWatch v. Connaughton, Judge Aiken ruled the Forest had inadequate baseline data.

• What is on the maps isn’t what is out there on the ground and vice versa. Without that baseline information, a good decision can’t be made.

• Did not use best available science regarding sedimentation because study was published in the 80s.

• Can’t come to resolution because we don’t agree on the adequacy of the baseline data and best available science.

• FEIS should be supplemented, providing for basic NEPA/NFMA/INFISH compliance before resolution can be discussed.

Meriel Darzen (Sierra Club)

• Ochoco Summit project does not meet Travel Management Rule requirement to minimize effects (to various resources), nor does it meet EOs 11644 or 11989.

• Did not see minimization criteria applied in analysis – there has been extensive litigation on this, including Idaho Conservation League v. Guzman litigation.

• Believes that mitigation in FEIS is vague • Doesn’t believe enforcement will be adequate.

Page 7 of 11

• Doesn’t believe having a trail system will reduce illegal use or user created trails; unfounded assumption and no guarantee that money is available.

• If available funding is applied to manage OHV use and restore areas within OHV management area, what will happen to the rest of the forest?

• Road closures are not enforced. • Inadequate baseline data; mitigation not discussed in detail.

Greg Jackle (ODFW)

• Expressed appreciation for ODFW/ONF working relationship. • Project does not support ODFW policy (ORS 496.012) • Does not believe the project meets its Purpose & Need because there is lots of OHV opportunity

in Central Oregon. • Believes watersheds will be severely impacted. • Road density is high and affecting the elk population in the Ochoco management unit – Starkey

research not followed on miles of open road per square mile. • Understand why HEI was use, but elk analysis was not based on best available science because

Blue Mtn. Elk Nutrition Model was not used, which addresses summer habitat, roads and distribution.

• Elk tend to stay on private land in the summertime and avoid public land during archery season; agency has done some work to mitigate this like a controlled archery hunt, limited cow tags, and private land hunt.

• Ochoco Unit is premier unit for trophy hunting – takes 7 years to draw a rifle tag and 2 years to draw an archery tag.

• There are high road densities in the project area; footprint is too high (300,000 acres). • 83% of the area is within 1.5 miles of an open road (doesn’t include closed roads) • RESOLUTION POTENTIAL - Wants elk model run and a minimum roads analysis completed.

Paul Cuddy

• Violations of NEPA: o Amendment added to FEIS was not included in DEIS. o New activities included in FEIS that weren’t in the DEIS. o Weed prevention measures weren’t included in FEIS.

• Does not believe that authorized system will stop unauthorized OHV use. • Not enough site-specific survey done; may have to modify trails at implementation without

appropriate public review; don’t really know where changes will be or effects of those changes. • Inadequate baseline data. • Maps don’t make sense – more like a programmatic document that would need site specific

NEPA to implement it.

Karen Coulter (Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project)

• Seen damage at McKay Creek • Wants native plants/animals/biodiversity/ecosystems protected • RESOLUTION POTENTIAL - Requested the following modifications to decision:

Page 8 of 11

o No trails in Old Growth Management Areas. o No trails on/through scablands. o No stream crossings (but appreciate that some were dropped). o Assurance of strict enforcement. o Trails on/near existing roads only to minimize disturbance. o No cross-country loops. o Avoid all impacts to soils, sensitive plants, weeds… o Trail use/maintenance/repair in dry season only. o Season of use must start later; June is too wet. o Monitor the sensitive lily population. o Address cumulative impacts of all other activities. o Ensure education and enforcement.

• Concerned about: o Weed prevention related to use of Six Corners Material Source. o No analysis of effects if mitigation measures are not applied and mitigation has not been

assured. o Effects to plants and animals; viability of Columbia spotted frog, redband trout and other

Management Indicator Species. o ONF water quality and soil standards. o Effects to quiet recreation.

Richard Nelson (OHA) – showed powerpoint

• 10,000 members; have contributed to the ONF in many ways (guzzlers, aspen, fencing) • Questions if Travel Management Plan is in place and being enforced and if so, by whom?

o Road status needs to be marked on the ground; no evidence that closures have occurred. o There should be a number to call to report road violations (similar to poaching hotline). o Road violators should lose their equipment. o Roads need to be signed as clearly open or clearly closed.

• Does not think ONF employees respond to open gate complaints. • There has been vandalism, signs removed, etc. • Trail segments are now proposed through areas that were previously closed. • Supports road density decrease. • There are 1,000 miles of OHV trail in Central Oregon; why do we need more? • Elk tags are declining on the ONF but it’s not because the elk aren’t there – showed statistics. • RESOLUTION POTENTIAL - Wants proposal withdrawn and elk habitat rehabilitated, which

OHA will help do.

Larry Ulrich (Ochoco Trail Riders)

• Has been riding dirt bikes in Ochoco’s for 50 years; doesn’t see deer concerned or bothered by that use.

• Prior to Travel Management Plan, could ride anywhere; therefore, user-created trails were not created illegally prior to 2011.

• Started pursuing designated trail system on ONF in 2003 (also one in 1996 that didn’t get implemented).

Page 9 of 11

• Has heard a federal employee say he or she never wants to see an OHV trail on the ONF. • OHV users are the only user group on the forest who pay their own way. • Grant funds are available for education, enforcement, and monitoring. • ONF is a huge forest and there’s room for everyone. • Hunters complain about OHV disturbance, but hunters kill the wildlife – OHVs just ride past

them. • Objects to season of use (except in Green Dot area); wants to see use from 5/15 till 11/30, as

Memorial Day is a big use time. • Objects to moving trail segment off of FR-930 to open road; this road isn’t near the stream like

the 4250 road, which is close to Jackson Creek that receives constant use. • Would prefer to have more trail connections rather than use of mixed-use roads; FR-2630

connecting east and west areas is better than nothing, but trail would be preferable to a road. Dirt bikes like single track trails, not roads.

Debbie Anderson: That concludes the meeting.

Deborah Krause: The law requires discussion and dialogue for resolution.

Debbie Anderson: Understood, but this meeting is for the objection process; those regulations do not require open discussion, but discussion between the objectors and Reviewing Officer; this meeting happened at the request of the Reviewing Officer and any additional discussions are at her discretion.

Deborah Krause: Insists that the law requires discussion and dialogue for resolution.

Maureen Hyzer: Will review objections and notes from today’s meeting.

Debbie Anderson: There will be a written response to each objection.

Maureen Hyzer: Explained that several things could happen after this. She could ask Kate Klein to hold additional meetings with individual objectors if it appears that resolution could be accomplished.

Deborah Krause: Asked about the timeline.

DA: Review period has been extended by 30 days (to make it a 75-day period); further extension may occur if resolution seems possible. There will be no decision (final Record of Decision) on the project until the Reviewing Officer issues written responses to the objections; there may be direction given to the Responsible Official (Kate Klein) in those responses.

EJ Honton: Wants decision makers to go look at the ONF in the field to see in person what the slides have shown.

Mona Drake: Damage on the ONF is reversible; OHV funding can help fix damage, whether it is from OHVs or horse trailers.

Several Attendees: Timing of the meeting (week day during business hours) is difficult for people; meetings should be held on weekends.

Debbie Anderson: We sincerely appreciate everyone’s time and we do apologize for any inconveniences; please be assured that we respect everyone’s time.

Susie Isaacson: Reiterated that FS staff should go to the field to see what they’re talking about.

Maureen Hyzer: Thanked everyone for coming; meeting concluded.

Page 10 of 11

Page 11 of 11

The following presentations were shown by objectors.

6/25/2014

1

Central Oregon Wild Horse Coalition Presentation

6/25/2014

2

6/25/2014

3

6/25/2014

4

6/25/2014

5

6/25/2014

6

6/25/2014

7

6/25/2014

8

6/25/2014

9

6/25/2014

10

6/25/2014

11

6/25/2014

12

6/25/2014

13

6/25/2014

14

6/25/2014

15

6/25/2014

16

6/25/2014

17

6/25/2014

18

6/25/2014

19

6/25/2014

20

6/25/2014

21

6/25/2014

22

6/25/2014

23

6/25/2014

24

6/25/2014

25

6/25/2014

26

6/25/2014

27

6/25/2014

28

6/25/2014

29

6/25/2014

30

6/25/2014

31

6/25/2014

32

6/25/2014

33

6/25/2014

34

6/25/2014

35

6/25/2014

36

6/25/2014

37

6/25/2014

38

6/25/2014

39

6/25/2014

40

6/25/2014

41

6/25/2014

42

6/25/2014

43

6/25/2014

44

6/25/2014

45

6/25/2014

46

6/25/2014

1

Presentation by EJ Honton and Deborah Krause

OHV - Alternative 3 Modified West Side

6/25/2014

2

Ochocos – a special place

It’s all about water: how much, when

6/25/2014

3

Lush mountain meadows are deceptive…

The topsoil layer is just a few inches thick over adobe clay and volcanic rock

6/25/2014

4

Snow any day of the year means that the growing season is very short

Spring rains grow tall, lush grass

6/25/2014

5

Fire season starts two weeks after muddy season ends

Off-road use cuts lasting trails

6/25/2014

6

After three years: OHV scars remain

25 years on, unused road still visible

6/25/2014

7

Harassed cows also cut trails

Noxious and invasive species proliferate in disturbed soils

6/25/2014

8

Rules should apply to all Forest users

June 1: Level I June 9: Level II June(?) _: Level III July(?) _: Level IV

6/25/2014

9

Campfire – Saturday, June 14, 2014Three Forest Service staff OK’ed

Pay-to-Play

6/25/2014

10

$37 million Ochoco NF deferred road maintenance backlog: How will trail

maintenance be funded?

One approach used to solve the road maintenance problem!

6/25/2014

11

But enforcement isunderfunded and ineffective

Many “non-existent” roads continue to be used extensively

6/25/2014

12

And policy is inconsistent!

The USFS assumes that OHVs will stay within the 50” trail width 100% of the

time. How? Education and Enforcement

6/25/2014

13

Dirt bikers in stream bed!

36 CFR 212.55(a): FEIS must contain an economic plan for ongoing

maintenance and administration

6/25/2014

14

Objection Summary – Part I• The fragile, tundra-like ecosystem in this area

of the Ochocos will not withstand off-road use. Damage created in days will take centuries to recover.

• Why invest substantial societal resources to create a trail network that must be closed by the agency’s responsible officer once adverse effects are identified? (Executive Order 11644 – Section 9)

Objection Summary – Part II• If the trail network is developed, rules and

regulations should be applied equitably for all forest users (invasive species, fire suppression, off-trail use)

• Forest users should pay-to-play

• A re-worked FEIS must contain an economic plan that funds education and enforcement

• DO NOT CREATE AN OHV TRAIL NETWORK THAT IRREPARABLY DAMAGES THE OCHOCO ECOSYSTEM

6/25/2014

1

Pictures from Friends of McKay

6/25/2014

2

6/25/2014

3

6/25/2014

4

6/25/2014

5

6/25/2014

1

OREGON HUNTERS ASSOCIATION

IS THE TRAVEL MANAGEMENT PLAN IN PLACE ?

IS IT BEING ENFORCED?

WILL IT BE ENFORCED, IF SO BY WHOM AND HOW MANY?

6/25/2014

2

6/25/2014

3

6/25/2014

4

6/25/2014

5

6/25/2014

6

6/25/2014

7

6/25/2014

8

6/25/2014

9

NEARLY 1000 MILES OF TRAILS ALREADY EXIST IN CENTRAL OREGON AND ARE UNDER THE OVERSIGHT OF CENTRAL OREGON OFF HIGHWAY VEHICLE OPERATIONS

AREA BETWEEN 22-150 AND 22-200 HAS BEEN CLOSED FOR MANY YEARS AND SIGNED TO PROTECT WILDLIFE AND HABITAT.22-200 AND 22-260 GATES ARE NOW LEFT OPEN AND SIGNS REMOVED.

6/25/2014

10

OCHOCO UNIT 1 ELK TAGS1998- 913 2013- 259

OCHOC UNIT 21998 618 2013 244

ANTLERLESS1998 820 2013 0

ELK TAG APPLICATIONS 20133875

AUTHORIZED496

NET LOSS OF OPORTUNITY 3389

6/25/2014

11

APPLICATONS ARCHERY1153

AUTHORIZED327

LOSS OF OPORTINITY 826

TOTAL NET LOSS

6911

6/25/2014

12

PRIVATE LAND TAGSAUTHORIZED

4060ISSUE D

364NET LOSS OF OPORTUNITY

2696

PROPOSED RELIEF

WITH DRAW PROPOSAL

REHABILITATE EXISTING HABITAT

BRING THE ELK BACK TO THE FORREST