Minnesota DNR's proposed
OHV policy worries trail users
By Roger Landers As a silent sport trail user for the past 20 years in the Brainerd, Minn., area, I oppose Minnesota DNR's latest effort to allow ATVs, dirt bikes and 4x4 trucks to travel unrestricted
on public lands. The current proposed Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) System Plan is a product of inappropriate and last-minute legislation in 1998, combined with Minnesota DNR's poorly proposed set of regulations and management plans.
The United States, and in particular, Minnesota, is experiencing a rapid build-up of a recreational motorized society. From noisy jet skis in the summer to high performance studded snowmobiles in the winter and powerful mud-slinging ATV's used almost year
around, recreational motorized technology growth has outstripped the means of controlling its adverse impacts on our society and the environment.
MN DNR officials believe they deserve a chance to manage OHV use in our state forests. DNR and, to a large degree, the DNR Trails and Waterways Division, was given a chance, and, in my opinion, left much to be desired. Carbide stud damage from snowmobiles was first identified on the Paul Bunyan Trail just North of Nisswa, Minn., in March of
1996. Since then DNR officials, appointed committees, and the legislature have spent many hours attempting to resolve further stud damage to state paved trails. After five years, the efforts have proven fruitless and damage continues with little enforcement of the laws. Until the legislature, with support from DNR, declares a total stud ban statewide, destruction to hard-surface state and local trail systems, road crossings, and private property will continue. This is a serious example of the
failure to resolve a recreation disaster. Why does DNR deserve another chance?
Other outdoor recreation resource caretakers, including other divisions in MN DNR, give serious consideration to the invasion, displacement and alteration of recreational settings. Why is DNR modifying the natural environment setting to satisfy the specific needs and desires of a minority recreational user group (OHV's)? This management philosophy is in direct conflict with environmental programs that DNR,
and specifically Trails and Waterway Division. is supposed to honor (i.e. biodiversity protection, Conservation Connection).
At jeopardy are millions of acres of public lands in Minnesota contained in our state forests that will be subject to environmental damage, wildlife disturbance and displacement, trail-user conflicts and negative visual impacts. This is a careless, pathetic and very liberal policy. States surrounding Minnesota and the U.S. Forest Service itself have more
restrictive rules governing motorized use on public land.
The DNR management plan has many flaws and ignores the reality that most Minnesotans seek quietness when enjoying our public lands. It assumes that enforcement will adequately police the new regulations. This is highly unlikely, because DNR's Conservation Enforcement Division is understaffed with little future change anticipated.
At a recent public hearing, I urged Minnesota's DNR to revise their latest proposed OHV System
Plan and consider the following recommendations:
1. Reclassify all OHV use as "Limited" on trails in state forests. This classification is consistent with surrounding states and U.S. Forest Service policies.
2. Prohibit OHV off-road and off-trail cross-country travel in state forests and other public lands. Implement a "closed unless posted open" policy for OHV use on public lands.
3. Repair OHV damage from existing and proposed motorized trails using funds from the OHV
dedicated account.
4. Implement an environmental review process for all OHV trail developments projects.
5. Implement a public hearing process before an OHV trail project is approved, similar to state and local units of government guidelines. This includes a notification to all landowners within two miles of a proposed OHV project.
6. Make available adequate enforcement for all OHV routes. Charge the OHV dedicated account for enforcing the regulations.
7. Implement
an ongoing systematic and reliable monitoring system that will detect OHV's impact on the environment, wildlife, and other trail users.
8. Buffer nonmotorized recreational facilities and adjoining residences from additional noise on OHV trails.
9. Include equal representation from nonmotorized groups when planning motorized trail facilities.
10. Reevaluate the motorized dedicated accounts. Gas tax funds are spent on recreational activities that use machines that pollute
the environment, destroy public property, disturb and displace wildlife, and disrupt the peace and quiet of other citizens.
Regrettably, the Minnesota DNR's Trails and Waterway's Division seems to be turning into a motorized department that gives only secondary consideration to nonmotorized trail users and maintenance of the natural environment. I'm concerned that the trails division seems to have a major conflict of interest: Large sums of money are flowing into this division from
snowmobile and OHV dedicated accounts for administration, planning and ongoing management purposes. Nonmotorized trail users and the general public deserve equal treatment, and the environment needs better protection.
I have strongly encouraged Minnesota's DNR to revise the current OHV System Plan based on public information and testimony given at public hearings. This is especially critical since nonmotorized advocates were not well represented in the OHV planning process.
MN
DNR must be able to look at the big picture and become a true steward of our valuable and cherished natural and recreational resources. This does not include giving in to the emotions of the motorized minority.
To learn more about this issue, go to Minnesotans for Responsible Recreation (MRR) website at www.mrr.tsx.org, then call or write the DNR and your legislators and voice your opinion.
Landers is an active cross country skier (21 Birkies), biker and runner. He is a Brainerd Nordic Ski Club board member and serves on two statewide DNR advisory committees. | 
