Tahoe National Forest Opens the Doors to More Off-Roaders
Tahoe National Forest, just northwest of California’s Lake Tahoe, is a place that refreshes the soul. Rugged beauty, quiet backcountry trails and the majestic Sierra Nevada Mountains all create a peaceful experience for visitors to cherish.
Unfortunately, off-road vehicles are taking a toll on this spectacular forest, which hosts the Granite Chief Wilderness Area and parts of the Pacific Crest Trail. In recent years, the roar of dirt bikes, ATVs and other off-road vehicles have broken the tranquility of the forest, disturbing visitors and wildlife, creating soil erosion and water pollution.
To get a handle on unmanaged off-roading, the Tahoe National Forest, like most forests in the country, initiated a comprehensive planning effort to determine where these vehicles will be permitted to travel. In September, the forest unveiled its environmental impact study and proposal. The news wasn’t good.
Instead of choosing to manage the existing 2,800 miles of roads and trails to provide for quiet recreation opportunities on the Tahoe, their proposal would allow dirt bikes, ATVs and other off-road vehicles on most of the forest — including designated roadless areas like West Yuba, Castle Peak and Grouse Lakes — leading to more visitor conflicts and increases in noise, air and water pollution.
The agency’s proposed course of action is fiscally unaffordable, environmentally irresponsible, and numb to the concerns of quiet recreationists.
Even worse, the forest’s proposed plan sets an unrealistic example for the eleven other national forests in California that will soon release their own proposals for dealing with off-road vehicles.
The vast majority of visitors come to the Tahoe to enjoy quiet forms of recreation. They come for the tranquility of the backcountry trails that wind through Ponderosa pines and the spectacular, quiet views from places like Mount Lola. So, it’s only reasonable that the Tahoe protect large areas of the forest for those of us who hike, backpack, camp, fish and otherwise visit the forest to experience the natural landscape without the noise and pollution caused by off-road vehicles.
For over two years, we have been working with the Tahoe National Forest to develop a proposal that preserves more quiet areas and protects the forest from damaging off-road vehicles. While the forest has refused to listen to reasonable concerns, we will continue to push them and are hopeful they will get back on track and develop an ecologically, fiscally, and socially responsible proposal.
Wilderness Experts View All >
Wendy Loya, Ph.D.
Dr. Wendy Loya joined The Wilderness Society in 2006 as our Alaska Region Ecologist. Her work focuses primarily on climate change and northern ecosystems. An overarching objective of her work is understanding how the cumulative impacts of climate change and industrial development can be quantified to achieve a better understanding of future ecosystem health and potential mitigation solutions.
... more
Comments
I just came back from the
I just came back from the most enjoyable hunting trip of my life! Our eastern Oregon hunting camp consisted of my wife, our son & daughter, my father & mother, and my 92 year old grandfather & grandmother. To hear the excitement & be able to videotape my little girl jumping up & down after she shot her first deer, & then to have my dad radio in to tell me that grandma had once again taken the camp record deer for the third year in a row was so exciting and a memory I will never forget. As my daughter & I were riding our dirtbikes back to camp to pick up the truck, I thought "this has to be one of the best days of my life!!". The very next weekend, my son & I our on one of our wheeling clubs cleanup runs & after it was all totaled up for the year, our two clubs had removed 4700 lbs of garbage, planted 1500 trees, it was a great feeling of acomplishment! Then to find a site dedicated to the removal of every pastime, every memory, every smile that my family & children have had, is an insult. I personally make sure that I have a place to enjoy, & that my grand children have land to use for the rest of their lives. So a word to the people who want to kill my families dreams, "sorry, it's not going to happen!!!" To the people who share my same interests, "get out & be heard, take responsibility for your actions & remember to leave it better than you found it, so the people who do want to shut down your lands who only visit once a year can see it all nice & clean"
Yes! We can all get along
We should set aside large tracts of our public lands that are free from the noise and pollution caused by ATVs, dirt bikes and other off-road vehicles. We should set these areas aside for those of us that like to hike, ride horses, or otherwise participate in quiet, non-motorized forms of recreation.
I'm glad to hear that you and your family are enjoying the outdoors and using your dirt bikes responsibly. Sadly, this isn't the case for all ORV users. These vehicles are extremely powerful and can easily damage the natural environment and spoil the experiences sought by quiet, non-motorized recreationists. For this reason, I think areas on our forests should set aside for quiet, nature-based forms of recreation and separated from motorized users. Further, I couldn't find any place in this blog posting where the Wilderness Society mentions "removing every pastime, every memory, every smile that [your] family & children have had." There's no mention of kicking ORVs off of the forests and public lands. Your implying this notion seems sensational and inflammatory. Of course everyone has the right to use our public lands, but not everyone has the right to abuse them. It sounds like you are using them responsibly, and this is good to hear. The Wilderness Society is trying to find a solution that calls for allowing ORV use where it's appropriate (environmental damage and impact to quiet users is minimized) and setting aside those places where it's not.
For everyone to get along, as your subject line suggests, we need to ensure that large sections of our forests and public lands are managed for quiet, non-motorized users and separate these areas from the motorized users.
Just my two cents.
No Off-Roading
I think it is ridiculous to let anyone get off the road with anymore than there feet or possibly horses.
These wilderness places are to be enjoyed not destroyed, which most off-roaders do they have no respect for the flora or fauna.
They tear the roads when wet, then they start driving around the mud holes and puddles tearing up more tundra, they throw there garbage around, beer cans, bottles, cigarette butts, pollute our National Forest in the name of fun and being macho, getting there 4 wheel drive full of mud.
Please adjust your thinking
You are incorrect to say that most off roaders have no respect for flora and fauna. What do you base this statement on? I have driven over a thousand miles off road in the Tahoe National forest over more than 30 years and find MOST off roaders respecful of their(not there) environment. They, like all outdoor enthusiasts are there to enjoy the outdoors not destroy it. Some say horses create more erosion problems than ATV's. The hiking trail to the top of mount whitney is more polluted than any four wheel drive road in the Tahoe National forest. I can't tell you how many hikers I've seen who defecate in the forest without proper desposal. Let's ban all hikers while your at it.
The key to the sucessful management of the Tahoe forest is allowing the use of this asset by all people not just those who can hike in 20 miles. The forest service already has very clearly marked what roads are designated for off roading and off roaders as do most people respect the rules.
I agree with the previous post
Let's see...Dan Smuts shown on the page is an avid mountain biker. Hmmm... anyone seen the amount of soil erosion that mountain bikers con tribute to? It's not pretty and they can be portrayed the same way as the 4 wheelers. Hmmm avid hunter also. Let's see, how is the tranquility of the forest impacted with someone with a 12 gauge blasting in the background. Lets ban all hunting, mountain biking, and give Dan more time to reflect on how the forest can be shared by all.
Lake Tahoe Off Road use
Sounds like Bush has weedled his way in and convinced a few people to change their priorities. What does surprise me is that California's Forest Service would go along with it. Sounds like a very good way to start more forest fires, doesn't it? Is there no way to rebuff this decision? Doesn't the public there in CA have a say in their public land use? What is the Wilderness Society planning to do about it? Couldn't you guys join with other conservation groups and get this reversed? I would be interested to know the outcome. I hope we are kept informed. I'm afraid Bush is going to try to do this in all the western states, and we need to keep abreast of the changes, so that when Obama gets into office he has a full comprehensive list of all the damage that has been done, especially in this the eleventh hour of Bush's presidency. I am willing, as I'm sure many others would be, to write to legislators or whoever to get this overturned. It has to be an overwhelming majority, otherwise the ATV's and off roaders will get it.
Speak about what you know
President Bush had nothing to do with this policy. The forest Service spent two years studying the roads and trails in Tahoe National forest and asked for the input of all people especially the folks of California. I have spent thirty years in the the Tahoe National forest and can say the Forest Service has served all Californians and all Americans well. This is a multiple use asset and must remain so for the good of all people. You might best worry about the fact that the economy is the prime concern at the moment and that Obama has hinted that public lands need to be exploited for the "good of the American people. Let's just put up windmills to generate electricity all across the forest and call it a day.
You are what we call a jerk!
You are what we call a jerk! Our wildlands were set aside to be protected for their natural beauty, their plants and their animals for their sakes and so that future generations can visit and see them. Their protection and preservation is and should be the number one concern. Not what you want! Anything that is done by humans that harrasses or destroys the landscape, plants, or animals should be eliminated! If the park service is not doing that then they are not doing their job and something should be done about that!!!! Now thats all that needs to be said so i will not comment further.
off-trail riding
This is a comment which could be addressed to all former comments. I am for no off-riding but I also know of the pressure by groups to allow off-roading amongst other users. In light of this I would like to purpose a compromise. There are groups which want off trail-riding for ATV's and motorbikes, snowmobilers, hikers, horse trail users and others. Maybe a solution would be to have separate trails for each special interest group. It would be more expensive then just having one trail but it would allow use by all groups without interfering with others. Having a 'cost' for different users can pay for these additional trails. Unfortunately, there are individuals who leave trash from all groups. For some of these people there is nothing to be done other then to post signs asking people to pick up their own trash, maybe having trash bins in different areas would be an helpful.
OFF-Roaders
Having spent a great deal of time in national forests, grasslands, refuges and parks in many states, I must say that the damage to ecosystems by motorized vehicles that I have observed in the last 15 years is simply staggering--and growing.
It is hard for me to grasp that driving along at up to 30 mph in very noisy vehicles can possibly be enjoyable to people who profess to love nature. They don't love nature; they love speed and risk-taking. Much of what makes our parks and forests so captivating and refreshing can only be observed at a slow and quiet pace.
And, there is the destruction of trails, wetlands, scrub and desert that I see expanding, often in ecologically sensitive areas and in spite of signage that clearly states: "no motorized vehicles allowed."
There is also a disturbing difference in the environmental ethics and values of motorized and non-motorized visitors to public lands. I believe strongly in the "leave no trace" ethic, but it is obvious, by the destruction of my home forest (Ocala National Forest) in Florida, that off-roaders have an entirely different set of values that enable them to leave literally tons of trash deep in the woods, harrass wildlife, especially the threatened black bear and scrub jay, sully streams and lake beds and tear up pedestrian trails to the point that they are impassable on foot. Efforts by the USFS and local law enforcement have made little difference to stem the tide of devastation. Off-roaders are under the mistaken impression that the have the "right" to ride anywhere they want on public land. Somehow, they believe their "rights" trump those of other forest visitors and the preservation of the land itself. They seem to be unaware that laws currently on the books prohibit the wanton and deliberate damage to public land and that they can be prosecuted for their destructive behaviors.
I watch them, photograph them and submit my photos to the USFS, Congress and law enforcement. To date, I have over 300 photos of deliberate and unlawful destruction of public land wrought by uncaring off-roaders.
I also speak to students to educate them about environmental ethics and to make them aware of the impact of their activities on their surroundings.
Liberalism is a disease
I love how when someone offers logical and fair minded responses, liberals revert to name calling, and blaming Bush like they do for everything that happens anywhere. Who is your scapegoat next year? Besides, I thought the term "liberal" meant to "live and let live" back in my hippie days. Conservatives are the ones that are about "conserving" our values, our heritage, and our country.
I took my brother-in-law off road in Moab a couple years ago, with a large group of Hummers. He is a liberal democrat and holds a high position at Grand Canyon Nat'l Park. After the day's outing, he was asked his thoughts by the organizer. His comment was that if as many people that had rode the Hummers all day had hiked the trails on foot, the environmental impact would have been much greater. He was surpised how little impact was actually made. Of course we uphold "Tread Lightly" and try to educate others that are not in clubs about proper respect and care for our resources. I think Obama would call people that want to limit public lands to just those who are capable of hiking them - SELFISH. And just because you think it is OK to ride Mtn Bikes doesn't mean another more extreme group might not try to stop you from doing that. This is a FREE COUNTRY. Try to celebrate that and live with in harmony with your American brothers and sisters. Educate those that use the lands. Fine those that damage the lands. I hate them, too. But do not use your pious attitudes to attempt to iinfringe the rights of American citizens. I mean can't we just all get along?
If you really think that
If you really think that there is any chance that "a large group of Hummers" traveling off-road does less damage than hikers on trails, then as a Moab resident who is sick of seeing my home get trashed by careless off-roading, I ask you not to come back to Moab. Ever again.