http://www.greatfallstribune.com/apps/pbcs.../608060302/1002

Aug 6, 2006
Motor vehicle fans drawing line in the sand around Little Belts
By SONJA LEE
Tribune Staff Writer

Motor vehicle enthusiasts across Montana are revving up efforts to retain the roads and trails on public lands that they've used for years.

Those who ride motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles and other machines worry that new National Forest travel plans could shut them out of large chunks of the state's forests.

They're drawing a line in the sand. And, for now, that line is in the Little Belt Mountains, putting the Lewis and Clark National Forest in the hot seat.

"There is no question we are being closed out. If we don't stand up and say 'whoa,' they will shut us out of everything," said Bruce Butler, state representative for the National Off-Highway Vehicle Conservation Council.

"I feel personally that there is room enough for all of us in the forest," he said. "The Little Belt Mountains are vital to us."

Last year the U.S. Forest Service ordered all 155 national forests to identify and designate those roads, trails and areas that are open to motor vehicle use. Some forests in Montana already had started that process at the time of the order.

Thousands of miles of roads and trails are currently open to motorized users in the Beaverhead-Deer Lodge, Bitterroot, Custer, Flathead, Gallatin, Helena, Kootenai, Lolo and Lewis and Clark national forests. But as preliminary travel plans are released to the public, some of those forests are considering options to reduce motorized use.
The importance of the Little Belt Mountains was clear earlier this week, when more than 250 people packed a public meeting in Great Falls to discuss a plan for the range.

The Lewis and Clark National Forest recently released a draft Environmental Impact Statement for travel in the Little Belt and Castle mountains and the northern portion of the Crazy Mountains. It governs road and trail use on about 924,800 acres of the forest.

"If you look at the ranges around Montana, this is the last really complete trail system we have," said Russ Ehnes, president of the Montana Trail Vehicle Riders Association. "There is a lot of interest out there in this plan."

Motor vehicle users dominated the Great Falls meeting, and they held nothing back when Lewis and Clark National Forest Supervisor Spike Thompson opened it up to questions.

"The size of the crowd probably caught us a little off guard," Thompson said. "People feel very strongly about their viewpoint on travel management."

Thompson said that since travel planning kicked off in the Little Belts, the Forest Service tried to bring motorized and nonmotorized users to the table to strike a compromise.

"We just haven't been able to find the right setting or conditions to sit down and talk this out," he said. "We've known what the issues are and how passionate people are and how polarized people are.

"Our attempts to help them and facilitate an agreement, however, have not been met with much success," he added.

As a result, the Forest Service asked motorized groups and the Montana Wilderness Association to draft their own travel plan alternatives. The Forest Service then added an alternative based on public comments, resource issues and current land use.

All the options are now open to public discussion and comment.

Throughout the country, forest officials are examining travel plans and weighing alternatives to balance recreational uses. Federal land managers must review off-highway vehicle, or OHV, use as part of a national strategy to ensure responsible motorized use.

The availability and capability of OHVs has increased, according to the Forest Service.

"Back when a lot of our roads and trails were built, we didn't have SUVs and Hummers," said Joel Krause, deputy director of engineering in the Forest Service's Northern Region in Missoula. "They are a lot more powerful and a lot bigger."

That affects soil, water, wildlife habitat, other recreational visitors and the spread of noxious weeds, he said.

Environmental laws also changed, and new species were added to the threatened and endangered lists.

In addition, budgets have been stretched. The National Forest is funded at less than 20 percent of what is needed to maintain the current road system to standards, Krause said.

"Because of changes in use, it doesn't surprise me that we are looking at reducing the size of our system," he said.

In the late 1990s, the Northern Region of the Forest Service made a commitment to look at travel plans. The national rule adopted last year took that another step.

"I think the most important thing people need to understand is it is going to be a local process, and they are going to have a lot of opportunities to influence the decisions being made," Krause said.

Travel plans also aren't permanent, and as issues change, the plans will be adjusted, officials said.

In Montana, travel plan proposals reflect efforts to implement more restrictive designations where OHVs harm land.

In a portion of the Helena National Forest, a final travel plan for some 230,000 acres in the North Big Belt Mountains closes nearly 100 miles of old logging roads and illegally created roads.

The plan is the culmination of a decade of analysis and leaves about 285 miles of existing roads and trails open to motorized vehicles.

"We tried to assure that there was a broad range of opportunities," said Dennis Heffner, planning staff officer. "A lot of what we closed were duplicate or parallel routes or roads that have grown in."

The Helena National Forest will next look at travel in the south end of the Big Belts, or the Townsend district area, he said. After that plan, the forest will look at the Lincoln area.

The Gallatin National Forest also is in the midst of travel planning. In its preferred alternative, the Forest Service opens up several closed logging roads to motorized travel, adding about 168 miles. Motorcycles, however, would see a 215-mile reduction in trails.

"We firmly believe that motorized use is an acceptable use, and we will provide that where we can," said Marna Daley, public affairs officer.

Daley said officials heard that the proposed closures aren't acceptable and they are looking at other options. A final decision is expected in November.

Motorized users, however, remain suspicious of travel planning.

"It doesn't matter if it's a travel plan or a timber sale. If they can close another road or area, they do it," said Fred Hodgeboom, president of Montanans for Multiple Use. "Every single forest is doing it."

The Motorcycle Industry Council reports that annual off-highway vehicle sales more than tripled between 1995 and 2003, to more than 1.1 million vehicles sold in 2003. ATVs account for more than 70 percent of that market.

As off-road vehicles increase in popularity, motorized users question why federal agencies are reducing the number of roads and trails those vehicles can access.

"Our feelings are that if you put us in one tiny area, there will be environmental damage," Butler said. "If we can use trails that are spread out, there is a lot less damage."

The Little Belt Mountains historically have been open to a wide variety of motorized uses. Currently in the Little Belts, 1,200 miles of bladed road and 500 miles of trail are open to some form of motorized use.

The Little Belt Mountains draw off-roaders from Billings, Great Falls, Lewistown, Stanford and several other areas.

"You can see a lot of country and go a lot of different places," said Bryan Cook, president of the Treasure State ATV Association.

In the Little Belts, only 62 miles of trail are exclusively available to hikers and backcountry horsemen.

Mark Good, field representative for the Island Range Chapter of the Montana Wilderness Association, said that most forests historically have been wide open to vehicle use. As management plans are developed, he wants motorized trails and roads reduced to create some balance.

Good said most trails in the Highwood Mountains are open to motorcycles. And even in the Little Belts the proposal drafted by the MWA leaves 69 percent of the forest open to motorized use.

"It seems to me that some balance needs to be restored in the forest," he said. "It would be irresponsible for the Forest Service to do nothing."

Good said forest users are simply asking that resources are protected and some quiet areas for nonmotorized users are developed.

Dan Bennett of Great Falls agrees. He said he is a quiet trail user, who would like to see some balance in the forest.

"They never should have let the level of motorized use get so high," he said.

Good also said motorized use has increased and vehicles have become more powerful and capable of covering greater distances. Those more powerful machines increase opportunities for resource problems, like erosion and damaged trails.

Vehicles going off road cut into wet ground, causing erosion, drainage problems and the spread of noxious weeds. When trails are cut into hillsides, it causes water to channel and wash away soil and vegetation.

In the Little Belts, drivers illegally traveling beyond existing roads and trails have scarred hillsides and created environmental problems that cost thousands of dollars to repair.

In April the Forest Service reminded drivers to exercise caution and police one another.

Motorized users bristle at being blamed for resource damage. In the Little Belts, motorized groups maintain large segments of trails and work to educate drivers about the rules and resource protection.

Butch Olson of Great Falls enjoys riding motorcycles, horses, ATVs and snowmobiles in the Little Belts.

He said that animals look at him as he drives through the forest; but they don't run off in terror. Olson also said riders are conscientious about caring for the land.

"The (current) travel plan has worked for the last 50 years," he said.

Thompson, supervisor of the Lewis and Clark National Forest, ultimately will sign the final travel plan for the Little Belts.

He hopes that folks on both sides of the issue will look closely at the options.

Thompson said the Forest Service is trying to offer a quality experience, and the quantity, or miles, of trails open to different uses, isn't always the best way to look at the issue.

In the Rocky Mountain Front people might have the highest quality nonmotorized experience, and the Little Belts might offer the highest quality motorized experience, he said.

"If both sides keep looking at the quantity of miles and not the opportunity to enhance the quality of an experience, I think that might hinder our ability to work something out," he said.