California Biodiversity Council
Regional Meeting with the Regional Council of Rural Counties

September 20, 2000
DoubleTree Hotel
Rohnert Park, California

Topic I: Off-Highway Vehicle Management

Secretary Nichols introduced moderator Wes Lujan, RCRC (sitting in for Dave Widell, California Department of Parks and Recreation, Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division).  Mr. Lujan introduced individual panelists for their presentations, as follows:

Bob Ham, Imperial County Supervisor and long-time OHV lobbyist, gave an eloquent introduction to the history of off-highway vehicle (OHV) activity in California.  In the 1960’s and 1970’s OHV started with WWII Jeeps, Honda Motor cycles and dune buggies.  There was no government regulation and riders often wreaked havoc by cutting fences and trespassing.  However, the environmental revolution of the 1970s raised awareness that the desert is not a wasteland.  There were lots of environmental resources and the question of regulation came to the forefront.  A political battled ensued; there was a push to control and register OHVs.  The final decision was to register vehicles every two years.  However, these registration fees went to the county in which the vehicle is registered.  This meant lots of dollars for Los Angeles and Orange counties even though the use occurred in the less populated desert areas. 

Paul Spittler, President of the California Wilderness Coalition, first thanked the Council for brining this panel together.  Some proponents of OHV-recreation often accuse, threaten, and call him names, but Mr. Spittler welcomed this chance to reconcile those differences.  The California Wilderness Coalition began in 1976 and Paul described the work the Coalition has done to save wilderness areas in California.  This is not to say that OHV activity should be prohibited, only that it should be regulated; it is a question of balancing recreation and the environment.  Although the Coalition sued the State Parks Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation (OHMVR) Division in 1999, Mr. Spittler noted that the new director [Dave Widell] is doing much better.  In order to achieve this desired balance, Paul asked that all trails be labeled open, limited, or closed.  He also requested monitoring and that OHVs be prohibited in wilderness areas.  In addition to monitoring, the state should repair existing and prevent further damage.  Paul did mention that in the last year, with the new OHMVR director, the situation has gotten better.  Laws are now enforced along with habitat monitoring.  Sheriffs are being brought into the fold whereas before, sheriffs felt left out without adequate funding to take care of all the problems.  Now, their inclusion in the equation is helping a lot.  The new regulations are being made and actually enforced.

Ron Rodrigues, San Benito County Supervisor, told the story of the Hollister Hills State Recreation Area.  In 1975 Harris Ranch sold 2480 acres at a low rate to the State as a recreation area for motorcycles.  The fencing was restored and riders now had a place to go.  Although, this land provides a fantastic resource for OHVers several issues arose including: water quality, air quality, geology/soils, transportation, and noise pollution.  Also, the dust produced by OHVs affects the area vineyards. 

Dana Bell, project coordinator for the National Off-Highway Vehicle Conservation Council, described the early days of OHV riding in California.  She grew up riding bikes throughout the state and has watched as laws began to restrict her access to California’s backcountry.  There are many types of people that want to many different types of things.  You run the gamut from off-highway motorcycles and dual sport motorcycles to all-terrain vehicles and four-wheel drive Jeeps.  They may want speed on the track, or long distance linear exploration.  It is impossible to serve all of these people with all of these interests unless you offer a wide variety of opportunities.  This conflict will continue to arise solely because of the sheer numbers of people that want to recreate.  For example, every Thanksgiving weekend 100,000 people go out to OHV parks and trails.  Dana often repeated that the only way to solve these use conflicts is with inclusion and collaboration.  You need to get every affected party at the table in order to make progress towards an amenable solution.  You need to entice the public to specific areas with good facilities and interpretation.  Lead OHVers to state regulated parks with these quality services.  When it comes to animals and sensitivity, make the riders aware and send them in the right direction.  It is important to bring solution, not just problems.  Make sure to answer the tough questions: what areas are affected and how, how do we address these issues.  Also, it is important to note that roads and trails built for transport are not necessarily good for recreation.  These trails need to be properly designed and maintained. 

Wes Lujan opened the panel to the Council and audience members for questions.

Al Wright (BLM) discussed the evolution of management.  Throughout the years new issues arose from less open space, threatened and endangered species to growing human populations.  Partnerships between the state and the user are an excellent way to help manage the desert in a responsible way.  Al, however, was concerned with the potential effects of population increase and the lack of a strategy to distribute use in ways that are compatible with the capacity of the land.

·         Panelist Paul Spittler answered by saying that involving the federal land managers in the strategic planning will be helpful.  It is important to find the most appropriate areas to encourage use.   Also, the OHMVR Division is conducting stakeholder forums bringing together 60 different groups and come to solutions civilly.

·         Bertha Gillam (USFS) noted that we may be “loving the National Forests to death.”  They are currently looking at the different types of demand.  The solution is to determine the capacity of the land and realize that we can not accommodate all of the use that people want, especially in the future.

·         Dana Bell responded that the OHV public has gotten poor service in the past.  The quality of the recreation was not considered.  On the ground efforts do not emphasize quality or public outreach.  There is no adequate staff, no outreach to schools, no way to work with the communities, and no interpretation.  Dana noted, “We need to entice the public to do what we want them to do.”

Gilberto Ruiz (SCAG) queried: How do agencies address species take issues with respect to OHVs?

·         Al Wright answered that monitoring is the only way to know what’s going on out there and once you know then you can address the issue.  Contrary to popular belief, there is interpretive information out on the trails, although it does need to be applied everywhere. 

·         Bertha Gillam (USFS) mentioned that public members often go out on the Forest Service monitoring projects.  Volunteers are invaluable especially with the declining dollars and staffers to agencies.  Bertha noted that the Forest Service isn’t doing everything it would like to on the ground.  Also developed biological conservation plans.  And the Forest Service continues its work with the public through local ranger units.

Bob Hicker, Mariposa County Supervisor, noted that Dana Bell’s comments were very true and that there is a significant need for interpretive trails.  We need better collaboration to encourage better use of trails.  He asked if there was a budget problem; could green sticker money solve this?  In any case, there is a need for better agency collaboration to encourage better use of the trails.  Bob also asked about the specifics of the monitoring being done on Forest Service lands and have they been available to the public in the past.

·         Bertha Gillam (USFS) would hope that each of her regional managers is sharing the monitoring information with the public.  Many of the public members do go out with them when they monitor, especially with watersheds. 

Frank Bigelow, Madera County Supervisor, noted the Department of Parks and Recreation didn’t communicate with the community when planning a new OHV park.  The proposed park was in the center of an active residential community and no one was told until the deal was almost done.  How do we establish this communications link between local governments and the proponents of these types of projects?

·         Secretary Nichols noted that Dave Widell’s strategy would hopefully fix this gap, but that it is a very long process. 

Mary Wright, DPR, asked about the consequences of noise pollution caused by OHVs: “Silence, a diminishing resource.”

·         Bob Ham informed Ms. Wright that there is a serious effort with industry and users to resolve that very problem.  It has gotten better since the inception of the legislation controlling OHV use.

·         Dana Bell told the audience about the Right Rider program targeting the 15-30 year-old age group that “likes to make noise.”  This program is attempting to make them think in quieter terms. 

·         Ron Rodrigues said that creating and adjusting the buffer zones with the landowners could fix the problem.  Also, it is possible to reconfigure the trails and make a world of difference lessen noise. 

Secretary Nichols closed the panel by thanking the panelists and the audience members for their participation.