The Open Gate
Greg Mumm Greg lives in South Dakota and his interests include 4-Wheeling, fly-fishing, and camping. |
|
January/February 2010
By Greg Mumm
The BlueRibbon Coalition, along with the Southern Four Wheel Drive Association and the United Four Wheel Drive Associations, have taken the next step in the process and appealed the decision to close Tellico.
This fight is not over. Some things are just wrong and need to be challenged.
Looking back, the Forest Service apparently set their mind from the beginning. Anyone who has spent hours reading and studying the assessment and decision documents could only come to one conclusion—the Forest Service has no desire to solve the issues in Tellico and manage it for OHV recreation.
I am not surprised. The reason the trails in Tellico have issues is because the Forest Service failed to do their job and manage them properly. And now, OHV enthusiasts and the surrounding communities are paying the price—for those communities, it means $4.8 million in lost OHV revenue.
The sad thing is that this process isn’t an either/or situation, like the rhetoric now coming from the Forest Service would have you believe. The scoping notice that started this process read: “The intent would be to greatly reduce the amount of soil leaving the road and trail system and entering the Tellico River and its tributaries as well as provide an OHV trail system.” We took them at their word and earnestly worked the process. What other choice did we have?
We pointed out issues and provided solutions. The Southern folks even commissioned a study from an outside engineering firm to ensure the best possible solutions to some very challenging issues. The Forest Service’s own Trails Unlimited Team report demonstrated sustainable ways to repair and maintain the trail system. And to what end? In reading the Forest Service’s response to comments, I heard every reason why the Forest Service says they can’t. In 166 pages, I didn’t read a single response that says, “We can.”
The Forest Service either lost sight of their original intent for the process or they didn’t really mean it. Or maybe they were afraid of getting sued. Whatever the reason, the time spent planning was obviously time spent justifying why they should close it and not in figuring out how they could fulfill their original stated intent.
The point is that this is wrong and we are trying to hold their feet to the fire. It isn’t the use of the trails in Tellico that is the challenge here. It is the management of those trails. The Forest Service failed to properly manage the trails and closing them doesn’t fix any sediment or erosion issues because the trails are still there. If the FS doesn’t have the funding with the OHV community help to fix and maintain the trails, they certainly don’t have the funding to close and rehabilitate them without that extra volunteer help and additional outside funding sources. We think the cost is just as much to close the trails, if not more.
You can make a difference in helping us win this fight. Please join and donate to support our efforts, not only in Tellico but across the country. It is important for the future of access for all forms of recreation that we challenge bad agency decisions and support the good ones. It is easy online at www.sharetrails.org.
