For many of us living in the Mid-Atlantic, George Washington National Forest is a special place – one of very few places to enjoy driving off-pavement and camp dispersed on public land within a couple hours drive. In November, for the first time since 1993, the US Forest Service released a Revised GWNF Forest Plan. Why does this matter?
For all of us that use and enjoy off-highway and dispersed recreation in the Forest – the plan matters. Here’s an excerpt from the introduction that sums up what the Plan is all about:
“The Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the George Washington National Forest provides for the ecological, social and economic sustainability of the natural resources on lands administered by the George Washington National Forest (GWNF). Desired conditions, land use allocations, suitable management practices, objectives, standards, and monitoring and evaluation requirements are the statements of the Plan’s management direction for the next 10 to 15 years.”
So, did the plan say anything about plans for Off Highway Vehicle access specifically? You bet. Looking at the the Record of Decision document released along with the revised plan, the rationale for changes to the prior 1993 plan are summarized. Specific to OHV travel in the forest, here’s what it says:
“The focus is on improving long-term trail sustainability, targeting high-use areas near larger urban population centers, and retaining the current all-terrain vehicle (ATV) systems and the amount of roads available for off-highway vehicle (OHV) use. Road
recommendations are based on a Travel Analysis Process. The goal is a road system that is financially and ecologically sustainable.
- Direction is for no net increase in trail maintenance with a focus on relocating or decommissioning unsustainable trails, decommissioning low use trails, adding stacked loops within existing trail systems, providing connectors between existing trails, and, if feasible, providing trailheads near population centers and/or major road routes.
- The three existing ATV and OHV Use Areas continue and additional trails within the areas can be expanded, but the Archer Run area planned in the 1993 Plan will not be developed.
- High clearance roads remain available for OHV use at current levels.
- No new developed recreation sites are planned, but some existing sites could be expanded.
- There will be no net increase in open road miles.
- There is an objective to decommission 16 miles of road per year. An additional 4 miles of road will be decommissioned if all Recommended Wilderness become designated by Congress.
- A small amount of new road construction (averaging around 1.5 miles per year) will be needed for management activities, but the net effect will be a reduction in total miles of road.”
The Record of Decision goes on to say:
“One of the objectives from the Transportation Analysis Process (TAP) for the GWNF is to reduce the maintenance levels for a number of roads. This will create opportunities for additional high clearance driving experiences, which in turn will mean that we can still provide for these driving experiences at or above current levels.”
If you want to read the reports directly from the source, you can find them HERE.
My take-aways from the Revised Plan are mostly positive. I am happy that the powers-that-be recognize the demand for high-clearance roads and backcountry recreation. I get the sense they are trying to balance access, environmental impact, and a thin budget to make everyone happy, and I can appreciate that. Still, the decommissioning objective stings a little bit.
I do wonder if we, as advocates for OHV access, could be doing more to partner with the USFS, both in terms of planning, volunteering, and organized influence (which usually means $$$) to ensure that the access we enjoy today is there for the next generation? I’ll be thinking about it, and maybe you should, too.
Organized volunteering is our best course of action. Even if it starts with trash cleanup and clearing downed trees. Make it organized and publicize it on THIS website. I will volunteer my time and ideas. Every trail day should coincide with a cleanup day.
The more we do the less money the government will have to spend, the more visibility they will have on our enthusiasm for OHV use, and the more they are likely to open new trails.
We completely agree with you Mike, if we don’t put in some effort to maintain area’s we use, the Forest Service will just end up restricting access.
You can definitely expect more updates in the future, and a trail ride/cleanup will be on our docket come spring.
Having seen what happened down at Tellico, when the “trails” are roads to get a traveler from point A to B with an intent, i.e. camping, the feds will work with you. But when the “trails” turn into deep rutted, bare rock and / or muddy avenues for highly modified rigs and no other purpose, they will get shut down. The day of trails like slippery rock, guard rail and school bus on Federal lands is a thing of the past.
Unfortunately it’s mostly economics for them. They have to maintain roads so they can get fire fighting vehicles back there, but they just don’t have the funds to repair them after a few thousand vehicles pass though in a season.
The only recourse for them at that point is to close down and gate off roads. We’re going to continue to encounter this issue, and our only real recourse is to be good stewards of the land that we all enjoy.