Trump Rescinds Ban on OHV use on Public Lands

[Dougfirtree]

Call me a nerd, but I've been thinking a lot about Saruman lately, and "The Scouring of the Shire."

This sucks. Keep bothering your reps, especially if they're on the red team. And vote boldly in November..

 

[elkduds]

unfortunately that approach simply won't work in the long run.

Imagine the news coverage. OHV users are complaining that their machines are being vandalized and incapacitated when they leave the trails that were formerly legal to OHVs. Since Trump ordered the rescission of rules regulating motor vehicle travel on BLM lands and national forests, machines and users have created disrupted wildlife, permanently damaged streambeds, streambanks and landscapes, and prompting opponents of this policy to adopt guerrilla tactics. No opponents were available for comment. Officials noted that the off-grid nature of these sabotage crimes makes them virtually impossible to prosecute, even when trail cams show images of camoflaged vandals damaging unattended machines.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Trying to decide whether to buy an Argo and wrap a red bandanna around my neck or start packing a bag of sugar in my pack to supplement the gas tanks of guys driving into my favorite elk meadow….

We were going to use ATVs to ride 3 1/2 miles up an ATV legal trail before shouldering our packs and hiking another seven miles into the wilderness to get to mountain goat camp.

Sounds like the pack in portion of our hunt just got a lot easier and the elk hunting just got a lot more crowded.

Also digging the potential to use an ATV to chase err.. access the isolated sections of BLM ground was planning to hike into for antelope season

 

[mtmuley]

Wait till I figure out how to corner cross with a ATV. mtmuley

 

[R.K.]

Pebble in the valve stem cap caused a slow leak and no monetary damage, just inconvenience.

 

[Dave N]

Wait till I figure out how to corner cross with a ATV. mtmuley

 

[TheTone]

View attachment 409493

Probably a lot of areas that would be shockingly easy on a dirt bike

 

[Nick87]

Trying to decide whether to buy an Argo

or start packing a bag of sugar in my pack to supplement the gas tanks of guys driving into my favorite elk meadow

Both.

 

[DFS]

I wonder who the hell is giving him the advice that this was a good idea. Burgam?

 

[mevertsen]

Wait till I figure out how to corner cross with a ATV. mtmuley

Screw ATV's. Thats so 1980s.

We need 1890s technology. ..

 

[Gerald Martin]

Welp, I guess we’re all gonna get Rzrs and not have any excuses….

 

[okie archer]

What am I missing here. Many places already allow atv/utv's.
Saw several last year on my Colorado elk hunt on NF as well as several years ago in AZ on a public land elk hunt. No I don't like it but it's not something new best I can tell.

 

[Montana_Wanderer]

That's just it! Many places already allow it. The ones that don't are special places and should remain that way.

 

[Rack Daniels]

I’d have to read the bill myself, or whatever the new law reads or whatever. One of my spots near Bozeman is a walk-in-only gated road off the main FS road. Some assholes would go up the main road and cut down the hill through the trees to go around the gate. I’ve tried to talk to them but they ripped by…. Now, I have nothing that I could talk to them about… FS might as well take the stupid gates down.

Just because federal land is open to the public doesn’t mean federal land open to the public should be open to wheels and motors any/everywhere. All it takes is one person to cut a new tire trail from checking something out, and now it’s a de facto road because everyone that comes after you sees tire marks and takes the “road”. There’s already very little enforcement for this kind of thing.
Disclaimer* I voted for DT.

 

[WyoCoalMiner]

Holy hell! Has anyone actually read the EO? The EO has done absolutly nothing to change current road or trail status. It changed nothing on what types of vehicles are allowed where and on what roads/trails. It rescinded two prior EO's issued in the 70"s that had language on the criteria to be used to determine where, when and what roads and trails where to be allowed and what types of vehicles would be allowed to travel on those roads. This Admin felt that the language in those EO's had vague and subjective language and that the aganecies already had the statutory authority and guidance needed to manage road and vehicle use without these EO's.

The Congress has enacted or amended a comprehensive set of statutory authorities to establish Federal land policy, including the National Historic Preservation Act, Public Law 89‑665, 80 Stat. 915 (1966) (codified as amended at 54 U.S.C. 300101 et seq.), the National Environmental Policy Act, Public Law 91-190, 83 Stat. 852 (1970) (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Endangered Species Act, Public Law 93-205, 87 Stat. 884 (1973) (codified as amended at 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, Public Law 94-579, 90 Stat. 2743 (1976) (codified as amended at 43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.). I have determined that those statutory authorities, together with executive department and agency (agency) specific land management authorities, provide the appropriate framework for managing off-road vehicle use on Federal lands without retaining the additional specific designation criteria imposed by Executive Order 11644 and Executive Order 11989. I have further determined that technological, operational, and land-management developments since the issuance of Executive Order 11644 and Executive Order 11989 support replacing those specific criteria with a framework grounded in applicable statutory authorities.

It's entirely possible that rescinding these EO's may result in changes to road, trail and vehicle use restrictions from the agencies and those are actual things to be concerned about but this EO isn't that. You still can't drive that rzr 7 miles further for your mnt goat hunt.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Well dang. It’s not even worth the waste of paper and ink if we can’t RzR up to the goat cliffs.

 

[WyoCoalMiner]

Well dang. It’s not even worth the waste of paper and ink if we can’t RzR up to the goat cliffs.

On the bright side, have not heard anyone bitch about the price of boot laces lately.

 

[BigHornRam]

Holy hell! Has anyone actually read the EO? The EO has done absolutly nothing to change current road or trail status. It changed nothing on what types of vehicles are allowed where and on what roads/trails. It rescinded two prior EO's issued in the 70"s that had language on the criteria to be used to determine where, when and what roads and trails where to be allowed and what types of vehicles would be allowed to travel on those roads. This Admin felt that the language in those EO's had vague and subjective language and that the aganecies already had the statutory authority and guidance needed to manage road and vehicle use without these EO's.

The Congress has enacted or amended a comprehensive set of statutory authorities to establish Federal land policy, including the National Historic Preservation Act, Public Law 89‑665, 80 Stat. 915 (1966) (codified as amended at 54 U.S.C. 300101 et seq.), the National Environmental Policy Act, Public Law 91-190, 83 Stat. 852 (1970) (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Endangered Species Act, Public Law 93-205, 87 Stat. 884 (1973) (codified as amended at 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, Public Law 94-579, 90 Stat. 2743 (1976) (codified as amended at 43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.). I have determined that those statutory authorities, together with executive department and agency (agency) specific land management authorities, provide the appropriate framework for managing off-road vehicle use on Federal lands without retaining the additional specific designation criteria imposed by Executive Order 11644 and Executive Order 11989. I have further determined that technological, operational, and land-management developments since the issuance of Executive Order 11644 and Executive Order 11989 support replacing those specific criteria with a framework grounded in applicable statutory authorities.

It's entirely possible that rescinding these EO's may result in changes to road, trail and vehicle use restrictions from the agencies and those are actual things to be concerned about but this EO isn't that. You still can't drive that rzr 7 miles further for your mnt goat hunt.

Reading the EO would make threads like this entirely too boring to read!

 

[WyoCoalMiner]

Reading the EO would make threads like this entirely too boring to read!

Also much harder to get the outrage machine started.

 

[SAJ-99]

It's entirely possible that rescinding these EO's may result in changes to road, trail and vehicle use restrictions from the agencies and those are actual things to be concerned about but this EO isn't that.

It is an EO to "clear the books". These rules were in conflict with the recision of the Roadless Rule, so they wanted to get rid of them. The recision of the Roadless Rule is far more direct and impactful, but the result is exactly what people are worried about. Changes won't be immediate, but it will be much easier for industrial use in those areas.

Disclaimer* I voted for DT.

And you got Russ Vought.