home > take action >gunnison TM > comment suggestions
Home
CBTRA Defined
Land Issues
Take Action
Membership
Inside Line
Events
Riding Tips
Bike Tips
ATVing
Non Moto
Trail Conditions
Contact
 
Take Action NOW
Ignore your trails and they'll go away . . .

Gunnison Travel Management
Suggestions for Effective Commenting on Route Changes (cont.)

Big-Picture Aspects of the Proposed Travel Management Plan that should be commented on:

Closed Unless Posted Open:
There are several problems with this, the biggest one being that the Forest Service's Greg Austin (the Gunnison's trail guy) has already indicated that it is highly unlikely that he and his staff will be able to both initially post every trail that is open and maintain the signage necessary to indicate that open routes are open. The amount of potential confusion for all users from this approach to signing routes, especially when it is already deemed an insurmountable task by Forest Service staff, makes this a highly unsatisfactory approach to signing trails.

Wilderness Trails Must Be Included in the Trails Inventory:
Typical of moves by the "Anti" crowd, they are lobbying the Forest Service to not include trails located on the Gunnison's substantial Wilderness areas when comparing the amount of motorized trails to non-motorized trails. At the Crested Butte Travel Management meeting, concerned non-motorized users commented the Forest Service should aim for the same motorized to non-motorized ratio for trails by the end of the Gunnison Travel Management process that the other GMUG forests ended up with--about 50/50. They did not appear happy when Greg Austin pointed out that 50/50 is the current motorized to non-motorized trail ratio on the Gunnison. When Greg explained that this was because of the significant amount of routes in the various wilderness areas of the Gunnison, the non-motorized folks immediately made it known that Gunnison National Forest wilderness trails should not be taken into account when looking at non-motorized trails in the Gunnison National Forest. Please, tactfully and constructively, let the Forest Service know why this line of skewed logic has no place in Travel Management for the Gunnison.

OHV Use the National Forests Is On the Rise:
While more education and enforcement will be needed to address the increasing OHV using population, take the time to point out the Forest Service that public lands need to accommodate the recreating public, as well. More recreationalists than ever are recreating on OHVs and coming to the Gunnison National Forest to do so. Closing routes doesn't lessen the number of users on public lands, rather it makes their impacts more intense and noticeable on the areas that remain open.

Anticipate the Maintenance Argument
It wouldn't be a bad idea to comment on the "Anti's" line of comment that there are more routes than can be maintained by FS and BLM staff now. From suggesting that if there were more staff available, the first thing the Forest Service should do is close more trails and enforce these closures to arguing that the number of routes should be trimmed back so that they can be better maintained, offer ideas and suggestions to help this be avoided.

Your Gunnison Basin riding opportunities depend on your taking the time to comment. Please don't miss out!

page 1 | 2 | 3

:
:

Links
Colorado Off-Highway Vehicle Coalition : : Stay the Trail : : Blue Ribbon Coalition : : Stewards of the Sequioa
KTM of Aspen / Rocky Mountain Racing Works : : Sun Sports--Gunnison
Forest Service : : BLM