BLM closing single track out in the west desert

[85CUCVKRAWLER]

If anyone rides dirt bikes then youve probably seen this, but if not, just a heads up. Lots of single tracks that have been cut, both recently and old trails, are having these brown BLM signs placed at the front of them. This is in the Delle area, which is all BLM land and is basically salt marsh and borders a bombing range. Literally nothing grows out there and the only thing you will find is a random cow grazing.

Its incredible to me that they just decide to do this. Who is the brainiac who thought this is a good idea? Now people are just going to flaunt the law and go around them. I mean, seriously, this sign is way out in the middle of nowhere with nothing around you. Who is going to enforce this? Its a literaly desert. Its hard for me to put into words how dumb of a BLM officer you have to be to think this was a good idea. Furthermore this area has no restrictions on its use, so there are trails ALL OVER THE PLACE, going every which way, so were just going to randomly put signs up everywhere now?

 

[OrangeSkidPlate]

I guess my question is, are these user generated trails or trails managed by the BLM? Not trying to advocate for trail closure but if they are user created then is "closing" an unsanctioned trail mismanagement of a resource? Soldier pass is next if they haven't already found out about the trail system out there.

 

[85CUCVKRAWLER]

I guess my question is, are these user generated trails or trails managed by the BLM? Not trying to advocate for trail closure but if they are user created then is "closing" an unsanctioned trail mismanagement of a resource? Soldier pass is next if they haven't already found out about the trail system out there.

The ones ive seen with the new signs put up are user generated trails. But, there are no "sanctioned" or "managed" trails out in the area north and west of Delle beyond I-80 and literal roads. Its all just open BLM land with single and double tracks going in every which way.

 

[OrangeSkidPlate]

It should be covered under the Salt Lake Field Office TMA but I am having a hard time finding managed routes. What I am guessing is the field office caught wind of trails out there and are finally getting around to signing them. A quick look at onX show some shared trails which may account for the signage. Management in my office have used that as a source for route closure, trailforks as well. As much as I like and use onX, people sharing trails on it or social media are going to get these areas "managed". Clearly people want trails and there is a lack of single track. The disturbance is there, keep the trail, charge a $5 day use fee. A Decision of NEPA Adequacy would be easy (should be easy) and the FO could adopt the route. This should be a no brainer to me as a rec planner but guessing by the hippies that were in the Salt Lake FO when I was there, they hate motorized use and it is becoming a VERY common trend with the younger people coming into the bureau to replace the older generations.

 

[Houndoc]

I guess my question is, are these user generated trails or trails managed by the BLM? Not trying to advocate for trail closure but if they are user created then is "closing" an unsanctioned trail mismanagement of a resource? Soldier pass is next if they haven't already found out about the trail system out there.

I think we all know that user generated trails can be damaging, are certainly bad PR and lead to limits on motorized access in general.

 

[anderson750]

I am a single track guy and am in the middle of the fight to keep it open in the San Rafael TMP. What most people don’t realize is that the BLM changes management directive in the 2009 settlement agreement from routes being open unless designated closed to closed unless designated open. I personally know some of the people who have built some of the trails out there. None of those trails are probably on any designated route.

You can draw a direct correlation to these trails being closed to people posting pics and and talking about them on social media.

 

[Gravy]

I think we all know that user generated trails can be damaging, are certainly bad PR and lead to limits on motorized access in general.

I don't think we all believe this.

All trails were user generated at one point.
Some of the have been there for more than a decade. And every spring you'd be hard pressed to find the faintest whisper of their existance.
And these trails particularly are not damaging anything. And compared to the cattle leases they are less damaging than one single cow trail. I mean truly imagine 45 or 50 1,300 lb heifers walking in a line all around in the middle of the desert for the past hundred years. And suddenly now it's an issue? It's an illusion. And we can guess who wants more control.

Closure isn't management.

 

[OrangeSkidPlate]

Not trying to defend the BLM in anyway, I think a lot of what we do as an agency is a joke. We let grazing absolutely decimate landscapes because the agency as a whole is too scared to push back on ranchers but will shut down an existing single track(s) because its not designated. Most of the user generated stuff around here are people adopting cow trails and linking them together. There are braided cow trails all over the place and those are perfectly acceptable. Clearly there is a need (need to me, maybe seen as a want from agencies) for more trails. Not to say dirt bikes or e bikes need their own trail systems and should be catered to but I will not ride sections of roads because of UTVs. It is a safety concern to me. Field managers and rec planners need to look at recreation through all lenses and realize there is a need (again, want?) for more riding opportunities. It was obvious that people cleared out UTV and dirt bike inventory in the last few years, lots of new people to the sport that see "hard enduro" races and want those kind of trails. I have no idea what land managers would do if a group came together and pushed to adopt this trails into the TMAs and designate them. Like I said earlier, it should be an easy process if an office was willing to do the NEPA or DNA. I'm not advocating for building trails on every square inch of BLM or FS, and I agree it does give off the wrong impression to the people who don't like motorized use. But on the flip, to use AF canyon as an example, you have so much use focused on less than 100 miles of trails (guess, not sure of mileage) and they are hammered. Shutting down everything or allowing unlimited trail building isn't the answer, but there needs to be a middle ground that I have no idea how to reach.

 

[glockman]

The person who created the hundred or so miles of trails in Soldier pass is an ex RME dude. If you go out there any day of the week you will see that he created a recreational asset that is being used by hundred of people weekly. That land has sat unused for me entire life. I sure hope people don't try to shut it down. The land around Delle is even more unused by hikers. I just don't understand why the process is the same for AF canyon and the god forsaken desert. The anti motorized crowd is unwilling to yield the unwanted desert salt wasteland? This is frustrating and I am fully expecting it to come to a head soon.

 

[jeeper]

We went through a phase on RME of dirt bike riders that were ultra conservative on trail riding. I remember sitting on a group ride while two members argued the benefits/drawbacks of going around a tree in the trail or going back through the puddle we already passed.

I'd go to Moab and get mad at anyone who placed a tire off trail. If we didn't control ourselves then the BLM would.

And then the BLM took dynamite to the 'precious' landscape. Then the BLM blasted tunnels closed. Then the BLM posted photos of a destroyed mountain meadow where they set up their own training course to teach their agents to ride. Then the BLM continued to close places that have no need to be closed. I realized the BLM cares nothing for actual management. They care about money and control.
So I no longer care one bit. I will not register a single vehicle to use offroad. I will not pay entrance fee's. I will not comply at all.

 

[85CUCVKRAWLER]

I think we all know that user generated trails can be damaging, are certainly bad PR and lead to limits on motorized access in general.

How do you think every ingle trail you have ever been on was created? they werent sent down by god or plotted out by a BLM bureaucrat.

 

[Houndoc]

How do you think every ingle trail you have ever been on was created? they werent sent down by god or plotted out by a BLM bureaucrat.

You are right, but as a off-road community we also talk about staying on trail and avoiding damage- both to be responsible land users and to give less ammo for those seeking to close access to motorized vehicles.

Obviously it is different in areas that are defined as open travel without restrictions.

 

[glockman]

You are right, but as a off-road community we also talk about staying on trail and avoiding damage- both to be responsible land users and to give less ammo for those seeking to close access to motorized vehicles.

Obviously it is different in areas that are defined as open travel without restrictions.

The ammo you speak of, is that you exist and they can see or hear you in actuality or hypothetically. How do you appease people who don't think you have a right to exist?

 

[OrangeSkidPlate]

I read it somewhere on this forum or another but the statement was along the lines "I follow trail etiquette, stay on the trail, trails are still closed." I agree that things are going to come to a head, how is my question. Mass non compliance? Do we have a Bundy type situation but with individuals from the offroad community? Again, I have seen it somewhere else or here, despite my distain for majority of the UTV crowd, we (motorized users) need a united front. The OHV crowd is huge but I think the lines separate when the UTV guy doesn't care about a single track closure because he can't drive down a single track.

The most frustrating thing to me about the anti motorized crowd is they want non motorized in areas that are kept open by motorized users. I have never seen a hiker or equestrian pack a saw or bother with trail improvement. That is my experience with my guess close to a 1000 hours of riding single track. Mountain bikers are a different story sometimes.

I think at this point I am just regurgitating things I have read either from the land use thread here or other forums....

 

[jeeper]

I read it somewhere on this forum or another but the statement was along the lines "I follow trail etiquette, stay on the trail, trails are still closed."

Mass non compliance

I know I have made those comments.

I didn't realize you work for the BLM. What do you suggest we do, and how do we make a change? It seems our voices aren't heard, Our service goes unappreciated, and our trails continue to close.

 

[Kevin B.]

I'm very conflicted. On the one hand, we can't have folks just making trails anywhere they want. I hate seeing seeing widened trails, braiding and social trails, whether I'm hiking or riding or driving. It's definitely nice to have some areas like the dunes and Swingarm City so that folks that do want to just go any-damned-where have a place to do that. On the other hand, they're not just closing down unsanctioned alternative routes, they're closing legitimate roads and trails all over the state.

It's not gonna be open season on dirt, not for me. I'll still stay on open roads and trails... mostly. And I'm still going to get pissed when I see tire marks somewhere there didn't used to be tire marks. But my days of unquestioning compliance are certainly coming to a middle.

 

[Gravy]

I know for a fact one of these carsonite signs are on STLA that continues onto private and the property owner has been cool with riders for a while now, I'm not sure the BLM even has jurisdiction. The other: an abandoned mining claim. Is riding on old tailings piles wrecking anything? Absolutely not. This is salted wasteland. Not some pristine forest, no shared use from any other recreational use other than perhaps some shooters and cattle leases. It's madness.
Remember next time you're driving down a paved road to a new development in Lehi that I once got upset at someone for riding on that property that later they've conveniently land swapped. Good thing I helped preserve it for the ancestory.com building parking lot and the houses above it near Texas Instruments.

 

[Kevin B.]

I know for a fact one of these carsonite signs are on STLA that continues onto private and the property owner has been cool with riders for a while now, I'm not sure the BLM even has jurisdiction.

I guess that raises the question, do we know for a fact that it's the BLM that is posting these? You can buy those carsonites and stickers online.

 

[OrangeSkidPlate]

I think this is where it gets weird for me is, "closing" user generated trails that in the BLMs eyes are closed anyways because of their rules or regulations is a no brainer to me as a "land manager" (I am a forester, I look at trees), you can't have people just making trails wherever they feel like it. Its poor optics. As a dirt biker, I see a trail with no sign in front of it, its fair game, let it rip. I think the rule of if its not designated, its closed is dumb. It is lazy management, but the bureau is extremely understaffed and claim to be underfunded (whole other gripe with where money goes and how its used but lets stay on trails).

If you want my opinion of what to do with unsanctioned route and closures of managed routes, I think I said it in the Swell thread, things are going to close and the best tool we have is clubs or groups that are willing to fight it in court (which may just be a waste of money, who knows). In the past I have commented on here pushing people to comment on NEPA or scoping, and after a few NEPA courses this winter, I really don't think it matters. I'll do my best to explain why I think that and I may be flawed in my understanding, so take it with a grain of salt. The BLM and NEPA planners from other agencies are not giving enough information about what a substantive comment actually is and are throwing out a lot of comments that oppose (or support) the management decision. I can throw the NEPA handbook definition of what a substantive comment is somewhere on here if its wanted. But essentially what was pushed from this NEPA training was that NEPA is a disclosure, the agencies are going to do what they line out and then litigation will stop it or it won't. Again, not trying to claim to be an expert on NEPA, but that is my understanding from the trainings. So after all that, my opinion is to enjoy it while its here, I hope mass non compliance opens the eyes of land managers but I think it will have adverse effects. BLM Utah is going to be making very restrictive changes to motorized use based on the settlement with SUWA. As for other states, there have been several other big pushes to get travel management plans out before the potential administration change. If they are signed before a certain point, it is more than EO to undo the new plans (I think).

Just to throw out a side for the enviro people, and maybe stir discussion, there are sensitive plant species that grow in the salty wasteland, I have no clue if those plants grow near or on the those trails but just to play devils advocate.

 

[mbryson]

I think this is where it gets weird for me is, "closing" user generated trails that in the BLMs eyes are closed anyways because of their rules or regulations is a no brainer to me as a "land manager" (I am a forester, I look at trees), you can't have people just making trails wherever they feel like it. Its poor optics. As a dirt biker, I see a trail with no sign in front of it, its fair game, let it rip. I think the rule of if its not designated, its closed is dumb. It is lazy management, but the bureau is extremely understaffed and claim to be underfunded (whole other gripe with where money goes and how its used but lets stay on trails).

If you want my opinion of what to do with unsanctioned route and closures of managed routes, I think I said it in the Swell thread, things are going to close and the best tool we have is clubs or groups that are willing to fight it in court (which may just be a waste of money, who knows). In the past I have commented on here pushing people to comment on NEPA or scoping, and after a few NEPA courses this winter, I really don't think it matters. I'll do my best to explain why I think that and I may be flawed in my understanding, so take it with a grain of salt. The BLM and NEPA planners from other agencies are not giving enough information about what a substantive comment actually is and are throwing out a lot of comments that oppose (or support) the management decision. I can throw the NEPA handbook definition of what a substantive comment is somewhere on here if its wanted. But essentially what was pushed from this NEPA training was that NEPA is a disclosure, the agencies are going to do what they line out and then litigation will stop it or it won't. Again, not trying to claim to be an expert on NEPA, but that is my understanding from the trainings. So after all that, my opinion is to enjoy it while its here, I hope mass non compliance opens the eyes of land managers but I think it will have adverse effects. BLM Utah is going to be making very restrictive changes to motorized use based on the settlement with SUWA. As for other states, there have been several other big pushes to get travel management plans out before the potential administration change. If they are signed before a certain point, it is more than EO to undo the new plans (I think).

Just to throw out a side for the enviro people, and maybe stir discussion, there are sensitive plant species that grow in the salty wasteland, I have no clue if those plants grow near or on the those trails but just to play devils advocate.

I appreciate your candor and perspective. Your observations are mine from watching this for pushing 30 years