BACKGROUND
There are new rules that are intended to be adopted on September 2, 2008, related to use of State Forest Service lands. I have reviewed the proposals and have some significant concerns. As I read these rules they show DNR’s intention to divert from its prior policies regarding open land use. I believe it is a veiled attempt to lock up most of the DNR land and there are significant rules that should be strongly opposed.
There are current Washington administrative codes in place which address managed lands and road use under Chapter 332-52. Apparently these WACs have been in affect for many, many years and the DNR is attempting to change them. Currently, WAC 332-52-030 (4) states in part, “…it is the policy of the Department of Natural Resources to encourage public use of all roads and trails, land and water under its jurisdiction consistent with its trust responsibilities…” It would seem from reviewing the new proposals; the DNR no longer wishes to follow the open use policy.
There are numerous new proposed sections but I have focused on several of the most important.
ANALYSIS
WAC 332-52-205 Recreation Permits This section provides that a recreation permit cannot be issued to the general public or non-profit club if it is for a “commercial purpose.” However, commercial purpose appears to be defined very broadly, stating that the “primary purpose is the sale or barter of goods or services, regardless of whether the use or activity is intended to produce profit.” I believe the DNR can read this to exclude motorcycle events where the club makes marginal profits to help run the club’s activities. Would the club have to forego all profit from events from this day forward? This language needs to be clarified.
WAC 332-52-400 Managing Road and Trail Use Section (3) provides how a user of a motor vehicle is alerted to whether he may ride on a road or a trail. The provision provides that a user is put on notice that he may not ride on a road or a trail if Department uses a (sign, gate, berm, trenches, concrete barrier, rocks, stumps or other barriers.) It provides “motorized vehicular use on or beyond these barriers is strictly prohibited unless otherwise posted.” This paragraph would essentially eliminate motorcycle riding behind any gate, concrete barrier, berm or water bar in the State of Washington. I believe this will effectively eliminate the use of public lands by motorized vehicles except for a designated recreational use facility such as Walker Valley, etc.
One can imagine a simple concrete barrier placed in the middle of the road, which would provide no effective barrier for a dirt bike. According to the proposal, this would place the user on notice that he may not use the area and would also qualify as a civil infraction pursuant to RCW 7.84, which is “declared not to be a criminal offense…” (RCW 7.84.020) These penalties, according to RCW 7.84.100 are not to exceed $500 unless each offense is specifically authorized by statute. Section (5) provides “persons shall only operate motorized or non-motorized vehicles off-trail or off-road on lands posted or otherwise designated by the Department as open for the designated recreational use.” This section requires that the DNR will have to sign all areas that a motorized vehicle is permitted “off-road or off-trail” and if there is no sign, you cannot ride there.
Knowing the DNR and its limited resources, I estimate the signing project for this will never be done and off-road users will always risk a civil infraction when riding on trails not signed. I believe this is a poor approach. Instead the DNR should adopt the reverse approach. Any trails that are not permitted, the DNR should be required to sign.
I believe that this section seriously threatens user’s ability to enjoy logging roads and nominal short trail sections that are currently available to users on DNR lands that are not currently designated as a recreational use facility. This section should be strongly opposed in its entirety.
This section cuts to the heart of the matter and is based on the false premise that off-road motorcycles and quads are causing damage to trust lands. Is the DNR seriously experiencing trust land deterioration due to off-road vehicle use by motorcycles and quads? In the 1990’s the DNR began gating most of the logging roads in the Northern District due primarily to garbage dumping and timber theft. Currently I estimate over 90 percent of the logging roads in the Northern District of the DNR are gated. These gates were not installed to prohibit off-road vehicle access. However, the DNR now has made proposals that would use these gates as a way to prohibit all access behind the gate. This is a sea change to the DNR’s previously stated policy of public access. The public has a right to recreate on trust lands so long as there is not damage occurring as a result. I would argue that 99 percent of the users that these regulations will affect do not cause damage to trust lands. (Note: My focus is on light off-road vehicles such as motorcycles and quads. These arguments are not made on behalf of heavy off-road vehicles such as 4x4’s.
WAC 332-52-405 Unauthorized Construction of Trails and Structures This section provides that a person may not construct, modify, repair or maintain a new or existing recreational trail “without advance written authorization from the Department.” It further notes that any violation of this section is a “misdemeanor” as opposed to Section 400 above, which only calls for a civil infraction. Obviously DNR is very serious about this section as they wish to make this a criminal offense. This section should be strongly opposed as it works hand-in-hand with Section 400 in excluding the public from public lands. This section will be used to intimidate responsible users. If an individual were to cut a tree off a path or a logging road, it would cause that individual to be a criminal. This section will prevent volunteers from working on state land and will have a “chilling effect” on volunteerism. The lack of volunteerism and intimidation of responsible users will leave trust lands in worse shape, not better. Responsible users offer many positive benefits to the trust, including maintenance and alerting law enforcement to inappropriate actions on the trust lands.
CONCLUSION
Light off-road vehicle users should strongly oppose these new proposals as they will have a devastating effect on ORV recreation in many ways. I have included a form petition that each user who opposes these regulations should sign and feel free to add their own personal comments. These petitions should be delivered during the public comment portion of the DNR process. The petitions should be widely distributed to clubs, ORV dealers and sporting good stores among others.