Cycle News - Archive Issues - 1970's

(Left) Principle author of BLM ORV regs. Lerry Young,lAbove) ORV activist Ron Morgenthaler. Pacific Northwest Trail Bike Workshop yields encouraging ~ialogue By Philip C. Briggs OLYMPIA, W A, AUG. 8-9 "Off-road vehicle recreation has rights that are just as important as any other form of recreation," said Bert Cole, Washington State Commissioner of Public Lands, as he opened the Pacific Northwest Recreational T " 1Bik W ksh rai 1 ~ ,or o~, CommlsslO~er since 1950 and, as such, In charge of the 10 State's Department of Natural Re sources, Cole has been instrumental in shaping Washington's progressive ORV programs. With 1.6 million dollars to spend in this , the sixth year of operation under the program's enabling legislation, it isn't surprising that the Department was co-hosting this important regional workshop . High ranking land use and recreation planners from every land administering agency in the northwest had been invited, as were prominent representatives of the broadcasting and newspaper media. All told, 78 people were there to hear Cole urge those in government to accept their responsibility to provide equal recreation opportunity to all forms of recreationists. Accomplishment won't be easy, as he cautioned, "It will be a difficult job for ORV users to get their share as it will require active education, political activity, and management programs." And getting our share was what the workshop was all about. Conceived by the Motorcycle Industry Council, the workshops are an educational tool designed to introduce land use and recreational planners to the needs and desires of the recreational trail bike rider and to give them a taste of the sport. During the first of the two days the planners heard presentations from fellow planners that have had . experience with ORV recreationists both good and bad, from the MIC and the A.~~ on the resources and ca~ablhtles they have that are available to the planners, and even a word or two from a couple of real live users (warts and all). There were some lightning bolts tossed that day, things I've thought, felt, and suspected but never heard from an authoritive source - on their side . Not to mention a lot of info that , besides being enlightening, would be usable to any of us the next time we've got to stand up and fight to keep or gain a place to ride. Ron Morgenthaler, a local rider and activist , got right up and punched them between the eyes with, "W hile public agencies pay lip service to off road riding as a legitimate form of recreation, their. efforts and our dollars go to marinas , swimming pools, bicycle paths and raceways , and other more traditional needs . While the need has grown, the opportunities (for ORV use) . have been reduced .' Wouldn't be too hard to look up some of those expenditures before you appear at your next hearing, and use those facts to cry discrimination, would it? Alan Isley, president of the MIC, displayed sample of a ton of different authoritive studies and information summaries that his organization has prepared for use by the planner, and the biker. If you ever need some information on the importance of your sport and the associated industry to your state to fight or support an ORV program (there's more bad programs than good, I'll admit), call Alan he's got it. For example, there's an estimated five million bikes used off highway in the U.S.A., by 12 million riders. Off road related sales were about 43% of the 1.7 billion dollars in motorcycle sales: Big bucks. Not to be trifled with . Gary Buffo, ORV coordinator for a local county (has your country got one?) reviewed research that concluded that "the manner and extent of participation in selecting outdoor activities is, in part, a function of personality." That means, if you dig bikes, you'll not be happy with tiddlywinks or tennis when your local government closes your favorite riding area . Tell 'em that. Further, " ... recreation satisfies deep-seated physiological demands." Or, more simply put, the dirt bike scratches an itch you can't reach any other wayl Together, these conclusions mean that the ORV user won't fold up his tent and go away when his favorite riding area is closed - no matter how hard a government tries , closure as a solution to the ORV problem is doomed to failure. . Buffo noted planners and managers have three alternatives for managing ORV users : 1. ignore them and hope they will go away; 2. recognize them , and impose controls on the user; and 3. recognize their value, and provide a range of environmentally acceptable recreation opportunities. He observed the first two have been tried, and have failed . Larry YOU!1R, Outdoor Recreation Planner for the BLM flew in from Washington, DC to layout some heavy thoughts (especially since he was the principal author of the currently-outfor-review ORV regs of the BLM). "Physiologically:' he observed, " th e public lands (administered by the BLM) with vast open spaces are well suited to trailbike use." That's because in the mountains a hiker is rewarded with a new vista, a new angle on the surroundings, every hundred yards or so - on the dez the same effect may take 25 miles - and no hiker can move that far fast enough to find the effort worthwhile. Remember that at the next BLM wilderness hearing the hikers wouldn't use a California desert wilderness even if they claim they want it. And in that fight, remember another thing Mr. Young said. " .. . The trailbiker is a citizen, a first class citizen , with the rights, privileges. and responsibilities of any other citizen using public lands." That cuts both ways, but so far it seems we've been getting the slippery, end of the stick. Stand up for your rightsl Roland Emetaz, recreation planner with the U.S. Forest Service had a dynamite presentation. I didn't know anybody else thought that way. With some excellent slides , and keen eye for hypocracy, Roland lacerated his fellow planners. ORV use is not OK in the managers' mind because of his: biocentric education; chosen profession and avocation (hunters, hilters); peer pressure; lack of ORV experience; lack of understanding of ORV users' needs and desires; and never having been introduced to ORV's in a positive manner. Closure of areas to ORV users because of resource damage, conflict between users, and user safety, are cop-outs. The solutions are: management; education; self-regulation; enforcement; restriction; and the last resort - closure. Roland's talk was a one-size-fits-all criticism of most of the ORV programs to date, and a similar sized plan of action for solutions to ORV problems. Great stuff. Joe Wernex, ORV Coordinator for Washington's Department of Natural Resources, told how they do it in Washington - and it's fine. They've 1% of the State's gasoline tax revenues plus ORV sticker fees, which totaled up to 1.6 million dollars in 1977. Heavy bread. Their program and accomplishments deserve more detail than I can give here, save to say it is impressive, and proof positive that state ORV ' programs can work. 1 suggest you write Joe in Olympia and ask for more info if you're trying to put something together. Richard Lendstrom, a county mountie complete with uniform, cuffs and pistol , gave a talk that proved ORV enforcement with cops on bikes can work. In four months of a special program, he and another officer undertook to solve that county's ORV enforcement problems by education rather than confrontation. They made thousands of contacts in that period, and only wrote a dozen tickets. And eliminated the problem. Soft fuzz is good fuzz. Dr. A. E. Kier Nash, of the University of California at Santa Barbara, laid out some heavy stuff. "American nature, n he observed, "is politically distributed as to who gets what, when, and where." (As in Jimmy Carter's recent move to take away our share.) "The urban UppeF classes' view of what is wilderness have succeeded in distorting historical fact." (Witness RARE II and the BLM wilderness selection criteria.) Some of the reasons for our problems (sucking hind tit as it were) are caused by " ... lack of recruitment of ORV proponents into regulating and management agencies ," the " . . . bias (included in) policy influencing research," and the " . . . low level of political mobilization of riders and industry." Dr . Nash displayed some preliminary results of Washington's legislatively mandated survey of ORV users and the general public, on ORV use. Problems for us abound. The general public looks with as much favor (not much) on garbage dumps near their home as they do cycle parks, and the great majority (81 %) find "... there's just something about any motorcycle." He sees further controls in the future, so as to leave us with much more restriction on where and what we ride in the next 1015 years. It's hard not to believe him. Too much good stuff came down to report. If the planners don't take it to heart and put it to use, we can beat them over the head with it. But then, judging by all the grins after they rode bikes on the second day, maybe I/we won't have to. •

• Cover