BCHNG RAISES $4,000 FOR LEGAL FUND

        CLICK HERE FOR WHAT CAN YOU DO TO HELP!!

By Larry Wheat, BCHNG Vice-President

There are many emails being sent around the equestrian and trail communities echoing the good quality and great participation experienced at the August 8th meeting of the Back Country Horsemen of North Georgia (BCHNG).  The primary purposes of this meeting was to present facts and the current status of the US Forest Service's plan re-implementing trail riding restrictions throughout the National Forest lands in Georgia, and then decide on a plan of action to support equestrian rights.  The Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests Supervisor's Office is pursuing actions that can lead to restricting equestrian riding to only designated trails and numbered Forest Service roads. More details are provided in the handout titled “Designated Trails Overview”, provided as a separate document in this newsletter.
 

We had 125+ attendees at the meeting, 12 saddle clubs were represented along with the Southeastern Distance Riders Association (SEDRA), North American Trail Ride Conference (NATRC), the Georgia chapter of the American Horse Council, and the Back Country Horsemen of Middle and South Georgia (BCHSG). Following the presentation and discussion period, we then discussed the available options of appeal should the Forest Service implement the proposed restriction, and an eventual federal court lawsuit should an appeal not be successfully resolved.  Appellants would be BCHNG, BCHSG, and the national organization Back Country Horsemen of America (BCHA).  By motion and vote, the participants voted overwhelmingly to appeal should the Forest Service implement this unwarranted restriction on equestrian access to the public National Forest lands in Georgia.  BCHNG and BCHSG have agreed to each contribute money for an appeal fund.  Participants at the meeting were generous and contributed to the BCHNG fund nearly $4,000.00 or about $32.00 per attendee.  BCHNG had encouraged the attendees to contribute $1,250.00, so the response was fantastic.  There were numerous comments supporting the equestrian heritage of our country.  Plans are now being considered about how to raise the significantly greater amount of money needed to pay for a federal lawsuit, should that option be selected in the future.

 We do not want to leave a misunderstanding about National Forest trails and trail support.  Many of us in the various BCH and equestrian organizations devote numerous hours to maintain trails in the National Forests, and not just horse trails.  We intend to continue to volunteer our time and resources to keep existing trails in good condition.  This difference of belief about trail riding in the National Forests is not an issue with specific persons, but is an institutional or heritage issue.  We do not condone environmental damage to our public resources, and we encourage all trail riders to be responsible users of these lands.

Please contribute to the BCHNG Legal Fund.  You can now MAKE A DONATION, easily and securely, FROM OUR HOMEPAGE via PayPal or credit card.
 
You can also mail a check, made out to “BCHNG Legal Fund” to:

BCHNG-Legal Fund
P.O. Box 268
Epworth, GA. 30541

Designated Trails Overview

Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests

(Presented at the BCHNG members meeting on August 8, 2007 by Larry Wheat)

This paper presents a brief history of the designated trail topic for the Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests (CONF) located in Georgia.  Then a summary is provided of the U.S. Forest Service (FS) analysis performed to justify restricting trail riding to only designated trails and numbered FS roads.  After this short presentation, we will invite your questions and do our best to answer them factually.

Definitions

·         A Designated Trail is an official trail – one that is maintained by the FS – and declared open for equestrian use.

·         Cross-country travel means anywhere off a designated equestrian trail or numbered FS road.

Designated Trail History

·         January 15, 2004, the Land Management Plan was approved.  It included a provision stating that horse, pack stock, and bike use is to be on designated routes only; that is, no public cross-country travel is allowed.  Routes include authorized trails, open roads, and closed roads unless otherwise posted. (FW-127)

·         An Appeal was filed in April, 2004 by the Back Country Horsemen of East Tennessee and the Back Country Horsemen of America.  In July, 2006, the Appeal Decision (Record of Decision or ROD) was released from Washington Office, USDA Forest Service.

·         The ROD stated in part “The Regional Forester is directed to either demonstrate that the analysis exists to support implementing Standard FW-127, or to conduct additional site specific analysis, including public involvement, regarding the need for and impacts of the decision to restrict horse and pack stock to designated routes.  Until such analysis is provided or completed, Standard FW-127 may not be implemented, and is subject to modification depending on the outcome of the analysis.”

The Forest Service’s Analysis Process and Conclusion – Called “Capability Analysis”

Four criteria were considered to determine suitable land for trails.  The complete FS PowerPoint presentation given at several clubs is available on the forest website, at http://www.fs.fed.us/conf/rec/rogs/horse/horse.htm.  The four criteria and the FS conclusions are:

·         Management Prescription – The Forest Land Management Plan specifies that certain areas are restricted and trails are not appropriate.  Six (6) percent of the National Forest lands are in this category. 

·         Terrain Slope – The terrain slope (would be side slope for trails) must be equal to or less than 30 percent.  Six (6) percent of the National Forest lands have a slope exceeding 30 percent and are unsuitable for cross-country travel.  Steeper slopes may be acceptable for designated trails.

·         Proximity to Riparian Zones – Except for crossings, trails may not lie within 100 feet of riparian streams (streams that contain water for at least some portion of the year, as shown by blue lines on topographic maps).  Eight (8) percent of the National Forest land is in this category.

·         Soil Type – There was no definition provided for this category.  There are numerous types of soil as documented in a FS reference document.  The FS concluded that 81 percent of the National Forest land is unsuitable for cross-country travel. 

·         FS Summary Considering all Four Criteria – Based on BCHNG discussions with the FS staff, the FS clarified their position to state that eighty (80) percent of the National Forest land is suitable for development of properly designed and approved trails.  About ten (10) percent of the National Forest land could sustain uncontrolled equestrian riding (i.e., cross-country travel).  However, no cross-country riding is going to be permitted according to the FS plan.

 Forest Service Plan of Action

·         The FS analysis is complete.  The FS plans to obtain approval to implement the same trail restrictions as initially implemented in early 2004.  Trail riding will be restricted to only Designated Trails and numbered FS roads.  There remains some uncertainty about how many miles of Designated Trails now exist for equestrian use.  The FS “Guide to Horseback Riding on the Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests 2007” lists 211 miles of trail.  Other values quoted have ranged from 186 to 243 miles.

·         During July 2007, the FS presented the topic to several equestrian groups and solicited their comments.

·         During August 2007, the FS plans to present the topic to at least two general public meetings and solicit comments.

·         In September or soon thereafter, the Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forest Supervisor may provide the Designated Trails Forest Wide Standard to the FS Southern Region for approval and subsequent implementation.

Meeting Summary - July 17, 2007 - BCHNG and the USFS - CONF 

Meeting attendees were Mr. George Bain, Acting Forest Supervisor, Mr. Paul Bradley, Deputy Forest Supervisor, Mr. Larry Luckett, Engineering and Recreation Staff Officer, Ms. Karen McKenzie, Public Affairs Officer, Mr. Jim McGarvey, President BCHNG, and Mr. Larry Wheat, Vice President BCHNG.  The meeting, held in the Forest Supervisor’s building in Gainesville, began at 10:00 a.m. and lasted for about 90 minutes.  Mr. Bradley was present during the first half of the meeting. 

The subject of the meeting was the proposed Forest Wide Standard that would restrict equestrian riding in the Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests (CONF) to Designated Trails and numbered Forest Service roads.  This is the same Forest Wide Standard that was implemented in 2004, later appealed, and placed on hold effective July 2006, pending further supporting analysis or information.  A series of questions were prepared prior to this meeting, based on information already provided by the CONF team at an earlier meeting and from a review of associated USFS documentation.  The meeting minutes follow the question format.  Not all questions were addressed within the meeting time available.

1)   Please briefly describe the proposed new designated trail policy.
Answer: This is the policy identified in the Forest Land Management Plan (LMP) implemented in 2004.  The currently proposed Designated Trails policy is not new.  Rather the CONF is providing additional analysis and supporting information to clarify the basis for the 2004 implementation decision.

2)   Are both the CONF and Cherokee National Forests covered by the current proposed policy?
Answer: Ms. Debbie Caffin, USFS Wilderness/Dispersed Recreation Specialist, Southern Region, will address this topic at the upcoming Southeastern Equestrian Trails Conference on July 21^st.  A different approach and circumstances apply to each forest. See: "An Interesting Tale of Two National Forests"

3)   How many miles of designated trails and numbered roads is the FS proposing for equestrians?

a)   Number of miles in each District?
Answer: The current mileages are listed in a CONF pamphlet and elsewhere.  Approximately 233 miles of trails are open for equestrians within the forests.  No additional designated trail mileage is being proposed by CONF at this time, but limited additional trails may be added in the future if the need and other requirements are satisfied.  Although resources are important, they are not the limiting factor when considering new trails. 

b)   Please describe each of the FS Road Levels and miles of each type.
Answer: This was not covered so that other questions could be addressed.  The five levels and mileage have been provided previously, and are included here for completeness.  Level 1 (normally closed road) has 155 miles, Level 2 (gated, opened seasonally) has 734 miles, Level 3 (gravel, open travel) has 471 miles, Level 4 (considerable travel) has 163 miles, and Level 5 (hard surface) has 23 miles.  This provides a total of 1546 miles open for equines.  But, it would be a rare equestrian who would want to ride on Level 3, 4, or 5 roads. 

4)   How many miles of undesignated trails does the FS estimate exists in NF?
Answer: Unknown.  A sample some years ago at Lake Russell indicated 50 miles within the 17,000 acre property. 

5)   Please briefly describe the four criteria used in the FS “Capability Analysis” along with the percentage of forest land assigned to the criteria.
Answer: Mr. Wheat had attended an earlier meeting on the Designated Trails issue and some information seemed questionable.  Today we were able to clarify the criteria.  The categories are:

a)   Management Prescription – The Forest Land Management Plan specifies that certain areas are restricted and trails are not appropriate.  Six (6) percent of the CONF lands are in this category. 

b)   Terrain Slope – The terrain slope (would be side slope for trails) must be equal to or less than 30 percent.  Six (6) percent of the CONF lands have a slope exceeding six percent.

c)   Proximity to Riparian Zones – Except for crossings, trails may not lie within 100 feet of riparian streams (streams that contain water for at least some portion of the year, as shown by blue lines on topographic maps).  Eight (8) percent of the CONF land is in this category.

d)   Soil Type – There was no definition provided for this category.  There are numerous types of soil as documented in a CONF reference document.  Some earlier misinformation was clarified during our session.  The position now is that eighty (80) percent of the CONF land is suitable for development of properly designed single-track trails (designated trails).  About ten (10) percent of the CONF land could sustain uncontrolled equestrian riding (i.e., cross country travel).   

6)   How did the FS arrive at, and the meaning of, “10% of the CONF” available to equestrians and where are these lands located?
Answer: The locations of these lands are scattered and were not identified.  A FS judgment based on soil type, slope, and the other above criteria concluded that reasonable uncontrolled cross country riding would not cause undue environmental damage to these areas.  

7)    Can the FS provide a definition of the term “Cross Country Travel”?
Answer: Anything off of Designated Trails or numbered Forest Service roads. 

8)   Does the proposed designated trails policy have any impact on the current equestrian use in the Cohutta Wilderness?
Answer: No.  The Rich Mountain Wilderness was also mentioned.  It was stated that development of new trails in that wilderness was unlikely.  Equestrian use of an existing 8-mile Rich Mountain Road is now allowed. 

9)   Can FS describe for us the background, public input and thought processes that initiated the actions that resulted in the designated trails policy? (i.e. What started it all?)
Answer: Many causes have contributed to the proposed restrictions.  Numerous and distributed cases of soil surface damage have been observed by field personnel.  Increased numbers of users in all or most categories, considerable damage by all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), and a general demand for improving water quality all combine to create the need for added management control of recreational users.  Because of the observed damage, senior USFS managers have identified the need to better manage uncontrolled recreation on national forests throughout the United States

10) Regarding the current analysis-justification of designated trails, has the CONF Supervisor obtained preliminary approvals by the Regional Forester and the Reviewing Officer for the Chief Forester regarding the process and due diligence conducted to this point?
Answer: The Southern Region is informed of the CONF actions, in an informal way.  There are not pre-approvals associated with the process.  The CONF is simply following normal response procedure for a Record of Decision.  Implementation of the Designated Trails standard will be conducted in a reasoned stepwise manner, after obtaining all approvals and considering timing needs of the user public. 

11) Can the FS describe for us the steps through which the analysis was conducted resulting in the designated trails policy?
Answer: It was believed to be more accurate to examine the entire CONF as a unified site, rather than sample a few areas and extrapolate such results to the entire forest.  The term “site specific” was stated to be flexible.  A prescribed burn, or a road project, or a designated trail development may be projects and sites.  Likewise, a site might involve something like the Cohutta Wilderness, or the entire CONF, depending on what is considered the best way to measure and manage the project.

12) How does the current analysis differ with the previous analysis?
Answer: The current analysis focused on only equestrian use.  This is an updated trails analysis rather than merely justifying the previous analysis.  Of course much of the initial analysis still applies at this time.  The application of the four criteria stated above in Section I.e was new for this updated analysis.

13) Can the FS describe the soil types comprising “81% of the CONF soil labeled ‘unsuitable for equestrians’” and what are the specific parameters that characterize these soil types as unsuitable for “cross country use”?
Answer: The question was based on misunderstood information.  See Section I.e.iv above for correct information.

14) Referring to the criteria that trails should not be built on a slope exceeding 30%, if only a small segment (200 yards for example) had a slope of 40%, would that trail be acceptable for use or new trail construction?
Answer: Yes, if all other quality trail design considerations were satisfied. 

15)  Does the FS consider the current analysis to be a “site-specific analysis” as indicated in the ROD July 25, 2006, pg.13
Answer:  Yes.  The entire CONF is considered to be a site for this analysis. 

16)  Given the following statement: In what ways has the FS followed this ROD directive?

“I encourage both the Regional Forester, and the Forest Supervisor, to continue to work closely with the appellant and other local interests in a project level analysis that implements these shared goals.”
Answer: The CONF team stated that closely working with local interests applies to smaller scale projects, such as a local trail system or prescribed burn.  They do not believe that it applies to forest wide topics.  Of course, the CONF is currently obtaining input from several equestrian and trail organizations, and plans to obtain general public input during August, 2007. 

17)  Given the following statement:

“The Forest Service proposed closing the national forest to cross country horse use because Forest Service managers have seen a dramatic and damaging increase in user created horse trails in places in the national forest that cannot sustain that type of use”  Letter from Regional Forester Myers to Sen. Johnny Isakson Sept. 13, 2006. 

a)   Has the FS documented the “dramatic” damage?

b)   Has the FS documented the “dramatic” increase in damage?

c)   Can the FS provide the number and locations of the damaged places?
Answer: The CONF has a few examples, such as Lake Russell.  An inventory of damaged places does not exist. 

18) What is the methodology the FS employed to justify going from “damaged places”, per Myers, to 81% of the CONF?
Answer: The question is based partially on a misunderstanding about the 81%.  The current position is that about 80 percent of the forest is acceptable for development of properly designed and approved trails, and 10 percent is acceptable for uncontrolled riding.  However, there will be no riding except on designated trails (less than 1 percent of the forest) and numbered Forest Service roads. 

19) From the latest RLRMP and FEIS, what is the number of “Suitable Acres for Sustained Yield Timber Management” within the CONF?
Answer: Not sure of the exact amount of acreage identified as suitable for Sustained Yield, however only about 2-3000 acres are harvested annually. However, according to the LMP none of the forest is allocated for just timber harvest.  Any timber harvest will be associated with other requirements. 

a)   Can the FS explain the justification methodology of a policy of timber harvesting while designating 81% of the CONF “off-limits” to equestrians?

b)   How do the soils of the timber management acres differ from and preclude equestrian use?
Answer to both items: Timber harvesting and associated logging roads disturbs the soil for a relatively short period of years (a pulse in time) whereas trails and roads provide a continuous source of potential water siltation.  This assumes that forested areas and associated logging roads are effectively re-vegetated in a timely manner. 

20)  From the CONF “Monitoring and Evaluation Plan” what responses were found from the survey question: “What types of experiences do the public want? Who uses the forests?”
Answer: The monitoring plan was briefly mentioned but no answers to the questions were provided. 

21)  Will in “process efforts” be permitted to proceed such as…

a)   The West Conasauga District - Dry Creek

b)   The Aska Trail System
Answer: Mr. McGarvey briefly summarized the Aska trail effort led by BCHNG.  The project proposes to allow equestrian use on existing hiking or bicycle trails.  Mr. Wheat briefly summarized the Dry Creek Trail System proposed by the Georgia Pinhoti Trail Association and supported by the Conasauga Ranger District.  Forest Supervisor approval is required to proceed on this soundly designed 20-mile loop trail system that connects to the Pinhoti Trail west of John’s Mountain and to the large FS equestrian parking lot.  The proposed system would eliminate a network of social trails, some beside a stream.  One copy of the trail system Design Plan was provided to Mr. Luckett, along with a summary trail map. No definitive answers were provided.

22)  Are there plans or discussions within the CONF-FS to reduce or eliminate equestrian parking and access points to designated trails?
Answer: There are no plans to eliminate or reduce equestrian parking facilities.  

23)  Are there plans or discussions within the CONF- FS to reduce or ban equestrian trails in the Cohutta Wilderness?
Answer: There are no plans to reduce or ban equestrian trails in the Cohutta Wilderness.  The Cohutta Wilderness Area shows very few signs of equestrian activity on non-designated trails. 

24)  What is the current status and future plans of the Designated Trails Policy within The Southern Region?
Answer: Ms. Caffin, USFS Wilderness/Dispersed Recreation Specialist, Southern Region, plans to address this at the SETC 2007 conference later this week. 

25)  Describe the FS process with regard to implementing the proposed “Designated Trails Policy”?
Answer: After final USFS approval, the policy/Standard will be implemented in a stepwise manner, giving reasonable time to inform the public and equestrians.

Back to BCHNG