OK, I had some driving around time to think about various things, then I come back and see this "invention", even better :awesomework:
And someone that is in the "group", please forward this to your local DNR or who ever partner..
I'm happy to see the DNR is atleast
SAYING they want to include "US" (for clarity, 'US' is going to include all motorized ORV use). This is positive, even though with track records of government agency, especially with MANY levels of upper management and politics that are far removed from the individuals that interact with the public
booo
many (and most/all should be) are skeptical.
HOWEVER, as I alluded above, and others have voiced, the DNR is jumping on to this in a very poor manner that, from a public perception, is poorly planed, executed and is just begging for confusion, distrust and anger.
If *I* were in charge, this is how I would go about it:
- NO November closure. Too soon, no plan in place, the public is skeptical and scared. Studying, surveying and mapping can be done with select (and well signed) daily/weekly closures of specific areas while letting everything else remain status quo. Trail "maintenance" or work on a trail that is just doomed to be closed is a waste of resources, money and volunteer efforts. Besides, from a global point of view, one more winter of uses as the 'park' has seen for the last 20+ years isn't going to cause the earth to crack in half, and its already been noted that winter use has been down. I would blame the economy for that.
- USE the winter months to plan, survey and map, then come out with a plan of attach for the spring months. Local user group meetings and public "disclosure" meetings are good PR. Explain that the public meetings are for information only, and have representative panels from the individual concerned users groups then meet with the "mobs" to make a list of concerns and issues to be brought forth at a later, smaller "focus" meetings. Make this all transparent as well.
- From what I gather, the desire is to effectively MOVE the motorized ORV area away from many of the current trails, and reinstated them higher up. Really I have no problem with this, but this is how I would tackle that:
- BEGAN the work on the "new" upper trails. Dryer, spring and summer time is the best for this. Get the most productive work done for the man-hours and money. Winter work IMO is a waste if you have the choice.
- AS the new, upper trails open, begin transitioning people to them, migrate the people from the trails to be closed to the "new" trails, then begin the closing of the "bad" trails as new (replacement) trails are opened up.
- BUILD with all users in mind. I liked someone aboves formula of how to base (key word, BASE) trail miles on for the various users. Trails should be "open" to all users if you fit. I.E., Bikes, quads and side-by-sides can use the 4x4 trails if they want, it just needs to be made clear that they are 4x4 trails, and they get the "priority". Same with quad/UTV trails, bike can uses them (they are not excluded) but quads/UTV's get the right-of-way, Single tracks/bikes have there own, but if mountain biker's want to ride on them, bikes(motor) get the right-or-way (plus its easier for mountain bikers to hear/watch/see MC's vs the other way around.
- GO "Simple and cheap" with the "camping facilities". Primitive is the word, designated would be better. We aren't looking for a KOA, just a place generally accepted a the "camping" area and that is not in the middle of a main trail. Outhouses, shelters, fire pits/BBQ's can come later, and probably be donated by clubs/orgs. Just realized too, this should be SEPARATE from the day-use parking area. And that area needs to be pretty big, a very good number of users trailer their rigs now-a-days, even if they are "street legal".
- ALL motorized and non-motorized vehicles should be allowed on access roads. For description I'm going to call these logging roads. Make the speed limit like 25 or 35 if need be, and enforce the crap out if it (just make sure that money is designated for Reiter ORV area improvements or budget, not to be stolen for other areas or the dreaded "general fund".
as an aside: a MC track and permanent rock-crawl course/area would be cool in the near future as well. Very near the parking areas. Rentable for organized events. Maybe for right now a large, flat-ish expanse designated for the future use for such things. Anything north of Olympia is severely lacking in such an arena. The current, active Gravel/Rock quarry would be a likely place. Or one of the larger clear-cut areas. But the trick would be to get something on the plan now that can be expanded later. Something like Straddleline would be a good, long-term model for this (without the ridiculous fees). Camping and parking close by a bleacher set-up over looking multi-use and specific use courses. That parking can also be used to access the ORV area via
open to all' access trails.