Best Management Practices for Off-Road Vehicles
Management of off-road vehicles (ORV) is becoming increasingly difficult as more people recreate on forestlands (including federal, state, and private timberlands). While ORVs have a disproportionate impact on the environment compared to many traditional forms of recreation, no universal set of guidelines exists for their management. Additionally, with travel planning continuing across Forest Service lands and other forestlands, a consistent set of guidelines for planning and managing ORVs is greatly needed.
Wildlands CPR and the Wild Utah Project have established a set of best management practices (BMPs), consistent with current forest management policy and regulations, entitled “Best Management Practices for Off-Road Vehicle Use on Forestlands – A Guide for Designating and Managing Off-Road Vehicle Routes.” As retired Forest Service Deputy Chief, Jim Furnish, states in the Preface: “BMPs are intended to provide a science-based consensus view of what works best in dealing with specific management challenges. Their value is that they eliminate the need for everyone to invent the wheel over and over again. BMPs are tried and true, realistic, cost effective, and practical. They allow us to consolidate learning and profit from the experience of others.”
In this document, we first briefly discuss the pertinent laws and regulations that pertain to ORV use and management. Following that is the presentation of the BMPs themselves broken down into the following major categories: (1) forest soils, (2) vegetation, (3) wildlife, (4) special ecosystems, and (5) quiet users. The actual BMPs are separated into “Planning and Decision-Making BMPs,” “Implementation BMPs,” and “Monitoring BMPs.” Justification (such as references to the scientific literature) of the BMPs immediately follows the BMP bullets in each major resource category. We close with a discussion of how managers can apply these BMPs in their decision processes, and needed future research on the social and ecological impacts of ORVs.
These guidelines will help managers designate appropriate routes, close inappropriate routes, and manage ORV use to reduce use conflicts and cause as little harm to the environment as possible. With a well-planned ORV route system that is fully enforced, use conflicts can be greatly reduced, and wildlife and their habitats can be protected.
This document is not designed to address policy questions around off-road vehicle recreation and whether or not it is a legitimate use of public lands. Instead it is intended to guide managers in those situations where policy makers have decided that off-road vehicles will be allowed. Additionally, like all other science-informed management directions, the use and implementation of these BMPs must include adaptive management. Finally, effective implementation of these BMPs must be accompanied by adequate funding and staff levels in order to ensure that necessary monitoring and legal enforcement are carried out.
If these BMPs are followed, forest managers will be able to determine over the long-term whether or not it is possible to accommodate off-road vehicle recreation while still protecting natural resources and quiet recreational activities. Land managers should be open to whatever the results of monitoring show, including the potential that long-term studies may show that off-road vehicle use is not an appropriate use of some forestlands.
Following is an excerpt from the BMPs for “forest soils.” To view the full set of BMPs visit: http://www.wildlandscpr.org/ORV-BMPs
Adam Switalski is the Science Coordinator for Wildlands CPR and Allison Jones is the Conservation Biologist for the Wild Utah Project.
1.1.1 Planning and Decision-Making BMPs for Forest Soils
• Do not locate routes in areas with highly erodible soils.
• Locate routes only in areas with stable soils; avoid locating routes in areas with biological crusts.
• Do not locate routes to climb directly up hillslopes. Route grades should be kept to a minimum and not exceed a 15% grade.
• Do not locate routes above treeline or in other high elevation areas that are ecologically significant and/or especially prone to erosion.
• Locate routes a minimum distance (as listed below) from waterbodies and wetlands:
• Fish-bearing streams and lakes – 300 ft.
• Permanently flowing non-fish-bearing streams – 150 ft.
• Ponds, reservoirs, and wetlands greater than one acre –150 ft.
• Do not designate new routes requiring stream crossings and prioritize closure, re-routing or creating bridge crossings for existing routes that have stream crossings.
• Do not locate routes in areas with soils contaminated by mine tailings, or mine tailings reclamation sites, at least until they are recovered, fully stable and able to sustain safe ORV usage. If route construction is necessary, reclamation activities should be completed prior to route construction.
• Close and restore routes that cause high levels of erosion (e.g., raise sedimentation above Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) and reduce native fish population potential).
• Require all motorized camping to occur in designated campsites. Reclaim undesignated motorized camping sites.
1.1.2 Implementation BMPs for Forest Soils
• Identify the type or types of soil and steepness in the area that is being affected by ORVs and use this information to prioritize mitigation efforts and create target management objectives to minimize erosion.
• Identify where waterbodies and wetlands are located, where routes cross them, and whether there are fish present.
• Prioritize stream crossing closures and route relocations, and if necessary determine appropriate sites for upgrades and/or bridge crossings.
• Ensure adequate maintenance of bridges and culverts on routes to help prevent unauthorized stream crossings that might damage soils, streambanks, riparian vegetation, etc.
• Estimate the average soil loss for areas that are currently and obviously negatively affected by ORVs using the Universal Soil Loss Equation.
• Close and restore routes if the soils are determined to exceed standards for tolerable soil loss.
• If closing or moving a particularly damaging route is not possible, mitigate erosion with waterbars or other erosion control measures.
• Close and restore areas that have become “mud bogging areas,” or are prone to “mud bogging.”
• Close and restore routes where it has been determined, through analysis, that cumulative impacts of erosive activities (e.g., ORVs combined with fire, livestock grazing, or other erosive stressors) are leading to a stream failing to meet erosion standards.
• Prioritize for closure renegade routes going directly up hillslopes, into wetland areas (including wet meadows), or adjacent to designated routes.
• Adaptively manage by closing or mitigating a damaging route if monitoring identifies that forest soil conditions are no longer in compliance with planning and decision-making BMPs.
1.1.3 Monitoring BMPs for Forest Soils
• Monitor for the amount of erosion occurring on all routes (designated and renegade).
• Gather data needed for the Universal Erosion Soil Loss Equation.
• Regularly survey for and identify renegade off-route spurs.
• Map stream crossings without culverts or bridges and note stream sedimentation levels and visible soil/channel impacts in these areas.
• Identify areas of significant amounts of bare soil or route-widening along routes through photos and route width measurements.
• Monitor closed and restored routes to ensure the measures taken are effectively mitigating impacts to forest soils.
Wildlands CPR and the Wild Utah Project have established a set of best management practices (BMPs), consistent with current forest management policy and regulations, entitled “Best Management Practices for Off-Road Vehicle Use on Forestlands – A Guide for Designating and Managing Off-Road Vehicle Routes.” As retired Forest Service Deputy Chief, Jim Furnish, states in the Preface: “BMPs are intended to provide a science-based consensus view of what works best in dealing with specific management challenges. Their value is that they eliminate the need for everyone to invent the wheel over and over again. BMPs are tried and true, realistic, cost effective, and practical. They allow us to consolidate learning and profit from the experience of others.”
In this document, we first briefly discuss the pertinent laws and regulations that pertain to ORV use and management. Following that is the presentation of the BMPs themselves broken down into the following major categories: (1) forest soils, (2) vegetation, (3) wildlife, (4) special ecosystems, and (5) quiet users. The actual BMPs are separated into “Planning and Decision-Making BMPs,” “Implementation BMPs,” and “Monitoring BMPs.” Justification (such as references to the scientific literature) of the BMPs immediately follows the BMP bullets in each major resource category. We close with a discussion of how managers can apply these BMPs in their decision processes, and needed future research on the social and ecological impacts of ORVs.
These guidelines will help managers designate appropriate routes, close inappropriate routes, and manage ORV use to reduce use conflicts and cause as little harm to the environment as possible. With a well-planned ORV route system that is fully enforced, use conflicts can be greatly reduced, and wildlife and their habitats can be protected.
This document is not designed to address policy questions around off-road vehicle recreation and whether or not it is a legitimate use of public lands. Instead it is intended to guide managers in those situations where policy makers have decided that off-road vehicles will be allowed. Additionally, like all other science-informed management directions, the use and implementation of these BMPs must include adaptive management. Finally, effective implementation of these BMPs must be accompanied by adequate funding and staff levels in order to ensure that necessary monitoring and legal enforcement are carried out.
If these BMPs are followed, forest managers will be able to determine over the long-term whether or not it is possible to accommodate off-road vehicle recreation while still protecting natural resources and quiet recreational activities. Land managers should be open to whatever the results of monitoring show, including the potential that long-term studies may show that off-road vehicle use is not an appropriate use of some forestlands.
Following is an excerpt from the BMPs for “forest soils.” To view the full set of BMPs visit: http://www.wildlandscpr.org/ORV-BMPs
Adam Switalski is the Science Coordinator for Wildlands CPR and Allison Jones is the Conservation Biologist for the Wild Utah Project.
1.1.1 Planning and Decision-Making BMPs for Forest Soils
• Do not locate routes in areas with highly erodible soils.
• Locate routes only in areas with stable soils; avoid locating routes in areas with biological crusts.
• Do not locate routes to climb directly up hillslopes. Route grades should be kept to a minimum and not exceed a 15% grade.
• Do not locate routes above treeline or in other high elevation areas that are ecologically significant and/or especially prone to erosion.
• Locate routes a minimum distance (as listed below) from waterbodies and wetlands:
• Fish-bearing streams and lakes – 300 ft.
• Permanently flowing non-fish-bearing streams – 150 ft.
• Ponds, reservoirs, and wetlands greater than one acre –150 ft.
• Do not designate new routes requiring stream crossings and prioritize closure, re-routing or creating bridge crossings for existing routes that have stream crossings.
• Do not locate routes in areas with soils contaminated by mine tailings, or mine tailings reclamation sites, at least until they are recovered, fully stable and able to sustain safe ORV usage. If route construction is necessary, reclamation activities should be completed prior to route construction.
• Close and restore routes that cause high levels of erosion (e.g., raise sedimentation above Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) and reduce native fish population potential).
• Require all motorized camping to occur in designated campsites. Reclaim undesignated motorized camping sites.
1.1.2 Implementation BMPs for Forest Soils
• Identify the type or types of soil and steepness in the area that is being affected by ORVs and use this information to prioritize mitigation efforts and create target management objectives to minimize erosion.
• Identify where waterbodies and wetlands are located, where routes cross them, and whether there are fish present.
• Prioritize stream crossing closures and route relocations, and if necessary determine appropriate sites for upgrades and/or bridge crossings.
• Ensure adequate maintenance of bridges and culverts on routes to help prevent unauthorized stream crossings that might damage soils, streambanks, riparian vegetation, etc.
• Estimate the average soil loss for areas that are currently and obviously negatively affected by ORVs using the Universal Soil Loss Equation.
• Close and restore routes if the soils are determined to exceed standards for tolerable soil loss.
• If closing or moving a particularly damaging route is not possible, mitigate erosion with waterbars or other erosion control measures.
• Close and restore areas that have become “mud bogging areas,” or are prone to “mud bogging.”
• Close and restore routes where it has been determined, through analysis, that cumulative impacts of erosive activities (e.g., ORVs combined with fire, livestock grazing, or other erosive stressors) are leading to a stream failing to meet erosion standards.
• Prioritize for closure renegade routes going directly up hillslopes, into wetland areas (including wet meadows), or adjacent to designated routes.
• Adaptively manage by closing or mitigating a damaging route if monitoring identifies that forest soil conditions are no longer in compliance with planning and decision-making BMPs.
1.1.3 Monitoring BMPs for Forest Soils
• Monitor for the amount of erosion occurring on all routes (designated and renegade).
• Gather data needed for the Universal Erosion Soil Loss Equation.
• Regularly survey for and identify renegade off-route spurs.
• Map stream crossings without culverts or bridges and note stream sedimentation levels and visible soil/channel impacts in these areas.
• Identify areas of significant amounts of bare soil or route-widening along routes through photos and route width measurements.
• Monitor closed and restored routes to ensure the measures taken are effectively mitigating impacts to forest soils.
Resource Information
Article Type:
Field Note
Road RIPorter Issue:
Resource Type:
Issues:
Tribal Related:
Not Tribal-Related
Site-Wide Search
Subscribe to The Dirt
