My view: A separate peace, split off roaders from others

Anderson E. Clipper |

4/27/2008 - 4/27/08

The April 13 "My Views" by off-highway vehicle riders Diane Spengler and Joanne Spivack require a thorough reply. They contain misleading claims and accusations; worse, gross misstatements of fact.

First Spivack claims that 26 percent of New Mexicans over 16 have participated in OHV recreation. When you examine the study she cites, you find that your SUV is considered an OHV, as is your four-wheel drive pickup, Jeep and anything capable of driving off-road and counted as having participated in OHV recreation even if you merely drove one time to a picnic or camping spot off a state or county road.

Accurate numbers are in the 2005 Forest Service data that shows nationally, OHV represents 6 percent of forest visits nationally, and in the Santa Fe National Forest only 3.5 percent. OHV recreationists are a small minority of Forest Service-area recreationists, yet their negative impacts are one of the four worst threats to our forests; fire is one of the four.

The vast majority are non-motorized, quiet recreationists whose pursuits usually require quiet and often undisturbed wildlife habitat. On a distance-traveled basis, no quiet recreationist can compare to the destructive power of the wheel-spinning, dirt-ripping, knobby/grip tires and powerful motors found on dirt bikes and all-terrain vehicles. The economic and ecological damage already done has yet to be translated into dollar costs, but photos of damage are shocking. Please go to JemezTrails.org and view the damage caused by off-roaders.

Another misleading, self-serving statement is that OHV users maintain trails. The truth is, the kind of maintenance they do is because wheeled vehicles need trails maintained for their use. Hikers, backpackers and others on foot or hoof, merely step over a log, or around a rock.

OHV maintenance wouldn't even be necessary if dirt bikes and ATVs had not used and damaged the trails in the first place. Quiet users don't heft chainsaws, shovels etc. because they don't need to.

Other users just aren't in the same league as heavy, powerful-engined machines with tires made purposely to dig dirt. Their use on trails with steep up-slopes or soft/wet ground and the dirt literally fills the air; the erosion issue is clear.

Joanne Spivack claimed that "only a small percentage of the national forest is currently available for OHV use." Ignoring for the moment the reality that ATVers routinely ignore signs and barriers where they should not ride, a small physical footprint still creates enormous impacts beyond the physical tracks; 'sound footprints' extending thousands of feet in all directions.

Didn't see much wildlife on your last OHV outing on Glorieta Mesa? They heard you coming, saw your dust cloud; the air-pollutant footprints (two-cycle engines emit 30 percent of their fuel, contributing to global warming) and the wildlife-fragmentation 'footprint.' OHV users love 'loops,' but these loops, among other negatives, fragment wildlife habitat.

"What is really needed is education?" Absolutely, but also needed are more private and public areas specifically devoted to OHV use with these benefits: reduction of death and injuries; easier, more economic emergency response; reduction of forest fire risks; special places for OHVers to test their skills, have events and share camaraderie. These areas would not damage as seriously as public lands, disturb wildlife or other recreations.

As with skateboarders, such parks could provide a legitimate and exclusive place for recreationists, who don't mix well with other interests, to enjoy their interest. There are already four OHV recreation areas in New Mexico and more are needed. Such parks, coupled with nature-based limitation of OHV routes on public lands and vigorous enforcement to keep OHVs on those approved trails, is the right and best solution to this problem, for our and future generations.

Anderson E. Clipper, Esq., lives in Santa Fe.