The Forest Service’s draft proposal for the mesa, representing more than a 1,200 percent increase over existing ATV usage, was considered a slap in the face.

Reining In OHV Abuse:
Approaching the Moment of Truth

by Leo Hubbard

he Santa National Forest is in the process of implementing the Travel Management Rule (TMR), which designates routes in the forest that will be legal for off-highway-vehicle (OHV) travel. If this process is handled in an objective, science-based manner, it could be a first step toward reining in OHV abuse. If it is approached in a biased manner, designating routes and trails that are unenforceable, it could greatly compound a problem that is already out of control.

OHV users represent 5 percent of the forest users, and a vocal minority of these users has taken an extremist position, pressuring the Forest Service to designate the maximum number of routes for OHV travel. Other OHV users believe this approach is foolish and will eventually turn public opinion against all motorized recreational use. They argue for an honest, aboveboard process that carefully considers the interests of all forest users and has a reasonable chance of reining in the abuse. Unless renegade riders are controlled, they foresee a backlash that could result in harsh legislation at county and state levels. This could take the form of mandatory confiscation of vehicles for second-time offenders or stiff fees to OHV users to help defer the cost of enforcement and offset the cost of damage caused by renegade riders.

Controversy has heated up over the past five months amid accusations that the Forest Service worked closely with the most vocal and extreme OHV proponents without giving equal consideration to the remaining 98 percent of the forest users. The man at the helm, Forest Supervisor Dan Jiron, is no stranger to controversy. A native of Colorado, Jiron came to Santa Fe from Washington, D.C. He served as the official spokesperson for the Forest Service during the time that the agency promoted a controversial and ill-fated plan to raise money for local government by selling off large chunks of our public land.

Jiron’s first few months as supervisor of the Santa Fe National Forests were relatively tranquil; implementation of the TMR was progressing quietly under the radar of the local community. Then last April, a group from Cañada de Los Alamos met with District Ranger Joe Reddan and showed him where illegal trails had been blazed by dirt bikes and all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), fences had been cut, private property had been vandalized, trails had been eroded, and discarded drug needles had been found.

During this four-hour meeting, Reddan and his staff did not mention the TMR, which the Forest Service promotes as an attempt to rein in this very type of abuse. Nor did he mention that the Forest Service was working closely with OHV supporters -- holding meetings, sponsoring field trips, and giving them the opportunity to mark their favorite trails on maps. The community learned of the TMR more than a month later and was angered that this information had been concealed. Anger spilled over at a public meeting in August.

At the end of that month, residents of Glorieta Mesa and adjacent communities learned of the TMR. They organized a meeting on September 5 and invited the Forest Service. The 150 people in attendance were articulate about their concerns of lack of enforcement, fire danger, safety on county roads, disruption of wildlife, destruction of private property, and many other problems associated with OHV use. They were very clear that they wanted dirt bike and ATV activity restricted to an area small enough to enforce. Seven days later, the Forest Service published a draft "proposed action" for the mesa, claiming that their draft proposal reflected public input. Their map indicated that 100 percent of the allowable roads were open to ATV and dirt bike traffic. Additionally, direct ATV access to trails was provided off County Road 51, which was known to be unsafe for this class of vehicle and where an ATV death had recently occurred.

It is my personal opinion that if a reasonable draft proposal had been submitted with small trail loops more or less coinciding with the current dirt bike and ATV usage, and if ATVs were not allowed direct access off of County Road 51, the proposal for the mesa would have slid by with almost no public resistance.

The Forest Service’s draft proposal for the mesa, representing more than a 1,200 percent increase over existing ATV usage, was considered a slap in the face. The community began to rally to keep the mesa from turning into an ATV park. As people organized, they began to realize that other areas of the Santa Fe forests, particularly the Jemez Mountains and La Queva area, were also honeycombed with ATV and dirt bike trails. The public began to make a lot of noise.

Having to decide what to do about this public unrest, Dan Jiron chose to abandon the process of "transparency" and make no further draft proposals available to the public. Additionally, he removed his contact information from the Forest Service website. This decision was pivotal because many perceived it as a clear message that the Forest Service was not working in good faith. The community groups decided to branch out and seek assistance from elected officials.

Controversy intensified on Glorieta Mesa when the small-scale-grazing-permit holders, some from families that have ranched there for six generations, learned of the TMR. During the same time period that the Forest Service worked closely with OHV riders, they also met with these ranchers. Joe Reddan was aware that their cattle had been chased, earth dams destroyed, gates left open, and fences cut by renegade OHV riders. Yet in these meetings he did not mention the TMR, which was supposed to address these very issues. They learned about the TMR from community groups and were angry, as they believed that this information was intentionally concealed to prevent their input.

The ranchers attempted to discuss the matter with Dan Jiron, but he did not make himself available. Eventually the staffs of Representative Tom Udall and Senator Jeff Bingaman brokered a meeting between Jiron and the ranchers. The ranchers expressed frustration that they were left out of the TMR process. Jiron would not agree to accept their input before the publication of the Proposed Action, but he assured them that they would have an opportunity to comment on the plan after it was published. This was unacceptable, and they interpreted it as a complete disregard for traditional New Mexican values and way of life. Through the intervention of Senator Phil Griego, Jiron eventually agreed to grant them the same opportunities to participate in the process that were afforded to OHV riders. In light of this experience, many ranchers are skeptical that their voices will be taken seriously. They believe that traditional New Mexico culture has almost no value to the Forest Service (nmdocumentary.com streams a video portraying the ranchers’ experience).

When Senator Griego learned that the small-scale-grazing-permit holders on Glorieta Mesa were excluded from participation in the TMR, he looked into the matter more closely. At the same time, Representative Jeanette Wallace was investigating the destruction in the Jemez from renegade OHV activity. The result was a joint memorial sponsored by Senator Griego and Representative Wallace, requesting that the Forest Service protect the traditional New Mexican way of life and effectively putting the Forest Service on notice that their activities are being monitored by the Legislature. Due in part to this controversy in the Santa Fe National Forest, Senator Bingaman decided to hold Senate oversight hearings to look into the way the United States Forest Service as a whole is handling the TMR.

Dan Jiron has been quick to point out that a proposed action has not yet been published and that it may or may not look like the draft proposed action. Will our forests become sacrifice zones or true multi-use public lands? We will have to wait to see what Jiron comes up with.

There is a widely held belief that the Forest Service is promoting the agenda of the most vocal and extreme OHV users. Many believe that it is heavily biased against the remaining 98 percent of the public. But as Jiron correctly states, the proposed action has not yet been released. Will the Jemez Mountains or La Queva area be sliced up with unmanageable OHV trails? Or will an enforceable, multi-use proposal be submitted? Will the ATV and dirt bike routes on Glorieta Mesa be expanded beyond their present usage? Will the proposal responsibly address the public-safety concerns on County Road 51? Will motorized recreation supplant the traditional culture and New Mexican way of life on the Glorieta Mesa?

Much of the controversy has centered around the intentions of the Santa Fe National Forest. Has Jiron been making a good-faith effort to rein in OHV abuse, or has the entire process been a ploy to legalize the maximum number of OHV trails for the most vocal and extreme OHV proponents? The proposed action is scheduled for release in March. The moment of truth is at hand.

The Forest Service is still accepting public input. Following the publication of the proposed action, they are required to consider public comment and alternative proposals during a 45-day "scoping period." Interested parties are encouraged to directly contact the Forest Service and/or work through their elected officials to express their opinions and concerns.





					Table of contents Home


	The Forest Service’s draft proposal for the mesa, representing more than a 1,200 percent increase over existing ATV usage, was considered a slap in the face. Reining In OHV Abuse: Approaching the Moment of Truth by Leo Hubbard he Santa National Forest is in the process of implementing the Travel Management Rule (TMR), which designates routes in the forest that will be legal for off-highway-vehicle (OHV) travel. If this process is handled in an objective, science-based manner, it could be a first step toward reining in OHV abuse. If it is approached in a biased manner, designating routes and trails that are unenforceable, it could greatly compound a problem that is already out of control. OHV users represent 5 percent of the forest users, and a vocal minority of these users has taken an extremist position, pressuring the Forest Service to designate the maximum number of routes for OHV travel. Other OHV users believe this approach is foolish and will eventually turn public opinion against all motorized recreational use. They argue for an honest, aboveboard process that carefully considers the interests of all forest users and has a reasonable chance of reining in the abuse. Unless renegade riders are controlled, they foresee a backlash that could result in harsh legislation at county and state levels. This could take the form of mandatory confiscation of vehicles for second-time offenders or stiff fees to OHV users to help defer the cost of enforcement and offset the cost of damage caused by renegade riders. Controversy has heated up over the past five months amid accusations that the Forest Service worked closely with the most vocal and extreme OHV proponents without giving equal consideration to the remaining 98 percent of the forest users. The man at the helm, Forest Supervisor Dan Jiron, is no stranger to controversy. A native of Colorado, Jiron came to Santa Fe from Washington, D.C. He served as the official spokesperson for the Forest Service during the time that the agency promoted a controversial and ill-fated plan to raise money for local government by selling off large chunks of our public land. Jiron’s first few months as supervisor of the Santa Fe National Forests were relatively tranquil; implementation of the TMR was progressing quietly under the radar of the local community. Then last April, a group from Cañada de Los Alamos met with District Ranger Joe Reddan and showed him where illegal trails had been blazed by dirt bikes and all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), fences had been cut, private property had been vandalized, trails had been eroded, and discarded drug needles had been found. During this four-hour meeting, Reddan and his staff did not mention the TMR, which the Forest Service promotes as an attempt to rein in this very type of abuse. Nor did he mention that the Forest Service was working closely with OHV supporters -- holding meetings, sponsoring field trips, and giving them the opportunity to mark their favorite trails on maps. The community learned of the TMR more than a month later and was angered that this information had been concealed. Anger spilled over at a public meeting in August. At the end of that month, residents of Glorieta Mesa and adjacent communities learned of the TMR. They organized a meeting on September 5 and invited the Forest Service. The 150 people in attendance were articulate about their concerns of lack of enforcement, fire danger, safety on county roads, disruption of wildlife, destruction of private property, and many other problems associated with OHV use. They were very clear that they wanted dirt bike and ATV activity restricted to an area small enough to enforce. Seven days later, the Forest Service published a draft "proposed action" for the mesa, claiming that their draft proposal reflected public input. Their map indicated that 100 percent of the allowable roads were open to ATV and dirt bike traffic. Additionally, direct ATV access to trails was provided off County Road 51, which was known to be unsafe for this class of vehicle and where an ATV death had recently occurred. It is my personal opinion that if a reasonable draft proposal had been submitted with small trail loops more or less coinciding with the current dirt bike and ATV usage, and if ATVs were not allowed direct access off of County Road 51, the proposal for the mesa would have slid by with almost no public resistance. The Forest Service’s draft proposal for the mesa, representing more than a 1,200 percent increase over existing ATV usage, was considered a slap in the face. The community began to rally to keep the mesa from turning into an ATV park. As people organized, they began to realize that other areas of the Santa Fe forests, particularly the Jemez Mountains and La Queva area, were also honeycombed with ATV and dirt bike trails. The public began to make a lot of noise. Having to decide what to do about this public unrest, Dan Jiron chose to abandon the process of "transparency" and make no further draft proposals available to the public. Additionally, he removed his contact information from the Forest Service website. This decision was pivotal because many perceived it as a clear message that the Forest Service was not working in good faith. The community groups decided to branch out and seek assistance from elected officials. Controversy intensified on Glorieta Mesa when the small-scale-grazing-permit holders, some from families that have ranched there for six generations, learned of the TMR. During the same time period that the Forest Service worked closely with OHV riders, they also met with these ranchers. Joe Reddan was aware that their cattle had been chased, earth dams destroyed, gates left open, and fences cut by renegade OHV riders. Yet in these meetings he did not mention the TMR, which was supposed to address these very issues. They learned about the TMR from community groups and were angry, as they believed that this information was intentionally concealed to prevent their input. The ranchers attempted to discuss the matter with Dan Jiron, but he did not make himself available. Eventually the staffs of Representative Tom Udall and Senator Jeff Bingaman brokered a meeting between Jiron and the ranchers. The ranchers expressed frustration that they were left out of the TMR process. Jiron would not agree to accept their input before the publication of the Proposed Action, but he assured them that they would have an opportunity to comment on the plan after it was published. This was unacceptable, and they interpreted it as a complete disregard for traditional New Mexican values and way of life. Through the intervention of Senator Phil Griego, Jiron eventually agreed to grant them the same opportunities to participate in the process that were afforded to OHV riders. In light of this experience, many ranchers are skeptical that their voices will be taken seriously. They believe that traditional New Mexico culture has almost no value to the Forest Service (nmdocumentary.com streams a video portraying the ranchers’ experience). When Senator Griego learned that the small-scale-grazing-permit holders on Glorieta Mesa were excluded from participation in the TMR, he looked into the matter more closely. At the same time, Representative Jeanette Wallace was investigating the destruction in the Jemez from renegade OHV activity. The result was a joint memorial sponsored by Senator Griego and Representative Wallace, requesting that the Forest Service protect the traditional New Mexican way of life and effectively putting the Forest Service on notice that their activities are being monitored by the Legislature. Due in part to this controversy in the Santa Fe National Forest, Senator Bingaman decided to hold Senate oversight hearings to look into the way the United States Forest Service as a whole is handling the TMR. Dan Jiron has been quick to point out that a proposed action has not yet been published and that it may or may not look like the draft proposed action. Will our forests become sacrifice zones or true multi-use public lands? We will have to wait to see what Jiron comes up with. There is a widely held belief that the Forest Service is promoting the agenda of the most vocal and extreme OHV users. Many believe that it is heavily biased against the remaining 98 percent of the public. But as Jiron correctly states, the proposed action has not yet been released. Will the Jemez Mountains or La Queva area be sliced up with unmanageable OHV trails? Or will an enforceable, multi-use proposal be submitted? Will the ATV and dirt bike routes on Glorieta Mesa be expanded beyond their present usage? Will the proposal responsibly address the public-safety concerns on County Road 51? Will motorized recreation supplant the traditional culture and New Mexican way of life on the Glorieta Mesa? Much of the controversy has centered around the intentions of the Santa Fe National Forest. Has Jiron been making a good-faith effort to rein in OHV abuse, or has the entire process been a ploy to legalize the maximum number of OHV trails for the most vocal and extreme OHV proponents? The proposed action is scheduled for release in March. The moment of truth is at hand. The Forest Service is still accepting public input. Following the publication of the proposed action, they are required to consider public comment and alternative proposals during a 45-day "scoping period." Interested parties are encouraged to directly contact the Forest Service and/or work through their elected officials to express their opinions and concerns.