Recreation

We haven’t posted much about recreation lately, and always welcome news and opinion from those with a recreation interest.

The Forest Service Retirees organization, (NAFSR) has a Recreation Committee and they organized a panel presentation at the Lake Tahoe Retirees’ Reunion.

Powerpoints are posted here. Particularly of interest is that there is a new effort called “Reimagining Recreation” within the Forest Service. My understanding (which could be wrong) is that they are working on it, and it will be developed with stakeholders via some sort of public process.

Taking a step back, I was not a fan of Sustainable Recreation.  It had an aura (granted, my opinion only) of “we’ll never have enough money, so we need to figure out what to shut down” with an undertone of “it would be better for the environment if people just stayed home anyway.”  The energy seemed kind of negative from where I sat.  It’s ironic that due to the winds of Fate, just when you think you know what’s going to happen, (no money forever) huge infusions come along.  It must be an enormous cultural/philosophical shift for current employees.

So I am enthused about this new process.  Anyone who knows more about it, please post in the comments.

Here are a few slides from the Reimagining Recreation powerpoint but the whole deck of slides are here.

Super article by Kyle Dunphey of the Deseret News. A bipartisan bill (cosponsors Manchin and Barasso) from an easterner and a westerner.  The story has links to the bill summary, who’s for and who’s “agin”, and the below summary of ten key takeaways from the 155-page bill.

So National Parks count as “protected” areas under 30 x 30. But NPS employees and the National Parks Conservation Association are worried about too many people causing environmental degradation.  The logical thing is to think.. maybe they shouldn’t count at some point, then, or some places within a larger park shouldn’t count as “protected”.  Perhaps Parks should become certified to a “protected from humans certification” like the recreation equivalent of FSC or SFI before they can count toward “protection” goals, with third party verification?  Anyway, here’s the story.

More parking

“Lot Full” signs are in high demand at Arches National Park, where increasing visitation has resulted in frequent park closures and popular trailheads overflowing with tourists.

One of the provisions in the bill is to increase parking, mainly for land managed by the Forest Service and Department of the Interior.

But due to a deferred maintenance backlog, which refers to projects that have been postponed due to budget constraints, the bill allows agencies to partner with the private sector “and lease non-federal land for parking opportunities.”

Parking is a hot debate, at least for National Park advocates, who worry that more parking will lead to more visitors that could result in more environmental degradation, search and rescue calls, wildfire risk and traffic.

“We could totally build a five-story parking garage but do you want to add that many people to the trail? What would that do to the experience while you’re hiking if you’re shoulder to shoulder and you’re waiting hours to get a picture under the arch,” ranger Melissa Hulls, visitor and resource protection supervisor at Arches, told the Deseret News in September.

Target shooting

The Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management will be required to maintain at least one designated shooting range for each district under the bill. The ranges will not require a fee.

The bill piggybacks on former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke’s wish to see more shooting ranges in national monuments. But some environmental groups warn that more target shooting could lead to increased wildfire risk and vandalism.

‘Long distance’ biking

Under the bill, federal land management agencies — specifically the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Reclamation and the Forest Service — need to identify at least 10 long distance bike trails, defined as a system with at least 80 miles on federal land.

Agencies will also need to identify 10 additional areas for trail development. For existing trails, the agencies need to “publish and distribute maps, install signage, and issue promotional materials.”

Broadband infrastructure

In a push to expand internet access on public land and rural communities, the BLM and Forest Service would be directed to identify “high priority” recreation sites that lack broadband.

The agencies would then estimate the cost to develop broadband infrastructure, and if necessary, partner with the Rural Utilities Service under the Department of Agriculture.

The National Parks and Conservation Association, however, says the provision raises concerns, and agencies need to first understand “the extensive use of and impacts to natural and cultural resources to build and maintain broadband at recreation sites within the National Park system.”

Defining ‘peak season’

Moab locals can confirm — the busy season is growing, inching into traditionally slow parts of the year.

In an effort to “better understand visitor trends” the Department of the Interior would be directed to examine the impact seasonal closures have on local tax revenue, while looking for opportunities to extend the time certain public lands are open.

“This section directs the agencies to make efforts to minimize seasonal closures on lands where such closures prevent recreational activities that provide economic benefits,” the bill reads.

Hotels and housing for gateway communities

Moab locals can also confirm that finding housing in the southern Utah gateway, whether as a renter or buyer, is a monumental task. Housing shortages in mountain towns and park-adjacent communities are driving locals out and resulting in labor shortages.

Under Manchin and Barrasso’s bill, the Department of the Interior will identify solutions to housing shortages, working with local governments, housing authorities, trade associations and nonprofits.

The bill also instructs the department to “provide financial and technical assistance to gateway communities to establish, operate, or expand infrastructure to accommodate visitation including hotels and restaurants.”

Climbing on Forest Service land

A brief provision in the bill says the Forest Service will “issue guidance” on climbing management in designated wilderness areas.

The bill is not entirely clear on what that “guidance” will be, but gives the agency 18 months to develop a plan that will consider the Wilderness Act of 1964 and the “appropriateness” of recreational climbing, placement and maintenance of fixed anchors and the use of other climbing equipment.

New digital tools

Several provisions in the bill seek to improve access to real-time data, permits and reservations. Consider this:

• The National Parks and Federal Land Pass would be available in digital format.
• Through a pilot program, the public could obtain real-time visitation data on federal land.
• Land agencies would experiment with new, more intuitive, ways to tally visitor data.
• Tourists who reserved visitation to public lands that require reservations or permits, could notify agencies of certain days they will not use — those days are then granted to guide companies and the unguided public.

Modernize campgrounds

Again turning to the public-private partnership model, the bill requires agencies to develop a pilot program to modernize campgrounds and buildings on Forest Service and BLM land.

Agreements with private companies would not last more than 30 years, and within three years of obtaining land use authorization, the company is required to spend at least $2 million on improvements.

Filming and photographing public lands

Buried at the end of the bill is a provision that would “modernize film and photography permitting on public lands to account for changing technology and social media.”

Production crews of less than eight people would not have to obtain a permit. Any filming or photography “that is merely incidental to an otherwise authorized or allowable activity” will not need a permit, either.

As always, readers are invited to link to their own organizations’ bill analysis.

In the spirit of “catching people doing something right” here’s the announcement: and a special shout out to Rep. Moore of Utah who spearheaded this bipartisan, and dare I say common-sensical and much-needed effort.  Sometimes agencies need a little push to coordinate in a way that seems obvious to citizens.

“America is home to some of the most beautiful natural wonders in the world, and it is essential that we have up-to-date information on how to best access our public lands,” Rep. Moore said. “The MAPLand Act will digitize tens of thousands of records so fishers, hikers, hunters, bikers, and those who spend time enjoying our outdoors have all the information they need to have great experiences and make fond memories.”

If enacted, H.R. 3113 specifically would require the U.S. Department of the Interior, the U.S. Forest Service, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to jointly develop and adopt interagency standards to ensure compatibility and interoperability among federal databases for the collection and dissemination of outdoor recreation data related to federal lands, according to the congressional record bill summary.

Under the bill, the entities must digitize and publish geographic information system mapping data that includes federal interests, including easements and rights-of-way, in private land; status information as to whether roads and trails are open or closed; the dates on which roads and trails are seasonally opened and closed; the types of vehicles that are allowed on each segment of roads and trails; the boundaries of areas where hunting or recreational shooting is regulated or closed; and the boundaries of any portion of a body of water that is closed to entry, is closed to watercraft, or has horsepower limitations for watercraft, the summary says.

“I’m thrilled that the House has passed our MAPLand Act… which will modernize and formalize data sharing across public land agencies, to support our natural resource workforce, our communities and outdoor recreation activities,” said Rep. Neguse.

Here’s the link if you want to see the text.

Below is the interesting part of the text IMHO:

SEC. 4. DIGITIZATION AND PUBLICATION OF EASEMENTS.
    (a) In General.--Not later than 4 years after the date of enactment 
of this Act, each of the Secretaries, to the maximum extent 
practicable, shall digitize and publish on the applicable agency 
website geographic information system mapping data that specifies, with 
respect to the relevant Secretary, all Federal interests in private 
land, including easements (other than flowage easements), reservations, 
and rights-of-way--
        (1) to which the Federal Government does not have a fee title 
    interest; and
        (2) that may be used to provide public recreational access to 
    the Federal land.
    (b) Public Comment.--The Secretaries shall develop a process to 
allow members of the public to submit questions or comments regarding 
the information described in subsection (a).
SEC. 5. DATA CONSOLIDATION AND PUBLICATION OF ROUTE AND AREA DATA FOR 
PUBLIC RECREATIONAL USE.
    (a) In General.--Beginning not later than 5 years after the date of 
enactment of this Act, each of the Secretaries, to the maximum extent 
practicable, shall make publicly available on the website of the 
Department of the Interior, the Forest Service, and the Corps of 
Engineers, as applicable, geographic information system data with 
respect to the following:
        (1) Status information with respect to whether roads and trails 
    on the Federal land are open or closed.
        (2) The dates on which roads and trails on the Federal land are 
    seasonally closed.
        (3) The classes of vehicles and types of recreational uses that 
    are allowed on each segment of roads and trails on the Federal 
    land, including the permissibility of--
            (A) off-highway vehicles;
            (B) motorcycles;
            (C) nonmotorized bicycles;
            (D) electric bicycles;
            (E) passenger vehicles;
            (F) nonmechanized transportation; and
            (G) over-snow vehicles.
        (4) The boundaries of areas where hunting or recreational 
    shooting (including archery, firearm discharge, and target 
    shooting) is permanently restricted or prohibited on the Federal 
    land.
    (b) Updates.--
        (1) In general.--The Secretaries, to the maximum extent 
    practicable, shall update the data described in subsection (a) not 
    less frequently than twice per year.
        (2) Public comment.--The Secretaries shall develop a process to 
    allow members of the public to submit questions or comments 
    regarding the information described in subsection (a).
    (c) Effect.--Geographic information system data made publicly 
available under subsection (a) shall not disclose information regarding 
the nature, location, character, or ownership of historic, 
paleontological, or archaeological resources, consistent with 
applicable law.

*************************

Harkening back to the “dispersed camping” discussion.. the bill seems to be about roads and trails and shooting.. but it seems like the maps could possibly include dispersed camping as well if the agencies want to; or drone policies, or ???.

It’s always interesting to think about how much the Forest Service and nearby communities have changed in the last 50 years.  Here’s a story from the Colorado Sun by Jason Blevins  on the Rainbow Family Gathering, how it’s managed, and what people think about it.

The Rainbow Gathering has not said where in Colorado they plan to land for the late-June, early-July festival. But in fire-fearing mountain communities already cracking down on camping and crowds, opposition to the event is mounting, with a focus on how tens of thousands of people camping together in the woods could spark a wildfire. (This post on Reddit — Take Action Against the Rainbow Gathering — spurred 670+ comments in less than 24 hours. You can guess the tone of those comments.)

>>>>

The loose structure makes it hard for federal land managers and local communities to address impacts and plan for the pending party of hippies. The Forest Service, citing online chatter and posts, suspects the group could be planning to gather in Grand County in June and July.

“The original 1972 gathering occurred up there so I think there is some potential desire to come back to Grand County for their 50th,” said Reid Armstrong with the Arapaho and Roosevelt national forests.

Without a leadership structure, the Forest Service has not been able to enforce its rules requiring a permit for gatherings of more than 75 people on public land. The agency typically writes tickets for illegal camping during big Rainbow rallies but, obviously, rangers don’t pen 10,000-plus citations at every gathering. The Rainbow group has since the 1970s argued that it has a right to assemble on public lands.

The National Forest has a national incident team that follows the Rainbow Family’s annual gatherings, which typically peak over the July 4th holiday. (Last year’s gathering was in the Carson National Forest near Taos, New Mexico.) That team — mostly Forest Service law enforcement officers — works with local communities and local police.

While the specific location won’t be known until the Rainbow Family sends a scouting party to find a spot that provides open spaces near a water supply, the Forest Service and Grand County law enforcement are aware of the possible gathering.

“We bring, historically, a lot of resources to help protect the local community and help reduce the impact on the community and natural resources,” Armstrong said.

In 2006, a scouting report from the Rainbow Gathering explored possibly returning to Grand County and identified a handful of possible locations on Forest Service land, including Church Park, Red Dirt Reservoir and Buffalo Park.

One upside for the Rainbow Gathering impact: The Forest Service knows it’s coming, unlike major wildfires like Cameron Peak and East Troublesome, the two largest wildfires in Colorado history that raged through portions of the Arapaho National Forest in 2020.

“So we can plan for it and prepare for it,” Armstrong said. “The impacts, however, can be the same. Slightly different, but the extent of the natural resource impacts can be similar, which is why we bring in an incident management team.”

…

The Forest Service reported about 500 members of the group remained after everyone left to fill in 200 trenches that had been used as toilets and to plant shrubs and grasses damaged during the gathering.

“The damage really is minimal and our assessment is no long-term or irreparable damage was done,” Forest Service spokesman Matt Glasgow told the Rocky Mountain News after the event.

The New York Times wrote about the first gathering near Strawberry Lake above Granby in July 1972. The event, which was on both private and Forest Service land, was billed as a religious festival and about 3,000 people walked more than 7 miles up to the remote location. Colorado’s Gov. John Love promised to prevent the gathering, but the blockade collapsed as thousands of “young people hiked across the mountains to get there,” reads the article.

Here’s the link to the press release.

**************

Washington, March 31, 2022 –

It also says: Read the e-bike policy here.

The links are in the middle of that page under “directives.” Hopefully someone can parse through and summarize.