Management Problem 2: Soil erosion or trampling
Problem observed or reports received
30, 78.9% respondents observed or received reports of this management problem
8, 21.1% respondents did not observe or receive reports of this management problem
22, 75.9% of those respondents who observed or received reports of this management problem
indicated that the problem differed by season.
6, 20.7% of those respondents who observed or received reports of this management problem
indicated that the problem did not differ by season.
1, 3.4% of those respondents who observed or received reports of this management problem
indicated that they did not know if the problem differed by season.
For those who reported the problem differed by season, how it differed.
◊
Fall hunt season--more
◊
In summer--user-created trails. In winter--wet/muddy.
◊
More in summer (2)
◊
More in winter (wetter)
◊
More in winter because it's wetter.
◊
Spring to snow--have it
◊
Summer--powdering-out of roads/going across meadows
◊
Summer-only problem
◊
Summer low season-low moisture-depend upon water
◊
Summer more
◊
Summer mostly, hard to do in winter
◊
Summer only (2)
◊
Summer: off-trail and streamside impacts. Winter--spring: meadow mud slops
◊
Thunderstorms
◊
Wet soils--less erosion. When dry on steeper slopes--worse.
◊
Wet weather closures--more problems in winter when wet
◊
Winter--closure for POC protection
◊
Winter--more
◊
Winter involves more vegetation damage--summer more soil erosion
◊
Winter is worse.
48
Management Problem 2: Soil erosion or trampling
Strategies used
Indirect Strategies
20, 66.7% yes
posters or signs
10, 33.3% no
14, 46.7% yes
brochures
other educational materials
user ethics
30,100.0% no
etiquette
manufacturers’ stickers on
ATVs*
9, 30.0% yes
21, 70.0% no
15, 50.0% yes
15, 50.0% no
7, 23.3% yes
29, 96.7% no
7, 23.3% yes
9, 30.0% yes
trail descriptions
trail use recommendations
21, 70.0% no
5, 16.7% yes
25, 83.3% no
non-issuance of outfitter,
guide, or event permits
organized events to do trail
maintenance
relocate or designate OHV
trails
seasonal closures
23, 76.7% no
1, 3.3% yes
bulletin boards
additional funding, matching
funds*
14, 46.7% no
24, 80.0% no
15, 50.0% yes
23, 76.7% no
Direct Strategies
16, 53.3% yes
close or limit use
6, 20.0% yes
local newspaper articles
15, 50.0% no
22, 73.3% no
30,100.0% no
public service announcements
30, 100.0% no
19, 63.3% no
8, 26.7% yes
1, 3.3% yes
29, 96.7% no
22, 73.3% no
11, 36.7% yes
maps
16, 53.3% no
16, 53.3% no
8, 26.7% yes
14, 46.7% yes
24, 80.0% yes
provisions for special use
permits
law enforcement
6, 20.0% no
3, 10.0% yes
users ride in dispersed patterns
27, 90.0% no
1, 3.3% yes
separate trails
29, 96.7% no
1, 3.3% yes
separate user groups
29, 96.7% no
make repairs as soon as
located*
pick up litter*
30,100.0% no
1, 3.3% yes
alternate between user groups
29, 96.7% no
1, 3.3% yes
29, 96.7% no
voluntary sound tests*
30,100.0% no
49
use OHV trail crews to maintain
trails*
Management Problem 2: Soil erosion or trampling
Resource Hardening Strategies
Specify a maximum grade on
9, 30.0% yes
trails?
21, 70.0% no
mean=13.1429
11, 36.7% yes
19, 63.3% no
artificial tread (e.g., geofabric
with sand and gravel, concrete
blocks)
What percent?
SD=2.41030
Specify a minimum grade?
30,100.0% no
3, 10.0% yes
27, 90.0% no
lengthened trails to disperse
riders
What percent?
n/a
14, 46.7% yes
16, 53.3% no
3, 10.0% yes
drain dips (meaning a reversal of
grade)
29, 96.7% no
2, 6.7% yes
28, 93.3% no
1, 3.3% yes
29, 96.7% no
22, 73.3% no
flexible water bars
27, 90.0% no
1, 3.3% yes
8, 26.7% yes
6, 20.0% yes
staging areas with parking
facilities
designated campsites
24, 80.0% no
for events, restricted to one
direction (e.g., uphill or
downhill)*
trail design: limit long
straightaways/use all single
track/ use natural obstacles*
3, 10.0% yes
barricades, barriers*
27, 90.0% no
2, 6.7% yes
28, 93.3% no
rolling dips, dog bones*
30,100.0% no
50
general trail maintenance
including consistent,
mechanized & 3-year plan*
overflow parking and staging
areas*
Management Problem 2: Soil erosion or trampling
Bridge Building/Collaboration Strategies
24, 80.0% yes personal contacts
6, 20.0% no
13, 43.3% yes
local OHV club meetings
11, 36.7% yes
meetings with state OHV groups
2, 6.7% yes
adopt-a-trail program
5, 16.7% yes
workshops
25, 83.3% no
trail safety evaluation form
30,100.0% no
2, 6.7% yes
committees with different groups
28, 93.3% no
education, including campfire
programs*
16, 53.3% yes
14, 46.7% no
maintain trail with local groups
and volunteers
working with sheriff’s dept.*
joint clean-ups with BLM*
30,100.0% no
30,100.0% no
mine safety evaluation form*
30,100.0% no
30,100.0% no
partner with OHV shops
28, 93.3% no
16, 53.3% no
30,100.0% no
volunteer patrols
19, 63.3% no
25, 83.3% no
14, 46.7% yes
partner with different groups
21, 70.0% no
17, 56.7% no
5, 16.7% yes
9, 30.0% yes
30,100.0% no
find out from users and
environmentalists where trails
should be*
* Strategies added by respondents in response to open-ended questions.
51
help from regional office and
state*
Management Problem 2: Soil erosion or trampling
Strategies reported “used most often”
6, 21.4% personal contacts
4, 14.3% posters or signs
3, 10.7% law enforcement
3, 10.7% general trail maintenance
2, 7.1% drain dips
2, 7.1% close or limit use
2, 7.1% maintain trail with local groups and volunteers
1, 3.6% non-issuance of permits
1, 3.6% organized events to do trail maintenance
1, 3.6% relocate or designate OHV trails
1, 3.6% barricades, barriers
1, 3.6% use OHV trail crews to maintain trails
1, 3.6% trail design
Strategies reported “most effective”
10, 34.5% personal contacts
Why “most effective”
◊
Talking to someone is better than leaving a
note or info board (won't get read). Message
gets across better.
◊
Explaining regs and then use law enforcement
◊
Combine FS presence with signs for
enforcement of rules and regs.
◊
One-to-one contact gets message across
better.
◊
Users see us out there; it establishes a
presence. Give them information to make the
right choice because they want to do the right
thing.
◊
Dialog between user and us important. Give
them "a why." Explain to them.
◊
With volunteers (peers) and done at the time of
the problem.
◊
Gives users an opportunity to ask for
clarification of the rules; lets the users know
that we are keeping an eye on the resources.
◊
Gets their attention
◊
Personal contacts with users if important--club
contacts help too.
52
Management Problem 2: Soil erosion or trampling
Strategies reported “most effective” (continued)
Why “most effective” (continued)
◊
People need a consequence for doing
something they shouldn't do.
◊
You can post signs and talk all you want but
change really happens when the tickets
start getting written.
◊
They seem to listen closer to LEO.
◊
95% of this unit's OHV is on existing admin.
roads--little to no problems if OHVs stay on
routes--fencing for minor off-road activities.
◊
no response (1)
◊
Removes water from trail.
◊
Last longer.
◊
Been proven to work
◊
Keeps people in the right area, affordable
◊
Better way to educate--display signs at
trailheads. It's a way to educate at the
meeting point.
◊
Keeping trails maintained makes it no
longer an issue.
◊
Because consistent annual mechanized
trail maintenance keeps on top of the
problem, facilitates drainage. Without it,
gullying and "rilling" occur. [rilling = furrows
begin to make channels]
1, 3.4% close or limit use
◊
Something user groups understand (i.e.,
closures)--no funding to use other
strategies.
1, 3.4% non-issuance of permits
◊
Permits have more intense impact--if
worried, we don't issue them a permit.
1, 3.4% relocate or designate OHV trails
◊
Relocate trails to lower grade--a long-term
solution. Then erosion becomes a minimal
problem.
1, 3.4% maintain trail with local groups
and volunteers
◊
Wouldn't get stuff done without volunteers.
1, 3.4% barricades, barriers
◊
Barriers "last forever;” can't be cut.
1, 3.4% use OHV trail crews to maintain
trails
◊
Trail machine moves dirt more efficiently.
Take care of all trail things before they get
really bad.
5, 17.2% law enforcement
3, 10.3% drain dips
2, 6.9% posters or signs
2, 6.9% general trail maintenance
53
Management Problem 2: Soil erosion or trampling
Strategies reported “most effective” (continued)
Why “most effective” (continued)
◊
1, 3.4% trail design
54
Someone once said, there are no bad
users, only bad trails...This has proven to
be true in many trail studies on erosional
impacts from various users.
Management Problem 2: Soil erosion or trampling
15, 51.7% of those respondents who observed or received reports of this management problem
indicated that their strategies differed by season.
14, 48.3% of those respondents who observed or received reports of this management problem
indicated that their strategies did not differ by season.
For those who reported their strategies differed by season, how they differed.
◊
Different types of use during different seasons. Winter-snow (problem not as critical at that
time) Use fewer strategies.
◊
Don't get too many volunteers in the heat of summer or rain.
◊
During hunting season--do more LE (expand)
◊
Erosion occurs during winter, soil saturation. Erosion increases the problem.
◊
Hunting seasons
◊
In the winter we enforce seasonal closures and allow snowmobile use when cover is adequate.
◊
Message to public/talking points change with season. Different resources of concern change
with season.
◊
n/a in winter
◊
Only winter--maintenance of trails
◊
Summer issue
◊
Summer, only
◊
Thunderstorms create big problems (summer).
◊
Wet weather closures
◊
Winter and summer differ--roads closed in summer are open in winter.
◊
Winter closures are used.
55