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