I have been actively involved in the Route Designation process for the Mendocino National Forest. I have worked directly with the OHV coordinator from the Upper Lake district on keeping a trail open that allows access to the South Fork of the Eel River just above Lake Pillsbury. For those of you who might be familiar with the area, it is part of the old Cabbage Patch Trail that connected to road 18N04.

Up to this point everything has been going well. The rangers assessed the trail & campsite and found no problems with erosion, archeological/ geological issues. The trail & campsite were supposed to go on the final draft map.

I checked Mendo's website a few days ago & the trail & campsite were not even on the map. I contacted the OHV coordinator I had been working with & he agreed with me that it was supposed to be on the map & that he even called the person in charge,Mike Vandame, (not sure of his title) at the main office.

The reason Mike Vandame gave for leaving the trail & campsite off the map was due to complaints made by the people who own property on the other side of the river. They have complained that atv riders have gone down the trail (which is on Forest land), crossed the river & rode up the other side (which is private property). The property owners have been at the Route Des. meetings as well, and have brought their attorneys with them.

My family & friends have been camping & fishing at this site for 3 decades. It is where i learned to trout fish. My kids are now 4 & 5 & I would like to continue the tradition...

I was instructed by the OHV coordinator in Upper Lake to call Mike Vandame, which I have & left a message. What questions should I ask? What points should I make? I feel like this phone call is similar to having one minute left in a football game, behind by 7, on 40 yard line & it is third down. I want to call the right play. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

State IN WRITING your request to have the trail and campsite included.

Basically, the comment period runs through Aug 2, 2007.

Your comments need to include the information about the trail and camp site.

The fact that there were complaints does not mean the route is automatically excluded from consideration.

Going back to the Travel Management Rule, each Forest is required to develop an inventory and work out a final travel plan from that inventory. Existing on-the-ground routes are supposed to be the starting point.

Part of the OHMVR Trust Fund inventory was to provide a listing of routes that defined the on-the-ground status which was to serve as Region 5 starting point for route designation.

According to the Mendecino web site, the routes presented are slightly different from those presented to the public during earlier scoping and route omitted are listed.

I would recommend that you do provide in writing your belief that the route should be included. If the trail continues past the water crossing on Forest land, it should be a valid trail. (I hope it is not a dead-end trail!!)

If the trail crosses and enters private property, there is going to be a problem. Unless, how does the property owner access their property?

Basically, as you have laid out your position, lay it out to Mike.

But, before you talk to him, make sure you have a map that shows the trail going on past the water crossing on forest land. From there, it could be a simple matter of placing a private property sign which is the responsibility of the property owner.

Forgot to add....


Get hold of Don Amador damador@cwo.com

Don has been very involved with the Mendocino process and may be able to provide additional assistance.

I was instructed by the OHV coordinator in Upper Lake to call Mike Vandame, which I have & left a message. What questions should I ask? What points should I make? I feel like this phone call is similar to having one minute left in a football game, behind by 7, on 40 yard line & it is third down. I want to call the right play. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Unbelievable!

Ask why the FS feels it necesary to acomodate one family when they are excluding thousands of others, especially when the camp site is divided from the private property by a creek. Classic case of "I don't want to manage it so I'm closing it".
Ask them to show you the soils and watershed study that would contribute to a closure reason.
Ask them if there were noise complaints and if so you'd like the documenatation of dates and where they were from and also you would like to see the decible readings validating the closure from a Level II sound testing device.
Ask them if there are signs stating no motorized vehicles past the creek and if this is a open unless posted closed area or closed unless posted open area.
Ask them if the engineering study on the area constitutes a closure order due to safety concerns - that will thow them for a loop.
Ask them if there are any sensitve species in the area, and if so, are they seasonal or year around. If seasonal they should only close off the area during that time.

Basically force them to give you a valid reason why they did not include it on the map. Right now the lame excuse you were given will not stand up in court.
Can you tell the FS has pissed me off today? :mad3:

Also, make a compelling case for the 'value' of your experience. It is a 'significant' loss to not be able to take your kids to a place you have fond memories of. It is 'significant' that a family tradition stretching three generations is being affected. How many other families 'could' there be, also affected?

As long as the private owners are respected, there is no reason to remove this route without good science.

Thanks for the replies. I will email Don Amador to get more feedback. Unfortunately the trail ends at the Eel River. The trail used to go clear through, in fact it was part of the enduro course when they used to race up there.

The value of the trail is the motorized access to that portion of the Eel. It is the only motorized access to that portion of the watershed.

I have my comments in writing about the trail (did that at one of the Route Des. meetings). When the ranger told me the trail & campsite were in good shape(that was in June)- I thought we were in the clear. The Upper Lake rangers reccomendation was to put it in the inventory!

I have done some homework on who owns the property on the other side of the river. It turns out that the property owners who are complaining do not even own the property that borders the river, they own the property above the property that borders the river. At the river there is no signs or gates indicating that it is private property.

One thing I need to do is go to all the other families/groups/etc. that I know use the trail to send in their comments.

If anyone is in the Mendo & want a challenging hillclimb- check out the trail. "The Hill" on the old cabbage patch trail has earned its reputation!