We were asked to attend a meeting at our local forest service office one evening last week. FS has come out with a new travel plan, and the hard work is done, but there was a dispute between various users over the status of eight local trails. Local hikers, who sat on a consensus panel, asked for some moral support.

It was an odd experience. There at a table sat representatives from hiking groups, motorcyclists, horsemen, landowners, and bikers. The object was to come up with a plan that allowed all of them access to the trails. Alliances had formed – strange alliances – horsemen and bikers and landowners were supporting motorcyclists. Hikers sat alone, four groups allied against them. No wonder they asked for support.

It was an odd twist, a screwed-up process – almost everyone was polite – when someone got angry, the moderator quickly stepped in with a time-out. Yet what was going on was a royal screwing of the public interest. Hikers represent 80% of the trail users in our Bozeman area, yet were outnumbered four to one.

They are making a stand. The motorbacks circulated a plan for shared use – on it, motorcycles would enjoy everyday access to seven of the eight trails with five exceptions – on one day each, five trails would be limited to hikers and stock. (The eighth trail would be open to bikers, but not motorbikes.)

Five trail days, eight trails, seven days a week – five out of 56. That was their compromise. During a break I overheard motorcyclists talking to one another – a guy actually said something like “Geez – they won’t compromise. They want everything.” He was talking about hikers!

The process is ongoing – parties have agreed to disagree. They’ll be back.

But here’s the bottom line: My wife and I are hikers and backpackers. We don’t have a problem with horsemen, bicyclers, and respect landowner rights. Our problem? Motorbikes and ATV’s. They don’t belong. Maybe the riders are nice people, but the machines are obnoxious. They make noise, pollute the air and scare off the animals. They degrade trails – riders aren’t very good at self-policing, and so they make new trails. Forest Services doesn’t have the personnel the monitor them.

It’s a joke that we are even talking with them. They don’t belong.

As we were hiking the Wind River Mountains this summer, I thought about the trail we were on – two feet wide – it’s been that way since I was a kid, and long before that. It goes back generations, perhaps centuries. A two-foot strip in a wilderness. It will stay that way for my grandkids and theirs save one problem – motorbikes and ATV’s can do more damage in a month than hikers have done in a hundred years.

They don’t belong. Don’t tell me to share – it makes as much sense as smokers telling non-smokers to “share” the air supply. Compromise is defeat for quiet trails and preservation of land and values.

23 Responses to “When Compromise Doesn’t Work”

  1. Rebecca Says:

    Great post, Mark. I’m not sure why landowners and horsemen would support increased ATV/motorcycle use. It seems to me that the last thing a private landowner would want is motorized recreation damaging the surrounding public land; likewise, why would someone enjoying a peaceful outing on horseback want to hear all that noise?

    I think the fact that everyone forgets in these discussions is that motorcycles and ATVs already have plenty of places open to them: logging roads. They can go anywere on the “forest highways” and not do any more damage or create more noise pollution than is already there. Best of all, they’re already maintained by the Forest Service/Bureau of Land Management, so no taxpayer dollars have to be spent creating new ATV trails.


  2. The hikers are scratching their heads too, wondering why, of all people, horsemen would like motorbikes spooking their rides. The bikers are upset about wilderness – that explains their opposition to hikers. The landowners are generally right wing Republicans, and simply have no affinity for common use of a public resources. But horsemen … go figure.

  3. Big Swede Says:

    After sucessfully filling my late season cow tag at Gardiner 5 years ago I had the opportunity to speak with the Hotel owner about the demise of elk hunting and the comming ban on snowmobiles. In an failed effort to chear him up I asked if the hikers and cross country skiers will fill the void left by hunters and sleds. He turned to me and said, The cross country skiers and winters hikers sleep 4 to a bed, cook in their rooms, buy no gas in town, and wouldn’t be caught dead in his overpriced gift shop. Driving home later that day I couldn’t help thinking about the businesses in the frontier mining towns when the gold started playing out.


  4. You’re right about that … hikers and cross country skiers are not good commerce. The atmosphere in Cooke City during snowmobile season is one of heavy drinking and smoke-filled rooms (and smoky outdoors). We XC-hiking people tend to be quiet and moderate. That’s bad for business.

    And isn’t that what it’s all about? Commerce? Are there any values outside commerce? If I can make a buck degrading our countryside and our trails, who are you to interfere?

  5. Big Swede Says:

    When it comes state or federal lands its all about money. The R and P act has provided 5 billion dollars in the last 75 years for federal lands. Park permits, licenses, fees, gas taxes, the list goes on and on. Hikers on the other pay little or nothing.

    My suggestion, off road stickers for back packs and day packs, tents and sleeping bags. If you want it all for yourself, then you should make up the differance.


  6. Here we go – “want it all for ourself” – it’s like your dog crapping on the sidewalk, and your saying “Hey – you don’t own it!” I’ll never access 99.9% of public lands – I just don’t want them degraded. You want to ride your ATV do it on your own land. Leave our public lands alone.

    The government is in place to preserve and protect – it’s a worthy use of tax dollars – our land. All of us.

  7. Rebecca Says:

    Hey, Big Swede, I pay taxes–federal, state and local, property, income and payroll. Most hikers do. Therefore, we have a say in what happens on our public lands.


  8. [...] Mark Tokarski wrote a fantastic post today on “When Compromise Doesn’t Work”Here’s ONLY a quick extractAs we were hiking the Wind River Mountains this summer, I thought about the trail we were on – two feet wide – it’s been that way since I was a kid, and long before that. It goes back generations, perhaps centuries. … [...]

  9. Big Swede Says:

    What % of public land do the atv’s and motorcycles utilize? By law, they must use established trails and roads. By law, they can only go into certain open public lands and parks. By law, their prohibuted in wilderness areas and in national parks. Taking this all into account, even with adding the less restrictive use rules of the BLM, motorized travel in public lands could not excede 25%. Obviously, the 25% is worth fighting for, no matter how brainless their comments were.

  10. Big Swede Says:

    And Becky, with body art like that, you can say anything you want.

  11. Rebecca Says:

    Aw. Just wait until you see the other tattoo. ;-)

    Seriously i’d say it was more than 25%, Big Swede. The vast majority of this state is open to motorized recreation.

    Can’t the rest of us taxpayers have a little peace and quiet?


  12. Swede – the people that do the negotiating cannot give an inch – their constituency would pillory them. And the footprint for motorized vehicles extends far beyond 25%. Once you guys take over a trail, that whole section of the forest is given over to noise.

    I like what Rebecca said up above – you guys can have the logging roads. IMHO, you don’t belong on trails. And it’s not because you’re not a nice guy – it’s that the machines are out of place there.

  13. Wulfgar Says:

    Please keep in mind that violations of the public “will” are the domain of only one side of the debate. If a hiker goes cross-country, no problem. There are usually no rules against such a thing, and the impact of said is negligible to the point of non-existent. Not so for the motorized vehicle user.

    Half the problem at hand is that ATVs frequently *do* go off of designated use paths and have a very significant impact on the terrain they cover. Even many ATV users get pissed at the assholes who spoil it for all … and yet the assholes keep on motorin’. I have a great deal of sympathy for the polite motorized vehicle user, *but* limiting their use is a wise thing to do, if the impolite cannot be controlled.

    So, I’ll make you a deal, Swede. Every time you kill an ignorant law-breaking ATV user and bury his ass in the forest, I’ll spend time and money to support and expand the use of motorized vehicles in the Gallatin. Do we have an accord?


  14. Reasonable compromise!

  15. Rebecca Says:

    The Israelis and the Palestianians can learn something from you, Wulfgar!

  16. Big Swede Says:

    First I want to redress my point about the amount of closure that motorized travelers face. A national park may be hundreds of thousands of acreas yet only have 30 miles of open trails 3′ wide. 3′ X 30 miles equals 3.63 acres, a small amount even for the smallest of parks.

    Next, I’d like to talk about the scofflaws. I admit one bad apple spoils the bunch especially when burning petro chemicals. But consider this, how many times have you backpacked to some pristine spot only to find fishing line on the banks, empty cans in the fire ring, garbage strewn around campsites, boy scout axe
    damage to living trees. Are you going to shut all access down because of slob campers?

    Hikers can go anywhere, slide down glaciers, climb rockslides, ford rivers. To say you can’t escape the sights or sounds of a motor (new sound regs just put in place) means your not wandering off the beaten path far enough.


  17. 1. In my office I have a desk. It has four legs that each take up two square inches of space. Therefore, using your logic, Swede, my desk is only taking up 8 square inches.

    2. I have rarely backpacked into places to find fishing lines on the banks, empty cans in the fire ring, and garbage strewn. That’s the sort of thing you find in day use areas.

    3. You haven’t addressed the problem of motorcycles and ATV’s leaving the trials, and the damage they do to the landscape. You also haven’t addressed the damage done even when they follow the regs. Read the last two paragraphs of what I wrote.

    They don’t belong on trails. They belong on roads.

  18. Big Swede Says:

    And Wolf, I was about to pre dig some holes, but they won’t let my backhoe back in the forest.

  19. Rebecca Says:

    I think you have no idea how the sound of a snowmobile, ATV or even jet ski bounces around the mountains when you’re in a bowl, the bottom of which is the lake or trail on which everyone’s trying to peacefully recreate, Big Swede. You’d have to be deep in the backcountry of the Bob or some other wilderness area not to hear the RRRRRRrrrrRRRRRrrrrRRRRR. Christ, I can’t tell you how many times I’ve wished for a high-powered rifle to nail some asswipe ripping across Salmon or Seeley Lakes on a jet ski near swimmers or fishermen.

    I’ll admit you’re right about the amount of garbage at a high-mountain lake or stream only available to hikers. Many of my favorite places are on the Bitterroot Divide west of Superior and St. Regis on the Idaho-Montana border. I’ll spend half a day hauling my lazy butt vertically up some trail only to find Power Bait bottles and PBR cans near an alpine lake. The slobs–in any recreational group–make us all look bad.

    But I guess you can say that of humanity as a whole, eh?

  20. Rebecca Says:

    Looking at Mark’s post now, I think it’s only us extreme-western Montanans who are complete slobs.

  21. jeff shelden Says:

    The conflicts come from the perpetual underfunding of public land management agencies, largely since the early 1980’s. There is no money to expand trails, in fact barely enough to maintain them. I hiked in the tobacco root mountains last summer– georgeous, “marlboro country” landscapes if ever there were any. But, large parts of the trail were nearly impassable, where ATV’s had rolled up big fist-sized cobbles on sections of the trail, four or five yards wide and hundreds of yards long, mostly on the steeper sections. I don’t mind seeing ATV’s at the same destinations as mine. In fact, in this case I met a man with a little boy on the back, and cooler of ice cold pop, which he shared, and I gratefully accepted. BUT, if land managers had enough resources, a separate ATV trail could be built and maintained to those destinations, at a distance that separates them from the hikers, horsemen, and maybe even the bikers. Current conservative land management policy purposely pits user groups against each other to encourage paralysis. ALL OF US should be lobbying our representatives at all levels of government for more money for land managers and resources and enforcement.

  22. Carolyn Says:

    I completely agree with Mark’s original remarks. I attended three of the meetings. Unfortunately I was not there last night to support the women who worked so hard to represent hikers in the face of the cabal of all the other groups and who had to listen as all the other groups including a runner who is also a therapist get way off track. No hiker ever said at any time that any one should be excluded from the forest. Wheeled machines are not always welcome in the forests. Not wheeled vehicles without machines. The bikers seem to think the hikers don’t want them in the forests. Perhaps one day a week they might stay one or more of the most heavily used trails – like Middle Cottonwood – just for safety purposes. I don’t see why the mountain bikers decided to side with motorcycles and abide by their designated days. The use is not the same. I don’t see why the horseback riders – and I have ridden some of the trails with friends – prefer to have possible noise and air pollution on all days, but that’is their decision. Back Country horsemen do lots of trail maintenance. I have several friends who ride, but are not represented by Back Country Horsemen. They cannot and should not be speaking for all riders. It amazed me that a moderator would allow off-track remarks when motorcycle riders and bikers and a member of the audience tried to bring in facts not pertinent to the discussion. The Task Force was supposed to address the 9 trails in the ROD and nothing else. Discussion of any other trial is not relevant to the ROD. Some hikers leave messes. Some fishermen (not included in the Task Force) leave messes. A hiker, however, is less likely to carrry a shotgun, beer cans in multiples, and other paraphanalia that messes up the country side than some ATV riders. Most of us enjoy conversations with other hikers. I also enjoy talking with bikers, but they are usually going down hill too fast to stop and be conversant with hikers. The motorcycles I meet when they are going downhill would have to stomp on brakes in order to stop in time to engage in friendly conversation. One motorcycle rider at the meeting said
    he likes to be able to go long distances in the same time he would be able to hike. Unfortunately when he drives by a hiker the noise and air pollution linger long after he is gone. Birds stop singing, a hiker
    can’t hear the creek, smell the forest. We all have to watch for the spreading of invasive species. Wheels carry more seeds than feet. Feet disrupt creeks and rivers less than wheels. So… inspite of the Chronicle
    calling hikers terrorists, some days we like it quiet – as in without machine noise. Check out many of the websites on motorized use in the forests and see what all reports say about mechanized use and the damages caused and the cost of rebuilding and restoring the land because of it. Yes, we can share the trail.
    Stay on task and only speak on the trails in the ROD.
    There are studies out that show the spending of non motorized users and the types of activities they will be looking for is on the rise. Is it all about politics? Money? or respect for the land and being good stewards? What happened to “leave nothing but footprints?” “Leave no trace?” More education is needed on what it means to respect the land. There will not ever be more of it. Either we all leave the public lands in all states better off than we found them or leave them worse off.
    Regarding the Tobacco Roots – the damage to the trails leading up to Albro Lake and Hollow Top Lakefrom wheeled use is apalling. No matter how nice a driver is, there are some places where machines – not people – don’t belong. The ability to go anywhere does not mean the right to go anywhere.
    Yes the FS needs more money to help the land.


  23. [...] 30th, 2007 I reported below (”When Compromise Doesn’t Work“) on meetings that were going on over the rules of use for nine trails close to Bozeman. I [...]


Leave a Reply