Read this today, in the minneapolis star tribune.


State plans for ATVs are at a crossroads

Tom Meersman, Star Tribune
March 22, 2004

Minnesota officials are on the verge of several important decisions in the continuing controversy over driving ATVs and other off-road vehicles on public land.

At the Legislature, several bills would open wetlands to off-road vehicles. Meanwhile, DNR officials have proposed 139 more miles of motorized trails in five state forests in east-central Minnesota, bringing their total to about 200 miles.

ATV enthusiasts also have asked the DNR to allow driving on the 146-mile North Shore State Trail that is now open to snowmobiles during the winter but is reserved for hikers and bikers in the summer. Vehicles would still be banned from the Superior Hiking Trail, which also parallels the North Shore of Lake Superior.

The proposals are provoking debate among motor sports enthusiasts, environmentalists and outdoors enthusiasts.


Laurie Martinson, DNR Trails and Waterways Division director, said the agency is studying what effects ATVs would have on the North Shore trail.

"We expect to take that information to the [DNR] commissioner in a few weeks to see if he wants us to review the request in detail or deny it flat out," she said.

The proposal has already angered environmentalists, who say the trail crosses nearly 250 wetlands and about 100 designated trout streams and tributaries. The DNR's Web site says that much of the southern 70 miles of trail may have standing water during the summer months.

Wetlands debate

Wetlands are a big part of the ATV debate in the Legislature.

On Friday, the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee passed a bill that would allow ATVs on peat bogs in winter or for hunting or trapping.

In a separate measure, Rep. Tom Hackbarth, R-Cedar, has proposed broader access to wetlands by ATVs and other vehicles.

"If you ride an ATV through a swamp and make ruts, the next year you won't be able to tell where that was," he said. "The reality is that riding doesn't destroy wetlands."

Last year the Legislature prohibited all off-road driving on public and private wetlands if they contain open water for most of the year. Hackbarth has proposed to allow driving on all wetlands on private property and those classified as peat bogs on public lands. The measure would allow driving on other public wetlands when they are frozen.

Matt Norton, policy analyst for the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, said that allowing ATV driving on wetlands would reverse 25 years of bipartisan state policy that protects them.

"We don't allow farmers to drain or fill wetlands, or homeowners to build on wetlands without special conditions and permits, yet here's this proposal to give a blanket exemption for ATV travel in these areas," he said.

Norton said that excessive ATV driving damages wetlands, which deserve protection because they help reduce flooding, filter runoff and serve as habitat for waterfowl and other wildlife.

DNR Deputy Commissioner Mark Holsten said that some private landowners must cross public wetlands to reach their hunting or recreational property. Holsten said the DNR supports changes to the law that would allow driving across some wetlands to reach a destination. A few other exceptions, such as driving to service utility lines, would also be allowed.

Hackbarth's bill, which has passed three House committees, would also give ATV drivers broad access to many state forests -- except areas posted as closed. Current law requires the DNR to consider which trails and roads should be posted open, a process he said is expensive and cumbersome.

In some northern forests, "you could ride all day and not see another ATV driver," said Ray Bohn, lobbyist for the state association of ATV clubs.

Differing ATV bills in the House and Senate, if passed by their respective floors in the next several weeks, seem almost certain to be headed for a conference committee at the end of the session to work out a compromise.

Meanwhile, DNR officials are identifying state forest trails for off-road driving. A group of 20 environmental and conservation organizations said last week that the process is flawed and does not take into account potential ecological effects or how vehicles affect the quality of life for nearby residents and other non-motorized users.

Gene Larimore of the Jack Pine Coalition, a citizens group in northern Minnesota, said that the DNR should not be designating miles of trails without knowing how much it would cost to maintain them and to enforce environmental and safety laws.

Martinson defended the DNR. The agency has proposed to close the Pillsbury State Forest in central Minnesota to off-road driving. And it has proposed to close 410 miles of existing trails in five other state forests, while leaving about 200 miles open for driving.

"Right now we have an unmanageable system," she said. "Any steps we take are improving that."

star tribune article