About these ads

Colorado to extend OHV monitoring program

Sharing the trails on Tenderfoot Mountain in Summit County, Colorado.

2011 pilot program resulted in 10,000 contacts with riders in problem areas

By Summit Voice

SUMMIT COUNTY — Colorado officials will continue an off-highway vehicle monitoring program that has helped increase compliance with off-road rules in Colorado.

The Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission last week approved $300,000 in funding to extend the pilot program launched last year.

In 201, teams of law enforcement officers from Colorado State Parks, the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management contacted 10,000 individual riders in problem areas identified by environmental and quiet recreation groups, according to state trails program manager Tom Morrissey.

Morrissey said less than 5 percent of those contacts resulted in warnings or citations — the majority for failure to comply with OHV registration requirements.

Rangers spent about 90 percent of their time on or around designated OHV routes. Morrissey said they saw little evidence of off-trail damage but did report a significant need for increased trail maintenance and better signage to identify designated routes.

Commissioner Jim Pribyl said the program had a successful first year.

“We appreciate how the OHV community worked with us to create a program that increased education and compliance with both state and federal OHV regulations,” said Pribyl. “The project has clearly shown that law-enforcement visibility deters illegal off-trail riding and increases compliance.”

Commissioners unanimously voted to fund the program for 2012, suggesting rangers focus on new compliance check areas and use of remote sensing equipment like trail monitors and game cameras to monitor illegal or user-created trails. Several commissioners also suggested that the trail program tap the local knowledge possessed by district wildlife managers to identify  problem areas with a need for monitoring and enforcement.

Morrissey also briefed the commission on the progress of this year’s recreational trail grant  process. Fifty-seven motorized project applications totaling $6.8 million were submitted by the December 2011 deadline. About $4 million in funding is available for motorized OHV trail grants in 2012. Applications for non-motorized trail projects totaled $4.3 million, with about $1.6 million available to award. Commissioners will vote on grant awards at the April 12 commission meeting in Pueblo.

Colorado’s OHV Trails Program is funded through the sale of OHV registrations and use permits. Over 160,000 OHVs were registered or permitted for use in Colorado during the 2010-2011 registration years. Revenue generated by the annual $25.25 user permit are used to support the statewide OHV program, the OHV registration program and the OHV trail grant program, including OHV law enforcement.

The report:

About these ads

4 Responses

  1. In 10,000 contacts, less than 5% resulted in citations or warnings. It shows that the vast majority is in compliance, which is a plus for them and others who share the trails, as well as the environment too. Of course, it also requires the same amount of scrutiny every year as there is a constant turn over of new and old riders. Good planning produces good results, allowing everyone to enjoy the out door experience. Well worth the price.

  2. 5.3% of riders that received either a warning or citation, which seems like a substantial number; if one of twenty automobile drivers were driving illegally, would our response be the same?

    Here’s the report:

    http://wildlife.state.co.us/SiteCollectionDocuments/DOW/Commission/2012/March/ITEM7OHVLawEnforcementPilotProgram.pdf

  3. Tim, Apparently your link is corrupted. Caused my machine to freeze. And your comparison is off base too. Dwelling on the small number of violators, as if they were in the same league as those who drive automobiles, then we would see something akin to a destruction derby out on the highways. The majority of OHV drivers don’t seem to be problematical, but that small percentage that want to go by their own rules, which you sound like your a member of, are.

    • The article includes an incorrect fact (its actually more than 5% – why exaggerate the facts?) accompanied by a judgement statement on what constituents high compliance, which I respectfully disagree with. I thought it was important to both set the facts straight.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 7,477 other followers

%d bloggers like this: