The growth of off-road vehicles, particularly those that have been modified to be `rock crawlers,' is a serious threat to the last wild places in the West, says today's author, who urges public support for congressional limits, protections and penalties.

TODAY'S BYLINE: Boslough is an impact research scientist at Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque. He owns property near Boulder, Colo., that is the subject of a dispute about off-roaders' access to it.

By Mark Boslough

Imagine an exclusive club that offers its members the opportunity to attend an "endangered-species feast." Guests are invited to dine on the last morsels of a species before it goes extinct (at $1 million per plate).

That was the outrageous basis for the 1990's movie, "The Freshman."

Ridiculous as it seems, this story taps into a very human desire to consume what is the most rare, whether it be a truffle, vintage wine or ivory. As suburban growth spills out across the western states, untrammeled land is becoming one of those rare commodities.

Off-road vehicle and SUV manufacturers understand this phenomenon, and their advertising reflects it. The typical commercial shows the vehicle-owner as conqueror. Powerful machines plow through muddy streams and race up steep hillsides to subdue the highest point in the wilderness.

Advertisers are selling the ability to get to places that people with lesser vehicles can't. An implicit (but not so subtle) message is that if you buy their vehicle, then you are the one who gets to deflower the last bit of virgin landscape, away from the unwashed masses.

The unspoiled parts of the West have gotten smaller while the population of region has exploded. The consumer base for off-road vehicles has grown along with the desire to take the increasingly elusive "road less traveled."

Deserted mountain roads where I used to drive my old Willys in the early 1970's are now often jammed with SUVs.

Wilderness conquerors don't like to get caught in traffic behind people out for family drives. Some have responded by souping up Jeeps, lifting suspensions and attaching giant wheels with massive tires. The "road less traveled" no longer refers to Jeep roads. It has become "off-road."

Modified vehicles can take their owners to places that I wouldn't have dreamed of driving my old CJ3. They are capable of climbing over boulders the size of refrigerators and blasting through axle-deep mud. Motorized sports known as "rock-crawling" and "mud-bogging" are now popular.

Rock crawling allows new routes to be opened. Old abandoned mining trails that had only seen an occasional wagon or mule train now are being invaded by motorized vehicles for the first time. Wet meadows and stream beds are experiencing an onslaught of macho 4x4s and are turning into rutted thoroughfares.

This has created conflict between conventional users - ranchers, hikers, equestrians, landowners and traditional sportsmen - and extreme four-wheelers who want to pursue limitless motorized use on public and private lands.

Non-traditional (go-anywhere at any cost) users have recently gained the upper hand. The Bush administration and several western states are re-interpreting an outdated and repealed Civil-War-era law (R.S 2477), which reads: "The right-of-way for the construction of highways over public land, not reserved for public uses, is hereby granted."

Contrary to arguments of the off-road lobby, lawmakers did not have motorized recreation in mind. The automobile had not been invented when the law was passed in 1866. Moreover, the law applies only to public lands. It does not allow the seizure of private property, which is constitutionally protected.

Many 19th century routes became part of a larger transportation network. Some ended up being county roads and state highways. But the vast majority either continued to be used in their traditional role as non-motorized trails, or else faded into oblivion.

Recognizing that R.S. 2477 had served its purpose, Congress repealed it in 1976. Most people assumed that stream beds, cow trails, horse paths, and overgrown mining trails on private property and in scenic areas were safe from development or motorized recreation.

Most ordinary four wheelers respect private property and the environment.

But some off-road clubs have become havens for extremists who are using R.S. 2477 as an excuse to expand their hobby onto private ranches and federally protected wilderness study areas.

Making matters worse, Interior Secretary Gale Norton recently issued a "disclaimer rule" allowing states and counties to seize both private property and federal land for the purpose of bulldozing new motorized rights-of-way across scenic and pristine areas.

Our Senator Jeff Bingaman, a Silver City Democrat, has written to the GAO to find out if this rule is legal.

Norton's rule has delighted hard-core off-road enthusiasts, who have been using R.S. 2477 as a weapon in an increasingly nasty war they declared against western landowners. Local governments are on their side in some places, like Catron County, where landowners along Dry Blue Creek are trying to protect their private property.

Elsewhere, off-road clubs have simply taken the law into their own hands.

My family's Balarat Creek Ranch (see our web site), is one battleground in the growing R.S. 2477 war being waged across our region.

A few years ago a representative of Denver-based Mile-Hi Jeep Club declared that our creek bed was a "public highway" under R.S. 2477, even though historical documents prove that this route is not public.

Nevertheless, he forcibly opened it up to rock-crawling, destroying dozens of trees and damaging a riparian wetland we were restoring.

Off-road clubs often claim that R.S. 2477 can open up access for everyone, not just those who are willing to leave their vehicles behind when crossing private property and protected land. Ironically many of these "no-limits" Jeep enthusiasts have rearranged the obstacles on existing trails, turning formerly accessible roads into rock-crawling courses too difficult for people in ordinary SUVs.

I have challenged representatives of national off-road organizations, including the BlueRibbon Coalition and Thread Lightly!, to disavow the use of R.S. 2477 claims against my family and our land by their members. So far, they have refused to take direct action.

Now more than ever, Congress needs to pass the proposed bill of Colorado Rep. Mark Udall, the Boulder Democrat, to protect our last wild places from motorized abuse.

Udall is the Democratic Party's deputy congressional regional whip for the West and his proposed bill, H.R. 751, would protect public lands and national forests from damage caused by off-roaders. It would allow penalties to be assessed up to $10,000.

Most importantly, it would save the last morsels of wilderness from being consumed by exclusive club members, who can afford expensive, specialized vehicles that can go anywhere, but at a severe cost to our public lands.

Print this