OCR Text |
Show 9.0 RECREATION AND TOURISM - LAND 9.1 Develop opportunities for OHV use The majority of the respondents supported alternative B which proposed not to allow OHV use on sovereign lands. The planning team received minimal support in allowing limited access for OHV recreation activities in particular selected areas around the lake. OHV activity, law enforcement, trespass, ecosystem impacts and public trust conflicts were the concerns most often mentioned in these comments. We oppose OHV use on sovereign lands and state WMAs. I have seen numerous tracks on the south shore between the C- 7 ditch and the Antelope Island Southern Causeway. OHV users are often using sovereign lands to trespass onto privately owned properties in this area and interfering with wildlife enhancement goals of these property owners ( duck clubs, Gillmor Sanctuary, etc.). There is no identified need to open sovereign lands to OHVs. The state should focus its efforts on adequately enforcing current OHV closure areas instead of opening new areas to OHV use. OHV use degrades, destroys habitats and creates noise pollution shattering the character of remote areas. These impacts affect all non- OHV users for the benefit of a few people. This should be eliminated based on the public trust doctrine of prioritizing uses for preserving the long- term purpose of the resource. OHV use is prohibited by statute on sovereign lands ofGSL. We support this prohibition since this type of recreation is indiscriminate and damaging to the ecosystem and requires strict law enforcement, a resource that DFFSL is lacking. A thorough analysis of recreational demands on the lake should be completed before any permitting of additional recreational activities. A more thorough recreation plan should be developed that would identify recreational users, level of use, impacts, monitoring, infrastructure, resources in question and current and future demands on the resource. DWR should be responsible for determining OHV use restrictions on sovereign lands/ WMAs to manage for the protection of migratory birds during nesting and other sensitive time periods. OHV use should be monitored to avoid or minimize degradation of essential habitat for birds and other wildlife. Under administrative rule ( R652- 110- 200) all sovereign lands are closed to OHV use pending formal evaluation through a planning process. The preferred alternative allows for OHV use to be considered in WMA planning. Under this alternative sovereign lands will be closed to OHV use unless WMA planning or other planning process, such as the west Box Elder access management plan, opens sovereign land to OHV use. Monitoring of OHV activity is a component of the west Box Elder plan. Monitoring will occur if other areas are opened to OHV use. Recreational opportunities- should not conflict or disturb critical habitat areas. Recreation should be managed to minimize impact upon wildlife. Not doing so breaks the linkage between recreation ( i. e. wildlife viewing) and the resource that the recreation activity is based upon. This highlights the need for thorough analysis of recreational impacts in the planning phase as well as the need to ensure that facilities 317 |