==
Bike-Walk Alliance of NH ==
All-Terrain Vehicles in New Hampshire
QUESTION: WHAT IS THE SOUND OF AN ATV RUNNING OVER A HIKER OR BIKER?
ANSWER: at the end of the article!
by Bill Kennedy
When is a democracy not a democracy? When does a state agency not have to follow the will of the majority of the people? In a state that advertises, "Live free or die", does that give ATV (All Terrain Vehicle) owners the right to have a state agency violate federal law so they can "live free"? These are just a few of the questions I came up with as I was going through some of the information about ATVs and how the State of New Hampshire through the Department of Resources and Economic Development (DRED) is using its power to circumvent the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Transportation Enhancements (TE) funding laws.
The BWA-NH has
received numerous meaningful emails from an organization called ATV Watch headed
by Andrew Walters, Director. Their goal is not to ban ATVs but to keep them
from encroaching onto the lands and trails designated for low-impact and quiet
activities such as hiking, walking, bicycling, snowshoeing, and cross-country
skiing. Conservation lands, some rail trails, sensitive woodlands, and trails
near homes will typically support low-impact use but not ATVs. The goals of
ATV Watch are supported by the BWA-NH. Together we wish to keep ATVs out of
sensitive areas so the public will have quiet areas to enjoy. The ATV Watch
web site offers more details:
www.ATVWatch.com or call Andrew Walters at (603)785-7722.
There's a ton of information out there, and I'll do my best to break it up so
you can chew and swallow it without getting indigestion! I'm not a hard core
anti-ATV person. I think the only thing I have against ATVs is that I don't
own one. If I had a 25 acre back yard it would be great to ride around it on
an ATV. I do know that mixing vehicle speeds is a bad idea. That's why farm
vehicles aren't allowed on the inter-state highway system. For the same reason
I think its prudent to keep ATVs, as well as any other motorized vehicle, off
of bike / pedestrian trails. An ATV could be on top of a biker / hiker before
they had a chance to see them. Hopefully the biker / hiker could hear the ATV
coming, but that would make the overtaken person responsible for crash avoidance,
which goes against state regulation. I would encourage you to read this message
and contact your elected officials and ask them why DRED is meeting behind closed
doors and why the NH legislature is not following federal statutes concerning
ATV use on TE funded trails. A more pointed question might be, why do they appear
to be looking for loop holes in the current funding laws. Note that much of
this letter was derived from Andrew Walters' email of June 19, 2007.
PART 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (sort of!)
The citizens of
New Hampshire successfully fought off a proposed change in the Statewide Comprehensive
Outdoor Recreation Plan which would have eliminated the reference to ATV use
as being a high impact recreational activity. DRED changed the Draft Management
Plan for the 146,000 acre Connecticut Lakes Headwaters Working Forest to include
ATV use. Now DRED is pushing to allow ATV use on 300 miles of rail trail. To
some it appears that DRED is hoping those opposing the expansion of ATV use
on lands prohibited by federal law will be on summer vacation and they can change
the laws implemented by the majority of New Hampshire citizens.
The New Hampshire Department of Transportation (NHDOT) owns approximately 300
miles of abandoned rail corridors (rail trails) in New Hampshire. DRED manages
these trails on behalf of NHDOT. Most of these abandoned rail corridors were
purchased with Federal Transportation Enhancement (TE) grants which were given
under conditions that prohibit all motorized use of the corridors except for
"snowmobiles."
In violation of Federal statutes, DRED has not just been allowing, but promoting
ATV use on the TE funded rail trails. ATV Watch has been in communication with
the State of New Hampshire and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in
an effort to compel compliance with the Federal Statutes. FHWA sent a letter
to NHDOT emphasizing the Federal restrictions and asking NHDOT to explain their
position.
It now appears that, rather than comply with the Federal statutes, NHDOT, DRED
and the Attorney General's Office are seeking to use loopholes in the statutes
for a permanent "work around" to the Federal ATV prohibition on TE
funded trails. The exact extent of this work around is not known because the
State is refusing to release any information on the issue. The State has learned
that information empowers citizens so the policy is being developed behind closed
doors.
Release of the new policy is imminent. ATV Watch believes that the solution
to this problem is with the Governor's Office. Hopefully you will momentarily
put aside the gardening, the summer chores and the vacation planning and pick
up the phone, or write an email voicing your opinion.
ATV Watch tries to give you the information you need in order to decide whether
or not it is worth taking action. After that it is up to you. A short email
or phone call voicing your opposition to the State circumventing the Federal
prohibition to ATV use on New Hampshire's TE funded rail trails can be very
effective. When we do not speak up, someone else (the ATV lobby) is effectively
speaking on our behalf.
Contact
information:
Governor John Lynch
Office of the Governor
State House
25 Capitol Street
Concord NH 03301
http://www.egov.nh.gov/governor/goveforms/comments/asp
NH DOT
David Brillhart, Assistant Commissioner
603-271-3734
dbrillhart@dot.state.nh.us
Less than 2% of the population of New Hampshire owns a registered ATV and ATV
registrations have increased by less than 2% per year for the last four years.
However, DRED continues with an incessant push to develop ATV trails on conservation
and public lands. This is demonstrating that a system, where payments from special
interests are dedicated directly to the decision makers that set policy regarding
those special interests, is a system that is inherently unbalanced. If we don't
want to continue to spend our time and energy trying to bring balance to DRED's
ATV trail development plans then the underlying system that generates the continuing
problems needs to be changed. ATV Watch hopes you will support them in this
effort in the future.
PART 2: FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS ON ATV USE ON PUBLIC
TRAILS
1. There is no greater impact on the environment of the citizens on New Hampshire
than the development of a linear network of ATV trails such as on the rail trails.
-- The linear nature of the trails results in impacts on the greatest number of abutters and lands.
-- The historic nature of the trails brings them into close proximity to residences, businesses and community centers.
-- Public comment received as part of a recent study by NHDOT indicated that more than 80% of the public is opposed to any ATV use on the rail trails
-- In many instances
rail trails pass through conservation lands and protected areas. ATV use on
these trails would be a conduit to the conservation lands and protected areas.
-- ATV use on these trails would be a conduit to the conservation lands and
an invitation to problems.
-- Many rail trails pass through sensitive environmental areas with critical
habitats for rare and endangered species.
2. In 2003 DRED supported House Bill 748 which eliminated the applicability
of the statutory ATV trail review criteria to the development of ATV trails
on the rail trails. These criteria were intended to protect communities and
the environment from the negative effects of ATV trail development. The criteria
that were eliminated included the requirement that ATV trail development on
State lands be compatible with local zoning, planning, noise and obnoxious use
ordinances. In 2006 DRED successfully opposed House Bill which attempted to
reinstate the trail review criteria into statute.
3. Allowing ATVs on the TE funded rail trails runs contrary to the intent of
TE funded projects. TE funds are intended to provide "opportunities to
enhance transportation related quality of life activities, as well as to improve
air quality and mitigate congestion." - State of New Hampshire Manual for
Development of Projects.
4. Public policy should not be developed behind closed doors. The Governor's
Office should insist on "openness in government" and compel DRED and
NHDOT to consider public input regarding ATV use on the rail trails.
5. Decisions made by the State of New Hampshire could have an impact nationwide.
If NHDOT and DRED successfully circumvent the Federal prohibition to ATV trail
development on TE funded projects this could set a precedent that would result
in ATV trail development on TE funded trails across the country. This could
ultimately impact thousands of miles of trails.
6. Developing public policy which allows ATV use on the rail trails will negatively
impact the ability of communities and conservation organizations to build public
support for rail trail preservation. The quickest way to kill community support
for a rail trail project is to mention the words all terrain vehicle and rail
trail in the same sentence.
7. DRED is in an unenviable position. They have allowed and promoted ATV use
on the rail corridors in violation of Federal statutes. The Sate of New Hampshire
should immediately comply with Federal Statutes and prohibit the use of ATVs
on the rail trials. If DRED wants to work around the restriction they should
do this within the confines of the law, not outside the law.
PART 3: BACKGROUND AND MORE INFORMATION
-- In violation of Federal Statutes DRED has been allowing wheeled ATVs on the
TE funded rail trails in the winter (with snow cover) by classifying wheeled
ATVs as snowmobiles or "snow traveling vehicles". Also, in one instance,
in violation of Federal Statutes, DRED issued a special use permit to allow
350 ATVs to use a TE funded rail trail for one springtime weekend. DRED recently
supported a bill in the New Hampshire Legislature to allow ATVs on the rail
trails in connection with the training of sled dogs.
-- Although the Federal statutes restrict motorized use on the TE funded rail
trails to "snowmobiles" only, there are two loopholes. First, there
is no Federal definition of a "snowmobile". Second, there is a provision
in the Statute which allows other motorized use "in such circumstances
as the [U.S.] Secretary [of Transportation] deems appropriate." These are
truly loopholes and have never been interpreted as a mechanism to allow ATVs
on the trails. However, in an attempt to gain access to a rail trail in Vermont,
ATV clubs recently asked FHWA to grant a waiver to the prohibition of ATVs.
FHWA is now developing a procedure to evaluate requests for waivers titled "Framework
for Evaluating Motorized Use on Non-motorized Facilities." The title alone
summarizes the situation.
-- ATV watch spoke with NHDOT in April at which time, without saying exactly
what their response was going to be, they indicated that the Federal restrictions
to ATVs seemed clear and that it was just a matter of implementing the restrictions.
Recently NHDOT indicated that the issue was not as straight forward as they
had thought. NHDOT said that DRED believes that it is very important to allow
ATV use on rail trails and that they are working with the AG's Office on a response
to FHWA. NHDOT said that it would be up to FHWA to make the final decision on
whether to allow ATV use on the rail trails.
-- In response to ATV Watch's insisting that the public be brought into any
attempt to circumvent the Federal prohibition to ATVs use on the rail trails
NHDOT responded that they would have to check with their attorneys as to the
requirements for public involvement in an issue like this.
PART 4: WHY DO WE KEEP RE-INVENTING THE WHEEL?
At this point, if you're still with me, and if your eyes haven't completely glazed over, you should be starting to smell something funny. I thought all public agencies had to conduct their business in public. That's why they're called "public"! DUH! And finally, we don't need to re-invent the wheel here. Read on about how one state tried unsuccessfully to allow ATVs and bikers and hikers on the same facility.
The state of Pennsylvania tried allowing ATVs on rail trails for 6 years. It
didn't work. You can read all about it at:
http://www.genset.org/library/11gsn/2002/gs021211.php#ATVS%20BANNED%20FROM%20PENNSY%20RAILS-TRAILS
The Susquehanna
County Rail-Trail Council included Snowmobiles in their master plan. The ATV
folks were upset, so the decision was made to include the ATVs. An ATV group
agreed to regulate and patrol ATV use, just like the snowmobilers do in NH.
500 passes were issued for the ATVs at $20 each. Despite an honest 6 year effort,
the dust, noise, trespass and safety issues could not be resolved; hiker and
bicyclist users did not feel safe sharing a pathway with ATVs. The Rail-Trail
Council (RTC) listed the following reasons for the permanent ban in a letter
to ATV owners:
1. The RTC'c founding vision was for a recreational greenway intended for hikers
& bikers. With recent ATV use, our many long-time members and financial
supporters were beginning to discontinue their memberships and their support.
2. Bikers and hikers were becoming a rarity out on the trails, because they
were either afraid to ride bikes with their families due to speeding ATVs or
they did not want to eat the dust created.
3. Adjacent property owners were complaining on a regular basis: dust, noise
and trespassing. Over 95% of adjacent property owners do not want ATVs on the
trail.
4. Complaints from two local realtors have indicated that property values along
the trail were decreasing. Property sales were lost in a few instances due to
ATVs trespassing on to adjacent property.
5. Township and borough officials were complaining on a regular basis. Again
speed, dust, noise and trespass being major complaints. Another major concern
was riding of ATVs along the streets to get to and from the trail.
6. Safety for all users is our major concern. The inherent nature of the trail
being long with few turns, encourages speeding. The speed differential between
a walker and an ATV rider is too great. ATV trails designed by professionals
are built to keep the speed down, and discourage speeds over 15 mph. Our rail-trail
is not designed for safe ATV use.
7. A major construction project of drainage improvements and resurfacing is
to begin in the spring of 2003. This project uses TEA-21 funds (federal highway
enhancement funds-FHWA). These funds are not to be used for ATV trails. According
to 23 U.S.C. 217(h), motorized vehicles (including ATVs) may not be permitted
on trails and pedestrian walkways which use Federal aid highway funds (except
snowmobiles, and where specifically authorized by State or local ordinance,
motorized wheelchairs, electric bicycles, and maintenance vehicles).
8. It is not just a few bad apples; ATV use just does not mix well with bikers
and hikers, who are our primary intended user group. We cannot have both, and
our seven years of attempted shared use have proved this. It is also proven
in the fact that no other rail-trails in PA allow ATVs (only one is attempting
shared use).
Well, if you're still with me and conscious, congratulations. We're almost done.
This information has been very hard to follow. I've usually found that when
somebody makes it difficult to follow their trail, it's because they're trying
to hide something. And when they're trying to hide something, it's because they're
"up to no good" as my father would say. As I said earlier, I have
nothing against ATVs. If I had a 25 acre back yard I probably would have been
out riding on one today. It's gorgeous out and anything is better than working
on a computer as far as I'm concerned! However, Federal policy is pretty clear,
considering it was written by politicians. I looked it up on their web site
and it says no motorized vehicles. So why is a NH state agency trying to circumvent
the Federal law? And, why won't they tell us what they're up to?
AND FINALLY!
Question: What's the sound of an ATV running over a hiker of biker?
Answer: I don't know and I hope I never find out!
Much as I dislike working on this computer, I know where my next email is going. How about you?
Thanks for your
time and patience.
Bill Kennedy
Member GSW & BWA NH
