Extreme Fire Danger – what it means to the Rubicon and OHV

Posted: May 3, 2014 | Author: Rubicon Ronin | Filed under: Access | Tags: ENF, LTBMU, Rubicon, TNF | Leave a comment

The winter of 2013/14 was a dud. The governor of California declared a drought for California in January. Mid-summer fire conditions existed in January and continue to get worse. The fire danger on the Rubicon and other trails this coming season will be extreme and fire restrictions will come very early. Unless we get a huge late snowfall, it could be a short wheeling season.

In 2007, the Tahoe National Forest (TNF) declared extreme fire danger and with a July 2^nd forest order closed the entire forest to internal combustion engines. That closure included chainsaws, motorcycles and jeeps. This closure rekindled my interest in building an electric Jeep, but that’s a topic for another article.

Due to continued hot, dry, and windy weather, fire restrictions in the Tahoe National Forest (TNF) will be increased beginning Monday, July 2, 2007…the restrictions will affect several activities:

* Fireworks – Absolutely no fireworks are permitted in the National Forest.

* Campfires – Only permitted in those campgrounds that have water systems, metal campfire rings, fire engine accessibility and regular patrols by campground hosts. Visitors can contact any TNF office for a list of campgrounds where campfires are permitted.

* Portable Stoves and Lanterns – Permitted in all campgrounds and the backcountry with a valid campfire permit.

* Woodcutting – Check the woodcutting hotlines each day to determine if chainsaws are

* Off-Highway Vehicle Use – Only permitted on designated roads; the Prosser Pit area near Truckee; and the Sugar Pine OHV area north of Foresthill. (Not permitted on trails other than the areas mentioned.)

* Smoking – Limited to vehicles, buildings, and in a 3-foot cleared area.

* Contract/Permittee Operations – Any operation or permittee that uses internal combustion engines or fire, must have an approved fire plan.

Thankfully, in 2006, the Placer County Board of Supervisors voted to recognize the Rubicon Trail as a “public trail”. That vote transferred control of the Rubicon Trail from the forest service to Placer County. Both forests involved were okay with Placer County claiming the Rubicon Trail as a public trail and thus controlling management of the trail.

WHEREAS the “McKinney Rubicon Trail” is a world renowned off-highway vehicle trail

that is partially located on federal lands within Placer County; and

WHEREAS the Trail has been in public use for at least 150 years; and

WHEREAS the Trail provides valued recreational asset for the citizens of Placer

because of the technically advanced driving conditions that exist in the open space

environment for off-road vehicle enthusiasts; and

WHEREAS the County desires that the Trail continue to be available for public use into

the future;

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Placer, State

of California, that this Board recognizes the “McKinney Rubicon Trail” as a public trail;

AND HEREBY states its intent to use all reasonable measures available to it to ensure

continued public access.

If Placer County had not voted in favor of the “public trail”, the Rubicon would have been closed in 2007 to vehicular traffic, including both Jeepers Jamborees.

A similar order in 2014, by any one of the three forests along the Rubicon, could close some of the side trails off the Rubicon. So, if you have any intention of wheeling any of these routes, do it early. Fire restrictions are progressive, they start with banning camp fires, then move to ban any open flames (including cigarettes) and progress until they ban all internal combustion engines.

Components of Stages

There are two fire restriction stages: Stage I and Stage II. There is one closure stage: Stage III. To reduce confusion and standardize the restrictions, the following conditions, by stage, should be used in all restriction documents. Additional elements may be added as conditions dictate.

Stage I

The following acts are prohibited:

Building, maintaining, attending, or using a fire or campfire except within a developed recreation site, or improved site. 36 CFR 261.52(a).
Smoking, except within an enclosed vehicle or building, a developed recreation site or while stopped in an area at least three feet in diameter that is barren or cleared of all flammable materials. 36 CFR 261.52(d).
Operating or using any internal or external combustion engine without a spark-arresting device properly installed, maintained, and in effective working order meeting either the USDA Forest Service Standard 5100-1a (as amended), or appropriate Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) recommended practice J335(b) and J350(a) (36 CFR 261.52(j)).

Stage II

The following acts are prohibited, in addition to the prohibitions of Stage I:

Building, maintaining, attending, or using a fire or campfire. 36 CFR 261.52(a)
Smoking, except within an enclosed vehicle or building. 36 CFR 261.52(c)
Possessing, discharging, or using any kind of firework or other pyrotechnic device.
36 CFR 261.52(f)
Using an explosive. 36 CFR 261.52(b)
Operating a chainsaw or other equipment powered by an internal combustion engine between 1:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. 36 CFR 261.52(h).
Operating or using any internal or external combustion engine without a spark arresting device properly installed, maintained and in effective working order meeting
either:
- USDA Forest Service Standard 5100-1a (as amended); or
- Appropriate Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) recommended practice
  J335 (b) and J350 (a). 36 CFR § 261.52(j) and 43 CFR § 9212.1(h);
Welding, or operating an acetylene or other torch with open flame. 36 CFR 261.52(i)
Possess or use a motor vehicle off: Forest System Roads (36 CFR 261.56) Except when parking in an area devoid of vegetation within 10 feet of the roadway; and except for parking overnight in developed campgrounds and at trailheads.

Stage III

The area is closed to all entry (36 CFR 261.52(e)) other than as follows:

Persons with a written fire entry and activity permit that specifically authorizes the otherwise prohibited act. This may include such persons as grazing-permit holders when entry is needed to gather, move, or otherwise manage their permitted livestock, special-use authorization holders when access is needed to maintain emergency or other communications operations, and others.
Any federal, state, or local officer, or member of an organized rescue or firefighting force in the performance of an official duty.
Resident owners and lessees of land within the closed area.

Dates for fire restrictions being put in place on the TNF over the last decade or so range from June 1^st to August 18^th and in in 2011 I don’t think they EVER had fire restrictions due to the huge and late winter. Dates for lifting the ban on camp fires range from September 1^st to October 23^rd.

So, get out early this season. Make sure you rig is good to go now so you can take advantage of the early opening dates of the trails in the Sierras. Don’t wait for the waters and air temperatures to warm up because by the time things warm up, they might be closed.

Bring extra layers to wear instead of starting a camp fire every night even if they are still allowed. Eat sandwiches instead of steaks and cereal instead of bacon and eggs. Or have a contest with your buddies to see who can build the better solar cooker for your next camp out.

“Access” – the new dirty word

Posted: May 1, 2014 | Author: Rubicon Ronin | Filed under: Access | Leave a comment

Yesterday, I took part in one of the Sierra Cascade Dialogs outside of Sacramento. It was a very well run meeting, trying to get input from all types of forest users in order to help FS leadership make decisions. We were not overwhelmed with questions and each table had a trained facilitator to assist the table with coming to conclusions. The FS was trying very hard to get our input and we (OHV users) need to participate but I wonder how much our voices were or will be heard.

I came away with two things standing out in my mind. The first was that the anti-OHV groups don’t like the word “access” because it delivers a negative connotation that there are “restrictions” on the general public from the forest. They wanted to twist or turn the conversation as to why there were closures. As if educating the users as to why they can’t drive down a road they’ve used for decades would make it okay.

From this point on, I will use the word “access” as much as possible.

The second thing that struck me was right at the end. The lady who opened the meeting, and facilitated one of the tables, gave some closing statements. She brought up two lists of words, one that the ‘tables’ had used in answering questions put to them asking what they wanted. The second list was words used by the “Line Officers” of the three forests representatives during their statements and while answering questions.

She then circled the words common to both lists. Although every table used the word “access” at some point during the day during their presentations and answers, at no time did the “Line Officers” use the word “access”.

That says so much to me.

Suggestions sent to FOTR…

Posted: April 26, 2014 | Author: Rubicon Ronin | Filed under: Maintenance | Tags: FOTR, Rubicon | Leave a comment

So, FOTR is holding it’s annual meeting on Saturday, May 3rd in Placerville at the DOT office. I think it starts at 9am. Unfortunately, I won’t be able to attend. Bills to pay, so I have to go to work. I’d like to pass along some ideas that I hope will be discussed at the meeting.

FOTR Meetings

Let’s start right there, meetings. With only one meeting a year, odds are that some people will not be able to attend. With only one meeting, trying to follow up on action items or to plan out an entire year is difficult.

I’d like to suggest a non-symmetrical quarterly system.

Projects and Weekends: Hold a winter meeting in January to plan what projects FOTR will tackle and what weekends will be chosen for the work parties. Before the next meeting, an outline of each project should be drafted.

Leadership: The spring meeting would be held in March and would be for the details: we have the projects, we have the dates, we have an outline for each project. Who wants to lead a project, who wants to cook, who wants to do logistics, who wants to do whatever? Maybe discuss how each project needs to be tackled. The lead roles should be filled prior to the next meeting.

Worker Bees: The summer meeting in May would be presenting the completed RICS forms (or equivalent) with the IC’s, crew leaders and major logistics already in place. At this meeting we’d be looking for shovelers, check in people, trailers, etc. We’d be finalizing timelines, camping locations and what’s for dinner.

Review: The fall meeting held in September would be a review of what has been done and possible what’s left before the snow flies. The list of things to do would need to be reviewed/updated prior to the January meeting.

By splitting the one annual meeting in to four meetings, more details can be documented for each phase. More people, over the course of the year, will be able to attend and feel like they are part of the process thus increasing morale and buy-in from the users.

Membership Drive / Information Exchanges

So, how to get more people involved and informed…

My first suggestion is to post ‘Press Releases’ in as many OHV forums as possible.

The basic steps would be to slowly build an email list of people, and which forum they represent, who are willing to post any and all RTF/FOTR Press Releases on to a single forum. The individual posting the Press Release would NOT be responsible for answering any questions posted regarding the Press Release.

There would be a disclaimer on each Press Release stating that FOTR does not monitor this forum and although discussion is encouraged, any communication with FOTR should be done by emailing FOTR directly.

By sending one email, a single Press Release could easily be posted on a dozen forums. Eventually, that number could be dozens of forums. This effort would not only inform users but would also recruit volunteers.

A similar technique could be used to reach every Cal4 club in the state. Eventually other states could be included. Maybe monthly, a Press Release could be sent electronically to each club to be read at the clubs monthly meeting. This might take a little more effort to write as it would need to document what is going on with FOTR more than a month out. (Note: not every club currently has an email address on file with Cal4)

Possible wording for emails to representatives and on the Press Releases:

“You have received this email because you have volunteered to pass on information about the Rubicon Trail and Friends of the Rubicon. If you no longer wish to assist with maintaining the Rubicon Trail, please contact FOTR and you will be removed from this emailing list.”

“This forum is not being monitored by FOTR representatives, although discussion is encouraged and FOTR members might post up and answer questions and offer opinions, any comments or questions aimed directly at FOTR should be emailed directly to FOTR.”

A new position within FOTR could be created within FOTR, call it the ‘Public Relations’ person but limit the duties to dealing with emails, fliers and letters.

This person would work directly with the Trail Boss in creating Press Releases, maintaining the email lists for forums and for OHV clubs and for actually sending out the Press Releases.

The last thought in this category is to send out a questionnaire to all current FOTR volunteers, past volunteers and possible future volunteers in order to find out why volunteerism and leadership is down. Possible questions have already been forwarded to RTF. This should be sent out after an email list for forums and clubs has been developed.

Rebuild/Redirect the FOTR Leads list

This has been mentioned before but I don’t believe or never heard that it had been completed.

Currently, the Leads list falls flat when topics are brought up for discussion. If you’re going to be on the Leads list, you should make the time to get involved with the issues brought up on the email list.

I’d suggest asking each person to send a one page summary of why they want/should be on the Leads list. I don’t know how many people are currently on the Leads list but it shouldn’t be more than ten percent of the General list.

Once the new list is compiled and working, the Trail Boss should monitor who is failing to partake in the conversations. If you’re not taking part in the conversation, you get a warning; if you don’t step up and become part of the conversation; you’re off the list.

I’d like to see this change in order to drive more people to take part in discussing the current topics/issues facing the Rubicon Trail.

Organization Chart

There is an FOTR organizational chart and responsibilities for each position floating around from 2010. I believe it was a Bebe creation. Let’s fill it in.

Looking at the list, the only name I could fill in right now is that of Jerry Reffner as Trail Boss.

I currently hold the position of liaison with the TNF. John Briggs is the liaison with Placer County. Kade Hendricks is the current liaison with the LTBMU. Not major roles but they would fall in under Planning if the chart were expanded in detail. I know of no other roles current filled.

The suggestion above about clubs and forums could be driven by a Comms Chief. Below I suggest a Plans or Ops Chief to maintain a current “To Do List”. An RTF director should be the Finance Chief as RTF funds most of FOTR’s efforts.

I think in order to fill these positions we need to detail out the role and responsibilities of each and every position including the role of Trail Boss.

To Do List(s)

Create a single list of things to do for the entire trail. Then, prioritize or choose items from the list for 2014. GPS each issue. This summer, I will be getting GPS numbers for each item on the Tahoe Side to do list.

Currently, we have FOUR different “To Do Lists” floating around:

Geographically east to west, by Doug
A categorized but not prioritized list, by Rusty
The Tahoe side priorities, by Tahoe side users
Placer County’s priorities from ’13 FOTR meeting, by Kansas

This duty should fall to a Planning or Operations Chief. I do not favor a single person deciding what FOTR should work on. I’d like to see a committee working under Plans/Ops of six to eight people sit down and keep an eye on what issues face the trail and which are priorities.

This committee should maintain a list of 4-5 items that need to be done on the trail. This list should be posted on the FOTR website.

Miscellaneous:

Develop an FOTR mission statement
Define the objectives of FOTR
Maintain the FOTR website with current information
Reach out to motorcycle, quad and side-by-side users
Education of volunteers: Offer training for leading a crew or a project; writing letters, emails, grants; filling RICS positions; basic organizational skills

Just thinking out loud…

Working with the Eldorado National Forest?

Posted: April 21, 2014 | Author: Rubicon Ronin | Filed under: Access, Maintenance | Tags: 14N39, ENF, Richardson Lake | Leave a comment

As the only pro-OHV appellant from the east side of the Sierras, I have taken a personal interest in getting the Richardson Lake Trail, 14N39, reopened. One of my clubs, The North Tahoe Trail Dusters, often would organize a mid-week after work run to the top of Sourdough Peak for a BBQ and to watch the sunset. We’d then wheel down in the dark.

Trying to work ‘with’ the Eldorado National Forest (ENF) to get this trail reopened has been a challenge. My fallback line to them has been “Partnership Not Pushback” but it seems I get more pushback than partnership.

Early on, before the Record of Decision (ROD), I had organized a tour of 14N39. Scheduled to be there were all the right people from the ENF and the users to drive them. The day before the tour the head ENF ranger, Lawrence Crabtree, pulled the hydrologist to another project. We went anyway and documented the ‘meadow’ issues and how each could be fixed.

The ENF later changed the rules and claimed that no planning could be done on any fixes until the forest hydrologist could visit the trail and get eyes on the issue. They couldn’t read our notes and draft something; they couldn’t look at our photographs and draft something; they couldn’t work from the first hydrologist’s notes and draft something.