Recreationists Challenge Forest Service’s Decision To Close Popular 4WD Roads On The Pike-San Isabel National Forests

Your Government counsel.™

The Colorado Off Road Enterprise and its members have filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging a decision by the Pike-San Isabel National Forests (PSI) to close highly popular roads to motorized recreation. The decision was made pursuant to the agency’s travel management process in response to a lawsuit brought by The Wilderness Society. The plaintiffs’ agency level appeal of the closure had been previously denied.

The challenge hinges in part on the PSI’s assertion that the roads at issue should be closed to motorized recreation because the public has no interest in engaging in motorized recreation on the roads. The PSI’s basis for its assertion was that, even though the nationally known roads were “extremely popular” with motorized recreationists, no one was currently engaged in motorized recreation at the time of its analysis. However, the only reason no one was engaged in such recreation was because the PSI had prohibited that activity while it studied the impacts of a wildfire in the area. Had the agency found that the public interest in motorized recreation was high, its travel management process required it to keep the roads open to motorized recreation.

Prior to filing the lawsuit, the plaintiffs had received documents pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act request related to the PSI’s decision. Those documents included internal emails between PSI employees which allegedly revealed a secret plan to decommission the roads before the completion of any analysis of the impacts on the environment of motorized recreation. One of the emails contained a critical assessment by an agency employee of the PSI’s tactics, stating:

If our leadership wants to know why the motorized community does not want to cooperate with the forest service, this is a great example of why they don’t trust us. I don’t blame them for their outrage.  

The matter has been fully briefed and the parties are currently waiting for the court to schedule an oral argument. The Garden Law Firm is representing the plaintiffs.

Share this post

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Subscribe to the mailing list

Close Menu