TESTIMONY OF ALAN T. HILL
Page 2.
GENERAL CONCERNS
The recreational riding community recognizes its responsibilities to treat our nation's public lands with respect. Recreational riders have a deep commitment to outdoor recreation and believe that recreation is a legitimate use of our country's public lands. Whether we are owners, breeders, trail riders, competitive riders, stock companies, or service providers we recognize that we have a vital interest in the responsible use and wise management of our natural resources. Our organizational and individual members recognize that we must protect our historical heritage and traditions and that not all forms of outdoor recreation are suitable for all sites.
The recreational riding community is very concerned about the recent direction of our nation's approach to recreation and a number of policy initiatives that seem to intend to deny public access to millions of acres of public land. We are concerned that if this direction is not changed, it will prevent Americans from participating in recreational activities, including horseback riding, in areas that have long sustained such activities. Some such initiatives include the U.S. Forest Service rulemaking on the expansion of "roadless" areas; the designation of millions of acres of land as "national monuments;" and the seeming absence of a national federal policy on recreation and public lands that is considered at the state and local level. In fact, it often seems as if the riding public is excluded when decisions are made on access.
We have become alarmed as we have witnessed during the last decade the continued decline in the condition and extent of our trail systems and a pervasive trend throughout the country of increasing restrictions directed specifically at recreation, pack and saddle stock use on our federal lands including wilderness areas, national forests, national parks, national monuments, backcountry and front country. During this same period, we have observed a shift in emphasis of the federal agencies from one of managing our national wilderness preservation system for the multiple purposes intended by Congress, i.e. recreational, scenic, scientific, educational, conservation and historical use, to the singular objective of restoring and sustaining pristine ecological conditions.
Consequently we have identified several major concerns that desperately need attention if we are to restore a proper balance between preservation and access, enjoyment and use of our resources by the recreational user.
We would like to focus our comments on the importance of access for riders to federal lands, the need for additional funding that is actually used on trails maintenance, the need for a national recreation policy, the necessity of a partnership between riders and the federal agencies to build and maintain trails and the importance of good science in making any decisions in this area.
ACCESS
Perhaps the most important issue facing the recreational segment of the horse industry is access to public lands, both federal and state. While the industry is losing its access to public lands, urban areas encroach on open green space. In fact, Horse and Rider magazine polled its readers in late 1999 regarding their "top problem or concern" and loss of riding trails was the number one concern, ranked first by 42% of those who responded.
National policy needs to reaffirm that recreational and historical uses -- such as equestrian uses -- be recognized as an appropriate and acceptable use on federal lands such as wilderness areas, national forests, parks and monuments, and that management of our public lands is for the use and enjoyment of the American people. It has been our experience that special designations, i.e., monuments, wilderness, roadless areas, seldom if ever expands recreational opportunities for horsemen. In practice these designations often result in a loss of access and recreational opportunities.
Restrictions and prohibitions imposed on recreational equine use and incidental grazing, should be the exception rather than the rule and be determined by site-specific analysis based on use, land characteristics and science. It should not be subjective or based on the social preferences of other users.
The ability of the Forest Service or any other Federal land agency to unilaterally close a trail or trail head with no notice or public process must be stopped. De facto restrictions on access or the limitation through onerous regulations must be eliminated. For example, the "number of heart beats" test on a trail at any one time in a national monument is unsound policy. A grandfather could not take his extended family on a trail ride because the number of people in the family would exceed the heart beat rule. Such de facto restrictions must be reconsidered.
< Previous Page (1) | Next Page (3) >
