Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

Some roads may open for use by off-roaders

Rich Landers Outdoors editor

While a bill that would authorize opening more secondary roads to all-terrain vehicles is cruising through the Washington Legislature, U.S. Forest Service officials in Washington are saying they may have been too strict in banning ATVs on some forest roads under existing law.

House Bill 1003 would allow land managers in Washington to determine what roads are open to off-road vehicle riding.

But Deborah Wilkins, a Colville National Forest recreation coordinator, said she started looking closer at state laws months ago to better understand why ATVers could ride on forest roads in Idaho, but not in Washington.

“The Colville has maintained that, according to Washington state law, it was illegal to ride ATVs on our roads and the result was that it forced them off into the bushes where they can do more harm,” she said. “I researched the state laws and it seemed clear to me that it was fine to ride on the non-highway roads in the national forest.”

Regional Forest Service officials also are beginning to change their interpretation of federal law as it related to state laws governing ATVs on roads.

“For many years in Washington, there was an attorney general’s opinion that off-highway vehicles may not operate on state roads and highways that are funded, developed and maintained with federal or state tax dollars,” said Gail Throop, Forest Service regional coordinator for off-highway vehicles based in Portland.

The opinion has been questioned more recently as the region’s forests have been developing policies for burgeoning off-road-vehicle use.

Generally, Throop said, supervisors on individual forests should have the authority to allow ATVs on certain so-called Level 2 roads, which are lightly maintained and often can be negotiated only by high clearance or four-wheel drive vehicles.

“The forest supervisors in Washington have pretty much been applying the attorney general’s opinion across the board without splitting out those roads that are maintained with federal money and those maintained with state money,” Throop said.

But even if forest supervisors choose to designate certain roads open to ATVs, all other state rules would apply, she said.

“There may be an opportunity to look at designating certain Level 2 maintenance roads for off-highway vehicles in the upcoming inventory, with designation following the establishment of new national travel management policy,” she said.

Among other things, the new national Forest Service travel policy seeks to allow motorized vehicles only on trails designated for motorized use and ban cross-country motorized travel unless and area is specifically designated for that type of recreation.

The policy is scheduled to be published this spring.

“Some forests already have designated motorized trails and prohibited cross-country travel,” Throop said. “That’s part of the reason for a national policy to standardize the rules.”

Meanwhile, here in Washington, Wilkins said the Colville is already holding meetings to get public input on potential off-road vehicle routes that certainly will include some forest roads that do not receive state funding.

“We like the idea of keeping the ATV use on the rustic Level 2 roads,” she said. “Already they’re running on the roads in the Colville, people know that. Were trying to get a handle on the issue.”

Idaho law allows ATVs on most roads and the Idaho Panhandle National Forests has done little to manage motorized use on its road system.

“ATVers in Washington are mad because they haven’t been allowed on forest roads, but in Idaho a lot of other people are mad because ATVs are all over the place,” Wilkins said. “We’re looking at a managed route system so people know where they can ride ATVs, including some interesting roads and routes, and other people will know where ATVs are not allowed.”