The number of people who use and appreciate Minnesota public forests without ATVs is roughly seven or eight times larger than those who use ATVs. The gap is still big, but not quite as big, in the hunting population.
Most Minnesota deer hunters (78 percent) don't use an ATV in any way, according to the DNR's last deer hunter satisfaction survey, from 2002. Yet, despite the overwhelmingly larger non-motorized community that does not own and ride an ATV on public land, the DNR has classified most public lands for ATV use.
So far, among the state forests, for which reclassification plans have been proposed or completed, about 4 percent are closed to ATVs and, thus, devoted to people who hunt, hike, bird watch, etc., in traditional fashion, without a motor doing the work for them. In addition to the 12 forests that have had reclassification plans completed and signed, 17 more have had a proposal made to the DNR commissioner. So far those plans either have been approved as proposed or have been sent back by the commissioner's office to have more motorized trails added, not less.
Those 29 forests have a combined acreage of 1,265,432 acres of DNR Forestry-owned land within their boundaries, according to DNR figures dated May 9, 2002. Of the 29, 19 have been classified or proposed to be classified as "Limited," and these 19 forests represent 507,963 acres, or 40 percent of the 1.265 million. An additional six forests totaling 704,021 acres have been proposed as "Managed," or wide open to motorized use. That is 56 percent of the 1.265 million acres.
Any assurance of high quality traditional hiking, hunting or wildlife watching experience is excluded on these Managed forests because you cannot count on being able to get away from ATVs or the damage they often leave behind.
Only four of the smaller-sized forests have been classified or proposed to be classified as "Closed" to ATVs, and only two other forests have been proposed to have areas within them. These four forests and parts of two other forests total just 53,448 acres, just 4 percent of the 1.265 million acres.
Here are the numbers again:
29 = number of forests classified or with plans sent to DNR commissioner's office for approval since 2003.
19 = number of forests classified or proposed to be "Limited" and open to ATVs.
6 = number of forests classified or proposed to be "Managed" and open to ATVs.
4 = number of forests classified or proposed to be "Closed" to ATVs.
2 = number of forests classified or proposed to be "Managed" but also have areas within them classified as "Closed." (This is a subset of the six managed forests above.)
1,265,432 = number of acres of state land in DNR Forestry management within those 29 forests' boundaries.
56 percent = amount of the total acreage in proposed "Managed" forests open to ATVs (704,021 acres of 1,265,432 acres).
40 percent = amount of total acreage in proposed "Limited" forests open to ATVs (507,963 acres of 1,265,432 acres).
4 percent = amount of the total acreage in proposed "Closed" forests closed to ATVs (53,448 of 1,265,432 acres).
280,000 = roughly the number of ATVs registered in Minnesota, roughly half of which ride sometimes or most of the time on public land.
5 million = roughly the state's current population.
5.6 percent = number of Minnesotans owning an ATV (roughly half of which ride sometimes or most of the time on public land).
*Source for the raw acreage figures and numbers of forests proposed in different classifications is from the DNR.
I'm one of the majority. I hunt and hike without an ATV. I can tell you what the academics and many other kinds of traditional users know: ATV use and a good-quality non-motorized experience are not compatible. ATV traffic displaces the folks who like a high-quality traditional experience. We're in the majority, but so far we have gotten 4 percent, and that is what we call the short end of the stick.
There is one other citation I want to offer you concerning the statement that ATV is not compatible with traditional forms of recreation. This is an excerpt from Chapter 4, page 8 of the Wisconsin State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan for 2005-2010:
"Upon closer examination of these compatibility ratings, two general observations are evident. First, it is fairly apparent that motorized and/or consumptive recreational activities are consistently rated as being less compatible with non-motorized activities than with other motorized activities. For example, when comparing the compatibility of all other land-based activities with hiking and ATV riding, it is evident that ATV riding is incompatible with every other land-based activity but snowmobiling. Hiking, on the other hand, is supplementary or complementary with all other activities."
I am not the only one who feels this way. This is Wisconsin state policy.
(Matt Norton is the staff attorney for the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy.)
