Rubicon Trail Closing?

[cumminscruiser]

I have heard talk of the Rubicon Trail closing next year. Can anyone comfirm this?

 

[alosix]

There's a link here in land use I think, over to pirate 4x4.

There's a group contending that its causing water quality issues. This appears to be a hard one to win against as well. Tellico on the east coast was lost to that.

Jason

 

[goodtimes]

This is a long and complex battle...rumors surface every year that it is closing, or not closing...depending on who you are talking to.

There are certain groups out there that would love to shut it down, and they make a concerted effort each year to accomplish that. Thankfully, their efforts have thus far failed. Hopefully this trend continues.

 

[cumminscruiser]

Rubicon

I heard that the closing of the trail was slipped into a bill four hours before the vote and the bill was passed. Now I dont have any friends in the state capital so I dont know this for sure. I have heard many times in the past people trying to close the trail but without any luck.

 

[cumminscruiser]

Rubicon trail

I dont think this is what my friends were talking about but its worth looking at.

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=779591

 

[ttora4runner]

It's still open but the fight is far from over:

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=773207&page=5

 

[paulj]

Here's a news article from January (Sacramento) abut

http://www.sacbee.com/197/story/1578494.html
Fix Rubicon Trail's problems or pay fine, water board tells El Dorado County

In a draft order issued Friday, the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board finds that erosion caused by vehicle traffic on the trail threatens fish habitat in the south fork of the American River and its tributaries.

and an editorial shortly after that article
http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1609334.html

Documents related to this action can be found at the Water Board web site. This includes (tentative) orders that the county will have to comply with over the next several years. That may include closure during the wet time of the year when erosion is a major problem (similar dates to closures in most parts of Eldorado Nat Forest). The staff response to comments received Jan-April is good reading. Engineers and geologists might be particularly interested in the comments and response regarding the sediment study (2nd half of the response document).

http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/centralvalley/board_decisions/tentative_orders/0904/index.shtml#12

Here's an interesting comment in the staff report

After reading OHV websites and blogs, Water Board staff understands that the nature of the
Rubicon Trail has changed. For many in the OHV community, it is no longer about the challenge
of crossing the Sierras without creating any vehicle damage, but it is a test of what an extreme
vehicle can do. Damage to the vehicle is expected and possibly encouraged. Rocks have been
winched into the trail to make passage harder, vehicles drive at a 45 degree angle along the
incised sides of the trail, and the trail has widened in some areas as drivers seek out harder
obstacles. These activities have lead to increased sedimentation and increased spills of
automotive fluids, and therefore have a greater impact on water quality.

 

[teotwaki]

This document makes for interesting reading
http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/centralvall.../rubicon_trail/rubicon_trail_stfrpt_att_b.pdf

 

[paulj]

The newest document on the Water Board site is dated Apr 14 outlining the Hearing Procedure for the hearing on the 23rd.

 

[jammyauto]

Jim, thanks for that link. I found it very interesting. I'm very supprised that so few in the offroad community seem to be getting involved. They recieved fewer than 4000 letters during the comment period and most were form letters. It seems like the actual ussage numbers are vauge but if only 30000 persons per year run the trail that indicates that very few will put out the effort to wright a letter about something they care about.
I seems to me that the fate of the rubicon and other similiar areas lies soley with ability of the folks who use the area to get together and take resposibility for them. That means much much more than annual clean ups and tread lightly training. That means full time enforcement and some system to contol use like a resevation system of some type. I would be happy to pay a fee to run the trail. It's sad that lots of folks can not pick up after themselves and be responsible. Complaining about those people won't get us anywhere however.
I've never run the trail because I usually avoid the crowd that is there in favor camping in remote areas. That and I don't own a vehicle that I think is capable of running the trail. I think it would be a real shame to lose the trail as it is such and icon.

 

[paulj]

The number of comments that the Water Board received were enough to alter their usual way of issuing cleanup orders. Apparently these are issued by executive action without hearings, for example if they are telling some sewer district to fix a problem with their discharge, or telling a construction company to stop allowing sediment flow from their construction site.

They had to setup a separate page for comment links
http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/centralvall...n_trail/rubicon_comments_received/index.shtml
and they may have even had to give this order a separate hearing (on the 23rd) with the rest of the business on the 24th.

I don't know whether more comments would sway the board much in either direction, especially if they were just statements of opinion. More statements to the effect 'Do not close this trail because I like using it', could just bolster the case for regulating its use.