Posted by: Sandy Steinman | August 1, 2012

Court Closes 89 Miles To Off-Road Use In Eldorado Forest

New Protections for fragile Sierra Nevada meadow habitat and the threatened California red-legged frog.

Press Release from Center for Biological Diversity

Court Finds Sierra Nevada Off-road Vehicle Plan Illegal

SACRAMENTO, Calif.— A federal court has rejected the U.S. Forest Service’s plan to increase off-road vehicle use in the Eldorado National Forest. The court decision, released Thursday, found the Forest Service’s “travel-management plan” violated legal protections for fragile Sierra Nevada meadow habitat and the threatened California red-legged frog.

The Forest Service’s 2008 travel-management plan authorized 1,212 miles of motorized vehicle routes across the Eldorado National Forest, including designation of 23 miles of routes created by off-road vehicle users in sensitive areas. The plan included nearly 40 miles of routes on soils susceptible to erosion, 10 miles of routes within meadows, 290 miles of routes near streamsides with 485 stream crossings, and routes in red-legged frog habitat.

“Off-road vehicle use can cause substantial damage to water, wildlife and soil resources and disturb quiet recreation,” said Karen Schambach, president of Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation. “The court recognized that the Forest Service needs to fully weigh those serious impacts before expanding off-road vehicle use on the forest.”

The court’s decision responds to a challenge brought by the Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation and Forest Issues Group. The court found the plan violated the National Forest Management Act and the Endangered Species Act by favoring off-road vehicle use over protection of sensitive forest resources, including endangered species and meadow habitats. The Eldorado National Forest contains key recovery habitat for the California red-legged frog and many other imperiled species as well as clean-water resources critical to the state.

“The court recognized that the Forest Service failed to take the steps needed to adequately protect red-legged frogs and important habitat from off-road vehicle destruction,” said Lisa Belenky, a senior attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. “The agency adopted a route system that unnecessarily cuts through important meadow habitat, impairs riparian conservation areas, and ultimately would undermine the health of the forest.”

The California red-legged frog is famously known from Mark Twain’s story “The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County.” Once so common it was a staple cuisine, California’s largest native frog has now lost 90 percent of its historic population. Remaining red-legged frog populations continue to be threatened by habitat loss in aquatic, riparian and upland areas; water-quality degradation; and pesticide use.
Plaintiffs were represented by Dave Bahr of Bahr Law Offices, Erik Schlenker-Goodrich of Western Environmental Law Center and Lisa Belenky of the Center for Biological Diversity.


  1. Most of the routes that are now closed have been open for many years. Any plans by the usfs to open new routes were put into place to bypass sensitive areas. Many of the routes that are now closed, have some of the most beautiful natural habitats I have ever seen. I have been enjoying these areas for 35 years. One of the best things about these areas is they lead to vistas and quiet serene settings that are not accessed by the masses. With more and more areas like these closed, the only way most will be able to enjoy these natural habitats is from state highways and hiking areas within 10 miles of them. Is there any conclusive data that directly relates the red frogs population loss to off highway travel? If so, I would love to hear about them. Most of the routes have existed for well over 60 years. Is nature not more appreciated when humans can enjoy and experience it first hand? Whether these roads are closed or not, they will still be used by the forestry, D.F.G. and Fire departments. In general, the citizens that use the routes do a damn good job of keeping the areas safe, clean, and have a universal respect for nature and wildlife. Hearing about the decision makes me sick to my stomach, I try to enjoy these areas with my kids at least twice a year. They love it, just as I did when I was a kid. Now we will have to find another spot and maybe get to enjoy it for a few years until it is closed also. I’am sure where ever we find will be crowded, as everyone else is also getting pushed off publicly owned lands. When will this b.s. end? Who is really suffering? Again I would love to see some real data.


    • I would suggest you contact the Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation and Forest Issues Group as they brought the lawsuit to court and could direct you to the research that they presented.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


%d bloggers like this: