| Strategy 12. | Reduce ORV Use in General |
| Tactic 12.1 | Increase ORV Use Fees |
| Purpose | Prevent or reduce resource damage or crowding and conflicts by increasing ORV use fees to reduce visitation. |
| Description | Visitation is reduced to limit associated resource and social impacts. Visitation reduction is achieved by modifying the cost of ORV use fees. |
| Costs to
ORV Visitors |
Moderate. Visitor access is retained, though at greater cost. Visitors with less commitment to ORV riding or with less wealth will reduce or discontinue their use. |
| Costs to
Management |
Moderate. The policy must be communicated with supporting documentation of its rationale. A system for determining a fee structure and its impact on visitation must be developed and managed. |
| Effectiveness | High. Visitation is reduced to levels that resolve unacceptable impacts. Agency presence and enforcement may also be critical to success. |
| Comments | Fees charged on a per-visit basis would have greater effect than annual fees. Use of this option is uncommon. |
| Strategy 12. | Reduce ORV Use in General |
| Tactic 12.2 | Reduce Number of ORV Permits |
| Purpose | Prevent or reduce resource damage or crowding and conflicts by limiting the number of ORV permits. |
| Description | Visitation is reduced to limit associated resource and social impacts. Visitation reduction is achieved by lowering the number of ORV permits issued annually for the entire area or by setting quotas for individual management units. |
| Costs to
ORV Visitors |
Moderate-High. Visitor access is retained, though only for those able to obtain permits. |
| Costs to
Management |
Moderate. The policy must be communicated with supporting documentation of its rationale. A system for determining who will receive ORV permits, such as a lottery, must be developed and managed. |
| Effectiveness | High. Visitation is reduced to levels that resolve unacceptable impacts. Agency presence and enforcement may also be critical to success. |
| Comments | A monitoring program could provide feedback on relationships between amount of use and impact for the purpose of adjusting the number of permits issued. |
| Strategy 12. | Reduce ORV Use in General |
| Tactic 12.3 | Make Access More Difficult |
| Purpose | Prevent or reduce resource damage or crowding and conflicts by making access more difficult to reduce visitation. |
| Description | Visitation is reduced to limit associated resource and social impacts. Visitation reduction is achieved by increasing the difficulty of access, either by reducing the number of accesses or restricting parking lot sizes under a designated access point policy (see Tactic 4.3), or by not maintaining initial segments of ORV routes. |
| Costs to
ORV Visitors |
Moderate. Visitor access is retained, though additional travel time may be required to reach preferred destination areas. |
| Costs to
Management |
Moderate. The policy must be communicated with supporting documentation of its rationale. Access areas may need to be moved, closed, or reduced in size. |
| Effectiveness | Moderate. Visitation is reduced, though not necessarily to levels that resolve unacceptable impacts. |
| Comments | A monitoring program could provide feedback on relationships between amount of use and impact for the purpose of adjusting the number, location, and size of accesses. |
| Strategy 12. | Reduce ORV Use in General |
| Tactic 12.4 | Limit Length of Stay |
| Purpose | Prevent or reduce resource damage or crowding and conflicts by limiting length of stay to reduce visitation. |
| Description | Visitation is reduced to limit associated resource and social impacts. Visitation reduction is achieved by setting limits on length of stay. |
| Costs to
ORV Visitors |
Moderate. Visitor access is retained, though trip lengths may be reduced. |
| Costs to
Management |
Low. The policy must be communicated with supporting documentation of its rationale. Increased visitor contact and enforcement may be required. |
| Effectiveness | Low. Visitation may not be reduced if individuals respond by increasing the number of trips. This tactic is likely more effective in reducing camping impacts, travel-related impacts may be unaffected or even increased. |
| Comments | Use and impact may be shifted from remote areas to more accessible areas |
| Strategy 12. | Reduce ORV Use in General |
| Tactic 12.5 | Require Certain Skills |
| Purpose | Prevent or reduce resource damage or crowding and conflicts by requiring certain skills to reduce visitation. |
| Description | Visitation is reduced to limit associated resource and social impacts. Visitation reduction is achieved by requiring ORV riders to have certain knowledge and/or low impact travel and vehicle use skills. |
| Costs to
ORV Visitors |
Moderate. Visitor access is retained, though visitors must attend courses and learn low impact skills. |
| Costs to
Management |
High. The policy must be communicated with supporting documentation of its rationale. Courses in low impact travel skills (e.g. locating and using resistant routes) must be developed and offered. A verification and/or testing program for skills must be developed and administered. |
| Effectiveness | Moderate. Visitation is reduced, though not necessarily to levels that resolve unacceptable impacts. Visitors may not apply learned new knowledge or skills. |
| Comments | A standard course could be developed to communicate ORV use regulations and recommended low impact travel and camping practices. Completion of in-class exercises and/or a passing grade on an exam (similar to a drivers license test), would be required to obtain an ORV use permit. |
| Strategy 12. | Reduce ORV Use in General |
| Tactic 12.6 | Regulate Area of Use to Reduce Conflicts |
| Purpose | Prevent or reduce social conflict problems with other user groups by reducing or prohibiting ORV use in selected areas or management units to spatially separate conflicting user groups. |
| Description | Visitors are discouraged or prohibited from operating ORVs in selected areas to reduce or avoid problems with conflicts between user groups. |
| Costs to
ORV Visitors |
Moderate to High. ORV riders would have to alter their preferred travel routes to avoid the selected areas. |
| Costs to
Management |
Moderate. Areas would have to be identified and advertised, possibly signed. Enforcement may be necessary to ensure compliance. |
| Effectiveness | Moderate-High. If voluntary, visitors may not modify their travel routes. |
| Comments | ORV use is already prohibited within two management units. |
| Project Front Page | Table of Contents | Introduction | Selection Process | Strategies and Tactics | References |