Jump to content

Sequoia National Forest-TRAIL CLOSURES-comments needed

Recommended Posts

If you live and ride around here please take the time to do this! This was sent out by Chris Horgan, Executive Director - Stewards of the Sequoia. Today 9/26/19 is the deadline.



Less than 200 comments have been submitted. Far short of the thousand we would like.
If you already submitted your comment thanks very much and we hope you will urge your friends to comment also.

Your help is needed to prevent the closure of about 30 miles of Sequoia National Forest motorized trails. We are told by Forest Staff if they hear from a thousand people on a topic they will take it very seriously. So here is your chance to object to their proposals to close 30 miles of trails, restrict recreation and make it harder to do future trail projects.
Please take action now. Feel free to forward this to your email list or on your Facebook page

Chris Horgan
Executive Director
Stewards of the Sequoia

USE THIS EMAIL ADDRESS TO SUBMIT YOU COMMENTS: r5planrevision@fs.fed.us Send an email to the Forest Service and tell them how you want to see your Sequoia National Forest public lands managed for recreation.

You can COPY AND PASTE all the below sample text into your email or draft your own comment, but they need to hear from lots of people now who don't want to see any trails closed.


Sequoia Forest Plan Comment:

Dear Ms. Hamedani and Forest Planners,

Regarding the Sequoia Forest Plan, please keep all existing multiple use trails open and make it a priority to add new trails to meet increasing demand and a growing population of motorized and mountain bike trails.

I oppose the expansion of a PCT Corridor of up to one mile. This will needlessly close or restrict perhaps 30 miles of motorized recreation trails which are under consideration for designation.

The Forest Plan should require the Pacific Crest Trail to be a good neighbor to other forms of recreation and to coexist in harmony with other forms of recreation, as it is required to do under the 1982 PCT Comprehensive Management Plan and to continue to be a multiple use experience. I oppose any Pacific Crest Trail based restrictions on other forms of recreation.

The Forest Plan should not recommend any more multiple use lands to be designated as Wilderness. We need to keep all of our multiple use lands wherein 98% of the public recreate.

The Forest Plan should not include new Recreation Management Areas as it will make it harder and more costly for future trail projects. The existing Recreation Opportunity Spectrum is working well. The 42,823 acre loss of Semi Primitive Motorized lands in Kiavah needs to be addressed by creating that amount of motorized lands in the Forest Plan to rebalance the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum.


You can read the thousand plus page Sequoia Forest Plan Draft HERE:

  • Like 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Done.  Please folks, take a minute and send an email.

Edited by Gflo
  • Like 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent...

Dear Forest Planners,

I am very concerned about proposed OHV permitted trails being closed under a new Forest Sequoia Plan. There are so few places to ride with friends and family off-road in the State of California. I understand there are up to 30 miles of dirt biking single track trails at risk of closure. I urge you to not reduce the available off road opportunities currently allowed in the forest.




Carnegie OHV park expansion is at serious risk as well.

AB1086 is awaiting the Governors signature or veto as of 9/20/19


Just send this or something like this opposition to the Governor

I oppose AB1086. Please veto this unwise legislation that sets a precedent not in the best interests of California's parks.


One could go on about how This bill allows for the 3000 acre Expansion property that was purchased in 1998 for 9 million, for the mandated purpose of OHV recreation, to be sold today 21 years later for the same amount!! This would be a gargantuan net loss of millions of dollars to the State. Obviously the State Parks OHMVR Division could not possibly purchase even 1/4 this amount of land within 1.5 hours of San Francisco for this amount today. This Bill amounts to essentially a theft of California State Park Dept assets. So after 21 years of effort, expense and process; 3 EIRs have been completed and the various interests of stakeholders considered resulting in an approved General Plan by the State Parks OHMVR Division to expand Carnegie svra. This bill is really catering to the interests of one wealthy and politically connected neighbor stakeholder. Of the 278 California State Park units only 8 are recreational vehicle parks. Off highway vehicle recreation is obviously very, very regulated in California, and does not need to be further restricted with even more limited access. There is an established process, It is not acceptable to change the rules and laws at the end of said process because one party doesn't like the result. Noteworthy is the fact that the expansion property is the site of a former mining site, not exactly pristine wilderness. The expansion property is bordered also by Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Testing Laboratory and a former private weapons testing facility(SRI International).


Being a dirtbike rider certainly gives one an idea of what it's like being a minority segment of the population! It sucks...


Please excuse the slight hijack/piggyback, but it's all for a similar cause

  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Reply with:

  • Create New...