Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Specifics on new OHV rules in Phoenix area?

Recommended Posts

I'm researching specifics on the new "Curb Your Dust" initiative in and around the Phoenix area, which limits OHV use. I've been looking on several sites, all of which end up sending me here: http://www.pr.state.az.us/partnerships/ohv/ohv_dust.html

There have been previous posts on here regarding some specific areas and/or information people have "heard". So far, this is what I've discovered: The areas in and around Phoenix are considered "Area A". On days with High Pollution Advisories (HPA) you cannot operate OHV's anywhere within Area A. It goes on to say, "In addition, cities in Area A now restrict the operation of motorized vehicles on many unpaved roads and vacant lots." This is followed by a link that is supposed to give you a phone number list, but doesn't work. Does anyone know how we can find specifics around the "many unpaved roads and vacant lots" it refers to? Please do not share guesses or rumors, I'm looking for factual info. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm researching specifics on the new "Curb Your Dust" initiative in and around the Phoenix area, which limits OHV use. I've been looking on several sites, all of which end up sending me here: http://www.pr.state.az.us/partnerships/ohv/ohv_dust.html

There have been previous posts on here regarding some specific areas and/or information people have "heard". So far, this is what I've discovered: The areas in and around Phoenix are considered "Area A". On days with High Pollution Advisories (HPA) you cannot operate OHV's anywhere within Area A. It goes on to say, "In addition, cities in Area A now restrict the operation of motorized vehicles on many unpaved roads and vacant lots." This is followed by a link that is supposed to give you a phone number list, but doesn't work. Does anyone know how we can find specifics around the "many unpaved roads and vacant lots" it refers to? Please do not share guesses or rumors, I'm looking for factual info. Thanks!

what specifics are you looking for? if you want to know the number of vacant lots, roads, locations and such, im sure the cities hold the information about every square foot they own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good question. I should have been more specific in my original post. I think I was just frustrated and was looking for any info I could find. I think I'll start a thread asking for riding spots around town the people know are still open or are closed now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

State trust land is closed but state still sells permits. It is ambigous. Ride unless it is marked closed at the entrance or till some tells you leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
State trust land is closed but state still sells permits. It is ambigous. Ride unless it is marked closed at the entrance or till some tells you leave.

Not all STL is closed.........yet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Ken Lamb. Sent out today

Recreation on State Trust Land:

Clearing the air on the dust issue

It's been over thirty years since the Land Department issued its first Recreation Permit.

In the preceding sixty-three years, little thought or attention was given to the impact of

recreation on State Trust Land. Today, recreation is big business and often with an

equally big impact. Thousands of dollars per year are spent pursuing various passions &

hobbies that often involve the use of State Trust Land. The impact of this recreation

ranges from hardly noticeable to down-right destructive.

Managing State Trust Land has been an evolutionary process from the start. Early in

the Department's history, the primary use of State Trust Land was for Grazing and

Agriculture. Indeed, much ofthe 9.3 million acres of the Trust Land portfolio is leased or

permitted for those endeavors. However, as Arizona has diversified and the population

grown, demand for Commercial and Residential Development has moved to the

forefront. The result has been record numbers in revenue generated for the Trust and its

beneficiaries. In the past 5 years, the Department has raised more revenue from

Development than the previous 50 years combined.

While demand for commercial and residential development has increased, so has

demand for recreational use of State Trust Land. Unfortunately, the minimal revenues

associated with Individual & Family Recreation Permits, do not even benefit the Trust,

but are instead sent to the Legislature's General Fund (recent legislative changes allows

the Department to recover some of the processing cost thru fee increases, but the funds do

not go to the trust or trust beneficiaries). Consequently, Recreation Permits have always

posed a degree of liability to the trust without real compensation.

Until recently, the amount of liability posed by recreation remained unnoticed. But

with sweeping environmental & dust regulations handed down from the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA), and subsequent laws and ordinances by various cities and

counties pursuant to Senate Bill 1552, the Department like any other reasonable land

owner/manager has been exploring options to limit its potential liability. Most of these

regulations are limited to a boundary called "Area A" largely within Maricopa County,

and the Department is primarily concerned with Trust Lands within that area.

The Land Department is not a regulatory agency like the EPA, but rather it acts as a

trustee with a fiduciary duty to the trust beneficiaries. In this respect the recreation

dilemma is purely an economic puzzle of costs and benefits, not one motivated by

politics or idealism.

The Land Department is not inherently opposed to recreation on State Trust Land. But

the Land Department has a fiduciary duty to the trust it manages, and to the beneficiaries

it helps to fund. Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law defines fiduciary duty as "a duty

obligating a fiduciary (as an agent or trustee) to act with loyalty and honesty and in a

manner consistent with the best interests of the beneficiary of the fiduciary relationship

(as a principal or trust beneficiary)". In short, when it comes to recreation, the Land

Servillg Arizolla's Schools alld Public lI",fifufiolls Sillce 19/5

1616 West Adams Phoenix, AZ 85007 www.land.state.az.us

Department must be prudent in permitting certain types of activities, especially when

such activities pose a potentially significant liability to the Trust.

The Department's numerous lessees and commercial permittees, who lease or are

permitted by contract to use certain parcels of State Trust Land, are required to abide by

Department policies, and all Federal, State, and local ordinances, as a condition of their

lease or contract. This is the Department's way of protecting the trust.

Furthermore, the proceeds of these leases and commercial permits financially benefit

the trust beneficiaries. It is for this reason that the Department has explored the

alternative Special Land Use Permit (SLUP) as a means for recreation on State Trust

Land within Area A. What is necessary is an applicant who is able and willing to comply

with strict state and local ordinances to manage trail systems and prevent illegal dust

generation in a specified area. A SLUP of this sort might allow for a commercial business

to operate by charging a fee for service; or it might be issued to a non-profit or even a

government agency that has an interest in keeping certain areas open for public

recreation.

The Land Department has made repeated and similar offers, to certain organizations

who are better suited to this type of management, to evaluate and process their

applications and proposals; and the offer still stands. However, as long as a known

recreational area remains open, unmaintained and continues to generate dust, then the

trust is left to foot-the-bill. It is not within our fiduciary duty to allow that to happen.

The Land Department is accepting applications for Recreational Special Land Use

Permits at 1616 W Adams, Phoenix, AZ 85007. The Department advices prospective

applicants to request a pre-application meeting to discuss their proposal; the application

fee is non-refundable and approval of the application is not guaranteed. For more

information please contact Kenneth Lamb, Recreation Administrator for the State Land

Department @ (602)542-3322 or by email @klamb@land.az.gov.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if we pay to lease it, folks can't hike on it or bike on it? That might be worth the money, just to see their faces when our hired rentacops run them off. Waaa Waaaa! I can hear them now. hahahahaha Imagine the exclusive use are of Granite Mtn....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, if we pay to lease it, folks can't hike on it or bike on it? That might be worth the money, just to see their faces when our hired rentacops run them off. Waaa Waaaa! I can hear them now. hahahahaha Imagine the exclusive use are of Granite Mtn....

Can you imagine what it would cost? Better yet could you imagine what the fine would be IF there was dust issues? :):D:worthy::ride::banghead:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose the issue would be one of controlling the boundary to keep unauthorized users out. The land managers don't do it because they have little incentive to do it well. Dust suppressant would have to be used on the perimeter trails to keep the dust from crossing ownership boundaries (per the county's rule). A title 5 dust permit would need to be sought, which would include a dust plan. Then, if you work the plan, you won't get fines.

The county has been very generous with those who have a dust plan. It's the repeat offenders that get the fines. Usually because they operate knowing they are in violation.

So, it's not impossible. It just takes some backbone and a group of people who really want to make it happen. AZOHVC is turning up the heat on the state and Scottsdale from what I understand. Donate money if you don't have the time to get involved. That's what some of us have/are doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suppose the issue would be one of controlling the boundary to keep unauthorized users out. The land managers don't do it because they have little incentive to do it well. Dust suppressant would have to be used on the perimeter trails to keep the dust from crossing ownership boundaries (per the county's rule). A title 5 dust permit would need to be sought, which would include a dust plan. Then, if you work the plan, you won't get fines.

The county has been very generous with those who have a dust plan. It's the repeat offenders that get the fines. Usually because they operate knowing they are in violation.

So, it's not impossible. It just takes some backbone and a group of people who really want to make it happen. AZOHVC is turning up the heat on the state and Scottsdale from what I understand. Donate money if you don't have the time to get involved. That's what some of us have/are doing.

Throw some dollar figures out there for us. How would we control the boundaries? I'm all for it if it is feasible. I have pretty much chalked up P & D as another riding area that we lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do I have to provide all the answers? Seems to me folks just sit back and wonder "why do I have to do anything". What seems to get missed is there is a reason that P&D wasn't closed 7yrs ago. Everyone else sits around and enjoys riding there, but doesn't bother to even ask what they can do. That's my beef.

Rant over, now, the numbers.

Wire fencing costs $5-7k/mi + labor(+/-). Most of the boundary is already fenced, repairs need to be made, new fences put in to exclude already closed areas. This was never done by ASLD.

Gates cost about $500 each (metal tube, installed). Changeable combination locks would be the easiest to install so that those who are allowed access, can get in. Probably 10 gates would be needed.

Security could be handled by remote sensors, trail counters placed at entry points (the ones with a camera attached). A rentacop could be employed as needed, especially at night. Use technology to tell you where the unauthorized access hot spots are and beef up from there.

Parking areas would need to be stabilized along with trails near houses/property boundary. It costs about $.10-16/sqft to stabilize an entry road or staging area using chemicals. I can email you a study that details cost. AZOHVC has this study already.

Initial cost is the hard part. Maintenance is easier of course. I figure initial cost would be in the $50k range plus lease cost (a big unknown right now). Yearly maintenance costs could be $20-30k. That's to install 10 gates, stabilize two staging areas totalling 6-8acres, a mile of fence and misc. spraying of boundary trails. Just a rough number, though.

It's possible if we pass the hat. Might be cheaper to fight the political battle in the long run since costs always rise and I really don't think this is about controlling the dust in Scottsdale. They never liked us, and never will. We have to fight for every trail. Are you ready?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I still ride there.

I wouldn't publicize that dude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone concerned about the dust ordinances in the Phoenix metro area, please contact the Arizona Off-Highway Vehicle Coalition (AZOHVC). This non-profit organization has been fighting for OHV rights for several years and has retained a lawyer/lobbyist to lead our fight. They've been doing amazing work. Be sure to visit their website ( http://www.azohvc.com/ ) and read the reports from Jeff Gursh.

AZOHVC needs volunteers so if you're interested in protecting your right to ride in Arizona, please consider offering your time/help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do I have to provide all the answers? Seems to me folks just sit back and wonder "why do I have to do anything". What seems to get missed is there is a reason that P&D wasn't closed 7yrs ago. Everyone else sits around and enjoys riding there, but doesn't bother to even ask what they can do. That's my beef.

Rant over, now, the numbers.

Wire fencing costs $5-7k/mi + labor(+/-). Most of the boundary is already fenced, repairs need to be made, new fences put in to exclude already closed areas. This was never done by ASLD.

Gates cost about $500 each (metal tube, installed). Changeable combination locks would be the easiest to install so that those who are allowed access, can get in. Probably 10 gates would be needed.

Security could be handled by remote sensors, trail counters placed at entry points (the ones with a camera attached). A rentacop could be employed as needed, especially at night. Use technology to tell you where the unauthorized access hot spots are and beef up from there.

Parking areas would need to be stabilized along with trails near houses/property boundary. It costs about $.10-16/sqft to stabilize an entry road or staging area using chemicals. I can email you a study that details cost. AZOHVC has this study already.

Initial cost is the hard part. Maintenance is easier of course. I figure initial cost would be in the $50k range plus lease cost (a big unknown right now). Yearly maintenance costs could be $20-30k. That's to install 10 gates, stabilize two staging areas totalling 6-8acres, a mile of fence and misc. spraying of boundary trails. Just a rough number, though.

It's possible if we pass the hat. Might be cheaper to fight the political battle in the long run since costs always rise and I really don't think this is about controlling the dust in Scottsdale. They never liked us, and never will. We have to fight for every trail. Are you ready?

You don't HAVE to do anything......you brought up the issues so I thought you might have the answers is all.....and lo and behold.......you do! 👍

I would appreciate you emailing me the study or if AZOHVC has it already on their website that will work. exmlb1@cox.net

Your last line tells it all.....City of Scottsdale never wanted us there and never will.......that is why I have given up that area (altho I didn't ride it that often anyway and the Tonto next to it is just as good) I'm ready. Let's fight for that and have them appropriate your kids park money to this cause.:worthy:

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:

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...