P.O. Box 111, Duluth, MN 55801
TEL: (218) 740-3175  FAX: (218) 740-3179 EMAIL: info@MnResponsibleRec.org  www.MnResponsibleRec.org

August 6, 2002

John Patterson, Program Manager
Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor
100 Centennial Office Building
658 Cedar Street
St. Paul, MN 55155

Dear Mr. Patterson,

MRR believes the DNR Motorized Trail Assistance Program promotes motorized use of public and private land in violation of Minnesota statutes and rules, without oversight or accountability, and with a plethora of unwanted outcomes. MRR believes that the following problems and unwanted program outcomes are endemic to this program:

• Program funds disbursed for activities violating environmental review laws
• Damage to public and private land
• No program obligation to repair damage
• Private property rights violated
• No program oversight or accountability
• Program funds bias DNR Trails and Waterways Division

We are writing to alert you to situations we believe will be of interest as you complete your audit of the DNR’s motorized trail assistance program. This communication follows a series of MRR communications with OLA:

• February 19 and May 6, 2002 MRR presented the OLA with a 3-ring binder of evidence of unwanted outcomes resulting from mismanagement and inappropriate use of public funds in the DNR’s motorized trail assistance program.
• May 1 MRR sent the OLA a letter communicating concerns about the importance of overcoming citizen and public employee reluctance to speak out about unwanted outcomes
• May 6 MRR presented evidence of internal DNR Trails and Waterways bias toward motorized recreation.

Below please find additional evidence presented as case studies illustrating what we believe are endemic problems with the DNR’s motorized trail assistance program. MRR urges the OLA to investigate these situations as an opportunity to better understand these problems and suggest appropriate reforms. To protect the privacy of citizens, contact information for individuals who can provide details regarding each case study will be provided in a separate communication.

Lake County: On December 14, 2001 the DNR released for public comment an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for its Moosewalk/Mooserun ATV Trail Proposal in the Finland State Forest. Environmental review laws preclude construction and implementation of such proposals during the review period. On January 1, 2002 $5000 in grant-in-aid funds were paid out for construction of one phase and section of the proposed ATV trail in December, 2001. MRR believes this construction was in violation of Minnesota Statute 116D.04 and Minnesota Rule Chapter 4410 prohibiting construction during EAW periods.

Cass County: In a January 14, 2002 ruling, the Honorable John P. Smith in Walker District Court ordered the DNR to complete Environmental Assessment Worksheets on proposals in its Off-highway System Plans for eight north central Minnesota counties. Environmental review laws preclude implementation of these plans prior to completion of the EAWs. MRR has been informed that the DNR has in fact been implementing its plans for the Spider Lake Recreation Area in the Foothills State Forest in Cass County and has been doing a significant amount of work in the area. MRR has requested information from the DNR regarding work performed and funding used in the Spider Lake Recreation Area since the January court order. MRR anticipates that the DNR has used motorized trail funds to complete this illegal work. MRR believes work performed in the Spider Lake Recreation Area since January, 2002 has been in violation of Minnesota Statute 116D.04 and Minnesota Rule Chapter 4410.

Clover Township, Hubbard County: MRR believes that officials of the Clover Township Board, which acts as fiscal agent and sponsor for the local Forest Riders ATV club in receiving DNR grant-in-aid funds, are simultaneously officials of the same ATV club. Citizens discovered related party transactions between the township and club while questioning the undue influence the ATV club appeared to have in opening a local bridge on private property to ATV use. Township officials, who simultaneously represent the Forest Riders ATV club, are regular recipients of substantial grant-in aid disbursements. (see attached "Trail Assistance Program Requests for Reimbursement") Citizens concerned that town officials were "double dipping" have forwarded their concerns to the state auditor.

Akeley, Hubbard County: Late last summer the Akeley Paul Bunyan ATV Trail Riders club installed a bridge over a state canoe route at the outlet of 11th Crow Wing Lake. The bridge was constructed less than 2 feet off the water making the canoe route unnavigable. Bridge construction also appears to have interfered with the functioning of two nearby culverts. No permits appear to be on record with the city, county, or local DNR office though ATV club members report that trail assistance program grants were provided to build this bridge. (The trail assistance program requires that permits be on file before funds are dispersed.) MRR believes construction of this bridge violates Minnesota’s Protected Streams and Rivers act which protects Minnesota’s waterways. After acknowledging the illegality of this bridge the local DNR Trails and Waterways staff worked with the local ATV club to raise the bridge to make it "legal". The bridge is still there today.

There are rather steep inclines leading down to this river crossing and the erosion is outrageous. They had to cut down trees and go through rushes to gain access to the river at this point. Now, snow and rain runoff go directly into the stream instead of being dispersed and filtered naturally. Video of the damage, as well as video of a mud cloud in the river resulting from the siting and construction of this bridge is available.

Two Harbors, Lake County: In 1998 residents of the Press Camp Road Neighborhood north of Two harbors terminated their easements with the local snowmobile club thus barring snowmobiles from crossing their property. To circumvent these closures the Voyageurs Snowmobile Club purchased a 40 acre landlocked parcel in the middle of the neighborhood with a loan from a local resort, Superior Shores. Today the club is trying to force its way back on to the land of adjacent unwilling private property owners using Minnesota’s cartway law. The club is using DNR motorized trails assistance funds to repay the land purchase loan. (see attached letter) MRR believes trail assistance funds should not be provided to clubs as a means of gaining access to private property and neighborhoods where landowners and the community have clearly expressed their desire to be free of snowmobile trails. We believe the Voyageurs Snowmobile Club is using grant-in-aid funds indirectly to violate the rights of private property owners and the wishes of the neighborhood.

Clover Township, Hubbard County: Regarding the above Clover Township Related Party Transactions case study, a local property owner incurred considerable expense (over $12,000 in legal funds to date) to convince the township to recognize that the bridge in question and which the township had tacitly sanctioned for use by ATVs is indeed on the property owner’s land. Private citizens should not have to spend thousands of dollars to protect their property from errant DNR trail assistance funded ATV clubs. MRR believes Minnesotans should not have to spend time and money to protect themselves from state funded snowmobile and ATV clubs determined to access or impact private property.

Soudan, Northern St. Louis County: Property owners in this community who chose to close their land to ATV riding are suffering from harassment by local ATV riders. One property owner says "he recently chased down two ATVers who had driven right past one of his no trespassing signs, only to discover one was a St. Louis County sheriff’s deputy while the other was a former Breitung police officer." Please see attached article

Lake County: Another property owner who chose to close their land to off-road vehicle use is experiencing continuous trespass and property damage.

The more gas registered off-road vehicle riders burn, the more gas-tax revenue the DNR Trails and Waterways Division earns. Millions of dollars in DNR motorized trail program funds have benefited not only local clubs and individuals but the DNR Trails and Waterways Division, which is largely subsidized by these "motorized recreation gas-tax funds", as well. MRR believes these funds have created a sense of entitlement among off-road vehicle riders who expect access not only to public and private land but to these public funds as well. MRR believes this sense of entitlement has been encouraged by DNR staff who feel a sense of obligation to serve the motorized interests whose gas-tax funds pay their salaries.

In the DNR’s own words, "The actual effect of [off-highway vehicle trail] designation will be to make funds available from the DNR…to local club[s]…" MRR believes gaining access to these funds motivates local snowmobile and ATV clubs to pressure the DNR (and counties and private landowners) to designate more trails. MRR believes the DNR Trails and Waterways Division is motivated to designate more trails and areas for motorized use because expanded use of off-road vehicles will generate more gas-tax revenue for the agency.

Furthermore, because program funds have for decades been distributed at the local level, local DNR, county, and even federal agency field staff are often discouraged from doing anything that would inhibit this flow of money and the open access to land it accompanies. MRR believes that local field staff who are members of these local communities, are often unwilling to incur the anger and hostility commonly witnessed among motorized clubs who don’t get their way. Public employees are also known to be directed by their superiors to "look the other way" when encountering damage to public land or illegal trail development.

The above assertions provide context for the following case studies:

In 1998, contrary to the land management policies of every neighboring state, Minnesota's DNR classified on an "interim" basis all existing trails in over 95% of Minnesota's state forest as open to ATVs, dirt-bike motorcycles, and four-wheel drive trucks.

In Rules Relating to Public Use of Recreation Areas, Part 6100.1950, Subpart 2 the DNR is required to utilize identified criteria in assessing and classifying state forests for off-highway vehicle use. In the DNR’s Statement of Need and Reasonableness for the rules the DNR notes that Minnesota Statue Sec 14.69 requires that "decisions [regarding forest classifications] made by the commissioner be based on substantial evidence" and should be "neither arbitrary or capricious." Rules also require the DNR "to regulate public use and promote public enjoyment of …state forest lands in ways that will leave them unimpaired and minimize conflicts among users"

Recognizing the potential for environmental damage and social conflict inherent in the DNR’s decision to open >95% of state forests to off-highway vehicles, MRR, along with representatives from the Sierra Club, the Izaak Walton League, Audubon, and Northeast Minnesotans for Wilderness, met with DNR Commissioner Allen Garber and staff in April, 1999 to request documentation supporting the classification of these forests and to express our desire for more restrictive classifications. At this meeting MRR and participants were told that no documentation existed. DNR Deputy Commissioner Steve Morse promised that hearings would be held on these forest classifications before they became "permanent" on January 1, 2000.

In December, 1999 MRR presented the DNR Commissioner with a report "Off-Highway Vehicles in Minnesota" documenting the statewide damage resulting from the DNR's open access policy and again urged the DNR to consider the evidence calling for more restrictive forest classifications. On January 1, 2000 without documentation, public hearings or even a press release acknowledging this significant action, the DNR "permanently" classified over 95% (approximately 3.8 million acres) of Minnesota's state forests as "open unless posted closed".

MRR believes this high-impact decision, which violated existing rules created to protect our environment, has been the most significant of all DNR off-highway vehicle planning decisions because it gave legal rights and access to a new class of high-impact machines (ATVs, dirt-bike motorcycles, and four-wheel drive trucks) to travel nearly unrestricted in throughout Minnesota’s state forests. We believe the DNR made this irresponsible and illegal policy decision in response to pressure from motorized groups. These special interest groups had come to believe they were entitled to this open access because the gas consumed by their machines generates millions of dollars in gas-tax revenue dedicated to providing them access to public land. MRR believes the DNR is vulnerable to this pressure because these gas-tax funds pay the salaries of DNR Trails and Waterways Division staff who administer the DNR Motorized Trail Assistance Fund.

Minnesota's citizens recognizing the potential for significant environmental effects from the DNR’s open access policy and proposals have petitioned the DNR to complete Environmental Assessment Worksheets on off-highway vehicle proposals for central and northern Minnesota. In each case these petitions, which were well-documented and authored by some of the states leading scientists and land managers, were rejected. As Steve Simmers, DNR Forest Recreation Coordinator, said February, 2001 in response to MRR member petitions for EAWs in North Central Minnesota, "Let's not go down that road unless we are forced, under the law, to do so." Despite a January, 2002 Walker District court order to complete EAWs on its Region 3 off-highway vehicle proposals the DNR continues to refuse to go down the road of environmental review.

Using motorized trail assistance funds in March of 2000 the DNR organized a conference to promote motorized recreation in Minnesota. This conference was cosponsored by the three main advocacy groups in Minnesota who represent the recipients of these funds: All-Terrain Vehicle Association, Minnesota Four-Wheel Drive Association, Amateur Riders Motorcycle Association, and Minnesota United Snowmobile Association. The DNR invited "special guest presenters" representing these interests and who where engaged in legal and other battles nationwide to gain unrestricted access to public lands. One speaker, Jerry Abboud, was executive director of a Colorado group that was suing the state of Colorado for implementing the very policies (designated routes only) Minnesota’s DNR was trying to implement at the time.

Another speaker invited to the DNR’s "Motorized 2000 Conference" was Tom Crimmons, a board member of the Blue Ribbon Coalition that seeks open access to public lands for mining, timber and fisheries extraction as well as motorized recreation. Blue Ribbon Coalition members include these industries as well as the Minnesota based advocacy groups listed above and Minnesota based off-road vehicle industries, Arctic Cat and Polaris. When MRR challenged what we believed was the inappropriate inclusion of the Blue Ribbon Coalition in this conference, our concerns were belittled by Trails and Waterways Division Director Dennis Asmussen in the attached 3/21/00 letter to Deputy Commission Steve Morse. In his letter to Deputy Commissioner Morse, Mr. Asmussen states "…the Blue Ribbon Coalition’s …mission, vision and values, …reads, with some exceptions, a lot like the Department’s."

The fact that the Director of the DNR division charged with administering the motorized trail assistance program believes the Blue Ribbon Coalition and the DNR have similar "missions, visions, and values" may largely explain in the most symbolic manner, the plethora of unwanted outcomes currently produced by this program. This fact, and the "Motorized 2000 Conference special guest presenters" sponsored by the DNR Trails and Waterways Division, illustrates how deeply inculcated this division has become in its commitment to serving the interests of motorized recreationists.

Attached please find a promotional flyer for the All-Terrain Vehicle Association distributed at the DNR booth at a recent Minnesota state fair. Witness also, the off-road vehicle club literature distributed in the lobby of the DNR headquarters in St. Paul. While MRR has made repeated appeals to DNR Commissioner Garber and Asssistant Commissioner Moore to display and distribute our information at these DNR sites, we were told no and have not been given the opportunity.

Also warranting investigation of DNR bias, it is reported that the mural in the new DNR office in Tower includes every form of motorized recreation without depicting non-motorized forms.

In 2002 the Minnesota legislature charged the DNR with conducting a motorized trail task force for making recommendations to the legislature in 2003. While registered off-road vehicle owners comprise less than 4% of the state’s population, 40% of those appointed by the DNR to serve on this task force represent motorized interests. Furthermore, while 50% of those appointed where nominated by organizations (All-terrain Vehicle Association, Minnesota Four-wheel Drive Association, Polaris Industries) to represent those organizations, the DNR refuses to acknowledge these affiliations. For example, the DNR appointed Lois Campbell, President, Minnesota Four Wheel Drive Association (nominated by this organization on the organization letterhead to represent the organization) to the task force. The DNR refuses to acknowledge Ms. Campbell’s official position with this advocacy organization and lists her on the task force roster simply as "a family business owner".

MRR believes the above situations are not unique to the locations and individuals involved in the local case studies examined. Rather, we believe that violation of state laws, related party transactions, lack of oversight and accountability, environmental damage, violation of public and private property rights, and biased DNR decisions are endemic to the DNR motorized trails assistance program.

We urge the Office of Legislative Auditor to investigate further the above situations and include a discussion of these case studies in your audit of the trail assistance program. We will call you to provide contact information for individuals at each location. In the meantime, please call on MRR at 218-740-3175 with any questions you might have.

Sincerely,

Jeff Brown
Co-director

3. Senator Ann Rest, Chair, Legislative Audit Commission

Representative Alice Hausman and Legislators
Mike Hatch, Attorney General

Jim Peters, MRR Attorney