Dennis Larratt Comments to State Parks Board

May 7, 2010

Dennis Larratt Comments to State Parks Board,

May 7, 2010

Representing the Rocky Mountain Enduro Circuit and Colorado TPA

1. The Colorado OHV Registration Program is a nationally recognized model program for responsible OHV recreation, maintenance, and education.
2. The Colorado OHV community has been the leader in the following:
   1. writing the OHV Registration Act, and obtaining a fee increase
   2. working cooperatively with State Parks on implementation and continuous improvement in the program
   3. writing Sound Level legislation
   4. cooperating with other groups in developing enhanced enforcement legislation
3. The Colorado OHV Program does not need a major revision for the following reasons:
   1. It has proven successful, as attested by increasing registrations, the letter just received by Mr. Winstanley from ALL Colorado Forest Supervisors, and the BLM.
   2. But all programs can improve, and we are not opposed to the proposal put forth by State Parks staff on Strategic Planning (November – April)
   3. The OHV Program passed the recent audit in better shape than most State Parks programs
4. There are a group of anti-motorized groups that have been trying to reduce the effectiveness of the program, and get effective control of it very actively for over a yea
   1. To this, I encourage you to ask why the same groups don’t spend the same amount of effort in trying to establish mountain bike and hiking programs that work with the same vigor as the OHV community in partnering with State Parks to generate funding for trail improvements.
   2. Look at the Law Enforcement statistics:
      1. HB 08-1069 reports shows DOW only wrote 20 citations and 5 warnings in a year.
      2. State Parks master database shows that State Parks, BLM and USFS citation rates continue a 5 year rate of decline, which is a clear indication of improved compliance, despite increased law enforcement efforts.
5. One of the proposals before the Parks Board is to revise the OHV Subcommittee.
   1. This is not needed, as everyone except the anti-motorized crowds have been largely satisfied with the performance of the subcommittee.
   2. Putting 3 anti-motorized members on the board, with veto power would be akin to putting 3 members PETA and/or ASPCA on the Wildlife Commission with veto power.
   3. If you are revamping the OHV Subcommittee, the State Trails Committee and all other subcommittees should receive the same scrutiny at the same time.
6. Summary – Please leave a good thing alone.