Managers of Big Cypress National Preserve in Florida, already criticized by conservationists for their approach towards off-road vehicles, would increase the miles of ORV trails under all but one of the preliminary alternatives in the preserve's draft backcountry access management plan while holding non-motorized trails somewhat static. The one that doesn't increase ORV use would preserve the status quo.
Under the preliminary plan sent out for public comment, miles of ORV use would increase anywhere from the current 278 miles of primary ORV trails and no new secondary trails to 380 miles of primary ORV trails and 192 miles of secondary trails. Non-motorized trail miles would increase anywhere from 12 miles (through a realignment of the Florida National Scenic Trail) to 102 miles, with some of those miles reflected in canoe trails.
The five preliminary alternatives related to the Backcountry Access Plan were developed by a NPS interdisciplinary team. The preliminary alternatives are conceptual in nature and will continue to be refined based on public input and ongoing field work at the Preserve, including work on the Wilderness Study, the release said. Additionally, some possible ORV routes in the conceptual alternatives may be dropped from consideration if the Wilderness Study reveals them to be located in wilderness-eligible lands.
The various alternatives to increase ORV traffic were disappointing to Matthew Schwartz, executive director of the South Florida Wildlands Association.
"According to the National Park Service, the Big Cypress National Preserve constitutes 63 percent of the 'essential habitat' for the endangered Florida panther. It is also home to 30 other species of animals federally listed as endangered or threatened or listed by the State of Florida as threatened or 'species of special concern.' In addition, over 100 rare native Florida plants are on state or federal protected lists. Thousands of species of plants and animals are present in the preserve which do not receive any protection. With development in southwest Florida proceeding once again at breakneck pace, the ecological importance of this magnificent preserve - with perhaps more biodiversity than any other public land in the continental United States - increases by the day," he wrote in an email.
"In previous management plans, NPS has identified the following impacts from the use of recreational off-road vehicles in the preserve: compaction, and oxidation of soils; destruction of native plants and roots; facilitation of the spread of invasive plant species such as Brazilian pepper (through soil disturbance and seed dispersal); and disturbances to listed wildlife species," he added. "Non-motorized visitors to the preserve - the vast majority - must cope with human altered landscapes, off-road vehicle trails that are often reduced to mud pies during long wet seasons, and the odors and sounds of loud motors during a visit where an experience of nature is sought after.
"South Florida Wildlands is just now going through the alternatives - but years of work on this topic including a great deal of litigation is at stake here. The Off-Road Vehicle Management Plan written for the preserve in 2000 (written in response to a 1995 lawsuit) clearly laid out a plan which would limit the use of off-road vehicles to a designated trail system on sustainable substrates and conditions. That meant wet prairies and marshes and habitat for federally listed species would be off-limits to vehicles. It also stressed the importance of limiting the 'spatial extent' of off-road vehicles for the benefit of the preserve's natural resources and the non-motorized users. It is painful that we have to revisit this issue again and again and the National Park Service seems unable to arrive at a final off-road vehicle trail system that both provides access and the necessary protections."
Along with seeking comment on the backcountry access plan, Big Cypress officials are developing a wilderness study and potential wilderness proposal. Both the scoping period for the wilderness study and public review of the preliminary alternatives are open for public comment to March 11. Additionally, tw public workshops will be held to provide information on the preliminary alternatives so that the public can inform their comments related to the process. The first public workshop will be on Wednesday, February 10, from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. at the Tree Tops Broward County Park, 3900 SW 10th Ave, Davie, Florida. The second will be on Thursday, February 11, from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. at the Big Cypress Swamp Welcome Center, 33000 Tamiami Trail East, Ochopee, Florida.
While this review of preliminary alternatives is not a procedural requirement of the National Environmental Policy Act, the NPS is seeking feedback on the alternatives at this early stage in an effort to keep the planning process both public and transparent, the park staff said in a release. Input received during this review period will be used to refine and finalize the range of alternatives that will be analyzed in the draft Big Cypress National Preserve Backcountry Access Plan / Wilderness Study / Environmental Impact Statement (BAP/WS/EIS). While alternatives for the wilderness study portion of the plan have not been identified, the input received during this scoping period will be used to develop a range of wilderness alternatives for public review in the Draft BAP/WS/EIS.
“It is important to note that a preferred alternative has not been identified, nor have the impacts of the preliminary alternatives been analyzed at this stage of the planning process. Once fully developed, one of these alternatives could be identified as the National Park Service preferred alternative, or a new alternative could emerge that combines elements from some or all of the preliminary alternatives,” said Big Cypress Superintendent Tammy Whittington.
Comments can be provided online at the project website or by mail to - Superintendent, Big Cypress National Preserve, 33100 Tamiami Trail East, Ochopee, Florida 34141-1000.
Stories about:
Story Categories:
A copy of National Parks Traveler's financial statements may be obtained by sending a stamped, self-addressed envelope to: National Parks Traveler, P.O. Box 980452, Park City, Utah 84098. National Parks Traveler was formed in the state of Utah for the purpose of informing and educating about national parks and protected areas.
Residents of the following states may obtain a copy of our financial and additional information as stated below:
- Florida: A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR NATIONAL PARKS TRAVELER, (REGISTRATION NO. CH 51659), MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING 800-435-7352 OR VISITING THEIR WEBSITE. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL, OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE.
- Georgia: A full and fair description of the programs and financial statement summary of National Parks Traveler is available upon request at the office and phone number indicated above.
- Maryland: Documents and information submitted under the Maryland Solicitations Act are also available, for the cost of postage and copies, from the Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401 (410-974-5534).
- North Carolina: Financial information about this organization and a copy of its license are available from the State Solicitation Licensing Branch at 888-830-4989 or 919-807-2214. The license is not an endorsement by the State.
- Pennsylvania: The official registration and financial information of National Parks Traveler may be obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of State by calling 800-732-0999. Registration does not imply endorsement.
- Virginia: Financial statements are available from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 102 Governor Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
- Washington: National Parks Traveler is registered with Washington State’s Charities Program as required by law and additional information is available by calling 800-332-4483 or visiting www.sos.wa.gov/charities, or on file at Charities Division, Office of the Secretary of State, State of Washington, Olympia, WA 98504.
National parks and their natural resources belong to you. The National Parks Traveler works to ensure you know how these essential places are being cared for.
Sign Up For Our Weekly Newsletter
Unsubscribe at any time.
INN Member
The easiest way to explore RV-friendly National Park campgrounds.
Here’s the definitive guide to National Park System campgrounds where RVers can park their rigs.
Our app is packed with RVing- specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 national parks.
You’ll also find stories about RVing in the parks, tips helpful if you’ve just recently become an RVer, and useful planning suggestions.
Comments
NPT refers to "non-motorized trail miles" in Big C using finite numbers of miles which doesn't make sense due to the fact that every square foot of Big C can be hiked anytime of the day and night. Hiking is totally unlimited throughout the 729,000 acres of Big C. so to allude that there is some limit seems quite incorrect to this reader. In order to entirely cover all of Big C on foot one can hike 5,000,000 miles or more before hitting the same dirt twice. In the case of ORV's just in the original 582,000 acres of Big C they could run for 2,400,000 miles before running the same spot twice. Trust me, it is challenging to understand how huge a land area Big C is without doing the math I have done.
Looks like Mr Schwartz and I will have to disagree on some of his quotes allowed in this NPT article even though he and I worked together recently to halt progress of a very environmentally destructive bike path called River of Grass Greenway that would have sliced it's way through 50 or so miles of Big Cypress cypress forests adjacent to Tamiami Trail/US 41.
The "importance" of Big Cypress to different species is a static condition in my opinion due to habitat only being able to support varying capacities of any species of flora or fauna. I agree that housing development is again on a roll but as it gobbles up available habitat, species that are displaced will not necessarily be moving to Big Cypress (increasing it's importance) since as with most habitats in South Florida the "inns are full" and any attempts to alter the natural carrying capacities usually result in a mess as has happened with panthers that now number more than 200% of what the available habitat south of Lake Okeechobee can properly support.
For years Mr Schwartz has opined against the very ORV trails he and many others use to hike and cycle the Big Cypress (so much for the ORV mud pie effect) but I guess that "selectively informing people" is what raw politics is all about. His continued reference to invasive plant seed dispersal by ORV's always has yielded chuckles of intellectual pity from real professionals at Big C meetings due to the real professionals understanding that wildlife (e.g. birds, bears, deer, hogs, turkeys etc.) will always be spreading seeds in Big C and that due to the existing ORV plan of 2000 - ORV contribution to that problem has been reduced by more than 98% since their access into Big C has been cut by at least that amount if not more.
Yet a select few continue attempts to further destroy this Florida/Gladesmen cultural tradition. It is difficult for me to understand this ceaseless attack when these activists have already caused access trails to be reduced from around 25,000 miles of trails down to approximately 400 primary miles with somewhat less secondary trails. Could it be just plain old bigotry or is someone paying these folks "piece work" rates (e.g. $100.00 a mile) for every public access trail mile removed?
I want our 1200 Miles of trails that was MANDATED by Congress. Yes the Congress of the United States of America. The 1200 miles of trails was cut to 400 miles by an illegal frivilous lawsuit against the NPS & BCY.Congress did not properly approve the reduction in trails!!!
Over 100 miles of so called secondary trails are closed now which include the best areas to do primitive backcountry camping. The secondary trials were closed while a study an environmental being done. They should remain open until the study is complete & proves that out traditional use with swamp buggys, atv's & airboats is environmentally damaging the area. Mean time Indians are allowed to roam day & night on the same machines that the NPS restricts us on. Our machines that the anglo man invented are traditional to them but shund as traditional to the hearitage of the anglo man. Anglo man is being discriminated against by there own inventions.
Therre has never been any evidence of a swmap buggy or airboat causing a ruining environmental effect on the big cypress. It obvious that the previous unrestricted use of these methods of travel since beginning of time have not polluted the BCY or Everglades yet we are the micron it is blamed on.
Obviously the problems have been caused by big business and Government vis the manipulations of the waterflow.
Please stop blaming use Sportsman!
As we know, Congress invited an enormity of problems in Big Cypress by calling it a "preserve." In that case, we can agree that traditional uses should be "consistent." No one should get special treatment.
That said, I fail to see how ORVs are any way to see a backcountry wilderness--or to treat our public lands. But there again, our government keeps picking favorites. Want a wind farm? No problem. We can call the death toll on birds and wildlife "collateral damage." Better yet, we can call it a "side effect" and avoid the word damage entirely.
Last night, President Obama talked at great length about a kinder and gentler country. Here is where we keep coming up short--in the halls of government itself. I sympathize with people who feel their country has abandoned them--even if I disagree with their lifestyle. I wish everyone seeing Big Cypress would walk or row a boat, but yes, government does break its promises. And here is how people react.
Skipper...
I'm caucasian, but ORVs are far from my version of "traditional to the hearitage of the anglo man". Frankly, again speaking as a white man, I'm embarrassed to be associated with your racist arguments.