When the Shoshone National Forest released its proposed travel management plan this fall, more than 7,800 public comments poured in on the potential changes to the forest’s trails and roads. The years-long process is designed to designate a “sustainable system of roads, trails, and areas that are open for motor vehicle use” in the Shoshone, according to forest officials.

The debate over the plan has been raging for more than six years, with passionate opinions on both sides of the issue. Initial meetings and field trips were conducted in the summer of 2015 to gain a better understanding of the current on-the-ground situation with interested members of the public. A proposed action was then released in 2016, alongside additional meetings and field trips.

There were three alternative plans initially offered, but after public comments were interpreted by Forest Service officials, a fourth alternative was offered.

“The fourth alternative … is a direct result of the public comments we received during the public comment period for the preliminary Environmental Assessment in the summer of 2020,” said Shoshone National Forest spokesperson, Kristie Salzmann.

The plan allows for more off-trail snowmobiling in the High Lakes Wilderness Study Area, increases trails for use by motorized all-terrain vehicles, closes some trails and roads and makes changes to travel regulations.

The plan has been highly debated on both sides. A 30-day public comment period concluded on Nov. 18. Of the more than 7,800 comments received, only 646 were original versus form letters sponsored by various groups for and against the proposal. 

Powell resident Howard Sanders, who is a member of the Shoshone Back Country Horsemen, is against increasing motorized traffic in the forest. 

“I am opposed to any additional off-road recreational vehicle (ORV) travel in the Clarks Fork, Greybull, or Wapiti districts. ORVs tend to not stay on the trail or road, especially when not supervised,” he wrote in comments to forest officials. 

“I see too much of this behavior when I am on horseback. These vehicles raise too much dust and disturb wildlife, some of which are already stressed,” Sanders wrote. “I do not think bad behavior should be rewarded by adding additional travel roads and trails. I oppose any additional areas being opened up to snowmobiling and for the same trespass reasons.”

The Back Country Horsemen contract with the Forest Service to keep trails open, clearing trees and repairing eroded areas through the summer months. The work is all on a voluntary basis.

Powell’s Shaleas Harrison also opposed more access for motorized vehicles.

“The Forest Service should recognize that the Shoshone Forest is the horse forest. It is not the Big Horns,” she wrote.

Powell resident Tate McCoy wished to make it clear that the High Lakes area should remain open to over-snow travel.

“I strongly encourage keeping the entire High Lakes Wilderness Study Area open to snowmobiling. In my opinion it shouldn’t even be up for discussion!” he said. “Congress made it very clear years ago that its intent was to protect snowmobiling rights in this entire area — not to exclude any. The area currently open to snowmobiling is all used and enjoyed by many outdoor enthusiasts like me. Decreasing the size of this recreation area in any way will have lasting negative effects on public use and enjoyment and is NOT what was intended for this area.”

Toby Sheets, a member of the Northwest Wyoming Off Highway Alliance and a Powell resident, called for additional ATV trails.

“More trails should be opening up with more loops available,” Sheets said. “We all pay taxes to keep the Forest working, so please allow our tax dollars to be used in OUR best interests, and for our kids’ and grandkids’ interests.”

Former Park County Commissioner Loren Grosskopf protested the process, including recent virtual meetings. “The public should have that access to face-to-face meetings and discussions,” he said in his comments.

Grosskopf also protested the difficulty reading, following and understanding environmental assessments and collateral materials.

“As an retired ex-Park County, Wyoming commissioner with years of experience with the Shoshone planning process, I find it extraordinarily difficult to follow the EA and its attachments/exhibits supporting the alternatives,” he said, adding “In consideration of how long the travel planning process has been already, rushing it through without actual public examination of the maps and exhibits with Forest Service personnel to explain them, is unjustified.”

The current Board of Park County Commissioners had raised similar concerns, calling the virtual meetings “very difficult to understand.” They called for the process to be suspended until in-person hearings could be scheduled.

Commissioners also said they preferred the status quo to any of the alternatives put forward by forest officials.

“With only 17% of [Shoshone National Forest] open for motorized use, if more roads are closed, that creates a more restrictive area where more people are operating in a smaller area, resulting in greater resource damage that we would like to avoid at all costs,” the board wrote in part.

There were many comments from people outside the area, including some who described themselves as Shoshone visitors. Others simply want to protect all forests or their favorite activities inside the forest. 

Michael J. Vandeman, of Colorado Springs, advised prohibiting all transportation modes in forests.

“The parks aren’t gymnasiums or racetracks or even human playgrounds. They are WILDLIFE HABITAT,” Vandeman said in his comment. 

He added that “even kayaking and rafting, which give humans access to the entirety of a water body, prevent the wildlife that live there from making full use of their habitat, and should not be allowed.” 

Vandeman also shared a profile filled with personal information, including his current interests (such as sailing) and favorite foods (such as pomegranate juice, sushi, pumpkin soup and olallieberry pie). His listed pet peeves included invasion or destruction of wildlife habitat, “especially by vehicles, such as ATVs, horses and burros, jet skis, mountain bikes, rafts, snowmobiles, and other ORVs.” 

Vandeman said he also disapproves of motor vehicles, road and highway construction, violence and wasting time.