The Quiet Disappearance of Cross-Country Travel in the Blue Mountains Forest Plan

The U.S. Forest Service says its new Preliminary Draft Land Management Plan for the Malheur, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests is about “balance” and “access.” But for anyone who rides, hunts, hauls firewood, or recreates using motorized vehicles off-road, the reality is this: cross-country travel is being erased — without the agency ever saying so out loud.

Let’s look at the key section where it happens — the Transportation Infrastructure chapter of the plan. On the surface, the language looks harmless, even supportive:

“The road system supports land management activities, wildfire operations, recreational and hunting use, access to private land in-holdings and commercial ventures, and Forest Service administrative needs.” “The trail system accommodates current and reasonably foreseeable motorized and non-motorized recreational needs.”

Sounds good, right? Roads and trails for recreation, hunting, and motorized use. So what’s the problem?

🛑 What’s Missing Is the Warning Sign

This section never mentions cross-country travel — not once. There’s no discussion of open motorized use across the landscape. No mention of preserving long-standing access used for gathering firewood, hunting camps, or checking on livestock. And there’s a reason for that.

The plan states:

“Site-specific designation of roads, trails, and motorized areas is outside the scope of forest planning and is addressed in a national forest’s travel plan.”

At first glance, this might seem like a bureaucratic footnote. But in reality, this is the doorway through which cross-country travel disappears.

⚖️ Default Closure Under Federal Rule

Under the 2005 Travel Management Rule, all motorized travel is prohibited except on routes or areas explicitly designated as open. If the Forest doesn’t say it’s allowed — it’s closed by default.

So when the plan says it’s deferring those decisions to a future Travel Management Plan — but provides no standard, no guideline, and no suitability statement supporting cross-country travel — it’s setting the stage for a system where only designated routes remain, and everything else becomes off-limits.

🎯 The Illusion of Motorized Access

The language in this section is carefully worded to suggest nothing is changing. It talks about maintenance of roads, cooperation with counties, and access for hunting and recreation. But what it does not do is:

• Commit to keeping any of the existing open areas for motorized use

• Identify cross-country travel as a suitable use anywhere in the plan

• Preserve traditional uses like hauling firewood or setting up hunting camps off trail

• Protect legacy roads or trails that don’t meet the new designation criteria

  
  

Instead, the Forest quietly lays out a new system in which motorized access only exists on designated routes — and everything else is off-limits.

🚧 Cross-Country Travel Erased by Omission

In short: there’s no need to close the forest roads — if you just stop mentioning them at all.

By failing to acknowledge or protect cross-country use, and by codifying a transportation framework that centers solely on designated roads and trails, the Forest Service is building a new baseline — one that normalizes restriction and marginalizes traditional access.

If you're someone who believes the forest should remain open for all — not just for those willing to walk 10 miles into a trail system — then this is your warning.

📢 What Can You Do?

• Submit a public comment opposing the loss of cross-country motorized travel and asking that the plan include a standard or suitability statement protecting it.

• Call out the language in the Transportation Infrastructure section for what it is: misleading and incomplete.

• Ask your county commissioners to demand that long-standing motorized uses — including off-road and cross-country travel — be explicitly protected.

  
  

The Forest Service may not say it’s closing the forest. But if they remove cross-country travel from the plan and then lock the gate later in Travel Management — the result is the same.