Public invited to comment on the largest outdoor recreation initiative taken on by the county
By Gwendolyn Craig
Franklin County is proposing a 500-mile multi-use trail network for off-road vehicle drivers, hikers, bikers, horseback riders and other outdoor recreationists.
Phil Hans, director of the county’s Office of Economic Development and Tourism, called the project “the most significant outdoor recreation project the county has undertaken that appeals to many different user groups.” The county already has a snowmobile trail network maintained by volunteer organizations.
The Adirondack Explorer thanks its advertising partners. Become one of them.
The Franklin County Legislature has determined the project could have significant environmental impacts and is currently accepting public comments on a draft plan that describes potential environmental concerns. The comments are due by 1 p.m. on Friday.
Some residents, including local town officials, are already concerned about the safety, environmental and quality-of-life impacts of such a network. Some are critical of the maps in the draft document, and would like a better depiction of the proposed routes.
The scoping document was published on May 2 and shows a trail system on county, state and privately owned lands and roads. It’s unclear how many miles of the proposed trails are in the Adirondack Park. Some of the trail routes cross outside of the park’s boundary.
The county will need to secure easements, usher the passage of local laws for the use of off-road vehicles on certain rights-of-way and collect various state Department of Transportation, Department of Environmental Conservation and Adirondack Park Agency permits.
The Adirondack Explorer thanks its advertising partners. Become one of them.
It’s unclear how much the project will cost or how long construction will take. Hans said the county is working with engineers to factor a cost per mile and funding will come from a variety of sources. The county plans to apply for state grant opportunities and use occupancy tax collection funding for the project.
The north end of the county has fewer land use restrictions, Hans said. As a result, a trail from Malone to St. Regis Falls could be the first to open.
But the county is first following steps required under the state environmental quality review act. Hans said once public comments on the draft scoping document are received, they’ll be added to the record and a public hearing will be scheduled.
The draft scoping document acknowledges potential negative impacts to fish and wildlife, surface water and wetlands, soils, noise and air quality. It notes that studies, surveys and other evaluations must be completed before the trail work can begin. It identifies some possible mitigation efforts to address potential negative impacts, such as requiring off-road-vehicles to have noise emission controls on their mufflers, establishing a trail user education program and closing certain trails during mud season.
The Adirondack Explorer thanks its advertising partners. Become one of them.
According to the document, the county believes by being the lead agency, “potential environmental impacts and public safety issues can be managed by utilizing the combined resources of the County and local municipalities.”
The project’s goal, the document says, “is to provide a safe, environmentally responsible multi-use recreational trail system that provides a network of diverse experiences in as many different areas of the County as possible.”
Rich Brandt, a town of Franklin council member, said he was not aware of the project proposal until a local resident sent him the county’s draft plans and public comment period last week. He was surprised to have not heard directly from the county. “The Town of Franklin,” he said, “would have more miles of motorized trail use than most other towns in the county.”
Hans said all town boards were notified and municipalities were sent a letter about the county’s decision to be the lead agency on the project in February. For more than a decade, Hans said, some local groups proposed a countywide, multi-use trail.
The Adirondack Explorer thanks its advertising partners. Become one of them.
“(T)he County saw the benefits that other destinations enjoyed and decided it was time to organize the efforts to drive progress more expeditiously,” Hans said.
“All landowners whose land we’d like permission to use have been notified,” Hans added. “I personally would not allow this process to move forward without the landowner first being notified. I wanted no surprises. Most reactions were positive and those that were not we readily identified to make sure we had alternate routes.”
In his talks with Franklin residents, Brandt said reactions have been mixed. The majority, he said, are not in favor of off-road vehicles used on public roads. Brandt said he’s concerned about cyclists, runners, ATVs and cars sharing some of the paved roads, especially those that have little to no shoulder.
Part of the proposed trail route goes near sections of the Bloomingdale Bog where many people bird-watch.
“I don’t think that those would work well together at all — ATVs and wildlife viewing,” Brandt said.
Anne Stowers, a resident of Vermontville near Loon Lake, said she is not in favor of an off-road vehicle trail network. She moved to the area two years ago from Oswego County, she said, in part to get away from ATV trails.
“All of a sudden it was ATV central, and we did not like it at all,” she said. “We thought this place would not ever have to face such an issue. I just always thought this was established as forever wild, a place that valued natural resources and the beauty and the solitude. I believe most people who live here do, and most people who visit here.”
Franklin County Legislature Chairman Edward Lockwood did not return the Explorer’s message seeking comment.
Hans said some town boards have already passed resolutions in favor of the trail proposal. The town of Franklin and town of Vermontville were expected to discuss the trail at their board meetings this week.
Comments on the draft scoping document may be sent to the Franklin County Office of Economic Development & Tourism, 355 West Main Street, Suite 428, Malone, NY 12953, Attention: Bobbie Keenan. Comments may also be emailed to [email protected] with the subject title “Proposed Multi-Use Recreational Trail System.”
To learn more, go to https://www.franklincountyny.gov/business/multi_use_trails_draft_scoping_documents.php.
Top photo: One of the proposed trail maps for the Franklin County Multi-Use Recreational Trail System. Screenshot from the county’s draft scoping document
Support Adirondack Journalism
As a nonprofit, we rely on support from our community of Explorers to help power this work, bringing you news and information, with no paywalls or strings attached.
While we appreciate gifts of any amount, setting up a recurring donation provides steady funding, allowing for long-term planning and expanded coverage on emerging issues in the Adirondacks.
Ya. That area has enough of a problem with off roading/mudding vehicles. You open up a trail network for off roadinf and nobody else will be able to or want to use it for walking. It will be a disaster. Not to mention the environmental disaster it will be.
“The trail system will be located on various County-owned lands, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) owned lands, Adirondack Park Agency (APA) owned land, and privately owned parcels. Portions of the Project will utilize existing County, Town, Village, and New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) owned roadways within Franklin County, and a small segment in St. Lawrence County.”
Plan was written by morons, the APA does not own land…
Having climbed some of the high peaks I am aware of how fragile the environment is and how long it takes to recover from even hikers.
Where I live in Pennsylvania has had ongoing problems with off-road vehicles and the arrogance of the people who use them. They have run both hikers and bicyclists off the trail with their high speeds and little care for sharing the use of the trails.
The plan is a wolf in sheep’s clothing trying to disguise a recreational plan which is largely an ATV/ORV plan. Franklin County lost on this year’s ago in the court when they learned Motor Vehicle law actually has requirements. The county’s SEQRA documentation and mapping is a disaster in the identification of environmental impacts and their supposed ideas for mitigation. Laughable to even consider how you can mitigate the noise! Keep this environmental disaster out of the Adirondack Park!
No ATVs!
Is this some sort of a joke? The maps are useless, you can’t tell where anything is. I don’t agree with Todd E. on a lot of things here, but this one for sure. This is a terrible idea, there is already tons of trespassing onto private lands from the trails that are already there. This would make it insanely worse. Just go to the Red Tavern bar along one of the “roads” that looks like it is part of this (again it’s hard to tell) on summer weekend. It will have 20 UTV’s there. They are all mostly riding illegally on easement lands where ATV’s are not allowed by the owners.
There is also zero enforcement of the ATV/UTV regulations in these areas so I guess we shouldn’t be too surprised. On my land riders just ignore the obvious posted signs and drive right on in. You tell the rangers about the issues, they do nothing. I don’t blame them, they are probably afraid of these guys. I’ve tried to talk to them, they just tell you to F-off. Then, I should say, some of them are like these nice older couples, these others spoil it for them.
There is no justification for this bad idea.
A. What is the justification, or need for expanding the ATV trail network?
a) The Draft Scope for the Draft Generic EIS fails to demonstrate the need to increase the ATV trail network in Franklin County. The justification for expanding the ATV trails network that was cited in the above EIS, is a vague anecdotal statement “In light of the significant growth in ORV sales nationwide and statewide over the last decade, a need exists within the County to provide a safe network of trails upon which ORV enthusiasts can legally ride.” A similar illogical case could be said “the population of the US and NY has increased, so Franklin County needs to build 20 new bridges.”
b) Normally, justification for expanding roads and trails is based on data that pertains to the scope of the area being addressed. In this case, Franklin County, not in the US or NYS. Normally, justification for expanding roads and trails is based on hard data, examples are; collection and compilation of vehicle counts, the number of hikers registered at trailheads, or trail cameras such as that applied in Old Forge which showed a 300% increase in cyclists in recent years.
c) The background data that should have been compiled for the justification of this proposal needs to be done before the proposal is submitted. Some of the info are:
1) How many ATV users are there in Franklin County?
2) What is the rate of usage (such as average riders per day)?
3) Has the number of ATV users increased or decreased over time, and by how much?
4) What is the existing legal ATV trails and roads network? Including private lands, Conservation Easements, logging roads, etc. Need to show in a map.
5) What are the traffic patterns? Areas of high, moderate, or low usage.
6) What is the feasibility of encouraging moving usage from high use to low use areas? Which is similarly evaluated and done on hiking trails.
7) Is the present trail network adequate? What are the criteria that were used to determination that traffic has increased to a point that such a huge increase in the trail network is warranted?
The answers to these questions should be done before releasing this proposal. It should not be a boondoogle “Build it and they shall come.” which is a risky endeavor rather than sound approach.
I also agree with the person who commented on the poor quality of the maps in the proposal (figs 1-3). There’s an old saying, The devil is in the details. Some of the indispensable tools that is required to evaluate the effect of expanding ATV trails are well-constructed and legible maps. However, the proposed trail maps shown in figures 1-3 of the Draft Scope for the Draft Generic EIS are poorly constructed and illegible. In these maps, it is difficult to see common map features, such as a lakes, rivers, wetlands, and valleys; as well as most major man-made features such as powerlines, railroad beds (active and inactive), and densely populated areas such as villages and hamlets. Also, it is impossible for a reader to locate one’s place of residence to determine the relationship of their property to the proposed ATV trails. In figures 1-3, the lines representing trails are too thick, that they block out important features such as roads, waterways, wetlands, trails, powerline, densely populated areas (hamlets and villages), which are features on the map that are crucial for interpreting whether ATV trails are suitable or not. Road labels are too large, they also block out important features such as roads, waterways, wetlands, trails, powerline, densely populated areas (villages and hamlets). When a county resident wishes to examine the map to determine their proximity to proposed trails, it impossible to do so with these crappy maps. The maps also lack latitude and longitiude, basemap credits, and map projection. Lastly, the GIS data used in the compilation of maps should have been made available to download
Expanding the ATV network is a bad idea!
A. What is the justification, or need for expanding the ATV trail network?
a) The Draft Scope for the Draft Generic EIS fails to demonstrate the need to increase the ATV trail network in Franklin County. The justification for expanding the ATV trails network that was cited in the above EIS, is a vague anecdotal statement “In light of the significant growth in ORV sales nationwide and statewide over the last decade, a need exists within the County to provide a safe network of trails upon which ORV enthusiasts can legally ride.” A similar illogical case could be said “the population of the US and NY has increased, so Franklin County needs to build 20 new bridges.”
b) Normally, justification for expanding roads and trails is based on data that pertains to the scope of the area being addressed. In this case, Franklin County, not in the US or NYS. Normally, justification for expanding roads and trails is based on hard data, examples are; collection and compilation of vehicle counts, the number of hikers registered at trailheads, or trail cameras such as that applied in Old Forge which showed a 300% increase in cyclists in recent years.
c) The background data that should have been compiled for the justification of this proposal needs to be done before the proposal is submitted. Some of the info are:
1) How many ATV users are there in Franklin County?
2) What is the rate of usage (such as average riders per day)?
3) Has the number of ATV users increased or decreased over time, and by how much?
4) What is the existing legal ATV trails and roads network? Including private lands, Conservation Easements, logging roads, etc. Need to show in a map.
5) What are the traffic patterns? Areas of high, moderate, or low usage.
6) What is the feasibility of encouraging moving usage from high use to low use areas? Which is similarly evaluated and done on hiking trails.
7) Is the present trail network adequate? What are the criteria that were used to determination that traffic has increased to a point that such a huge increase in the trail network is warranted?
The answers to these questions should be done before and be the basis of this proposal, not “Build it and they shall come.” which is a risky endeavor rather than sound approach.
I also agree with the person who commented that on the draft scoping document that the maps (figs 1-3) are useless.
B. There’s an old saying, The devil is in the details. Some of the indispensable tools that is required to evaluate the effect of expanding ATV trails are well-constructed and legible maps. However, the proposed trail maps shown in figures 1-3 of the Draft Scope for the Draft Generic EIS are poorly constructed and illegible. In these maps, it is difficult to see common map features, such as a lakes, rivers, wetlands, and valleys; as well as most major man-made features such as powerlines, railroad beds (active and inactive), and densely populated areas such as villages and hamlets. Also, it is impossible for a reader to locate one’s place of residence to determine the relationship of their property to the proposed ATV trails. In figures 1-3, the lines representing trails are too thick, that they block out important features such as roads, waterways, wetlands, trails, powerline, densely populated areas (hamlets and villages), which are features on the map that are crucial for interpreting whether ATV trails are suitable or not. Road labels are too large, they block out important features such as roads, waterways, wetlands, trails, powerline, densely populated areas (villages and hamlets). When a county resident wishes to examine the map to determine their proximity to proposed trails, it impossible to do so with these maps. In the legend, for Franklin County, a black thick line should represent the boundary of the county similar as the thick lines were done for Essex, St. Lawrence, and Clinton Counties, and some other line used for the towns with Franklin County. The maps also lack latitude and longitiude, basemap credits, and map projection. Lastly, the GIS data used in the compilation of maps should have been made available to download.
There are a whole slew of other concerns why drastically increasing the ATV network in Franklin County is a bad idea, some of these are:
1) Safety on driving on county paved and unpaved roads as well as on some trails.
2) Noise, noise, noise, especially where the proposed trails go thru on adjacent the densely populated areas such as the APA designated Hamlets of Loon Lake, Onchiota, Rainbow Lake, and Gabriels
3) Environmental damage
4) Increase in greenhouse emissions
5) Wildlife disturbances
The author could have cited the success of a similar trail system in adjoining Saint Lawrence County where it seems to be working well.
Susan, conditions may be more favorable for ATV use in St. Lawrence County than in Franklin County because St. Lawrence Co. has much fewer significant densely populated areas within the Adirondack Park than Franklin County, which has several densely populated areas (Village of Tupper Lake, Village of Saranac Lake, Paul Smith’s College, hamlets of the Loon lake, Onchiota, Rainbow Lake, Vermontville, and Gabriels). The largest populated center in the Adirondacks is the Saranac Lake area. So, what this means is that, in Franklin County, there would be greater interaction between ATV users with our residents than in St. Lawrence Co. You have to evaluate specific conditions that characterize each area. Also, it’s easy to say something is better elsewhere, but where are the facts?
Build baby build . I cant wait to ride that trail
I’m in a unique position to see both sides of this story. As one who has backpacked in many areas of the Adirondacks, I have seen hiking trail damage that RIVALS anything that I have seen ATV’s do. The disgrace of soil erosion caused by bagging trailless peaks on non-maintained herd paths, is an issue that has been conveniently hidden from the public forum. “Physician heal thyself”
But, as an avid low impact ATV’er also , I have also seen well-meaning trails disintegrate due to poor soil type.
ATV’s used repeatedly on the wrong soil, such as one that has loam or sand intermixed with rocks and boulders, soon lose their loam and sand, and become a nightmare of maintenance, else you’ll soon be riding on a body and equipment jarring bolder field.
These improper trails are just as unsightly and damaging to the flora and aquifers’, as what’s been happening for years on certain trails in the high peaks and beyond.
Existing hard packed, properly built and time proven dirt logging roads that have also had vehicular use do just fine with heavy ATV use. And should be considered as primary candidates. And, all paved secondary back roads of course, are choice candidates as well for ATV use.
But, for certain trails such as, low use deep woods logging roads. A method should be devised, using some sort of soil sampling, to determine prior to establishing a trail, if such will hold up to expected increased ATV use.
As an avid low impact ATV’er, I want us users to put our best foot forward and return the favor now being offered us. By starting this new era, with nothing but a genuine concern and honesty about our own potential effects upon this wonderful gem that we have all inherited, that which we call the Adirondacks.
Well over a century of hiking by tens of thousands of hikers is not comparable to the few decades of off-road motorized use…
… just ain’t no comparison…
In all our travels to bike in NYS and other states, we have never seen a trail that also allowed ATVs that was used by hikers and bikers, Between the noise and the smell of the exhaust, ATVs do make for a relaxing hike or bike ride.
Why not just come out and say that you want to develop an extensive trail system for ATVs???
I live in owls head ny Franklin county and once the spring arrives we have100s of atvs traversing our roads be they county town or logging trails. Bar none it’s noisy and often especially when going down the wolf pond – Bryant siding road which has two restaurants. it’s high speeds no enforcement of speeding and disregard for walkers hikers bicyclists.. coming into Mountainview heading to trailside is also a problem and as often happens trash is also an issue. People have a right to ride recreational vehicles, but need to follow the rules of the road and not litter also.
I would like to reinforce Ellie’s comment. The noise is a nuisance as it is a continuous parade all day long, no solitude for local residents. That’s a problem. However, the trash that is indiscriminately tossed on the forest roads, all day long, is completely out of hand. No consideration of ATV expansion of any kind should take place without serious consideration given to a plan to mitigate the litter problem.
Sounds like this is going nowhere. It took decades of effort to try to turn the long unused and never profitable Adirondack RR bed into a trail. That idea made too much sense. Instead, a split the baby solution to refurb tracks to Tupper Lake and build a trail the rest of the way to Placid. What a senseless result (New York ‘s version of California’s high speed rail). Too many forces doomed the rail bed to path conversion and will do the same to this one.
No off-road vehicles, period!
Stop this while you can. Lewis County promised all sorts of things in their SEQRA such as clean-up facilities for ATVs coming into or leaving the county to prevent the spread of invasive species. Never happened.
They promised adequate law enforcement. What a joke that is! No real enforcement exists and Lewis County is like the wild west where children as well as adults ride not only on municpal highways that have been illegally opened, but also on opened roads where not even a pretense of a trail exists.
The new law that raised the minimum age of ATV riders in New york State has been totally ignored.
Stop it now or you’ll regret it!