A proposed 300-mile all-terrain-vehicle loop trail linking Challis, Mackay and Arco has hit a speed bump.
The loop, a brainchild of the Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation, met criticism from conservationists, ranchers and residents who own property near the proposed trail, according to Dave Claycombe, an outdoor recreation specialist with the IDPR.
Now, IDPR is refocusing its proposal on three separate, smaller loops near Challis, Mackay and Arco.
Claycombe said the smaller loops would appease some of the concerns from the opposition, which he feels misunderstood the details of the original project, specifically the fact that the loop already exists.
"We're not turning over any new dirt, these are routes that are already open to full-size vehicle travel," he said. "You can ride every bit of the loop right now on an ATV, and about 95 percent in a motor-home.
"That's why I'm a bit puzzled and frustrated."
Including side trails off the main route, the loop would have provided a network of 460 miles of off-highway vehicle terrain. The U.S. Forest Service's travel plan already allows for OHV use on that land. The BLM also manages much of the land along the proposed loop. Dave Rosencrantz, field manager of the Challis BLM Office, could not be reached for comment.
Claycombe said the IDPR only intended to erect signs, build bathrooms, and install information kiosks and support stations along the loop.
Carol Benkosky, district ranger with the U.S. Forest Service's Lost River Ranger District in Mackay, said the opposition's concern wasn't the construction of new trails, but an increase in OHV traffic.
"I think in some groups there was a lot of fear about traffic increase," and therefore "more people going off the main route, creating new trails and vandalizing private property," she said.
Claycombe said creating an official loop would minimize rogue trail development and mitigate damage to the environment and wildlife habitat.
"We were trying to bring people out of areas that aren't appropriate for OHV use and bring them on a defined route," he said.
The new plan forces the communities to take matters into their own hands, Claycombe said.
"Instead of letting the whole concept die, we want to come back to the communities and say, 'If you want this done, you need to take the leadership role,'" he said. "At this point, everybody understands that the three loops may be a little more palatable to all the stakeholders involved."
While the big loop would not require significant additional road or trail construction, the smaller loops may.
"Ultimately, that is up to the communities," Claycombe said.
And as for the future, "My perception is that the smaller loops may some day facilitate the larger loop," Benkosky said.
"It's still a consideration," said Claycombe.
Public meetings regarding the three loops have yet to be scheduled.
