Tonto FS Travel Management

[CannondaleKid]

While the FINAL MVUM (Motor Vehicle Use Map) for Tonto has not been released, I came across the FAQ's for Travel Management Planning on the Tonto National Forest.

I believe these three FAQ's have relevance to the HAZ community:

#7. I’ve heard that the Cherry Creek Road will be closed? Why?
The Cherry Creek Road (FSR 203) east of State Route 288 is partially within the Sierra Ancha Wilderness designated boundary. The Wilderness Act does not permit motorized travel in designated wilderness. South of Devil’s Canyon, and north of PB Springs will be barricaded prohibiting motorized travel.
In other words, no more vehicle travel allowed between Devil's Chasm & PB Springs.

#8. I heard that the Powerline Road will be closed. Why?
A portion of the Powerline Road (FSR 393) is within the designated Maztazal Wilderness boundary. The Wilderness Act does not permit motorized travel in designated wilderness. FSR 393 is northeast of Bartlett Lake. Less than one mile near Alder Springs will be physically blocked, prohibiting motor vehicle use.
Now if that isn't crazy I don't know what is... while FSR 393 will be open to 'high clearance' vehicles, there will no longer be no legal way to GET to it!
Previously there were three legal options to reach it by 4WD vehicle:
A. No access from old Sunflower Highway (Wilderness issue @Alder Spring)
B. No access from Log Corral (FSR 3456) as that will be legal only for dirt-bikes
C. No access from crossing near Bartlett Lake because that road will be designated 'Administration Use Only'

#9. Will the road to Aztec Peak be closed? Why
The Road to Aztec Peak (FSR 487) will be closed where it enters the Sierra Ancha Wilderness. The road will be gated, prohibiting motorized access for the general public. The route provides the only access to the Murphy Ranch. The landowners will be authorized access to their private property via FSR 487. Federal law permits access to private land within federal boundaries.
So no more PUBLIC vehicle travel allowed past Moody TH to Aztec Peak or Murphy Ranch due to a 1-mile segment of Wilderness overlapping the road.

Although there has been talk of possible assistance from our Senators/Representatives in reference to #7 & #8, in neither case did it make any difference.
RE: #7: Personally I'm ambivalent about Cherry Creek Road... yeah it would be nice to have more solace out that way, but I've always enjoyed the drive. (Besides, at least one Camp Grasshopper will no longer be a 'car-camping' site.)
RE: #8: But for FSR 393? It simply makes no sense whatsoever! Supposedly some folks well-connected with the FS were told earlier that this was a 'mistake that would be fixed' but now it appears the mistake will be made permanent.

[flagscott]

A closed road is a chance to get in a little more walking. No harm done.

[JoelHazelton]

Supposedly some folks well-connected with the FS were told earlier that this was a 'mistake that would be fixed' but now it appears the mistake will be made permanent.

Sounds like the mistake was allowing vehicular travel through a wilderness area, and that they fixed the mistake.

[CannondaleKid]

Sounds like the mistake was allowing vehicular travel through a wilderness area, and that they fixed the mistake.

Yes, I agree when speaking about the .4 mile that FSR 393 encroached into the Mazatzal Wilderness... but that isn't the 'mistake' I was referring to.
I meant the mistake of changing FSR 3456 (Log Corral) from High Clearance to Motorcycle-only so there will now be absolutely no 4-wheel vehicle (4x4 or ATV) access to Bartlett Lake from the East. The FS said they meant it to continue to be High Clearance and they would amend the plan to fix that 'mistake' but so far they have not...

A closed road is a chance to get in a little more walking. No harm done.

So then what? Should we close ALL the Forest Roads just so we can hike farther? I think not.

[chumley]

If Tonto is anything like any of the other Forests in Arizona, the MVUM will be updated annually based on input from users. I feel like this isn't worth a lot of personal anguish on my part. Plus, I haven't ridden a dirtbike since I was in high school. This would be a good excuse to change that!

[Grasshopper]

South of Devil’s Canyon, and north of PB Springs will be barricaded prohibiting motorized travel.

South of Devil's Canyon or South of Devils Chasm?

[RedRoxx44]

Probably south of Devil's Chasm. Nothing a sawzall or bolt cutters can't fix, and a good winch.

[Grasshopper]

@RedRoxx44
I'm pretty sure you are correct regarding Devils Chasm closure at the south end and a whole lot of miles in-between which eliminates overnight vehicle camping for most all the major ruin sites, historic sites, and mining which is most all that I am aware of except one ruin site on the north end. It also closes vehicle access to all four of my previously posted Camp Grasshopper Campsite locations on Cherry Creek Road FR203.. guess they all now become recommended Backpack sites.. Happy Hiking !!

[CannondaleKid]

@Grasshopper "Devil's Canyon" is the location the FS FAQ used, which I took to mean as Devils Chasm, but again, it's no wonder they can't get anything right when they can't even read a name off one of their own maps correctly.
:whistle:

[Grasshopper]

I was just curious how many miles in-between this proposed North to South Tonto NF "Cherry Creek Road FR203" CLOSURE might include--> I calculate ~14.2 miles ( http://hikearizona.com/map.php?MY=22726&M=6 ) of the 40.5 mile road total.

[CannondaleKid]

I was just curious how many miles in-between this proposed North to South Tonto NF "Cherry Creek Road FR203" CLOSURE might include--> I calculate ~14.2 miles of the 40.5 mile road total.

That sounds about right Hank.
And as I mentioned in the Juniper Fire thread...
That means:
An extra 3 mile round-trip road-hike for the hike to the Cold Spring/Pueblo Canyon TH.
An extra 7-mile round-trip road-hike to reach the Grapevine Trail #135 TH from the north.

[skatchkins]

Dang. Is there an effective start date?
Log Corral was a fun offroad trail. Camp at the lake, then exit below the dam.

[CannondaleKid]

@skatchkins I'm still trying to get a definitive answer on the timeline. Hopefully I can get further details at the next TRAL meeting (2nd Wednesday in Sept at the Tonto FS office in Mesa).

[Nighthiker]

I am approaching the age where my knees may speak louder than my voice.

[ASUAviator]

Sounds like the mistake was allowing vehicular travel through a wilderness area, and that they fixed the mistake.

What do you suppose came first?? Mining roads from the late 1800's/early 1900's or federally designated wildness from the 30's and 40's? I assure you it was the roads.

[JoelHazelton]

@ASUAviator
True, but there are plenty of old roads in wilderness areas. Difference is vehicular travel was cut off when the wilderness area was established. For the record I agree it's a little suspect that that road is now totally inaccessible due to some technicality, but it sure doesn't bother me.

[chumley]

@ASUAviator
Our country has a few things in it's history that we shouldn't really be proud of.

There are a few roads out there that probably ruined an area forever. I think there are many roads that the Wilderness Act ended up closing and for the most part I'm ok with it.

Though I also thoroughly enjoy being able to drive to some amazing places. The Rocky Mountains are by far the most accessible mountain range on Earth. Nowhere else has the kind of roads that we built in the Rockies. And I'm a fan!

I'm also ok with a balance. There are a lot of roads out there and many more are created by irresponsible users each year. Some restrictions and management doesn't really bother me. There are plenty of places we can drive to. There are not so many where you can walk in peace and quiet for miles and miles. (Except maybe in Alaska ;) )

[CannondaleKid]

For the record I agree it's a little suspect that that road is now totally inaccessible due to some technicality, but it sure doesn't bother me.

I'm not going to get bent out of shape whether it is blocked off or not so whatever way it goes, I can accept it.

As far as the actual Wilderness Boundary issue, my belief is that between 1933 when the Sierra Ancha Primitive Area was first designated as such and 1964 when it became a Federal Wilderness there were numerous policy changes that when taken as a whole ended up with the flaws that we have today.

But the story begins earlier... in 1929 the Forest Service came up with new designations for different land uses of Forest lands, one of which was "Primitive Area" which was designed "to maintain primitive conditions of transportation, subsistence, habitation, and environment to the fullest degree compatible with their highest public use."

So, in 1933 when it was designated the Sierra Ancha Primitive Area, there really wasn't an issue with the road being there nor with it being used. And further, it appears much of the boundary paralleled the road, only slightly to the west, almost as though the intent was that the road would NOT be in the Primitive Area.

Fast forward to 1964 when almost all Primitive Areas were re-designated as Federal Wildernesses. At that point I believe in the legislative push to make this all happen quickly that much of the legwork and research to find and deal with possible boundary issues was not very thorough, and here we are having to deal with the issues today.

And the Sierra Ancha isn't the only wilderness with unresolved boundary issues... the FSR393/Mazatzal Wilderness is due to the road predating the Wilderness.

But in the end, my gut tells me a lot of the issues arose due to sloppy mapping... not the surveying, but by different criteria various federal & state agencies used for their maps, as well as accepting information from older maps without verification. In words I used to hear all the time when in the military, "close enough for government work".

So, if the NFS hadn't been mandated to come up with an updated Management plan, this issue would never have come to light, and the road would continue to be used as it has been since before it became a Wilderness.

[CannondaleKid]

There are a lot of roads out there and many more are created by irresponsible users each year.

Absolutely!
I believe this is a big motivation behind the FS mandate for a thorough management evaluation, with one of the results being an up-to-date "Travel Management" plan.

When it's all been said and done, the only problem I see is if there aren't funds for the personnel to monitor compliance, folks will still cut fences and locks as they are doing today.

[Grasshopper]

I found this, our original, Aug-2016 HAZ Forum Discussions related to the first published Tonto National Forest "Travel Management Plans"
(it also appears that there may be some member forum discussion comments/pages missing?)

Anyway, I wanted to re-activate this Forum Topic as it appears to me that Tonto NF Management has now "officially" approved their original YR-2016 Proposed
Travel Management Plans:
Tonto NF Travel Management Plan (approved/signed 10/5/21.. Implementation 09/01/2022 Estimated)
https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/tonto/?c ... EV3_018761
(On October 5, 2021, Neil Bosworth, Tonto National Forest Supervisor, signed the Record of Decision for Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest. This decision designates a system of motorized roads, trails, and areas forestwide.)

As of this 3/27/24 forum posting, on the Tonto NF Website, I have been unable to locate the "Tonto NF Travel Management Map" that confirms what was agreed to by Forest Management on 10/5/21

From earlier HAZ Member @PeraltaPhil triplog narratives/member comments [ triplog ] and [ triplog ] , it now appears quite possible that some version of the original Tonto NF YR2016, proposed Upper Middle closure section on Cherry Creek Road (FR203), has now been "officially" implemented with locked gates?