Roads on federal land have always been, and always will be, governed by state law

Regardless of any federal policy, the operation of motor vehicles and their use on public roads is a state issue. Therefore, it is the duty of local law enforcement to enforce state laws governing the operation of motor vehicles, littering, squatting, and the vast majority of issues related to roads and the infrastructure that facilitates their use. This includes everything from bridges, culverts, and drainage ditches to roadside pull-offs, lookouts, and other amenities—all of which are governed by state law.

Federal policy governing the operation of motor vehicles applies only to vehicles defined as “off-road vehicles.” Executive Order 11644 clearly defines an off-road vehicle as one used cross-country on virgin soil where no road exists. This is also reflected in the existing travel management rules, which share the same definition but have been arbitrarily expanded to give federal agencies authority over a “system of roads and trails,” rather than simply prohibiting cross-country travel on virgin soil.

Documents in the Federal Register from 1972 describe how the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service rejected the idea of creating a system of roads and trails and restricting their use. They explicitly stated that Executive Order 11644 was intended only to prohibit cross-country travel in specific geographical areas for off-road vehicles and denied its application to roads. After environmental interests failed to achieve their desired outcomes during the rulemaking process, they sued the federal government to force more restrictive travel management rules. At the time, federal regulations codified the application of state law to roads and applied off-road vehicle restrictions only to cross-country travel on virgin soil on public land.

Federal land managers often claim that travel management plans need revision and updating from the 1980s plans, citing concerns tied to cross-country travel. They argue that the 1980s plans allow cross-country travel and claim that, to protect the environment, endangered species, cultural sites, and wilderness areas, such travel must be prohibited. However, the 1980s travel management rules only authorized federal agencies to designate areas as limited, closed, or open to cross-country travel over virgin soil where no roads exist. These arguments appear to be scare tactics, enabled by relentless propaganda targeting motorized users.

Despite decades of open cross-country travel, our public lands are not riddled with sprawling motorized paths, as propagandists suggest. We are not recklessly running over desert tortoises, chasing elk, or desecrating cultural sites. Today, if you dare to veer off a designated motorized path, you’re likely to face harsh criticism, ridicule, or ostracization from 4×4 clubs or other organizations.

Organizations like Tread Lightly! and Leave No Trace emerged as front groups for federal agencies, transforming the off-road community into an on-road community by heavily promoting trail etiquette standards. Safety organizations created strategic planning documents for motor vehicle use on federal land. In 1992, a U.S. biological assessment responding to the Convention on Biological Diversity labeled roads on federal land as facilitators of exploitative and extractive industries. By the early 2000s, environmental litigation transformed the travel management process into a tool for expanding wilderness and other protected areas. By 2006, travel management rules evolved into the restrictive process we see today.

Through this evolution, cross-country travel has been virtually eliminated, and over 100,000 miles of roads have been closed in national forests alone, with at least twice that on BLM lands. Meanwhile, motorized users blame each other for alleged destructive actions. Many claim that trash, off-road driving, and other negative behaviors are responsible for the closures. In reality, the travel management process has little to do with the off-road community and far more to do with disrupting what environmental interests consider exploitative industries, such as ranching and small-scale mining.

The travel management process is intentionally designed to plan, fund, and implement the obliteration of roads, returning them to nature for future wilderness designation and to connect protected areas. Roads are strategically closed to prevent motorized activities near wilderness areas, wild and scenic rivers, national trails, endangered species habitats, cultural sites, and other areas protected under administrative designations.

Now, in 2024, Wall Street investors are eyeing these protected areas—created by eliminating cross-country travel and closing roads—to implement the United Nations’ system of environmental economic accounting. They aim to transform ecological functions protected under travel management policies into financial assets.

But don’t worry! “You’ll own nothing and be happy” while paying exorbitant fees for guided tours under the doctrine of ecotourism.

So what is the solution to all of this? Revised Statute 2477 and state governance of public land.