We are writing to express our opposition to the proposed Border-to-Border Off-Road Touring Route, or B2B, from the North Dakota border to Hovland. We are asking the County Commissioners to oppose this route in Cook County.
We are not alone in our view; others opposing the route due to road maintenance and increased tax concerns are: The Minnesota Association of Townships, Clearwater and Pennington counties and three townships in Beltrami County. The proposed B2B would go around these counties and townships opposing the route.
All highway-licensed vehicles can already access any road being considered for this project. However, the B2B would create a nationally advertised, designated mapped and signed trail specifically for highway licensed Off Road Vehicles, (OHV) which would be a major change for Cook County. One of our primary concerns is the increased use of our county roads expected by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and the potentially significant costs passed on to taxpayers.
In a March 2018 letter to the Clearwater Lake Area Association president, the DNR’s original B2B point-person, Mary Straka, wrote: “The exact amount of increased people and vehicles on the touring route will require monitoring once the route is in place. An estimate may be a few thousand a year to start with on the more attractively marketed segments.”
We are concerned about the damage an increase in traffic may inflict on our roads and the additional burden to our current backlog of maintenance needs. In Cook County there are an estimated 18.8 miles of county roads on the proposed route, 16 of which are gravel.
As engineer John Olson of the U.S. Forest Service explains, graveling costs vary significantly in our area from $20-65 thousand (K) per mile, depending on variables such as type of gravel, road width and distance from the gravel pit. $20K might not be realistic Olson explains, saying an average price currently would be about $40K per mile. This is an estimated $640,000 for Cook County roads. In 5 or 10 years, with inflation, this figure could be adjusted higher.
The State of Minnesota’s Off Highway Vehicle fund cannot, by law, cover any county or township roads, which would include B2B, related road maintenance needs. Therefore, the DNR requested funds in 2019 from the state legislature for the purpose of B2B related road maintenance reparations.
However, only $200,000 to cover the entire route’s 850+ miles across many counties was approved. There is no guarantee the money would be granted again by the required biennial legislative vote and in the previous legislative session, funding was denied.
Further, the DNR’s proposed B2B route reimbursement terms for counties and townships set a very high hurdle that will be difficult for any county or township to meet. They read: “To be eligible for reimbursement, the claimant must demonstrate that: the needs result from additional traffic generated by the border-to-border touring route; and increased use attributable to a border to-border touring route has caused at least a 50 percent increase in maintenance costs for roads under the claimant’s jurisdiction, based on a ten-year maintenance average.”
This eligibility requirement puts the burden of proof on the road agencies, such as Cook County, in requesting monies. The 50 percent threshold of increased costs is unrealistically high. If the county cannot prove this, or identifies less than the 50 percent increase, the county will be responsible for paying the increased road maintenance costs, meaning Cook County taxpayers.
We do not feel the taxpayers of Cook County should pay for any extra road maintenance costs due to the proposed B2B route, let alone have to prove it before getting reimbursed. No one knows if future funds will even be allocated. Who would monitor these road segments, how would it be done, and how much would it cost to adequately document extra maintenance needs?
The B2B would attract a variety of users including organized clubs and caravans, as well as individuals. Vehicles going off designated trails and “mudding” are a couple of examples of misuse that would be difficult to monitor. Who will police these backroads?
In the Superior National Forest, the proposed B2B route includes 164 miles of Forest Service roads. These include 58 different streams that would be crossed 77 times by the proposed route, 36 of which are designated trout streams. Many of the roads have minimal maintenance and are not suitable for increased traffic.
Law enforcement officials already cover a large area and it would be unrealistic to expect them to effectively monitor this use, too. While we appreciate OHV clubs offering to pick up litter and clear fallen trees, volunteers cannot be a substitute for necessary professional road maintenance and volunteers do not have the authority to enforce any laws.
Supporters of this proposal say that it will increase tourism. Without thoughtful use of our natural resources, some of the very things that attract people to Cook County will be lost. The Border-to-Border route for highway-licensed vehicles would be a nationally advertised, designated mapped and signed trail, and would change the very experience for which the majority of people come to the North Shore.
We again ask the county commissioners to oppose locating the Border-to-Border trail in Cook County. The disadvantages and the risk to taxpayers would outweigh any possible benefits. Thank you.
The following local citizens signed the letter:
Mary Ann B. Atwood
Gary W. Atwood
Barb Backlund
Jill Barber
Kris Barber
Greg Barringer
Lynn Barringer
Ann Bellman
Denny Fitzpatrick
Sharon Frykman
Greg Gailen
Bryan Hansel
Lesa Hofer
Mike Hofer
Jeanne Larson
Lawrence Landherr
Jake Leingang
Sandra McHugh
Helen Muth
Margy Nelson
Chuck Perrin
Don Pietrick
John Praxmarer
Susan Schubert
Maryl Skinner
Paule Wannebo
Rod Wannebo
Leave a Reply