Cook County News Herald

B2B requires more thoughtful planning

As I See It


I’d like to draw your attention to the Minnesota DNR proposed Border-to-Border Route (B2B) that seeks to utilize existing public roads within the county in its plan to promote a designated route specifically for Off Road Vehicle (ORV) use.

My comments in regard to the proposed B2B center on the following objectives: 1) To clarify what the B2B offers versus what is available today for ORV travel opportunities in the county. 2) To provide perspective on the expectations we should have regarding the planning and funding of such a project. 3) To highlight the key role our county commissioners play in considering this proposal.

First, it’s important to understand what the B2B proposal entails, which is the planning, mapping, signage and promotion of a designated touring route across the state utilizing existing county and US Forest Service roads. There is the expectation (no facts or estimates provided – I’ll come back to that) of economic benefit to the county in the form of increased tourism.

The DNR is working with the Minnesota 4-Wheel Drive Association (MN4WDA) to identify new opportunities for ORV travel, and the B2B proposal is where they’ve landed currently, with additional routes in the pipeline. Focusing on Cook County, the ORV community already enjoys recreational use of all the roads included in the proposed B2B route. In fact, there are currently about 1600 miles of trails open to ATV use in the Superior National Forest and 1957 miles of USFS road miles open to off-road, highway licensed vehicles.

The concern with the B2B is the new, increased scale of promotion that will occur through off-road enthusiast groups and social media on a national level. This would certainly result in significantly increased traffic levels on these roads. This is not a “for ORV / against ORV” discussion or an attempt to restrict in any fashion the use of existing public roads. The real issue here centers on understanding the costs and impacts, both economic and environmental, that large-scale promotion of a designated ORV route will bring to the county.

The project sponsors of the B2B including the Minnesota DNR and the MN4WDA should expect to be challenged on the strength of their plan and its promise of economic benefit to the county. My perspective comes from 30+ years as a business leader with a major medical device manufacturer where, among other things, I was responsible for approving and overseeing projects of similar or greater complexity, including managing millions of dollars of capital and expense spent annually.

The relevance of my experience to the B2B is that successful projects consistently follow a disciplined management process including concept, scoping, planning, implementation and monitoring. They are vetted carefully by experienced subject matter experts who challenge the assumptions and highlight the hidden risks and costs of what the project sponsors are pitching.

Yet, this proven approach has not been apparent with the B2B. Even the most basic of questions directed to the Minnesota DNR B2B Project Manager Andrew Brown, and others, have not been answered in a way that substantiates an understanding of the impacts of the B2B much less the promise of economic benefit.

For example, an obvious question to ask would be something like, “What is the year 1-5 projected increase in ORV usage of county and forest service roads in number of vehicles?” There have been no projections provided, yet there are certainly ways to develop a reasonable estimate based on similar projects. It’s only from this kind of information that one can begin to understand the costs and impacts this proposal will generate. Further, there is no quantitative analysis of the tourism impact based on the ORV user demographic spending habits or considering the potential tourism displacement from new user impacts.

Most importantly, there is no annual access to guaranteed funds provided to the county or forest service for road repair, road maintenance, non-native invasives control, or impacts to water quality from the many stream crossings on existing roads, some of which are in a chronic state of disrepair. From the lack of investigation and answers addressing these basic questions, it’s clear the project does not have an adequate plan.

In my experience evaluating, leading and assessing projects the scope of the B2B proposal, this lack of planning would result in the project being quickly rejected in favor of other opportunities.

Finally, I want to highlight the key role our county commissioners play in the process of assessing the B2B proposal and forming a position on it. There is no mandate to participate in the B2B and in choosing not to participate there is nothing taken away from any stakeholder group, yet a myriad of issues can be completely avoided. Clearwater County, for example, has chosen to opt out of the B2B citing their belief that the costs will outweigh the promise of economic benefit, and the Minnesota DNR has honored that.

My intent here is to bring forward relevant perspective and information with which the county commissioners can make an informed choice based on fact rather than emotion, and I thank them for their careful consideration of this issue.

In addition, I recognize and appreciate the commitment and work of local volunteer ORV groups such as Tread Lightly, towards sustainable and responsible ORV use in our unique watershed of pristine waters. We need to bear in mind, though, that national promotion of county and forest service roads for a designated ORV route is a whole different ball game that would likely bring new and unique challenges inherently difficult for the required professional agencies and personnel to manage without proper understanding and attention up front. Opting out of the B2B from a county perspective seems to be a reasonable choice given that nothing is gained or lost by any stakeholder in this matter.

To reiterate, the intent of my commentary is not a debate about the merits of ORV use, whether for or against, but rather is a request that we do the necessary due diligence to ensure that approval of such a project as the B2B doesn’t leave us all with a bad aftertaste.

Editor’s note: Mike is a resident of Grand Marais.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.