Some of Oregon’s largest outdoor groups are challenging a plan by the U.S. Forest Service to limit hiking and camping in three Oregon wilderness areas.

The federal agency announced a plan in November for a sweeping permit system in the Mount Jefferson, Three Sisters and Mount Washington wilderness areas.

A sharp increase in crowds during the past decade — and environmental damage that’s followed — prompted the new regulations on 450,000 acres of Oregon’s most iconic backcountry.

“The goal is to maintain the quality of our wilderness areas and the experience they offer,” said John Allen, supervisor of Deschutes National Forest. “It’s about keeping the amount of people to a level where they’re not degrading these special places.”

But a coalition of groups and individuals say the Forest Service plan is overly restrictive, would bring confusion and chaos, and is not justified.

A total of 96 objections have been filed opposing all or some parts of the plan. The Forest Service, which is legally required to take objections into account, is meeting with many of the groups this week.

“We’d love them going back to the drawing board and coming up with a much less dramatic plan,” said Sarah Bradham, acting executive director of the Mazamas, one of Oregon’s oldest and largest outdoor groups.

“They went right to the most restrictive system without trying anything in between,” she said. “They relied on limited data to justify something that will make it more difficult for people to experience their public lands.”

The Forest Service said it's in the process of addressing the objections with the groups involved, and couldn't comment on every major point.

Looking for more backstory? Listen here:

Limiting backyard recreation

Under the Forest Service plan, people would need an overnight permit at 79 trailheads and a day-use permit at 30 trailheads. Each trailhead would have a quota of permits for sale.

For example, at popular Marion Lake Trailhead, in the Mount Jefferson Wilderness, there would be 10 overnight group permits and 40 day-use permits available each day.

Current example:In the 1990s, this Oregon wilderness was overrun. Here's how they saved it

Bradham, and many other objectors, said the day-use permit system goes too far, requiring people to get a permit for quick hikes near their homes, particularly around Bend and Sisters.

“It will cut people off from recreating in their own backyard,” Bradham said.

The Forest Service said it would keep some permits available for "day-of" trips.

Even midweek?

A number of people wrote that the Forest Service overemphasized the crowding problem. They noted that while some popular trailheads do get hammered on peak weekends, many get little use, especially midweek.

Woody Keen, of Bend, provided pictures and reports from many of the most popular trailheads during the summer of 2018.

“My personal observations over the summer months found most trailheads not crowded or overused when looking at a variety of days of week and different times,” he said.

Janee Nekuda of Aumsville also thought requiring a permit midweek for day-hikes was overkill.

“I realize how much heavier the use of the area has become … but the proposed restrictions seem extreme,” Nekuda wrote. “Perhaps it would be better to restrict access on the weekends, but not during the week. And to end the restrictions after Labor Day, when hikers thin out considerably already.”

The Forest Service said previously that in addition to addressing current issues, the permit system protects special places into a future that's expected to see growing traffic on trails.

Why not limit entry only on most popular trails?

Many people objected to the number of places with a limited entry permit requirement.

They said a permit might make sense at slammed places such as Jefferson Park, South Sister or Green Lakes Basin. But to require a permit to camp from 79 trailheads, and hike from 30, is too much.

“Any restrictions or permits should only be put in place on the most highly accessed trails,” wrote Sherry Brainerd of Bend. “That does not include a majority of the trails for which permits are proposed. Simply saying that low-use trails will be restricted in order to fend off potential future higher use is a totally inappropriate action that should not be taken.”

Pay to play

Many people objected to the idea of requiring more fees to get outdoors.

While the Forest Service hasn’t specified the cost of permits yet — that’s being done separately — many users thought adding fees to the cost of gas and outdoor equipment would limit the pool of people able explore iconic areas.

“Requiring a fee-based permit system puts wilderness out of reach of low-income individuals,” wrote Holly Scott of Bend.

Even if a day use permit was just $10, that means 10 hikes would now cost $100.

“For those of us who are below the poverty line, hiking is our go-to entertainment,” wrote Sarah Yost of Dallas. “We budget the gas money for each trip, and buy our yearly forest pass when we can afford one after our tax return.

“I'm afraid of the impact that charging an additional fee will have on those of us who can barely afford to get there in the first place.”

Try other options

Four outdoors groups, including the Mazamas, said the Forest Service jumped to limited entry without trying less impactful strategies.

Before moving to the permit system, the groups said the Forest Service should:

- Manage day use by size of parking lot and other indirect measures, but only require day use permits, quotas and fees in exceptional circumstances.

- Require permits and quotas for overnight use.

- Maintain, reroute, and construct trails at a high standard to prevent resource impacts despite high levels of use.

- Physically close and restore unwanted social trails and campsites with a combination of user fees and a corresponding increased agency budget.

Other objectors suggested the Forest Service add pit toilets to reduce human waste in popular areas, ban dogs, reopen neglected trails and offer more education.

Other objections

Numerous objections that are more specific were raised.

They included the challenge of having to plan months in advance to get a permit for a climb up South Sister, which could limit groups that lead guided or educational hikes.

Concerns were also raised by hunters and anglers, who already pay a fee for their license.

In general, there was also a weariness of this model becoming the norm in Oregon, with land management agencies deciding to use a permit system to limit visitors statewide in the future.

“I am very concerned we’re heading toward permits becoming the norm on public lands,” Bradham said. "It's just a lot of bureaucracy to go through just to take a hike."

To read all the objections, see this page: https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public/ReadingRoom?List-size=25&Project=50578&List-page=1

Previous report:New permit system will limit hiking in Mount Jefferson, Three Sisters wilderness in 2020

Zach Urness has been an outdoors reporter, photographer and videographer in Oregon for 11 years. To support his work,subscribe to the Statesman Journal for $0.99 per month.

Urness is the author of “Best Hikes with Kids: Oregon” and “Hiking Southern Oregon.” He can be reached at zurness@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6801. Find him on Twitter at @ZachsORoutdoors.