For decades, 43 CFR § 8342.1 has quietly dictated how the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) designates off-road vehicle (OHV) access on public lands. On its face, the rule appears neutral, tasking land managers with determining whether lands are “open,” “limited,” or “closed” to OHV use. But in practice, it has become a regulatory bludgeon used to justify sweeping closures of long-standing access routes across the West.
BlueRibbon Coalition, is calling to rescind and revise 43 CFR § 8342.1. This rule is outdated, vague, and consistently misused to erode the rights of the American public to enjoy their public lands.
A Legacy of Misuse
BLM frequently cites § 8342.1 to shut down access under the pretense of “minimizing” user conflicts or resource impacts, often without regard for the long-standing, lawful use of these routes. In the San Rafael Swell and Henry Mountains/Fremont Gorge Travel Management Plans, BLM relied heavily on this regulation to close hundreds of miles of routes, many of which were historically used by local communities, recreationists, and OHV enthusiasts. These decisions are now the subject of ongoing federal litigation brought by BRC.
The BLM’s interpretation of "minimization" has been weaponized and used to eliminate motorized access based on subjective user conflicts or speculative impacts, even on roads outside designated Wilderness. In some cases, they’ve used this rule to create unlawful "buffer zones" around Wilderness boundaries, directly violating the John D. Dingell Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act, which prohibits such administrative overreach.
An internal memo written by Nada Culver, who was the attorney for the Wilderness Society before filling a high-ranking position in the BLM during the Biden Administration showcases exactly how anti-access radicals see this CFR as a vital tool for restricting access to public lands.
Read the memo here: https://www.blm.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2025-01/Policy-Memo-for-Application-of-the-Minimization-Criteria.pdf
Flawed Premise: Minimize Use, Not Manage Use
Public lands are governed by a multiple use mandate, enshrined in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA). Our laws do not require minimizing motorized recreation but they do require managing it in balance with other uses. The current language of 43 CFR § 8342.1 fails this test. It enables agencies to default to closure, rather than evaluating how access can be sustained and shared responsibly.
A Better Vision for Public Access
BRC proposes a revised framework that prioritizes maximizing multiple-use access and shared stewardship. Our proposed changes would shift the focus from “minimization” to balancing uses, promoting safety, and maximizing public recreation opportunities:
“Areas and trails shall be located to maximize multiple use on public lands between recreationists, lease holders, off-road vehicle users, and others, while ensuring safety and compatibility with surrounding conditions.”
This approach honors the rights of all users, motorized and non-motorized and aligns with the spirit of our public land laws.
Sign the Petition!
We’ve submitted a formal proposal to rescind and replace 43 CFR § 8342.1. We urge the Department of the Interior, under the leadership of Secretary Doug Burgum, to act swiftly to restore balance, fairness, and access to America’s public lands.
It’s time for a rule that reflects today’s needs, not yesterday’s biases. It’s time to stand up for the families, local communities, and outdoor enthusiasts who rely on access, not exclusion.
Join us in defending access and sign the petition below.
