Issue: Horseback field dog trials at Middle Fork Fish & Wildlife area
Background
September 1990
Field Trial Clubs of Illinois (FTCI) ask Department of Conservation (DoC) to allow horseback field trials at Middle Fork. Plan is opposed at public hearing hosted by DoC in Danville. Opponents cited conflicts with: habitat (due to extensive mowing); wild turkey restoration; recreational horseback riding; bowhunters and others. The Committee on the Middle Fork (COMF) expressed support for 'walking' field trials, but requested additional information on plans for horseback trials and associated impacts.
February 1991
DoC hosts a second public hearing, proposes course layout, but provides only slightly more detail on impacts, and receives overwhelming opposition from the invited representatives of diverse interest groups. DoC promises to develop a plan detailing measures to minimize user conflicts and impact on resource.
May 1991
DoC field trial staff develops draft plan outlining conditions under which field trials at Middle Fork would be held. Plan is never released because of internal opposition from DoC wildlife biologists.
June 1992
FTCI supports legislation adding Middle Fork to the list horseback field trial sites. DoC supports legislation after amendment ensures that DoC, not the field trial interests, will control the schedule and conditions under which trials are held. DoC asks COMF to help secure IEC and IWF support for amendment, and promises that any field trials will be subject to restrictions set forth in the May 1991 plan. DoC assures COMF that plan will be modified to accomodate concerns of DoC wildlife biologists, and the plan will be finalized before any field trials are held.
July 1992
DoC signs Memorandum of Understanding with FTCI clarifying that Middle Fork and Green River sites will be subject to greater controls because of need to protect high quality resources. COMF agrees to DoC proposal to hold one National Championship field trial at Middle Fork subject to restrictions set forth in the May 1991 plan, in order to observe and document impacts.
October 1992
Over COMF objections, DoC issues permit for field trial without first adopting the plan. Rather than a national championship trial as agreed, the event is too small to observe significant impacts.
March 1993
DoC issues another field trial permit, this time without even informing other interest groups. COMF objects, noting the continued absence of a management plan, and no DoC effort to observe and document adverse impacts.
May - August 1993
COMF was invited to represent environmental interests in a series of meetings at the DoC regional office in Champaign. Also represented were FTCI and a person selected by DoC Director Manning to represent the interests of recreational horseback riders. All parties agreed on plans developed by DoC professional staff to:
• allow fall field trials during the (approx 6 week) period between dove season and the beginning of upland game season; and
• restore the area to presettlement vegetation as soon as possible, so field trials could be held in areas of little bluestem savannah without mowing anything but a 15-foot wide gallery trail.
DoC wildlife biologists opposed winter/spring field trials because scientific evidence does not support the field trialers' assertion that there would be no significant adverse effects on wildlife, especially ground-nesting birds such as wild turkeys which DoC is trying to re-establish on the site. DoC biologists also expressed concern about harassment of wildlife during late winter when they are already stressed, diseases carried by pen-raised birds released by field trialers, etc. They noted that other DoC sites hosting winter/spring field trials do not support huntable wild populations of upland game, perhaps due to the field trials.
September 1993
DoC Director Manning meets with COMF and FTCI officers and secures agreement on a compromise plan. Both sides agreed:
• that DoC will issue a request for proposals and fund a 3-year scientific study commencing in January 1994 to determine the conditions under which horseback field trials could be held without significant adverse effects on (game and nongame) wildlife and their habitat;
• to refrain from legislative end-runs for the duration of the study;
• that the Middle Fork would be one of perhaps several sites studied;
• that FTCI would be allowed to set tentative dates for two field trials to be held between Jan-Mar 1994 under conditions prescribed by the researchers as part of the research protocol;
• researchers would determine if, when and under what conditions other trials were to be held at Middle Fork during the 3-year period.
COMF objected to the politically-imposed constraints and reluctantly accepted this compromise after two requested modifications were denied by Manning:
1. that the researchers be permitted to answer the relevant scientific questions by conducting any necessary field trials at other less ecologically valuable sites; and
2. that researchers be allowed to gather one or more years of baseline data at Middle Fork before any winter/springtrials are held, if in fact the researchers decide such trials are a necessary part of the research protocol.
November 1993
DoC solicits COMF and FTCI comments on draft request for proposals (RFP), which is slightly more than one page in length. COMF responded within two weeks, suggesting precise language to ensure scientific validity of the results, so they can be used as basis for policy. FTCI submitted no comments.
January -February 1994
Manning met with COMF and FTCI to inform them of current status:
• RFP still not issued, and will not be rewritten;
• US Fish & Wildlife Service asked DoC to coordinate with similar study in Indiana before using federal funds to address similar questions in Illinois;
• potential bidders will be invited to Middle Fork for meeting before January 27 to discuss RFP;
• FTCI asked to schedule 6 field trials for winter/spring 1994;
• DoC offered to allow trials on March 24-25, March 26-27 and April 9-10.
• Manning overruled COMF objection to violations of the earlier agreement, which assured that any field trials would be conducted as part of the research protocol;
• Manning asserted that field trials prior to April 15 would neither compromise the proposed study nor adversely affect the resource;
• Manning granted COMF request that potential bidders produce, at their upcoming meeting, a written set of limitations to be imposed on these 3 field trials (e.g. control areas to be avoided; numbers of horses and dogs, etc.);
• COMF asked if trials can be moved to February or early March to avoid conflicts with wild turkey restoration project;
• FTCI began talking about holding more than 3 trials throughout March and early April;
• COMF asked Manning to clarify how many trials will be held;
• Manning asked FTCI to answer! FTCI replies "up to 5" and promised to provide exact dates;
• COMF asked for letter from Manning stating how many trials will be held, the exact dates, and the researcher-specified limitations under which they will be conducted.
On Jan 14 DoC was provided with a draft of this background sheet and asked to correct any factual errors. On Feb 18 DoC responded, but offered no corrections. There had still been no meeting of researchers as promised.
For further information contact the Committee on the Middle Fork, 509 W Washington, Urbana IL 61801, 217 337 1097.