Informational Survey to Assist with the Update of the 2008 Soil Standard and Guidelines

California State Parks, Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division

Question Title

* 1. Is the Soil Standard, as written, comprehensible? If not, how would you change it?

Question Title

* 2. Are the guidelines of the Soil Standard helpful and easy to use? If not, why?

Question Title

* 3. Which portions of the 2008 Soil Guidelines were beneficial, and which were not? What definitions would you add to the ‘definitions’ in Appendix 1?

Question Title

* 4. How would you modify any of these definitions?

Question Title

* 5. Are there more specific/standardized guidelines that would be helpful to include in the monitoring plan?

Question Title

* 6. What new technologies could to be incorporated for project/trail assessment?

Question Title

* 7. Should the Soil Guidelines reference other methods of assessment evaluation? If not, why?

Question Title

* 8. How can the Soil Conservation Guidelines better address open ride areas?

Question Title

* 9. What are some new erosion control methods that should be incorporated into the guidelines? (e.g. vertical mulch, articulated concrete, etc.)

Question Title

* 10. Are there any suggested references that OHMVR should consult in the update of Soil Standard and Guidelines?

Question Title

* 11. In Section 2.6 of the existing Soil Standard, are there any additional project design considerations (Section 2.6.1), or project design features (Section 2.6.2) that should be added?

Question Title

* 12. Trail assessment is one of the most fundamental and useful trail tread monitoring techniques. What other monitoring techniques would be beneficial in the management of OHV facilities?

Question Title

* 13. Are there any suggestions for improving the documentation of maintenance activities?

Question Title

* 14. As an alternative to the Soil Conservation Plan, how best can OHMVR Grantees best adhere to the Soil Guidelines?