Off-road vehicle users continued to vent their anger over a proposal to significantly reduce the number of miles of roads and trails open to motorized recreational activities in the Eldorado National Forest during a Tuesday night meeting in Folsom.

The informational session conducted by the U.S. Forest Service was the fourth in a series of five community forums to discuss the draft environmental study that will help determine how wheeled motorized vehicle travel will be managed in the Eldorado National Forest.

An estimated 250 people packed a meeting room at the Lake Natoma Inn, some coming from as far away as Nevada, Walnut Creek and Modesto. Many had attended earlier gatherings, and most of the issues they raised echoed those discussed at a July 24 meeting in Placerville.

Diane Rubiaco, district ranger for the forest's Pacific Ranger District, acknowledged the crowd's grievances at the outset of the meeting. Rubiaco said she understood that off-road vehicle users are "mad as hell" at the Forest Service for citing maintenance costs as a reason for closing routes that off-road vehicle enthusiasts looking for a rugged outdoor experience don't want maintained anyway.

She said she also appreciated that many were angry because they only recently learned about the travel management plan.

And, Rubiaco said, she realized that people were "mad as hell because you do not trust the Forest Service, and you do not believe we are capable of managing your National Forest,"

But, she said, "I also know there are some people who are mad as hell because (they think) we have designated too many roads, and that we are only hearing one side at these meetings."

The environmental study was required under a court order issued in August 2005 by U.S. District Judge Lawrence K. Karlton in response to a lawsuit filed in 2002 by the Georgetown-based Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation and several other environmental groups. They contended that the Forest Service had not studied the effects of off-road-vehicle use on the Eldorado National Forest.

Karlton found the Forest Service had failed to follow National Environmental Policy Act procedures in 1990 when it authorized off-road vehicles to use trails and paths created over the years by forest visitors.

The "preferred alternative," selected by Eldorado National Forest Supervisor Ramiro Villalvazo as the basis for the final environmental study, would allow use of 844.3 miles of roads and 217 miles of trails, compared with 2,003.5 miles of existing roads and 249.3 miles of existing trails.

One man Tuesday likened the reduction to closing Interstate 5 and Highway 99 in the Sacramento area, arguing that it would result in overuse of the routes that remain open.

Although the current environmental study was prompted by the lawsuit, Forest Service officials said similar restrictions are likely to occur in other National Forests.

"This is the national direction for travel management," Rubiaco said. "We are ahead of the game."

All will allow motorized vehicles only on designated routes, she said, but the forest supervisor will determine which routes should be designated and what times of year they should be open.

Some people said restricting motorized travel would prevent people with disabilities from experiencing the forest's more remote areas.

Amy Granat, representing the California Off-road Vehicle Association, said she turned to off-road vehicles when she became disabled.

"Everybody else can get on their legs and hike out to the area," she said.

Jason Nedlo, team leader for the travel management project, said the travel management plan is intended to establish a backbone system of roads and trails that the Forest Service can reasonably maintain and sustain. But he described it as a dynamic document that can be revised annually, explaining that routes could be added once the basic plan is in place.

"Every year, we're coming out with new maps," he said.

Comments on the draft environmental study are due by Sept. 4.

Forest Service officials stressed that comments must be submitted in writing to have legal standing and should address specific issues in the study.

"Be specific about what you care about and would like to see in the final project," Nedlo said.

Comments may be mailed or hand delivered to Eldorado National Forest, Forest Supervisor Ramiro Villalvazo, Eldorado National Forest Travel Management DEIS, 100 Forni Road, Placerville, CA 95667. They also may be faxed to (530) 621-5297 from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, or submitted by e-mail to comments-pacificsouthwest-eldorado@fs.fed.us.

The draft environmental impact study and other project information are available on the Eldorado National Forest Web site, www.fs.fed.us/r5/eldorado/projects/route. A compact disc also may be requested by e-mail from eldoradoroute@fs.fed.us, or by calling Jason Nedlo at (530) 621-5276.

The final informational meeting on the study is scheduled from 7 to 9 p.m. Thursday at the Pleasant Hill Recreation Center, 320 Civic Drive, Pleasant Hill.