Henniker board delays final decision on closing three roads to ATVs, asks town counsel to review

The Henniker Select Board on Nov. 4 heard more than two hours of testimony from residents and ATV‑club representatives over whether to restrict off‑highway recreational vehicles (OHRVs) on three town roads.

Petitioners said that constant ATV traffic near homes has harmed residents’ quality of life and urged the board to close Dodge Hill Road, Hemlock Corner Loop and Colleague Pond Road to non‑residents. "We're trading our peace and quiet and the sanctity of our homes for the recreation of a small group of people," one petitioner said, urging the board to treat qualitative harms as central to the decision.

Representatives of local ATV organizations and the town’s OHRV committee countered that recent trail reopenings provide alternate routes and that a campus of trails remains available to riders. Keith, an OHRV committee representative, told the board the club has proposed reduced speeds in sensitive areas and additional signage; he said the reopened T‑1 link gives riders a bypass that reduces neighborhood traffic.

Roger Belson, one of the petitioners, said the petitioners had compromised in their request — asking only that the three roads be limited to Henniker residents — and warned he would submit a warrant article as "a last resort" if the board did not make a decision by Dec. 1.

Board members raised legal and enforcement questions about any restriction that would allow residents but bar non‑residents from a public road. Chair said he would draft a motion reflecting a narrow compromise — limiting access to club members or residents when trails reopen in spring 2026 — and asked staff to consult the town attorney to determine whether such a restriction is lawful and enforceable.

"We need to know what our options are and what the implications are for the ordinance," one board member said. The board agreed to get a legal opinion and to take the issue up again at its Nov. 18 meeting, meeting the petitioners’ timeline for a response.

Next steps: the board will ask the town attorney to review whether the board can implement resident‑only or club‑only restrictions, whether an ordinance amendment is required, and what enforcement obligations (signage, patrols) would follow. If counsel advises the board that such restrictions are lawful, the board said it would return to consider an ordinance change; if counsel advises it cannot, the board will need to explore alternative remedies or accept a petitioned warrant article.

The public hearing portion of the matter concluded at the Nov. 4 meeting; the board did not adopt any ordinance changes that night.