The Pomfret Forest: Protected Land or Playground Project?

Pomfret’s residents take great pride in our town’s natural beauty — from our quiet roads and rolling hills to our cherished forest lands. That’s why so many of us were thrilled when the Town of Pomfret obtained a Conservation and Public Recreation Easement and Agreement designed to preserve the Pomfret Forest “forever predominantly in its natural, scenic, forested, and/or open space condition.”

This easement isn’t just a promise — it’s a legal obligation. It clearly states that the land is to provide opportunities for public recreation, while preventing any use that would significantly impair or interfere with its conservation values. In other words, the property is protected for passive recreation only — not for the kind of high-impact, high-risk uses that are now being introduced.

What Does “Passive Recreation” Really Mean?

In Connecticut, passive recreation includes activities such as:

• Hiking

• Birdwatching

• Nature photography

• Cross-country skiing

• Fishing or picnicking

These are activities that allow people to enjoy nature without altering it — minimal environmental disturbance, minimal infrastructure, and minimal risk.

Active recreation, by contrast, includes uses that require constructed facilities, equipment, or man-made features such as athletic fields, skate parks, or mountain bike jumps. These uses typically increase maintenance needs, liability exposure, and environmental impact.

This distinction matters because it directly affects how towns are protected under state law. Passive recreation carries much lower liability — if someone is injured while hiking on public open space, the town is generally shielded from lawsuits under Connecticut’s Recreational Land Use Act. Once you add man-made features — like ramps, jumps, and constructed obstacles — that protection weakens or disappears. Suddenly, the town is assuming significant legal risk on property that was supposed to remain natural and low-maintenance.

What’s Happening in Pomfret Forest

Recently, members of the New England Mountain Bike Association (NEMBA) have been building out trails on the protected property. However, these trails include man-made obstacles and jumps reportedly reaching up to 10 feet high — features that clearly fall under active recreation, not passive.

There have also been social media posts suggesting the addition of a band pavilion — another structure that contradicts the intent of the easement.

These actions appear to be a direct violation of the easement terms, transforming what was meant to be a natural preserve into something resembling a recreational park — and exposing the town to both legal and financial liabilities.

Accountability and Transparency Matter

For those who want to review the facts firsthand, we will be including a copy of the actual easement in this post. We encourage every taxpayer and resident to verify our statements and bring questions to Board of Selectmen meetings. Transparency should never be a threat; it’s the foundation of good governance.

Unfortunately, when concerned residents raise these legitimate questions, town employees — on the clock and on social media — have publicly mocked or dismissed them. Some have even resorted to name-calling and labeling people as “anti-recreation” or “anti-mountain biking.”

Let’s be clear: this isn’t about being against mountain biking. It’s about honoring a legally binding conservation agreement and protecting Pomfret’s taxpayers from unnecessary risk. Mountain biking can absolutely coexist with conservation — but man-made jumps, ramps, and pavilions are not consistent with the passive recreation standard this land must adhere to.

And as taxpayers, is it ever a bad time to uncover facts, protect our town, and hold leadership accountable? We think not.

PHOTOS OF MAN-MADE OBSTACLES IN THE POMFRET FOREST:

Conflicts of Interest?

Adding another layer to the issue: 

One of the board members of Northeast Opportunity for Wellness (NOW) — who also serves as Vice President of QCNEMBA (Quiet Corner New England Mountain Bike Association) — is currently a member of Pomfret’s Board of Finance and seeking reelection.

This raises reasonable questions:

• Is he aware of the easement’s restrictions?

• Has he communicated them to NEMBA or his organizations?

• If not, why?

• And if so, why have these clear violations been allowed to continue?

  
  

Whether this is a case of disregarding the law or simply a failure to inform, the outcome is the same — the Pomfret Forest is being misused, and the town is now at risk.

Where Do We Go From Here?

Pomfret’s residents deserve transparency, accountability, and respect. We can support outdoor recreation without compromising our legal obligations or conservation values.

It’s time for the town to uphold the terms of the easement, halt any unauthorized construction, and restore public trust by addressing these violations head-on.

This isn’t about politics — it’s about protecting Pomfret’s legacy, honoring our agreements, and keeping our town’s most beautiful places truly protected for generations to come.

OFFICIAL COPY OF CONSERVATION AND PUBLIC RECREATION EASEMENT & AGREEMENT: