Road Riporter 11.2 Summer Solstice 2006

Summer Solstice 2006. Volume 11 No. 2

Mojave Riparian Recovery Threatened By Daniel Patterson and Dan Funsch

The White Mountains of Mono Country, California. Photo by Daniel Patterson.

Inside… Mojave Riparian Recovery Threatened, by Daniel Patterson and Dan Funsch. Pages 3-5

Depaving the Way, by Bethanie Walder. Pages 12-13

Policy Primer: Citizen Alternatives for Travel Planning, by Tim D. Peterson. Pages 18-19

Biblio Notes: The Impact of Roads on Aquatic Benthic Macroinvertibrates, by Christine Morris. Pages 6-8

Citizen Spotlight: Glen Jensen. Pages 14-15

Odes to Roads: The Deep Blue Breath of Wildness, by Phil Condon. Pages 20-21

Regional Reports. Pages 9-11

Get with the Program: Restoration and Transportation Program Updates. Pages 16-17

Around the Office, Membership Info. Pages 22-23

Check out our website at: www.wildlandscpr.org

I

n April, Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT) introduced legislation to allow motorized access to 16 wilderness dams in the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness Area along the Montana/ Idaho border (see alert on page 15). While the bill sounds outlandish, we must take this threat seriously. The threat is great for two reasons. First, in December 2004, Congress passed a law to change wilderness boundaries to allow for road use. Second, during the past few years Congress has been passing comprehensive land management bills that threaten the concept of wilderness as places free from motors. Senator Burns’ bill is a real danger to one of the largest wilderness areas in the lower 48 states. First, let’s look at the 2004 precedent. The Cumberland Island Wilderness is part of Georgia’s Cumberland Island National Seashore. This Wilderness Area was shrunk, partially “un-designated,” by a bill that allowed motorized recreational access to historic sites. The “Cumberland Island Wilderness Boundary Adjustment Act” mandates that five to eight round-trip rides be made available daily on two roads. It was passed as part of a larger “must pass” appropriations bill, and it set a dangerous precedent. Second, several new land management bills (see RIPorter 9:4) (either proposed or enacted) contradict the traditional concept of designated wilderness under the Wilderness Act. For example, three new “wilderness” bills in Colorado provide legislatively protected motorized recreation opportunities (outside of the wilderness boundaries). Numerous similar bills are currently being debated in Congress. Burns wants to change the Bitterroot boundaries to allow maintenance at 16 dams that were constructed prior to the wilderness designation. He claims the bill is solely for maintenance and safety, but it would exempt activities on the dams, lakes and rights of way from the National Dam Safety Program Act (as well as other environmental laws). The bill would allow unlimited motorized travel along the rights of way, not just motorized use for dam maintenance. In 1997 the Forest Service determined that emergency measures were needed to make the Bass Creek dam safe, and they allowed water users to rebuild a road and repair the dam with heavy equipment. The agency has repeatedly made provisions for motorized “emergency” dam access without special legislation. This bill is not justifiable, it is simply a direct attack on The Wilderness Act.

Bass Creek dam, in the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness. Photo courtesy of Montana Trout.

2

Senator Burns has feigned a safety concern while actually pushing motorized access into this incredible wilderness. While the bill is unlikely to pass Congress if debated on its merits, if it were attached to an appropriations bill or some other must-pass legislation, it could quickly become law. For more information, see page 15 or visit our website.

P.O. Box 7516 Missoula, MT 59807 (406) 543-9551 www.wildlandscpr.org

Wildlands CPR works to protect and restore wildland ecosystems by preventing and removing roads and limiting motorized recreation. We are a national clearinghouse and network, providing citizens with tools and strategies to fight road construction, deter motorized recreation, and promote road removal and revegetation. Director Bethanie Walder Development Director Tom Petersen Restoration Program Coordinator Marnie Criley Science Coordinator Adam Switalski NTWC Forest Campaign Coordinator Jason Kiely Transportation Policy Coordinator Tim Peterson Program Assistant Cathy Adams Newsletter Dan Funsch & Marianne Zugel Interns & Volunteers Anna Holden, Breeann Johnson, Tracy Jo Schweigert, Marlee Ostheimer Board of Directors Amy Atwood, Greg Fishbein, Jim Furnish, William Geer, Dave Havlick, Rebecca Lloyd, Cara Nelson, Sonya Newenhouse, Patrick Parenteau Advisory Committee Jasper Carlton, Dave Foreman, Keith Hammer, Timothy Hermach, Marion Hourdequin, Kraig Klungness, Lorin Lindner, Andy Mahler, Robert McConnell, Stephanie Mills, Reed Noss, Michael Soulé, Steve Trombulak, Louisa Willcox, Bill Willers, Howie Wolke

© 2006 Wildlands CPR

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

“With Friends Like That...” BLM Threatens<Mojave Riparian Recovery By Daniel Patterson and Dan Funsch

F

or a few precious years, two of the nation’s finest specimens of desert riparian area have been protected from off-road abuse. In hard fought battles that began nearly a decade ago, the Center for Biological Diversity (“the Center”), Friends of the Inyo, the Sierra Club of California, and their allies won protections for the Mojave Desert’s Furnace Creek and Surprise Canyon. Now, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the Inyo National Forest, and a small but vocal community of off-road enthusiasts are threatening the recovery of both these unique areas. Furnace Creek drains the eastern side of the magnificent White Mountains in Mono County, while Surprise Canyon cascades down from the Panamint Range of Death Valley National Park into the BLM California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) in Inyo County. At the behest of off-roaders, BLM and the Inyo National Forest are considering allowing offroad vehicles to ‘mud bog’ in Furnace Creek and to once again open Surprise Canyon to off-road vehicle use. This would rewrite two success stories of desert riparian restoration, and lead to the quick degradation of water quality and wildlife habitat. The issue has recently attracted the attention of California’s OHV Commission, as well as California’s Senators Feinstein and Boxer.

Furnace Creek Background Furnace Creek is a beautiful perennial stream draining the arid east side of the White Mountains, on the boundary between the Mojave and Great Basin deserts, containing some of California’s northernmost Joshua Trees. This slow moving creek creates rare desert wetlands and nurtures a mature forest of gigantic cottonwoods and water birch thickets. It is home to the Mono Basin sage grouse, which the Center has petitioned for Endangered Species Act protection, and is a rich part of the desert web-of-life. The area provides important habitat for neo-tropical migratory birds, such as yellow and MacGillivray’s warblers, yellow-breasted chats and lazuli buntings, and supports marshes of cattails and sedges. The health of this riparian area is also vital to local deer populations, raptors, mountain lions, bobcats, and quail. Furnace Creek’s lower section is within the BLM California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) and managed by the BLM Ridgecrest Field Office, while its upper length lies within the Inyo National Forest. An old “road” up Furnace Creek washed out sometime

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

Looking up a waterfall along Surprise Canyon. Photo by Daniel Patterson.

in the early 80’s, but natural reclamation by willows, cottonwoods, water birch, cattails and sedges was not enough to keep off-road vehicles, jeeps & motorcycles out. Vehicles punched through the creek, shrubs, bogs and all, leaving a muddy mess in their wake. Offroaders wanted the road rebuilt, while conservationists argued the area should be closed to off-road vehicles to facilitate the canyon’s natural recovery. In 2003, both the Inyo National Forest and BLM found that the off-road vehicle damage was legally unacceptable and issued an interim closure for the area.

— continued on next page —

3

— continued from page 3 —

Surprise Canyon Background Like Furnace Creek, Surprise Canyon is managed by the Ridgecrest BLM office as part of the CDCA. It the most productive spring-fed stream in the entire Mojave Desert: it is fed by Brewery Spring within Death Valley National Park, and Limekiln Spring. Surprise Canyon is home to the endangered Inyo California towhee and endemic Panamint alligator lizard, and it is potential habitat for endangered riparian obligate birds such as the Southwestern willow flycatcher and Least Bell’s vireo.

“Desert riparian lands should be conserved and restored, and protected in their natural state. Offroad vehicle recreation should not be expanded, encouraged, or maintained in fragile desert riparian landscapes...” — California OHV Commission

For years, BLM had allowed unregulated extreme off-road vehicle use of Surprise Canyon. Off-road vehicles regularly winched-up waterfalls, cut native vegetation and spilled oil & gas into the water. The damage was so bad that at one point BLM stated: “The canyon riparian zone currently does not meet the BLM’s minimum standards for a properly functioning riparian system due to soil erosion and streambed alterations caused by off-highway vehicle use.”

In 2000, the Center for Biological Diversity, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, and Sierra Club filed a lawsuit against BLM in the Northern District of California, seeking to close the canyon to off-road vehicles. Then in 2001, as part of a settlement agreement, BLM published a protective closure notice in the federal register, which banned motor vehicle use in the canyon at least until BLM completed its CDCA Plan amendment. The vehicle closures were to be a top option considered by BLM in the CDCA Plan.

Re-opening Old Wounds Recently, a handful of extreme off-roaders started a move to again open Surprise canyon to off-road traffic. They hope to ride through and winch up the waterfalls, despite the great damage this would cause to natural and recreational values. Many goodsized riparian trees – cottonwoods and willows – would have to be removed. The Park Service and BLM are preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to address options for the area, which will be presented in the form of an amendment to the CDCA Plan. While the Park Service appears to oppose re-opening the area to off-roaders, BLM seems intent on allowing the off-road destruction. In Furnace Creek, a similar initiative by off-roaders would re-open the area to allow “mud bogging,” where offroad vehicles drive through fragile wetlands. This would impair water quality and sensitive wildlife habitat and turn back the clock on the natural restoration that has been occurring since the closure. The Inyo NF and Ridgecrest BLM office are now considering options for Furnace Creek. They released an Environmental Assessment (EA) early in 2006 and analyzed six alternatives to either permanently close — or realign and improve the road.

Rare desert stream beds at the mouth of Surprise Canyon. Photo by Daniel Patterson.

4

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

State Commission and U.S. Senators Weigh In The State of California addressed the issue in late 2005 by adopting a new policy to protect critically endangered desert streams. Recognizing that desert riparian areas have declined by over 90 percent in California, the California Off-Highway Vehicle Commission (OHV Commission) passed a policy declaring: “Desert riparian lands should be conserved and restored, and protected in their natural state. Off-road vehicle recreation should not be expanded, encouraged, or maintained in fragile desert riparian landscapes. It is the policy of the Commission that absent extraordinary and demonstrable need, it will not fund or support any grants or cooperative agreements which will directly or indirectly encourage, increase, or maintain off-road vehicle use in or through the bed, bank, or channel of any existing desert riparian botanical area. The Commission shall maintain a list of priority Desert Riparian lands and shall evaluate the list at least every five years to maintain the integrity of these protected areas. The Division shall not solicit or approve any grant or cooperative agreement which will develop or reestablish off-road vehicle use in a desert riparian area unless exempted from this policy by noticed vote of the Commission.” While the state OHV Commission does not have management authority over either Furnace Creek or Surprise Canyon, their strongly worded statement lends support to the effort to protect these areas. Shortly after the OHV Commission acted, BLM’s California Director wrote a letter opposing the policy.

Hikers take in the scenery along Furnace Creek. Photo by Daniel Patterson.

Next to join the debate were California Senators Feinstein (D) and Boxer (D). In a letter in December 2005, they requested that the BLM and the Park Service support the permanent closure of Surprise Canyon above Chris Wicht Camp, the terminus of an access road. Their letter cited the area’s “rare and remarkable” resources, the presence of endangered species, and the availability of alternative destinations for off-road vehicle riding. They also pointed out that while the 1994 California Desert Protection Act omitted a narrow “cherry stem” of the canyon from Wilderness designation, it did so to allow potential access to mining claims, not to authorize recreational off-road vehicle use.

Help Protect These Desert Riparian Treasures While awaiting the release of decision documents for the Furnace Creek Road Environmental Assessment (EA) and the Surprise Canyon EIS, the Center for Biological Diversity is organizing allies and preparing for possible legal action should it be needed. The Center submitted joint comments on the Furnace Creek EA along with the California Wilderness Coalition, Friends of the Inyo, and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. Meanwhile, over near Surprise Canyon, the Center is working closely with local residents who realize that they cannot take clean water and natural

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

quiet for granted. They vow to take direct action if necessary to keep off-road vehicles out of the canyon. Please lend your support to the campaign to protect these unique areas by contacting the Center for Biological Diversity.

For More Information Read the California OHV Commission Policy on Desert Riparian Areas: http://ohv.parks.ca.gov/default. asp?page_id=24182 For more information on Furnace Creek: http:// www.friendsoftheinyo.org/web-content/pages/furnace/ Furnacepage.htm Join the campaign by contacting the Center for Biological Diversity at 520.623.5252 or dpatterson@bio logicaldiversity.org — Daniel R. Patterson is a Desert Ecologist with the Center for Biological Diversity. Dan Funsch is editor of The Road RIPorter.

5

Bibliography Notes summarizes and highlights some of the scientific literature in our 10,000 citation bibliography on the physical and ecological effects of roads and off-road vehicles. We offer bibliographic searches to help activists access important biological research relevant to roads. We keep copies of most articles cited in Bibliography Notes in our office library.

The Impact of Roads on Aquatic Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Using Bioassessments as Indicators of Stream Health By Christine Morris

S

edimentation is widely acknowledged as a major cause of degradation of instream habitats (Wood et al. 2005). During rain storms and snowmelt, dirt and gravel roads bleed sediment into ditches that often drain into streams. These roads are a major source of stream sediment loads, especially harmful fine sediments, and roads contribute more sediment to streams than any other land management activity (USDA 2000). Sedimentation is directly related to a decrease in benthic macroinvertebrate density and a change in diversity according to a number of studies. In this paper I review some of the impacts of sedimentation on benthic invertebrates and explain how examining macroinvertebrate diversity can help determine overall aquatic ecosystem health.

Overview of Impacts

Wood and Armitage (1997) define four primary ways in which fine sediments impair macroinvertebrate diversity and health: 1) altering substrate composition and changing its suitability for some taxa; 2) increasing drift due to sediment deposition or substrate instability; 3) affecting respiration due to silt deposition on respiration structures or low oxygen concentrations associated with silt deposits; 4) impeding filter feeding by increasing suspended sediment concentration, reducing the food value of periphyton, killing aquatic flora, and reducing the density of prey items. In addition, through drift caused by scouring the streambed, macroinvertebrates can become more susceptible to predation or experience damaged respiratory systems (Newcombe and MacDonald 1991).

6

Roads are also responsible for chemical contamination of streams. For example, Forrow and Maltby (2000) investigated the mechanistic basis for reduced leaf processing in a stream contaminated with motorway (superhighway) runoff. They found the feeding rate of Gammarus pulex (Amphipoda), the dominant detrivore at the site, was significantly reduced downstream of the motorway discharge. Approximately 70 percent of the reduction in feeding rate could be accounted for by the direct effects of exposure to contaminated sediment. Increased stream temperature and reduced dissolved oxygen content of streams can also be attributed to road activities such as the clearing High school students learn the importance of of stream-side vegetation and macroinvertebrates in stream monitoring. Photo by Adam the input of sediments. Fine Switalski. sediment reduces dissolved oxygen content of the affected stream as suspended solids absorb heat from sunlight and increase stream temperature. Temperatures greater than 21oC (70oF) can severely stress most coldwater macroinvertebrates (Frondork 2001).

Using Macroinvertebrates for Stream Assessments

Bioassessment of rivers and streams can reveal water quality and stream ecosystem impairment. Aquatic benthic macroinvertebrates are especially useful indicators as each species has a specific tolerance for water conditions (Frondork 2001). These aquatic biota are affected by the physical, chemical and biological conditions of the stream and may show impacts from habitat loss not detected by traditional water quality assessments. As monitors of environmental quality, macroinvertebrates can reveal episodic as well as cumulative pollution and habitat alteration. The use of macroinvertebrates as bioindicators has been shown to be one of the most reliable and cost-effective assessment tools of water and habitat quality in streams throughout the world (King et al. 2000).

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

Macroinvertebrate assessment is crucial for determining aquatic ecosystem health in roaded landscapes. The presence of roads has been shown to be highly correlated with changes in species composition, population sizes, and hydrologic and geomorphic processes that shape aquatic and riparian systems (Trombulak and Frissell 2000). Macroinvertebrate diversity and abundance are affected by roads; their physical and behavioral changes can pinpoint sources of road-caused habitat impact. Various models have been used to assess macroinvertebrate response to road induced aquatic changes. The heterogeneity of stream ecosystems, the variable responses of macroinvertebrates, Water quality degradation due to roads is not often apparent to the casual observer, so it is important to and the differences between agency models suggest that analy- rely on indicators such as macroinvertebrates. Photo copyright Mark Alan Wilson. sis of the reference conditions and acquisition and interpretation, state agencies use different the model used is essential in interpreting bioassessment methods and models to biologically assess water quality. results. Though impact is evident, collaboration between (Barbour et al. 1999). agencies and citizen scientist working groups to define model standards is needed for remediation of problems indicated by bioassessment results.

Multimetric Assessments

EPT Index

The most general macroinvertebrate assessment model uses the EPT index. This index claims that although different insect taxa vary widely in their sensitivity to sedimentation, the taxa from the orders Ephemeroptera (E), Plecoptera (P), and Trichoptera (T) behave similarly. However, a taxonomic group can exhibit a great deal of heterogeneity (Lenat et al. 1981), so an assessment method like the EPT may be insensitive to changes in species composition unless composition is altered along with overall taxa richness (Hawkins et al. 2000). Multimetric and multivariate approaches can increase a model’s accuracy. These models evaluate the sampled community by comparing observed conditions to what conditions or taxa are expected to occur in the absence of disturbance. The sampling method is important to consider as well. Gradient sampling designs have been shown to be more sensitive and powerful statistically than designs based on random allocation of samples (King et al. 2000). The type of model used in macroinvertebrate assessment significantly affects determination of water quality impairment. Identifying the specific impact on a macroinvertebrate population may also be difficult due to the geomorphological and geochemical controls on the physical and chemical characteristics of streams. Many of the environmental variables are interrelated (Griffith et al. 2001) and as a result, community assemblages will be correlated with these variables, though species distributions may be directly affected by only one or a subset of the variables (Griffith et al. 2001). In addition to the physical variations that may influence data

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

US EPA Region IV has suggested adopting national multimetric assessment methods, sharing information on successful approaches to decision criteria, developing regional reference conditions across political boundaries, and developing shared ecological databases. They have also initiated cooperative efforts to increase exchange of biological data in shared ecoregions or basins. Conducting side-by-side assessments with multi-agency projects and using a single method would also assist in stream classification and developing regional reference conditions by ensuring that differences in assessment results are a consequence of natural differences in biotic communities and not investigator bias (Housten et al. 2002).

Conclusion

Roads cause a variety of impacts on stream ecosystem health and water quality. The use of macroinvertebrate assessment can reveal these impacts if properly conducted. Careful environmental analysis of the site, data comparison to reference sites and species-specific response models can provide accurate assessment of stream impairment and can generate predictions of macroinvertebrate response to road-caused impacts. Comparison of macroinvertebrate assessment results based on methods and models collected by various citizen groups and state agencies will facilitate an accurate understanding of road-caused impacts on stream health. — Christine Morris is a graduate student in Environmental Studies at the University of Montana.

— References follow on next page — 7

References Barbour, M. T., J. Gerritsen, B. D. Snyder, and J. B. Stribling. 1999. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for use in Streams and Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrates, and fish. EPA 841-B-99-002. Second Edition. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Forrow, D. M., and L. Maltby. 2000. Toward a mechanistic understanding of contaminant-induced changes in detritus processing in streams: direct and indirect effects on detrivore feeding. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 19(8):2100-2106. Frondork, L. 2001. An Investigation of the Relationships between Stream Benthic Macroinvertebrate Assemblage Conditions and their Stressors. Thesis for Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Griffith, M. B., P. R. Kaufmann, A. T. Herlihy, and B. H. Hill. 2001. Analysis of macroinvertebrate assemblages in relation to environmental gradients in Rocky Mountain streams. Ecological Applications 11(2):489-505. Hawkins, C. P., R. H. Norris, J. N. Houge, and J. W. Feminella. 2000. Development and Evaluation of Predictice models for measuring the biological integrity of streams Ecological Applications 10(5):1456-1477. Housten, L., M. T. Barbour, D. Lenat, and D. Penrose. 2002. A mulit-agency comparison of aquatic macroinvertebrate stream based bioassessment methodologies. Ecological Indicators 1(4):279-292

King, R. S., K. T. Nunnery, and C. J. Richardson. 2000. Macroinvertebrate assemblage response to highway crossings in forested wetlands: implications for biological assessment. Wetlands Ecology and Management 8:243-256. Lenat, D., D. L. Penrose, and K. W. Eagleson. 1981. Variable effects of sediment addition on stream benthos. Hydrobiologia 187-194. McGurk, B. J., and D. R. Fong. 1995. Equivalent roaded area as a measure of cumulative effect of logging. Environmental Management 19(4):609-621. Mebane, C. A. 2001. Testing bioassessment metrics; macroinvertebrate, sculpin, and salmonid responses to stream habitat, sediment, and metals. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 67:293-322. Newcombe, C. P., and D. D. MacDonald. 1991. Effects of suspended sediments on aquatic ecosystems. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 11:72-82 Trombulak, S. C. and C. A. Frissell. 2000. Review of ecological effects of roads on terrestrial and aquatic communities. Conservation Biology 14(1):18-30. United States Department of Agriculture. 2000. Forest Service Roadless Area Conservation Rule: Final Environmental Impact Statement. Wood, P. J., J. Toone, M. T. Greenwood, and P. D. Armitage. 2005. The response of four lotic macroinvertebrate taxa to burial by sediments. Arch. Hydrobiology 163(2):145162. Wood, P. J. and P. D. Armitage. 1997. Biological effects of fine sediment in the lotic environment. Environmental Management 21(2):203-217.

Hikers make their way along the spring-fed creek in Surprise Canyon. Photo by Daniel Patterson.

8

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

Forest Guardians Awarded Collaborative Road Decommissioning Grant On Friday April 28th, a 15-member federal panel granted Forest Guardians $360,000 under the Collaborative Forest Restoration Program (Community Forest Restoration Act, Pub. L. No. 106-393) to decommission and close excessive roads on the Santa Fe National Forest in New Mexico. The Santa Fe National Forest has the highest road density of any forest in the Southwest Region. The federal grant is unique in that it greatly expands the concept of forest restoration in the Southwest beyond tree-cutting. High road densities degrade water quality, compact soils, fragment wildlife habitat, and contribute to fire ignitions during inappropriate weather conditions. The project will eliminate these negative consequences, improving forest health and water quality for downstream users such as land grant communities, municipalities, acequia (irrigation) associations, and acequia systems. Under the terms of the grant, Forest Guardians will work with several collaborators, including Billy Cordova Logging Inc., Coronado High School, and the Coyote Volunteer Fire Department to restore forests that were heavily logged and roaded over the last century. The goal is to rehabilitate 20 miles and 10 stream crossings. Road decommissioning and revegetation is expected to cost $5,000 per mile and $3,000 per stream crossing. The project will also help develop a sustainable forest restoration industry in the area.

New Federal Policy Aides States In Claiming Roads (RS 2477) Outgoing Interior Secretary Gale Norton signed a “secretarial order” reinforcing states’ and counties’ rights to claim roads on federal land as their own, and maintain or expand them. The policy will apply to roads on all public lands, including national parks and wildlife refuges. The order effectively repeals Bureau of Land Management rules, which, since 1997, required states and counties to show proof of construction in order to claim a road under RS 2477. Now, counties need only prove road claims under state laws. Norton’s order reflects a court ruling last fall that upheld the rights of several Utah counties to grade roads across the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. Under the ruling, neither the state nor the federal government can act unilaterally in changing the size or use of a road. States’ rights advocates praise the policy as a victory for local control, while environmental groups are concerned that the order will lead to increased development and access for off-road vehicle use on public lands. “There are red flags all over this,” said Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance Director Heidi McIntosh. “The biggest red flag is that the trails and other routes that are now closed to vehicular traffic will be turned over to the counties, who will in turn try to turn them into highways.”

No Progress In Snowmobile Emissions Since 2001 A Yellowstone National Park study has concluded that even the cleanest snowmobiles have failed to meet projected improvements in emissions. The study demonstrates that snowcoaches are up to 41 times cleaner than the most environmentally-friendly snowmobiles in the Park. Yellowstone asked snowmobile manufacturers to reduce carbon monoxide emissions by 70 percent (relative to 1999 two-stroke engines), but no 2005 snowmobile has met that goal.

Off-road vehicle tracks in a high alpine meadow. Photo courtesy of Forest Guardians of Santa Fe, NM.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

Yellowstone National Park is working on an environmental impact statement that will call for improved technology, but many are unsure if snowmobile manufacturers can be made to comply. Emissions are expected to improve when cleaner technologies are developed.

— see more updates on next page — 9

Victories California’s Algodones Dunes Will Remain Protected A federal court has ruled against an attempt by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to rescind protection of the Algodones Sand Dunes in southern California’s Sonoran Desert. The area is home to several threatened and endangered species, including Peirson’s milk vetch, desert tortoise, and flat-tailed horned lizard. In 2000, 50,000 acres of the 180,000-acre dune area were set aside and designated off-limits to off-road vehicle use. This reprieve has allowed endangered wildlife to begin to recover. The BLM, however, recently released a new plan for the dunes that would allow off-road vehicles in protected areas. The Center for Biological Diversity and other groups sued the agency. The court ruled that BLM’s proposed management plan violated federal statutes including the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. For now, these dune areas will continue to be free of motorized use.

Gallatin National Forest May Decommission Old Logging Roads The Gallatin National Forest in Montana is proposing to decommission 47 miles of old logging roads and a 1.2 mile stretch of an unauthorized off-road vehicle route in the Bangtail Mountains, northeast of Bozeman. Many of these roads cut through land formerly owned by Big Sky Lumber. Forest officials have known for years that the roads are causing severe erosion, and that siltation in nearby streams is above allowable levels. Westslope cutthroat trout inhabit the area. The Forest Service now has the money for the project, and expects to get started in the summer of 2006. Environmentalists and motorized use advocates seem to agree that the project is a good one.

Plan To Reopen Florida Forest To OffRoad Vehicles Rejected

An ATV rider ignores an “area closed to motorized vehicles” sign. Photo courtesy of the Center for Biological Diversity.

Proposed Off-Road Use Along Alaska’s Dalton Highway Struck Down A bill that would have opened the land along Alaska’s Dalton Highway (see RIPorter 11.1) to off-road vehicle use died in the Alaska Legislature May 2nd. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Ralph Seekins (R-Fairbanks), would have allowed off-road vehicles and snowmachines in the area. It generated firm opposition from a broad swath of Alaska interests, including the Northern Alaska Environmental Center, the North Slope Borough and the Alaska Trucking Association. There was concern that motorized use in the area would have negative effects on wildlife, and could create dangerous conditions for truckers using the road. Similar proposals have been submitted in Alaska several times before, without success. The proposal’s sponsor vowed to resurrect the bill next year.

A plan submitted by Florida’s Southwest Division of Forestry to allow off-road vehicle use in Southern Golden Gate Estates has been rejected by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The 55,000-acre Estates area is part of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, intended to mitigate some of the damage inflicted to the Everglades for decades. The plan is overseen by the Army Corps of Engineers. The Corps rejected the proposed re-opening of at least 12 miles of trails to off-road recreation. Other proposals such as a shooting range and cattle grazing were similarly rejected. The plan also generated criticism from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The sensitive area has been closed to off-road vehicle use for some time, but was previously a haven for off-road vehicle users and gun enthusiasts.

10

Off-road vehicle scars on a vegetated sand dune, Santa Fe National Forest. Photo by Chris Kassar, Center for Biological Diversity.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

Alert Burns’ Bill Threatens Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness Legislation would allow more than 100 miles of road building, unlimited motorized use. Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT) has introduced legislation (S.2633) that would allow dam owners in Montana’s Bitterroot Valley to build roads and use unlimited amounts of motorized equipment to access and maintain 16 dams in the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness. The bill would allow roads to be built where trails now exist in ten canyons, most of which are entry points into the 1.3 million-acre Wilderness.

Burns’ bill would:

• Grant unrestricted rights-of-way (ROW) up to 120 feet wide where trails now exist, and up to 500 feet from the high-water mark around the dams and lakes. The bill allows dam owners to sell the ROW to anyone, which could lead to resort home development. • Exempt activities on the dams, lakes and rights-of-way from the Wilderness Act, National Environmental Policy Act, National Dam Safety Program Act, or any federal law to protect fish and wildlife or maintain water quality. • Allow unlimited motorized travel along the rights-of-way and unlimited use of motorized equipment at the dams. • Strip Forest Service jurisdiction from the lands and give it to the state. The dam owners would not be liable for any claim or damage resulting from their operation of the dams, except where one could prove negligence of the owner.

Take Action Now! • Write or call Senator Burns and tell him what you think of his dam bill. Urge him to encourage the Forest Service and water users to seek wilderness compatible, non-motorized solutions. • Write or call your own senators and congresspersons and make them aware of your concerns.

A dam at the edge of Canyon Lake in the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness. Photo courtesy of Wilderness Watch.

The bill would strike a blow to the Wilderness Act and could set the stage for road-building in other areas of the National Wilderness Preservation System. Furthermore, the bill is entirely unnecessary. The Wilderness Act recognizes valid rights of water users to maintain dams in the Wilderness while preventing degradation of wilderness character. The Forest Service should assist water users in finding wilderness-compatible, non-motorized ways to maintain the dams…as it has been done for the past 100 years.

Contact Information Senator ____________ United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 (202) 224-3121 (Capitol Switchboard) www.senate.gov Representative ______________ U.S. House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 (202) 224-3121 (Capitol Switchboard) www.house.gov For more information contact Wilderness Watch. Visit their website at www.wildernesswatch.org.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

11

Wildlands CPR Announces

A Road Runs Through It

By Bethanie Walder

I

t was almost exactly ten years ago (August 1996) when the Wildlands CPR board realized that we couldn’t just focus exclusively on providing activists with legal, scientific and technical information about roads and offroad vehicles. We discussed how critical it is for people to understand WHY roads have ecological and economic costs, WHY we have too many roads and not enough roadless lands; WHY wildlands should be restored through road removal; and WHY off-road vehicle recreation is damaging. After all, if people don’t understand why something is a problem, they are unlikely to do anything about it. That fall we launched an essay section in our newsletter to start to build real understanding about the problems with roads and off-road vehicles, and the opportunities for real wildland restoration. Our first essay was written by one of our advisory board members, Howie Wolke. In his essay, “Aliens Unlock Secrets of the Road,” Howie theorized that if aliens were observing the United States, “they might easily conclude that roads – from superhighways to bumpy dirt tracks – have a deep religious significance to our society. Why else would humans crisscross the entire landscape with them?” Later in his essay, he concludes that our religious-like zeal to build roads is driven by our desire to control nature, “We fear what we can’t control, and we can’t control nature without roads and their trappings.” Howie’s essay was terrific, and it set the stage for the next ten years of incredible essays about the problems with roads and off-road vehicles, and the values and importance of watershed restoration, roadless wildlands and more.

12

“Wilderness: A Reminder” is a wood engraving by Claire Emery. A Road Runs Through It: Reviving Wild Places is illustrated with Emery’s stunning wood engravings. Emery is an artist and naturalist who focuses on conveying the beauties and mysteries of nature through art and education. She has illustrated publications for clients including W.W Norton, Montana Audubon, U.S. Forest Service, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, California State Parks, Mountain Press, and Orion magazine. Visit her website at http:// emeryart.com.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

Several years ago, we started an effort to compile some of the best essays into a collection that we could make more widely available than our newsletter. Last year we found a publisher, Johnson Books, and the collection is being published this summer. Entitled A Road Runs Through It, it contains 28 essays from an amazing array of writers. Some of the essays are reprints from our newsletters over the past ten years. Some are reprints from other books, and quite a few were written just for this collection. Tom Petersen, Wildlands CPR’s Development Director, took on the task of shaping this collection of essays into a meaningful, coordinated book about roads, off-road vehicles and watershed restoration. For the past several issues of The Road RIPorter we’ve been printing abridged versions of these new essays, including pieces by Phil Condon, Janisse Ray and Dave Havlick. We’ve printed them to tickle your interest, and we hope you’ll pick up a copy of the book to read the essays in their entirety. In addition to those authors, the book contains a foreward by Annie Proulx and essays by Peter Matthieson, Barry Lopez, Edward Abbey, Derrick Jensen, Stephanie Mills, Mary Sojourner, Katie Alvord and many more fine authors. Several of these authors will host readings in their home towns once the book is published this summer. It’s our hope that A Road Runs Through It will help expand the debate around roads, off-road vehicles and restoration. It presents an opportunity for readers to carefully consider the impacts our actions have. As Howie said so many years ago, “As society matures beyond its lingering frontier mentality, perhaps we’ll loosen our white-knuckled grip on nature. Maybe we’ll realize that more roads (and dams, clearcuts, strip malls, human protoplasm…) make our world poorer, not richer. … Perhaps we’ll begin to restore a balance, a life affirming partnership with the world from whence we came. A much wilder world than the one in which we now live.” And Howie’s right. Ten years ago the National Park Service was the only agency routinely restoring wildlands by removing unneeded, ecologically-damaging roads. In the time since, we’ve seen the Forest Service state that they should remove up to 186,000 miles of roads from national forest lands, and we’ve seen them invest in some of that

To Purchase A Road Runs Through It: Call Johnson Books toll-free: 1.800.258.5830 Mention Wildlands CPR and get a 15% discount ($15 instead of $17.50) The book is also available on Amazon.com. While it may be less expensive there, Wildlands CPR doesn’t make as much per book. So give Johnson Books a call to help support Wildlands CPR. Thank you! much needed work. We’ve seen the Park Service expand some of its road removal programs, and we’ve seen all three land management agencies consider new approaches to off-road vehicle management (albeit significant flaws remain). Granted, funding for forest restoration is currently tied up in nationwide debates over fire and logging, limiting investment in road removal, but we’re working on that. While it might be easy for a resource organization like Wildlands CPR to focus our efforts on WHAT can be

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

done to address road and off-road vehicle problems, we won’t be satisfied until a larger and broader number of people understand WHY off-road vehicles and roads are a problem. As Aldo Leopold once said, “recreational development is a job not of building roads into lovely country, but of building receptivity into the still unlovely human mind.” A Road Runs Through It attempts to build that receptivity, with thoughtful, provocative and creative literary essays. We hope you enjoy reading it as much as we’ve enjoyed putting it together.

13

The Citizen Spotlight shares the stories of some of the awesome activists and organizations we work with, both as a tribute to them and as a way of highlighting successful strategies and lessons learned. Please e-mail your nomination for the Citizen Spotlight to [email protected].

Citizen Spotlight on Glen Jensen By Cathy Adams

I

n 1994 Glen Jensen bought 270 acres of land bordering Arkansas’ Ozark National Forest. By 2003 he and his wife had saved up enough to build their dream home, planning to spend the rest of their lives enjoying the sights, sounds and solitude of nature. Then in June of 2005 Glen received a letter informing him that the Forest Service was proposing to designate 74 miles of trail in his backyard as off-road vehicle (ORV) routes; directly impacting a quality of life he spent more than a decade trying to build. Glen’s time spent hunting, fishing and observing wildlife near his home allows him to witness bear, deer, mountain lion and turkeys in their natural habitat. One of his favorite things to do is to listen to nature sounds, but Glen says the noise and disturbance created by off-road vehicles cause the wildlife to disappear. “From my experience, deer in the woods become completely nocturnal, the bear will move out and turkeys will nest elsewhere…I’ve seen turkeys abandon nests due to off-road vehicle disturbance.” Currently, some hunters and hikers use the 74 miles of trail, but the trails are at least 30 years old, overgrown and have been mostly reclaimed by the forest. With all the downed trees and limited access, off-road vehicles go somewhere else. But if the Buckhorn OHV Trail goes through the Forest Service would clean up the old trails, create three miles of new trail and construct three new trailheads — one of which would be 1.5 miles from the Jensen’s home. With the three county roads around his home creating a triangle of access points, there would be a constant stream of off-road vehicles near his property. “We live here because of the solitude and quiet. If the Forest Service puts an off-road vehicle track here it destroys our way of living. So the only choice is to fight it or leave…and I don’t want to leave.”

Glen after a successful hunt.

14

So fight it he did. First Glen prepared comments on the proposed trail. He learned that motorized vehicle use would be unrestricted, the Forest Service had funding only for trail construction (not upkeep), there would be no dedicated law enforcement, no published regulations for the area and no dedicated management resources. “There’s only one Forest Service law enforcement officer responsible for 450,000 acres in three counties, he said ‘there’s no way he can police the activity.’” When Glen asked about enforcement he was told the ATV clubs would police themselves. Concerned about this and other issues, Glen commented that the proposed trail along the north boundary of his property would also disturb wildlife. He expressed his concerns over the county road use and maintenance, trash dumping and littering, the project’s funding, maintenance and noise, dust and water quality impacts. A few months later Glen received a Decision Notice from the Forest Service with a Finding of No Significant Impact. However, they did consider the section of proposed trail that ran along Glen’s northern property boundary, and moved it farther north. While Glen appreciated that, it was the only concern they addressed, so he decided to file an appeal and found an environmental law firm to assist him. While Glen waited for his appeal to be processed, he researched more of the project. He contacted organizations and individuals who commented on the original proposal. He contacted his state senator, state representative and Governor, and he called U.S. Senators Mark Pryor (D) and Blanche Lincoln (D). Sen. Pryor sent someone out to walkthrough Glen’s property and asked him to put on paper what kind of proposal he would accept should the project go through. Glen decided he would like to see the trailhead proposed 1.5 miles from his home removed.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

Senators Lincoln and Pryor both wrote letters to the Forest Service relaying Glen’s concerns. Near the end of January 2006 Glen received a letter stating that his appeal was accepted and that he should receive a reply within three months. One week later he got another letter saying that the Forest Service had decided to go forward with the project. Glen called the Regional Office: “You told me this would take until March. I thought someone would come out to look at it…review maps…and a few days later I receive this letter? That shows me you didn’t review my appeal.” Undeterred, Glen researched further and came across another project proposed for the same area: The Pine Mountain Dam. The dam would provide area residents a year round supply of water to combat past shortages. Glen compared maps and found that the Buckhorn OHV Trail would cross the river upstream of the proposed dam, which he thought could potentially have an impact on the water quality of Lee Creek, the source downstream residents were planning to use as their drinking supply.

Off-road access points often become a conduit for the illegal dumping of garbage and debris. Photo by Glen Jensen.

This discovery gave Glen the new angle he needed. He found that Sen. Lincoln got $100,000 appropriated for the dam and found that the Army Corps of Engineers had put up $350,000. Glen called State Representative Beverly Pyle (R) and asked her to send a letter about his findings. Glen also wrote to Michael Sanders, the supervisor of the Ozark-St. Francis National Forest. In short order, Glen received a response from the Forest Service saying they were pulling the Buckhorn OHV Trail project until further analysis could be completed. Glen was thrilled to get the news. Although the success was only temporary, Glen figured he had two to five years until the Forest Service could complete another EA, and it bought him time to gain support from the community. Glen’s advice: don’t give up. He participated in the comment period, wrote an appeal, and did extensive research. He submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to release the names of those who commented on the proposal and to see the sources of project funding. He found out that only 39 people commented on the proposal, and he called them to try to collaborate. Glen credits the non-profit environmental law firm, Wildlaw, for valuable assistance, in particular, their publications that offered advice on Forest Service regulations and how to prepare for litigation. Glen also recommends getting on the Forest Service mailing list for projects in your area. “Don’t get taken by surprise,” he says. Glen’s inspiration comes from going out into the woods and listening to nature’s sounds. “I go back and forth on the off-road vehicle trail and I sometimes think it won’t be that bad. But then I sit in the woods listening to the birds and the squirrels…hear hens clucking on a nest behind me…and then I hear a four wheeler four miles down the road…and that’s just one.”

Off-road impacts to soils, water and solitude are among Glen’s concerns. Photo by Glen Jensen.

Glen isn’t sure what the future holds for the Buckhorn OHV Trail. “If the project goes through I will submit comments, file an appeal and go to federal court if I have to. If it ends, well, then that’s it.” As of now Glen’s passion has forced him to use his personal money to fight his cause, “Right now I’m trying to sell 121 acres to fund this fight and I’m taking money out of my 401k to do this.” But Glen believes it’s all worth it, “If they put the off-road vehicle trail in I can’t hunt. I can’t hear the gobble of turkeys over the noise of off-road vehicles. It will take away my freedom to pursue what I consider to be one of the most important activities in my life.” — Cathy Adams is the Wildlands CPR Program and Membership Associate.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

15

Transportation Program Update Wildlands CPR’s Transportation Program is pleased to announce that we have awarded strategic mini-grants ($3,000-$5,000) to activists in the thick of off-road vehicle planning. On-the-ground fieldwork is expensive and difficult to fund, but critical considering that desk-bound land managers are often unaware of the devastating impacts that unmanaged off-road vehicle use has wrought on their watch. Wildlands CPR was uniquely positioned to dispense aid to groups working to restore native ecosystems and recreational balance on our national forests, thanks to support from the 444S Foundation. Early this spring, Wildlands CPR asked local conservation groups to submit proposals for funding to advance both proactive and defensive efforts to implement the new Forest Service off-road vehicle rule. The response was overwhelming. We received 22 proposals requesting about four times the funding we had to give. All the proposals were excellent, and it was truly a heart-wrenching process to decide who would make the final cut. In the end, we chose to fund those groups that demonstrated the closest adherence to our three goals: projects that will address immediate threats and opportunities related to the implementation of the new Forest Service ORV rule in western national forests; projects that will advance a proactive litigation strategy to uphold the Executive Orders as forests begin to implement the rule; and projects that could test a proactive zoning approach to route designation as part of the implementation of the new Forest Service rule. We awarded mini-grants to Washington-based Conservation Northwest, The Three Forests Coalition (Utah) and Great Old Broads for Wilderness, Los Padres Forest Watch in south central California and The Upper Gila Watershed Alliance in New Mexico. In addition, we funded an independent project to investigate the dubious legality of the notorious Paiute ATV system in central Utah. Please join with us in wishing these groups a safe and productive field season!

16

Wildlands CPR staff at a recent planning retreat. From left to right: Jason Kiely, Marnie Criley, Tim Peterson, Bethanie Walder, Adam Switalski, Cathy Adams, Tom Petersen. Wildlands CPR photo.

Ecosystem Management Decision Support Workshop Adam helped organize a Forest Service Regional Training Academy workshop on using Ecosystem Management Decision Support (EMDS) in transportation planning. EMDS is a GIS-based system that has been used as a transparent tool to prioritize road removal and designate off-road vehicle routes. Fraser Shilling (UC Davis), Brian Muller (CU Denver), and Paul Burgess (Redlands U) led the workshop along with Mark Jensen (FS Region 1 Analyst). The workshop was attended by about 25 people from the Forest Service, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Land Management, University of Montana, Environmental Protection Agency, and private consultants.

Information requests Adam continues to provide citizens, activists, scientists, and managers with scientific information on roads, road removal, and off-road vehicles. Recent information requests came from the University of Uyo (Nigeria); Colorado Environmental Coalition; Utah State University; The Nature Conservancy; the Heritage Forest Campaign; the Nez Perce Tribe; National Parks Conservation Association; Five Valleys Land Trust; The Wilderness Society; and concerned citizens in the U.S. and Chile.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

NTWC Update The Natural Trails & Waters Coalition has organized four workshops on “advocacy through authentic collaboration” this quarter. The workshop prepares participants to (1) assess a forest’s goals and methods for using authentic collaboration, (2) help design the process, and (3) effectively engage in that process, condition their involvement, or choose not to participate at all. A balance of conservationists, off-roaders, other recreationists, and agency staff have been invited to the workshops. The Coalition secured a matching grant from the National Forest Foundation to organize these workshops once the Forest Service and BLM announced their intention to employ “collaboration” for many of the scores of travel planning and off-road vehicle route designation processes that are expected to take place in the coming years. We have partnered with grassroots conservation organizations who have hosted the workshops and expert trainers from the University of Virginia’s Institute for Environmental Negotiation. Wildlands CPR has also supported these workshops through issue expertise and representing the Coalition at one workshop. The first of these workshops were hosted by the Center for Biological Diversity and held in Flagstaff, AZ (March 18) and in Albuquerque, NM (April 1). The California Wilderness Coalition hosted a workshop on May 11 to in Sacramento. Friends of the Routt Backcountry, a member of the Backcountry Snowsports Alliance, hosted the Steamboat Springs workshop on May 13. Nearly 100 people have attended the workshops so far, including two dozen Forest Service staff, dozens of off-road vehicle users, quiet recreationists, and conservationists. One outcome from the New Mexico workshop, for example, is that the 13 conservation/quiet recreation groups who attended have now formed a statewide coalition to address off-road vehicle issues. The Center for Biological Diversity is coordinating this new effort, with help from the Natural Trails and Waters Coalition. Wildlands CPR staff will represent the Coalition at the next workshop, to be held on July 15 in Salt Lake City. The Coalition will arrange for up to three more collaboration workshops in the coming months.

Restoration Program Update The Restoration Program has been in high gear this spring on the local, regional and national levels. Locally, Marnie devoted time to the Governor’s Restoration Forum in Billings, Montana June 8-9. Montana’s Gov. Brian Schweitzer is very interested in pursuing a restoration economy, and Marnie worked with members of his staff to help coordinate this Forum. One key theme of the event was investing in restoration work in Montana. Wildlands CPR intern Breeann Johnson finalized a paper that addresses this issue, and Marnie presented the paper at the Restoration Forum. More than 300 people attended the extremely successful event. Regionally, Marnie continues her involvement with the Hells Canyon Collaborative. The Collaborative finalized a charter and is now focusing its attention on roads analysis and transportation planning. Wildlands CPR will bring Fraser Shilling to the next collaborative meeting on June 20 (Fraser has utilized the Ecosystem Management Decision Support System (EMDS) to conduct roads analysis on the Tahoe National Forest). It is possible the Forest Service, with assistance from the Collaborative, will utilize EMDS to conduct transportation planning and roads analysis within the Hells Canyon National Recreation Area. Marnie also led a successful roads workshop for the Northeast Washington Forestry Coalition, which is in the process of writing a collaborative roads policy for the Colville National Forest.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

Nationally, Marnie and the National Forest Restoration Collaborative are planning a trip to Washington DC in late July to meet with public land agency personnel about collaborative restoration efforts related to roads, weeds and fish. This trio will focus on successful collaborative efforts that go beyond just logging and fire issues.

Citizen Science on the Clearwater National Forest Adam continues to support citizen science monitoring on the Clearwater National Forest, working with Len Broberg (University of Montana Environmental Studies Director) and Anna Holden (UM graduate student and Volunteer Coordinator). Adam helped Anna develop outreach materials, increase recruiting, and prepare for teaching at Kamiah High School. Anna’s abstract was accepted for an oral presentation at the Society for Conservation Biology’s (SCB) annual meeting in San Jose, CA this summer. She will present methods for organizing citizen science volunteers, as well as some preliminary monitoring results. Adam is helping her key out tracks and analyze data for the presentation. For more information or to get involved, contact Anna at: clearwaterroads@wildlands cpr.org.

17

The Policy Primer is a column designed to highlight the ins & outs of a specific road or off-road vehicle policy. If you have a policy you’d like us to investigate, let us know!

Using GIS to Build Citizen Alternatives for Travel Planning By Tim D. Peterson

Editor’s Note: This policy primer is abbreviated from a more detailed guide on citizen alternatives, available on our website at www.wildlandscpr.org.

B

ecause travel planning has significant environmental consequences, it constitutes a major federal action subject to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This means that citizens have the opportunity to submit alternatives for consideration in a draft environmental assessment (EA) or draft environmental impact statement (EIS). Many travel planning processes produce a range of alternatives that favor motorized recreation at the expense of solitude, natural quiet, and resource and wildlife habitat. Depending on the political climate, agency employees themselves may even advocate expanding motorized route networks. Often, a token “conservation alternative” will be alarmingly similar to the agency’s proposed action. In this scenario, a true conservation alternative formulated by citizens is indispensable. It is critical to get involved early, determine what the agency’s alternatives will look like, and plan your own alternative based on true conservation values. It is also critical to meet with the Forest Service early to understand their format and timelines to make sure they will accept and analyse your alternative. Knowing conditions on the ground, as well as thoughtful data gathering and GIS analysis, are key to building a successful conservation-oriented alternative.

There are a number of ways to complete the GIS portion of building an alternative, and rather than producing a specific set of instructions, this primer offers an overview of the technical process below. An important note: it is advantageous to utilize a GIS technician who is familiar with the issues related to travel planning, and who knows the lands they will be mapping. There are essentially three major phases to building an alternative for transportation planning: data gathering and analysis, constructing and analyzing an alternative, and advocating for your alternative. Additionally, if certain routes are well-known for inciting user conflict or damaging resources, provide specific information on why the routes should be closed to motorized use as early in the process as possible. This will help to take the worst offenders “off the table.” Include photographs and a 1:24,000 quad map displaying their location, and GPS coordinates if practical. This information is the most effective in eliminating “bad actors” from consideration for designation.

Data Gathering & Analysis Overview Step 1: Determine criteria for areas where off-road vehicles do not belong, including, but not limited to: •Designated, recommended or citizen-proposed wilderness or roadless areas •Riparian zones (streams and wetlands should be granted a 150foot buffer from each edge) •Critical habitat for threatened, endangered and sensitive species (animal and plant species) •Critical summer and winter range and fawning areas for big game species •Areas covered by highly erodible and otherwise fragile soils •Intersections with trails, areas, and watersheds traditionally used by hikers, skiers, horseback riders, mountain bikers, hunters, or other quiet recreationists and sportsmen •Areas containing archaeological sites, cultural artifacts, and historic sites •Selected sensitive vegetation types such as wet meadows, mesic meadows and alpine tundra •Municipal Watersheds Consider establishing a list of specific criteria such as these for submission to the agency prior to construction of your alternative.

Deep ruts from an illegal, user-created route on the Wasatch-Cache NF, UT. Photo courtesy of the Sierra Club, Ogden Chapter.

18

Step 2: Obtain all of the available GIS data relevant to travel planning from Forest Service planners, agency GIS staff, your state’s wildlife division, and USGS.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

Forest Service data may be posted on the forest’s website. A recent ruling by the 9th Circuit re-affirms that GIS data qualifies for a FOIA fee waiver. Some forests have their own GIS websites, and a call or visit to the relevant agency GIS technician should produce a list of coverages maintained by the agency. Be aware of what datasets are called, and request them by name. For example, most forest’s coverages of timber sales are called “activities,” not “timber sales.” Some forests may have edited or expanded available coverages based on input from agency specialists. You will need data on geography and administrative designations, roads, topography, forest cover, wildlife and wildlife habitat, sensitive species, soils, vegetation types, and much more. Please contact Wildlands CPR for a complete list. Step 3: Layer the datasets and criteria to identify those routes that appear to meet and those that violate established criteria. Step 4: Take maps to meetings with engineering staff and “ologists” from the Forest and District levels to ask them to identify the routes and areas they are concerned about due to problems with user conflict, erosion, spread of invasive weeds, wet stream crossings, etc. Ensure that the Forest Service is using appropriate datasets in their planning. Contact Wildlands CPR for a complete list of datasets that should be used. Step 5: Based on GIS analysis and hot spots identified by Forest Service staff, prioritize and target ground-truthing fieldwork to get additional information, such as: •The level at which inventoried roads are maintained: be they for passenger vehicles, high clearance trucks, off-road vehicles, or be they closed, or revegetated (some or all of this info may be available in GIS form and may not need to be monitored for confirmation) •Condition of riparian zones that contain routes •Existence of inventoried or uninventoried routes •Condition of routes on steep or unstable slopes •Known or suspected hot spots of cross-country travel Step 6: Use existing protocol and forms to document route conditions (such as those provided by Wildlands CPR, http://www.wildlandscpr.org/resourcelibrary/misc/Monitoring.htm, or Great Old Broads for Wilderness, http://www.goginer.org).

Building a Conservation Alternative In GIS When constructing an alternative in GIS, be sure to code your designations in the same terminology as the Forest Service. Obtain the list of classifications that the agency is using. Terms such as “obliterate,” “open yearlong – no restrictions,” “seasonal closure,” and “NM Trail” may be used. If your terms match, the Forest Service will be able to analyze your alternative more easily. Using different designations than the Forest Service can lead to an apples/oranges comparison. Step 1: Run pre-selected screens on the agency’s roads data based on the criteria you defined in phase 1. The result will produce a new roads coverage that will be flagged for conflict with one or more of the established criteria. These conflicting routes are the first draft of routes that will be closed to motorized use in your alternative. Step 2: Examine the screened roads data carefully, re-coding as “open” those routes that are arterials or collectors that conflict with the screens. (For example, an interstate highway may be flagged many times, but cannot be closed by this process.)

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

Protection from off-road vehicles has allowed vegetation to recover in the Furnace Creek area of the Mojave Desert. However, it is now under threat of motorized use once again. Photo by Daniel Patterson.

Step 3: Carefully examine critical summer and winter range for game species, and code seasonal closures for routes in conflict. Again, this may be impractical for some arterials and collectors. Step 4: Review your designations route-byroute, using your preset screens and any photos or additional relevant information. Make sure all route segments are coded correctly, as small mistakes now can lead to big headaches later in the process. Step 5: Rejoin cut route segments so the total number of segments matches the agency’s data. Step 6: Assess the maximum possible “distance from roads” in your alternative, the “conservation alternative” and the preferred alternative. Calculate 1/2 mile, 1 mile, 2 miles, 3 miles, 4+ miles from roads in GIS, (there are a number of ways to accomplish this.) Construct tables and maps displaying this information. The results are often shocking, and have impact with the public and agency personnel. (For example, even with many route closures, most areas of the forest are still likely to be within two miles of a road).

Advocating For Your Conservation Alternative Step 1: Submit your alternative to the FS in a timely manner. Urge them to fully analyze it in the DEIS. If you have followed the steps above to assure consistency, there should be little argument that analysis isn’t feasible. Step 2: Build a grassroots campaign to garner support for your alternative. Generate media, letters to the editor, and meetings with the Forest Service from community leaders and activists. —Tim Peterson is the Wildlands CPR Transportation Policy Coordinator.

19

The Deep Blue Breath of Wildness By Phil Condon Editor’s Note: The following is an abbreviated version of the full essay included in A Road Runs Through It (See Depaving the Way on pages 12-13).

A

bout two years ago I stumbled across a worldwide writing contest on the Internet. Sponsored by British Shell Oil, it offered a prize of twenty thousand pounds, and the question under consideration was “Do we still need nature?” I tried to write a line or two or five, dispirited by the question and distrustful of its context. I wanted to believe the question was only intended to provoke, but I didn’t enter the contest. I don’t know anyone who did. That contest theme still comes back to me now and again, especially when I talk with someone who strikes me as if he might take the question seriously. Yet given who’s out there cutting on all the cutting edges, those who seem to pull the rest of us along like so many field hands picking up the gleanings, maybe to all of us sooner or later it will have to be a serious question. The need for nature, the defense of wildness. Many others have articulated both of these ideas better than I can, but in 2005, on the racing curve of change we’re still trying to comprehend as history, it’s likely good for each of us to take another run at thinking them through.

Yet here in the dark of a July morning, midway in the quick six hours between last and first light this time and latitude in Montana, it’s difficult to feel coherent or logical, for more than a few minutes or a few sentences at most, about anything. Half a decade after the second coming didn’t come and the calendar crash didn’t crash, on this mind-muddled, bloody-handed, and soon-to-be unthermostatted planet, coherence feels close to impossible. The center is long loose— at worst gone, at best invisible—and the circumference, now surmised from sketchy evidence somewhere, I’m sure, to be only an erratic ellipse, won’t hold either. I slide to sleep most nights with a daylong brew of too much information and too little wisdom, in a slosh and surfeit of forlorn facts and faiths, trusting my dreams to the deep blue breath of wildness. And pressed, I find my waking self trusting truth deeper than logic and rationale, traces from waymarks along the paths I’ve come, most often found on foot and among trees, soil, and stone, alongside free-moving water, and beneath wide skies of all shapes and colors. Behold, the world. And I believe our species, we humans, are the beholden. . . . . . The day was too hot for bushwhacking but that’s what I was doing. I’d just cooled off in Rattlesnake Creek right where Bee Creek comes in. I nestled among wet stones, only my face, chest, and toes above water, as wands of sunlight wafted through cottonwoods. In ten minutes my jaw chattered and my shins ached. I was so cold I started hiking Bee Creek.

South San Juan Wilderness, Colorado. Photo copyright Tim Peterson.

20

About the time I ascended into a hillside ravine of permanent mid-day shadow, the low arching limbs had me on hands and knees, half in the trickle creek, half out. I smelled a mix of dusts in the half distance—leaf dust, rock dust, grass dust— the summer heat and wind working on the mountain world, breaking it apart that afternoon like any other, molecule by molecule. When I came to thickets of coarse green straws, horsetail scouring-rushes, I stopped to sit on a boulder white-

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

gray-green with lichen. It’s impossible to move through the world without your weight falling on other life. The question, I guess, is how to be aware of it, how to move and carry it through a living world. It’s so easy to throw our weight around, but throw it around enough and that’s all we see, the world a mirror to our own poundage and force: tires and fumes, the blade and the dynamite, a bottomless concrete kiln and countless culverts. As quickly as I’d chilled in the creek, I heated up in the rough, arbored crevice of Bee Creek. Ninety-five in the shade, I guessed, weather to stay still in. I slowed my breath, listening to the midday wind in the pines above the watery silence. It’s a different sound in hot light than at cool night, higher-pitched and more uniform. I waited for nothing in particular, just glad to be out there alone. Except for the jets I expected, six miles up, and except for my breath, it was free of human sound. Learning time. Nothing in particular came along soon enough, though, in the form of a whirr that could have been more wind but wasn’t. A hummingbird whizzed by into the maze of a still-blooming syringa bush and then perched. Stunning. I’d seen them perch and tuck wings only a few dozen times in my life. This one seemed way too small, with its wings settled, to ever fly fast or far. And then more surprise: it had settled in right next to another who was already there apparently. For how long I didn’t know. The two sat an inch or so apart five feet from my forehead. I was sure they were blackchinned hummingbirds, but I couldn’t see enough color to tell male from female. I tried not to tremble with my breathing, but something told me they knew I was there and were willing to sit still that close to me if I was willing to do the same. What did I look like to them? Too impossibly big for locomotion of any kind? Each of us lived and moved in a world scaled beyond the other’s understanding. Then, transcending my speculations, why I remember all this enough to tell happened. They turned, one to the other, their beaks in profile seeming as narrow as tenpenny nails and as long as the birds were tall. I took this in, made my mental comparisons, just in time to see the bird on the right open its beak wide, maybe two inches, while the one on the left moved its closed beak down and into the other’s. Something rare was happening in that four o’clock heat on a steep slope in western Montana, and I wanted to slow it down but couldn’t. The first bird kept poking its long beak all the way down into the second’s throat, and I could think, of course, only of what I really know, which is love, and sex, and eating, and I wondered if I was seeing

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

Photo by Marcel Huijser.

two mates or two siblings or a parent with offspring. The breeze winked sunlight between the arms of Douglas fir and fingers of river birch for a long clock-gone moment, and then it all stopped; the beaks closed up and the birds turned back, both facing me again. Just as I decided that, yes, it must be feeding, the first bird lifted, its wings a dynamo blur again, and hovered off to disappear in green. I wanted to feel lonely for the one remaining behind, or for myself, but before I could do either, the second one’s wings changed too. It rose, turned, and vanished. Both birds seemed about the same tiny size, no clear distinction, and I wasn’t sure who was feeding whom, one regurgitating a nectary syrup or mashed insects for the other or one retrieving food from the other’s throat. I couldn’t tell the feeder from the fed, but maybe that’s just a line the mind draws through the fleshy fabric of wild time where every living thing, and maybe every dead thing, too, is both, over and over again. I’m sure somebody somewhere knows, in general, what’s likely, what’s known, about what I saw, but no one really does because those two very particular hearts the size of peas beating two hundred times a minute, those tiny moments with wings, showed me something one time only and then took it with them back into their folded forest life. No matter how I name and number, it still comes out the same: four o’clock, Bee Creek, ninety-five degrees, forty-two hundred feet above sea level, Rattlesnake Mountains, two birds, a thousand-odd trees, one human. Wildness. — Phil Condon teaches environmental writing and literature at the University of Montana. Author of Clay Center and Montana Surround, he is a winner of the William Faulkner Award for Creative Writing.

21

W

e’ve had an early heat wave here in Montana, with May temperatures in the 90s. Our gardens are growing, the rivers are practically over-flowing and work, well, work is positively crazy as we prepare for summer field seasons, travel planning on a grand scale, the Montana Governor’s Restoration Forum, and the publication of our new book, “A Road Runs Through It.” The book is the culmination of years of work, and we’re really proud of it. A big congratulations to Wildlands CPR’s Development Director, Tom Petersen, for making this happen, and especially for editing the book. We hope you’ll decide to get a copy for yourself, and some for your friends, too. Preparing for the book release has been a big project this spring, and we’d like to once again thank all of the authors who wrote essays for the book. We’d especially like to thank Claire Emery, who came in at the last minute and created six stunning woodcut engravings to use as illustrations. We will be making prints of these woodcuts available for sale, both as wall hangings and as notecards. If you’re interested in viewing Claire’s designs, please visit our website. And thanks Claire, for all your incredibly hard, speedy, and beautiful work on the woodcuts. Speaking of thanks, we’d like to extend a big thank you to the Firedoll, Cinnabar, Patagonia and National Forest Foundations for generous grants to support our work. Both the National Forest Foundation and the Cinnabar Foundation have awarded Wildlands CPR challenge grants. If you are interested in helping us meet either of these challenges, we would certainly appreciate it. The Cinnabar Foundation grant ($5,000) is for support of all of our programs, while the National Forest Foundation ($6,150) grant is for our citizen monitoring on the Clearwater National Forest. Both grants provide a one-to-one match, so if you send us $100, we’ll receive another $100 from the challenge grant. If you are interested in helping us meet these grants, please just put a note in the memo line of your check – THANKS!

The Ecology of Transportation: Managing Mobility for the Environment This new book written by ecologists, planners, and social scientists from around the world reviews the impacts of transportation in an increasingly globalized world. The book takes on a holistic view of transportation and addresses the impact of road, rail, ship and aircraft transport in all environments. Adam Switalski, our Science Coordinator, co-authored a chapter addressing the impacts of motorized and non-motorized recreation on the environment. In this chapter, entitled “Environmental impacts of transport related to tourism and leisure activities,” Davenport and Switalski synthesize the most current research on the impacts of recreation ranging from kite surfing to snowmobiling. To see an abstract, table of contents, and to order this book go to: http://www.springer.com/west/home/ environment?SGWID=4-198-22-107940445-0

Sign up for citizen monitoring on the Clearwater National Forest! Wildlands CPR has partnered with the University of Montana, Clearwater National Forest, and Nez Perce Tribe to monitor the effects of forest restoration in the Clearwater National Forest. With the help of citizen scientists, we will be monitoring how fish, wildlife, and habitat recover following road decommissioning. Monitoring will take place from early spring until early autumn. Training and transportation are provided. There will be several trips, so contact Anna Holden, volunteer coordinator, for a schedule. For more information or to become a volunteer this summer for Wildlands CPR, please contact Anna at 406-5439551 or email her at: [email protected].

22

Yucca flower. Photo by Gary M. Stolz, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

Join Wildlands CPR Today!

We’ve made joining Wildlands CPR easier — and more effective — than ever before. Please consider making a monthly pledge!

Consider the advantages of our Monthly Giving Program • Reducing Overhead

• Making Your Gift Easier

Monthly giving puts your contribution directly into action and reduces our administrative costs. The savings go to restoring wildlands and building a more effective network.

Say goodbye to renewal letters! Your credit card or bank statement will contain a record of each gift; we will also send a year-end tax receipt for your records.

• Our Promise To You You maintain complete control over your donation. To change or cancel your gift at any time, just write or give us a call.

Name Phone Street Email

City, State, Zip

Type of Membership:

Individual/Family

Organization

Business

Organization/Business Name (if applicable)

Payment Option #1: Credit Card Pledge

$10/Month (minimum)

$20/Month

Payment Option #2: Electronic Funds Transfer from Checking Account other

Charge my: ___ Visa ___ MasterCard ___ American Express Credit Card Number: _________________________________

$5/Month

$10/Month

$20/Month

other

I/we authorize Wildlands CPR to deduct the amount indicated above from my checking account once per month.

Signature

CSC Number: ________________ *(see below) Expiration date: _____________________________ Signature: __________________________________________ * The Card Security Code (CSC) is usually a 3 - or 4 - digit number, which is not part of the credit card number. The CSC is typically printed on the back of a credit card (usually in the signature field).

Thank you for your support! The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2006

Please include a voided check. All information will be kept confidential. Transfers will be processed on the first Friday of each month, or the following business day should that Friday be a bank holiday.

NOTE: If you would prefer to make an annual membership donation ($30 standard membership, or more), please visit our website (www.wildlandscpr.org) or send your check to the address below. Please send this form and your payment option to: Wildlands CPR • P.O. Box 7516 • Missoula, Montana 59807 23

Waterfall along Surprise Canyon in California’s Mojave Desert. Photo by Daniel Patterson.

Non-profit Organization US POSTAGE PAID MISSOULA MT, 59801 PERMIT NO. 569

Access is not just about getting to a place or knowing that a place is available. Access in its deeper sense must include the drawn out acts of arriving. — Dave Havlick (from his essay in A Road Runs Through It)

The Road-RIPorter is printed on 100% post-consumer recycled, process chlorine-free bleached paper with soy-based ink.