Road Riporter 13.2 Summer Solstice 2008

Summer Solstice 2008. Volume 13 No. 2

CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS ADDRESS OFF-ROAD VEHICLE DAMAGE By Franklin Seal

As the U.S. Congress holds hearings on the impacts of off-road vehicles, the choices facing America’s public lands have never been clearer. Photos by Laurel Hagen.

Inside… A Look Down the Trail, by Bethanie Walder. Page 2 Congressional Hearings Address Off-Road Vehicle Damage, by Franklin Seal. Pages 3-5 Odes to Roads, by Brad Hash. Pages 6-7 DePaving the Way: by Bethanie Walder. Pages 8-9 Get with the Program: Restoration and Transportation Program Updates. Pages 10-11

A family enjoys quiet and solitude.

Regional Reports & Updates. Pages 12-13 Biblio Notes: The Effects of Motorized Access on Wildlife in the Northern Rockies, by Greg Peters. Pages 14-16 New Resources. Page 17 Field Notes: Best Management Practices for ORVs. Pages 18-19 Organizational Spotlight: Friends of the Inyo, by Cathrine Walters Adams. Pages 20-21 Around the Office, Membership Info. Pages 22-23

Check out our website at: www.wildlandscpr.org

Above: vehicle tracks crossing through streambed. Left: Crowd at an off-road rally near Moab, Utah.

I

n mid-April, the news broke in Missoula, MT that Undersecretary of Agriculture Mark Rey had been negotiating in secret with Plum Creek Timber Company on behalf of the Forest Service. Behind closed doors for over a year, they sought to redefine road easements across public land to allow for residential development. When county officials caught wind of the talks and informed Senator John Tester (D-MT), the backroom deal was, at least temporarily, delayed. But with little zoning in place, the counties are in a vulnerable position. Plum Creek, the largest private landowner in the country, owns 8 million acres of industrial timberlands nationwide, with 1.2 million acres in Montana. Much of it is located in the desirable, expanding, partially logged-over, fire-prone, wildland-urban interface. During the past few years, Plum Creek has been selling these lands for subdivisions. But then a little problem occurred. Many of the roads accessing their property cross Forest Service land, so Plum Creek has easements, or rights-of-way (ROW), to use them. The easements were initially granted for logging, but Plum Creek now asserts that they should allow access for residential development. Such use was never considered when environmental analyses were conducted on the easements. There is no question that some form of access is legal. Private landowners whose land is completely surrounded by public land are guaranteed reasonable access, typically defined as a road (although courts have ruled that non-motorized access is reasonable). Nonetheless, the legal questions regarding Plum Creek’s national easement renegotiation remain unanswered, likely until the issue ends up in court. If the agreement between Plum Creek and the Forest Service is adopted, the impacts to land, water, and rural communities will be great. In the Seeley-Swan Valley of Montana, for example, most Plum Creek land sits in habitat corridors for the grizzly bear, protected by the Endangered Species Act (ESA). For Rey to negotiate this profound change to road use without any analysis in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act or the ESA is likely illegal, but again, the courts are likely to make that decision. The complicating factors in the renegotiation of leases are too numerous to address here, but include the fact that most of the roads in question are not considered public, and can be closed or removed to protect aquatic and terrestrial resources. This management authority would be limited by the renegotiation. In addition, Plum Creek land in MT is assessed as “agricultural,” with very low property taxes. Selling the land for residential use should require reassessment, which might make the idea less financially viable for Plum Creek, or even a severance tax. Finally, zoning to prevent residential use is difficult for counties to impose, in part because Plum Creek (as the largest landowner in some counties) can protest and effectively veto it. To reduce the damage, county and state government should ensure that Plum Creek land is reassessed as residential for tax purposes; that zoning is put in place to limit the type of development; and that critical habitat is purchased through land trusts and other means to protect it. There’s no question that Mark Rey overstepped his authority in trying to negotiate this backroom corporate giveaway to Plum Creek with no public involvement. But there’s also no question that the subdivision threat to these lands existed long before this deal was undertaken, and the affected states and counties must move quickly to limit the damage that could occur if such large amounts of forest undergo a wholesale conversion to residential use.

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 Legal Liaison/Agency Training Coordinator Sarah Peters Communications Coordinator Franklin Seal Montana State ORV Coordinator Adam Rissien Utah State ORV Coordinator Laurel Hagen Program Associates Cathrine Walters Adams Restoration Research Associate Josh Hurd Journal Editor Dan Funsch Interns & Volunteers Jeff Aaron Hindle, Greg Peters, Cassidy Randall Board of Directors Amy Atwood, Greg Fishbein, Jim Furnish, William Geer, Chris Kassar, Rebecca Lloyd, Cara Nelson, Brett Paben

© 2008 Wildlands CPR

2

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS ADDRESS OFF-ROAD VEHICLE DAMAGE By Franklin Seal

T

he damage that off-road vehicle use inflicts on our public forests, deserts, grasslands and wetlands is certainly no secret. Even many off-road vehicle advocates admit concerns about the growing problem, fearing that the increasing degradation of public resources will further poison public opinion against them and cause land management agencies to clamp down. But while the problem is no secret, it has never gained the full attention of Congress — until now. Earlier this spring, the off-road vehicle problem moved into the public spotlight when a US House of Representatives committee held oversight hearings on the issue. That hearing was a first step in long-absent congressional oversight regarding failed off-road vehicle management on federal lands. Unfortunately, the testimony from the Forest Service and BLM representatives was less than informative about the scope of the problem and the challenges these agencies face in bringing rampant off-road vehicle abuse under control. However, testimony from several other key witnesses was very helpful in articulating the scope of the problem and making key recommendations.

Dust rises as if to signal a growing concern over the impacts of motorized recreation. Photo by Laurel Hagen.

The Senate committee hearing was convened for the purpose of finding out why the agencies are failing to grapple with the negative impacts of off-road vehicle use on America’s public lands and what the agencies might need to start doing differently. Taking center stage in the discussion was the “travel planning process” – a complex analysis and decision-making procedure with the aim of designating appropriate roads and trails. Both the Forest Service and BLM have been engaged in somewhat similar travel planning processes now for years, but some of the committee members didn’t seem to think those processes were going along so well. “The BLM has identified travel management on its lands as ‘one of the greatest management challenges’ it faces,” stated committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman, D-NM. “Likewise, the Forest Service has identified unmanaged recreation — including ORV use — as one of the top four threats to the management and health of the National Forest System. Despite these statements, it seems to me that neither agency has been able to successfully manage off-road use.”

It was clear from the agency and from the off-road vehicle industry representatives that their mantra about a few bad apples has not changed. Fortunately there were speakers who pointed out the profound enormity of this problem, and that real regulatory changes are needed if we are to develop a culture of responsibility. Those changes include the protection of special places, the adoption and implementation of tough, strict rules for motorized recreation on public lands, and the swift and consistent enforcement of those rules. More recently, on June 5, the Senate followed suit with its own hearing on off-road vehicle damage to public lands. For the first time in perhaps a decade, members of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee grilled leaders of the Forest Service (FS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) about why off-road vehicle use is being allowed to damage America’s national treasures.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

Factory Butte, Utah BLM... majestic natural landmark, or off-road playground? Photo by Marcel P. Huijser.

— story continued on next page — 3

— continued from previous page —

“Existing rules for managing off-road vehicles are not being enforced,” Bingaman added, and the agencies are ignoring unregulated use “with significant consequences for the health of our public lands and communities, and adverse effects on other authorized public land uses.” But representatives for both the Forest Service and the BLM, while cleverly acknowledging the huge scale and complexity of the problem, seemed reluctant to admit any management failure. BLM deputy director Henry Bisson explained that the off-road vehicle problem has been building over many years. “What was once the vast and spacious public land of the West that few knew about and fewer actively used for recreational purposes has now become something quite different.” He cited a combination of reasons to explain the dramatic increase in social conflicts and resource impacts: population increase in western towns, unauthorized user-created routes, explosive growth in the use of off-road vehicles, advances in technology and intense marketing by thrillcraft manufacturers. Forest Service Deputy Chief Joel Holtrop called up statistics from a Forest Service telephone survey, The National Survey on Recreation and the Environment, to show that the number of people “participating in OHV recreation” has grown dramatically. And indeed it has. But sometimes the most interesting and illuminating statistics are the ones not mentioned. For instance, Holtrop seemed careful to avoid citing another, more obvious and detailed Forest Service survey completed in 2004. The National Visitor Use Monitoring Four Year Report survey reveals that even with the serious explosion in off-roading, visits by thrillcraft users still constitute less than six percent of all visits to the national forests. This tiny percentage of visitors are using and damaging a grossly disproportionate percentage of the public lands. Somehow, this fact was not mentioned. Holtrop did say that even a few off-road vehicles can severely impact the forests. “The first motor vehicle driving across a particular meadow may not harm the land, but by the time 50 motor vehicles have crossed the same path a user-created trail will likely be left behind that causes lasting environmental impacts on soil, water quality, and wildlife habitat. Additionally, some visitors report that their ability to enjoy quiet recreation experiences is affected by the noise from motor vehicles.” Holtrop also acknowledged that many of these user-created routes are inappropriate and may need to be closed. “These user-created routes are not part of the forest transportation system, did not undergo environmental analysis, were not designed and constructed for recreational use, and do not receive routine maintenance by the Forest Service,” he said. “Some of these routes may merit consideration, with appropriate environmental analysis, as potential additions to our transportation system. Others run through wetlands, riparian areas and stream channels, and their use by motor vehicles adversely affects water quality, causes erosion, and introduces invasive species. User-created routes causing unacceptable resource damage should not be designated for motor vehicle use.”

Quiet users negotiate an unauthorized trail created by off-road vehicle users. Photo by Laurel Hagen.

to avoid ecological damage, and are within the agency’s ability to maintain on a sustainable basis. Which makes it all the more curious why Holtrop avoided mentioning another Forest Service document. The Forest Service deputy chief spent a great deal of time detailing the requirements of the 2005 Travel Management Rule, subpart B, that requires the agency designate a system of routes and publish a Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM). But while spending more time on that subject than just about any other, he utterly failed to mention subpart A of the 2005 Rule, which first requires the agency analyze its lands and determine what a minimum road system would look like prior to moving on to the process of designating routes and publishing them on a map.

No one could have stated it any better. User-created routes in national forest and BLM lands have absolutely no business being given the status of a designated route, published by the agency on a map and handed out to visitors. Such designated status should be reserved for routes that are planned, that meet a purpose and need, are designed to be resilient and

Subpart A — identifying a minimum road system — is a crucial, necessary step if the final mapped and published system of routes is to represent a rational and planned choice. Ignoring that step implies that the end product — the MVUM map and the route system it describes — will represent an impotent caving-in to offroad vehicle abuse. The fact that Subpart A was never mentioned during the hearing ought to give committee members pause.

4

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

Trout Unlimited’s Western Energy and ORV Coordinator Bradley Powell testified on behalf of the angling community, listing a host of “OHV horror stories” from his days working for the Forest Service. “In New Mexico, on the Santa Fe National Forest, I vividly remember the deep ruts and bog holes created in prime elk habitat. On the Tonto National Forest in Arizona there are areas that look like heavy equipment has cut deep incisions into the land. On a typical weekend day in the spring there is a dust cloud over the area that can be seen for miles.” US Geographical Survey research ecologist Jayne Belnap told the committee that current off-road use is causing soil erosion and dust pollution — even when the road or trail lies unused. “Just the presence of the roads themselves produce dust, you don’t have to drive on them,” she said. Recent studies have shown that dust pollution increases snowpack melt and reduces the delivery of late-season water into rivers and streams. “The dust issue is going to be a major, major issue,” Belnap said. “We are going to have profound impacts on water delivery.” She quantified the problem as representing “billions of pounds of dust a year coming off these trails.”

BLM’s proposed road system for the Labyrinth Canyon area. Dark areas represent roadless areas proposed for addition to the Wilderness System. Map by Laurel Hagen, produced with Google maps.

Other witnesses called attention to the lack of enforcement of existing off-road laws. Frank Adams, Executive Director of the Nevada Sheriffs’ and Chiefs’ Association, pointed to the “feeling of anonymity that many of the OHV riders have because there is no way of identifying them or their vehicles.” “Most states do not require a license plate for such vehicles,” he said. “Those states that do require tagging, the tags are not large enough to be seen without being in almost on top of the vehicle. If you are able to determine that there is a tag on the OHV, determining the tag number is almost impossible.” Adams went on to call for federal incentives for state-run license plate programs for off-road vehicles and increased funding for enforcement. But when Montana’s Senator Jon Tester grilled off-road vehicle group representatives Edward Moreland, Vice President for Government Relations, American Motorcyclist Association and Greg Mumm, Executive Director, Blue Ribbon Coalition about their willingness to support such a program, both cited the expense and bureaucratic difficulties faced by off-road vehicle users as their reason for not supporting more visible registration numbers or license plates. But Tester was not to be put off. He continued to question them about what it would take for them to support such a program. And they continued to cite the expense and difficulty as their primary objection. Finally, Tester asked them, what if the licenses were made free of charge and extremely easy to obtain, would that remove their objections? Curiously, both said they would still refuse to support it. Perhaps Adams’ comments about the “feeling of anonymity” that off-roaders cherish may be a more accurate way of getting at their real objections to vehicle ID numbers. While off-road vehicle users may remain anonymous for the time being, the impacts of their recreation are finally being exposed to the light of day. And while it’s unlikely that Congressional awareness of these impacts will translate into new legislation at this point in time, it may well prove to be one more step towards increased agency commitments to educate offroad users and enforce policies that protect public resources.

From user-conflicts to water quality impacts, motorized recreation leaves a lasting impression on our public lands. Photo by Glen Jensen.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

— Franklin Seal is Wildlands CPR’s Communications Coordinator. He lives and works in Moab, Utah.

5

Three Ways In By Brad Hash

The first road was a trail.

The second road was a river.

Paved hard and long by paw, hoof and foot, it dropped into the canyon from the north plateau etching its way along near-vertical hillsides descending to gentler slopes studded with bunch grasses, lupine, mule’s ear, sagebrush and phlox. The narrow path yielded to formidable chunks of basalt -- sharp-angled and menacing like giant rock cactuses -- buoyed by dry, sandy soil. Lichens of muted greens and grays held tight to hard surfaces.

At the Lewiston landing a wooden craft, the bow pointed upstream, due south, ferried the first white settlers to the canyon. For those living in more urban confines, the nation’s Great Depression had resurrected the allure and independence of the homestead.

Nimi’ipuu (later named Nez Perce by French trappers) men used to cross the saddle near what is now Soldier Hollow taking the trail into the canyon in early spring and again in winter to hunt deer, sheep, goat, and bear. Along the warm, open south aspects and in the bottomland, women gathered berries, biscuit root, camas bulbs, wild carrot and wild potato.

Seventy river miles from their previous lives, a dozen feet of a singular family stepped from the boat onto polished river stone and ancient layers of volcanic ash of the east bank, certain the sun would rise. Following the creek up canyon, they planned to secure a lifestyle where providing dinner would be governed by the forces of nature rather than the forces of the free market.

The twelve-foot wide stream that cleaved this place over millions of years bristled with native trout and offered a fertile spawning ground for salmon after an 800-mile swim. The brisk waters rushed high and hard through the spring snowmelt.

A permanent life there was hard. Searing summer heat better suited for the Sonoran Desert cued the Nimi’ipuu to seek higher grounds where they could continue gathering – gooseberries, huckleberries, hawthorn berries, currants and service berries – and hunting the game that flowed with the ripening plants. This was the way until 1855. That year, beyond the canyon and the horizon of the Nez Perce, men of the U.S. government drew up and offered a treaty to the people. The agreement was brokered, accepted and later broken by the authors. Two decades later came a similar parchment worth every bit its weight in federal thievery. However, this treaty -- to further funnel the people from their homes in north-central Idaho and northeastern Oregon and on to truncated terrain at Lapwai – met opposition, especially among the Wallowa band. Defying U.S. hegemony and a culture that offered no peace to their puzzle, hundreds of Nez Perce walked over a thousand miles to find the freedom taken from them. Changing times and arbitrary boundaries put that concept out of reach. Their road reached the end of the earth at the base of the Bear Paw Mountains in Montana. The good life was over, for good.

Breaking sod was more like quarry work. And although the canyon was generous in seasonal plant foods, harvesting and processing roots and bulbs required knowledge not so easily gained in city life. But they had seeds for vegetables and fruit trees. And livestock. A few head of cattle could graze well without risking their not-so-nimble necks in the treacherous high ground. Milled lumber was boated from Lewiston and dragged by teams of horse and mule up canyon for over a mile to the homesite. A solid two-story structure void of imagination, comprised almost entirely of right angles, and yet equipped with the first flush toilet in Idaho County, was completed in the late 1930s. The barn was as big and bland as the house. This life held little time for creativity.

And the canyon was silent. By 1955 the homestead was vacant. ***** *****

6

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

The steepest wall of the canyon was before me. The road hugged it, looking like a scratch in its side. I imagined one day the scratch would heal and our car culture would be shut out of Getta Creek canyon. I wondered what my girlfriend would think of this place. I wondered what I thought of this place. I walked. The pitch was so steep I had to peer from the edge of the road to glimpse the ground immediately below. Like a string of beads, deciduous trees snaked along the canyon bottom camouflaging Getta Creek fifteen hundred feet down. What it lacked in engineering and design, the Getta Creek canyon road made up for in arrogance.

Photo by Brad Hash.

The third road was a lie. A sharp cut started about a mile in from the northeast rim of the canyon. By steel blade and diesel engine a swath wide enough for two trucks ripped its way from the hard-packed dirt county road, leveling Douglass firs and Red cedars nestled in the draw, up to the open knoll of the plateau. In 1995 I drove my low-clearance, two-wheel drive car this far and parked. I was advised such vehicles should go no farther. Before strapping on my backpack, I walked several yards to the west, and crossed a barbed-wire fence to get a more vivid view of my future -- the northern reaches of Hell’s Canyon. With no expression I stared down into Getta Creek canyon. I was curious, not captivated. To me the landscape seemed inverted. The ridges and plateaus met the sky flat, like a calm sea, The creek bottoms were tight, jagged, like mountains upside-down. Getta Creek and its canyon, along with dozens of counterparts, attached like ribs to the spine of the Snake River running north to the Columbia. The high desert was an alien to me. The dirt road, contoured with 18-inch waterbars, eased over the knoll switch-backing about a quarter mile down. From my vantage point it vanished beneath the ridge about twenty yards past the turn. For sale in the canyon were 70 acres of creek-split land somewhere below, west of me, and at the end of the road. I was invited to join a group of fellow primitive skills instructors who were forming an intentional community. There was a two-acre garden, over five hundred generous fruit trees – the homesteader legacy – and berry patches the size of supermarkets. I was fleeing a civilization built on coal power plants, plastic, and slick marketing.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

Now a mile or so from the creek the road laid over craggy bedrock, maintaining its brutal descent. I was only half-way to the cabin and already hated the road. But where else would I be able to live this life? The good life. Later, I ignored the sensibilities of the woman who would later become my wife. Money was saved, money was borrowed, and my share of the land was purchased in 1996. My home was a canvas wall tent as I cleared ground to build a straw bale cabin. I worked hard to convince myself I loved it. Two hours from the nearest town would be tolerable isolation. Within two years heavy spring rains and record snowmelt did their part to correct the lie. Unable to withstand the deluge, the road slumped several feet down the hillside at its most treacherous section, and down below Getta jumped its banks washing every speck of dirt from the road for over a mile. The flood left gouges in the road four-feet deep and twice the length of anyone’s truck. Surveying the damage, I now acknowledged the truth. That road wasn’t meant to be. Nor was I meant to be here. Besides, a “model” sustainable community has nothing to model if no one can access it. That July, two weeks after proposing to my girlfriend beneath a towering Ponderosa pine shading our future homesite, I went the way of the Nez Perce and the homesteaders before me. Each of us traveling different roads into the canyon and each of us, with our own reasons, taking different roads out. — Brad Hash writes from Missoula, Montana, where he and his wife annually break plans to visit their property they still own in Getta Creek canyon.

7

When Good Policies Lead to Bad Decisions By Bethanie Walder Editor’s Note: This article first appeared in Wildlands CPR’s on-line Newsletter, April 30, 2008.

A

few weeks ago I got a demoralizing phone call about the cover of a new coffee-table photo book about the ecological destruction caused by off-road vehicles. Wildlands CPR has been distributing the book Thrillcraft: the Environmental Consequences of Motorized Recreation. While we didn’t publish the book, we think it is an important addition to the debate about the appropriateness of motorized recreation on public lands. Though the subtitle focuses on ecological impacts, I would argue that the book is actually more about the dominant culture of lawlessness among off-road vehicle recreationists. It uses extreme examples to paint a polarizing picture, much to the detriment of the many lawabiding off-road vehicle riders who also use public lands. Nonetheless, we think the book presents a very critical perspective on off-road vehicle use, so a few weeks ago we sent copies to about 100 Forest Service Supervisors, Regional Foresters and Regional Recreation Directors throughout the country. Many other conservation organizations have also been distributing the book to their local Forest Service offices. Soon afterwards, I got that phone call, from the Forest Service. They said that the books we sent to their California offices would be returned because some photos in the book violate the agency’s sexual harassment policy in that region, which prohibits “inappropriate material” in the office. The book’s dust cover, in particular, features a dune buggy with a cartoon caricature of a topless woman wrapped in an American flag. That same photo shows up inside the book, and according to the Forest Service there are one or two others that are also explicit. I understand and support strong sexual harassment policies, and I recognize that this photo might technically be in violation. That said, when employees take a class in

8

cultural diversity, or sexual harassment, the instructor will use case studies or examples to help the employees understand what is allowable and what is not. That is the same context in which these photos appear in the book – not to violate a policy, but to illustrate it. The woman who called is not the first to object to the cover photo, nor will she be the last. Fellow conservationists, other agency staffers and concerned readers have also voiced complaints. The photo is offensive, and probably shouldn’t be on the cover. But it’s there for a reason – to show exactly what type of attitude pervades off-road vehicle recreation on public lands. It’s

not glorifying such activities, but is directly, unequivocally condemning them. The book is intended to be provocative, and the editor chose a cover photo that serves this goal. As an aside, I find it fascinating that not one person who has objected to this photo has mentioned that the scantily clad woman is wrapped in an American flag. No one seems offended by that, but couldn’t it be considered unpatriotic, or even a desecration of the flag? I explained to the caller that the book uses photos and essays to reveal the inappropriate nature of off-road vehicle recreation on public lands. She countered that, taken out of context,

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

the photos could make some people uncomfortable and that is what their policy is supposed to prevent. But while I do not want anyone to feel uncomfortable looking at a book about off-road vehicle recreation, perhaps awareness about some of the offensive and harassing behavior can be helpful to women who are trying to protect themselves. For example, on numerous occasions, women who attend ATV rallies on public lands have been cornered inside crowds of drunken men and forced to remove their shirts in order to exit. There are no photos in the book showing this, but on several occasions law enforcement officers have had to escort women out of such scenes. In fact, officers have reported that they felt their own lives

the only other “offensive” photo in the book.) I’m angry because these men don’t think the land is worth anything, and apparently don’t think women are either, except for their bodies, perhaps. And I’m angry because the Forest Service caters to these people rather than addressing the damage they cause. I thought about classes I took a long time ago on ecofeminism, about the intersection between the domination of nature and the domination of women. According to Wikipedia (more handy than digging up my old textbooks), ecofeminists argue “the social mentality that leads to the domination and oppression of women is directly connected to the social mentality that leads to the abuse of the environment.” The Forest

I’m angry because the Forest Service is more offended by a cartoon of a topless woman on a dune buggy than by the damage that dune buggy causes the land.

threatened by out-of-control behavior at off-road vehicle events occurring on our public lands. The agency caller would not waiver: the book violates their policy. Understanding that the dust cover is particularly egregious, I recommended that she tell the staff to remove it, but keep the book. That wasn’t good enough, the photo and others are also inside. I pointed out that it would be hard to take the photos out of context when they are in a book about ATV recreation and rider behavior. She would not back down. I said that a book demonstrating inappropriate behavior and calling for it to be stopped is not inappropriate. No dice. Finally, I told her to go ahead and return the books, and hung up the phone in defeat and anger. I’m angry because I’m a feminist woman and an environmentalist, and the Forest Service is more offended by a cartoon of a topless woman on a dune buggy than by the damage that dune buggy causes the land. I’m angry because a whole group of men think it’s funny to paint pictures of topless women on their vehicles, or to wear t-shirts while riding their ATVs that say, “If you can read this it’s because the bitch fell off.” (I’m pretty sure that is

men, with above average income, our neighbors, brothers, and friends, who probably don’t behave badly at home. Yet, they seem to behave badly when driving off-road vehicles, especially in large groups. This behavior, tolerated at off-road vehicle rallies in particular, results in nothing other than profound desecration to the land, and in many instances, very serious harassment of women. It is not appropriate. And the Forest Service would do better to spend their time trying to figure out how to get offroad vehicle recreation under control, and ensuring that the activities they allow on their land are appropriate, to women and to the land, than rejecting a book that points out how wrong such behavior is. Quite frankly, it’s embarrassing how the agency ignores the social and ecological problems caused by outof-control off-road vehicle use. Some forms of motorized recreation provide textbook examples (ecofeminist textbooks, anyway) of the destruction of nature combined with the domination and oppression of women. In this situation, the black and white interpretation of the sexual harassment policy makes no sense. To look at a picture that is included only as evidence of inappropriate behavior and say that it violates a policy designed to prevent inappropriate behavior seems extreme. The Forest Service should continue to prevent sexual harassment in the office. In addition, it’s time for them to stop lawless, reckless, and inappropriate off-road vehicle recreation on the land as well.

Service does NOT consider the culture of lawlessness pervading off-road vehicle use on public lands and resulting in the profound destruction of nature inappropriate. Nor will they allow a book in their offices that illustrates just that reality, because it contains two or three offensive photos. If they find this book so contrary to their policies, why don’t they find this destructive form of recreation inappropriate and against their mission to protect forest resources for all Americans? I am frustrated not because environmental concerns trump women’s issues or vice versa, but because the two are inextricably linked. As previously mentioned, not all off-road vehicle riders break the law. (But studies from Utah and Colorado show that more than 50% of riders routinely ride off-route, even when they know it’s not legal.) Likewise, it would be unfair to say that most off-road vehicle riders are misogynists. In fact, most motorThrillcraft documents environmental damage caused by offized recreationists are colroad vehicle use. Photo by Laurel Hagen. lege-educated, professional

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

9

Program Updates, Summer 2008 Restoration Program

T

he $40 million Legacy Roads Remediation Initiative, passed by Congress last December (see RIPorter 13:1 for more info), presents a golden opportunity to remove roads and restore watersheds in national forests across the country. It remains a key focus of our efforts to broaden the watershed restoration movement nationally. Wildlands CPR’s Washington Coordinator Sue Gunn has been working with the Washington Watershed Restoration Initiative to increase next year’s Legacy Roads funding, and she traveled to Washington DC to testify on the subject before a House Interior Appropriations Committee. Prior to testifying, Sue helped coordinate Legacy Roads funding requests to Congress with activists in Washington, Montana, Colorado, New Mexico, Oregon and California.

Mark VanderMeer addresses a Wildlands CPR-sponsored workshop in Montana’s Swan Valley. Wildlands CPR file photo.

Wildlands CPR also co-sponsored the Forest Roads and Watershed Restoration Symposium in Tacoma. Director Bethanie Walder and Sue were on the planning committee and recommended key speakers for the economics and case studies panels, as well as the lunchtime keynote, former Congressman Pat Williams. The Symposium, organized by Pacific Rivers Council, was a fantastic success and helped define the need, regionally and nationally, for continuing the Legacy Roads funding. Participants included state and federal agency staff, conservationists, scientists, economists, and state and federal decision-makers to name a few.

Practitioners, and Swan Ecosystems Center. It was the culmination of a two year effort to promote road removal in this region. The workshop included local landowners, agency staff and restoration professionals, and focused on mapping out a long-range restoration program for sections of heavily logged and roaded forest previously owned by Plum Creek Timber and now owned by the community – the creek is home to endangered bull trout. At the end of the workshop, a representative of Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks awarded the Elk Creek Management Group a grant of $5,000 to begin immediate restoration work, which may eventually involve removing several roads.

Restoration Program Coordinator Marnie Criley continued our partnership with Northwest Connections to co-host the Elk Creek Restoration Assessment and Implementation Workshop in Swan Valley, MT. The weekend workshop was co-sponsored by the Center for Environmental Economic Development, Madrone Enterprises, National Network of Forest

Wildlands CPR Staff Scientist Adam Switalski has been ramping up his work on the Citizen Science Monitoring Program in the Clearwater National Forest. He hired an Idaho field technician and a Missoula volunteer coordinator to expand this project. In addition, Adam trained a new Friends of the Clearwater (Moscow, ID) field organizer in data collection techniques, as they are partnering with us on this project. He also continues to work with University of Montana students and faculty to investigate revegetation techniques on removed roads.

10

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

Transportation Program

A

dam also directed our efforts to distribute the off-road vehicle Best Management Practices report (see RIPorter 13:1 and page 18 this issue for more info). This guide for agency land managers provides a detailed, science-based “map” for ensuring that any off-road vehicle recreation that is allowed is well-managed and has the lowest possible impacts. Adam sent out the BMP report, in a combined mailing with our 2007 ORV Enforcement report, to nearly 1,000 Forest Service Supervisors, District Rangers, BLM Directors and conservation organizations. The report is available online, and we also featured it in our April email newsletter, which drew more than 250 people to visit the online BMP page. Wildlands CPR worked with some of our national partners to promote Congressional oversight hearings on off-road vehicle management of public lands (see cover story). Wildlands CPR Legal and Agency Liaison Sarah Peters helped finalize a settlement agreement with the National Park Service over a lawsuit we cofiled in 2005 (see story page 12). We first initiated settlement discussions with the NPS in late 2006, and Sarah ensured that Wildlands CPR’s most specific concerns were well-addressed through this agreement. Our coplaintiffs in the case were the National Parks Conservation Association and Bluewater Network, a division of Friends of the Earth. The settlement will result in a pilot project in 10 national parks to increase enforcement and education on off-road vehicle use in the parks. Sarah also assisted numerous conservation groups throughout the west in their efforts to develop strong appeals of final travel plans. In our other efforts to influence travel plans, Montana Off-road Vehicle Coordinator Adam Rissien filed scoping comments on travel plans in several districts of the Kootenai and Flathead National Forests. Adam’s primary focus, however, is on the Beaverhead-Deerlodge and Bitterroot National Forests, where he is providing strategic guidance to two quiet recreation coalitions. He is helping them develop strategies to submit strong written comments, coordinate ground-monitoring programs, and expand public attention regarding travel planning. Adam’s work with the Bitterroot Quiet Use Coalition bore fruit when Missoula’s local CBS affiliate decided to develop a four-part series on the off-road vehicle problem, featuring interviews with local land managers, ORV riders, hunters, conservationists, backcountry equestrians and private property owners. The segments on enforcement and stopping motorized abuse were excellent and presented a diversity of viewpoints about the multitude of problems caused by off-road vehicle recreation. A highlight of the series was the first interview with an amputee on crutches. He told the story of being run over and severely injured by an ATV rider who was trespassing on a non-motorized trail.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

Utah Off-road Vehicle Coordinator Laurel Hagen has been organizing local groups in rural Utah in an effort to build support and generate comments on travel plans on the Dixie, MantiLaSal, and Ashley National Forests, and in the Moab Field Office of the Bureau of Land Management. Moab holds a special place in the off-road vehicle world and is beset with annual gatherings of thousands of unruly off-road vehicle users such as the Easter Weekend Jeep Safari. This year, Laurel documented the very un-quiet commotion with a photo essay that she posted to our blog and featured in our e-newsletter. The post caught the attention of bloggers and online discussion boards and resulted in a storm of traffic to Wildlands CPR’s website and a flurry of comments on her post. More than 400 people, both pro and con, were drawn to check out the off-road chaos. Laurel has also been partnering with the Boulder Community Alliance to help promote the Boulder-Escalante area as a destination for non-motorized recreationists. As such, the group developed a fantastic brochure highlighting some of the hiking and other quiet recreation opportunities in the region. Numerous local businesses are listed on the brochure, which is being distributed in hotels and other places where visitors gather information about local activities. It’s been very well received in the community, and also received two awards at a regional tourism conference. The brochure provides an exciting new model for countering the dominance of off-road recreation in southern Utah and Laurel hopes to create similar brochures in other areas, as well.

Wildlands CPR is helping to curb illegal off-road use and the ecological damage it causes. Left photo courtesy of Southern Rockies Conservation Alliance; dirt bikes by Swan View Coalition.

11

WCPR Lawsuit Settlement Gives Boost to ORV Education and Law Enforcement in National Parks

A

merica’s national parks are our national heritage, as famous for their dramatic beauty as for their quiet solitude and incredible wildlife. For many Americans, they represent a rare chance to escape the harried, noisy life in the city, to see natural systems at work. But increasingly, the jarring world of the city is creeping into our national parks. Off-road vehicles are a case in point, and while they aren’t allowed in many parks, ecological damage and user conflicts are on the rise from illegal use. In addition, numerous parks allow off-road vehicles, but have not met all of their legal obligations for managing such recreation. Existing law gives park administrators the ability and responsibility to control off-road vehicle use, but in many cases, funding shortfalls or political pressures result in the problem being ignored. With the recent settlement of a longstanding lawsuit, park administrators have finally acknowledged the severity of the problem and pledged new action to protect park resources.

Area, CA; Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, MI; St. Croix National Scenic Riverway, WI; and Wupatki /Sunset Crater Volcano National Monuments, AZ.

tion or the results of their internal survey. More importantly, they had failed to adequately manage off-road vehicle impacts and use in the parks.

In 1999, Bluewater Network, a division of Friends of the Earth, Wildlands CPR, National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA) and dozens of other organizations filed a rulemaking petition requesting that the Park Service take action to prevent off-road vehicle damage in the national parks. After meeting with the plaintiffs in July 2004, the Park Service conducted an internal survey of illegal, off-road vehicle use at all national park sites. The 256 responses demonstrated that off-road vehicles are causing widespread damage in America’s national parks. At Joshua Tree National Park in California, for instance, off-road vehicles are often illegally used on park trails—risking the safety of visitors enjoying those same trails on foot or on horseback. Today, miles of tire ruts scar the park’s fragile desert landscape.

The settlement requires the Park Service to develop environmental impact statements and special rules governing the ongoing, legal use of offroad vehicles at Glen Canyon National Recreation Area in Utah, and Cape Lookout National Seashore in North Carolina. It also requires similar action before the Park Service can permit offroad vehicles at Amistad National Recreation Area in Texas or at Big South Fork National Recreation Area in Tennessee.

In 2005, the three groups joined together to file a lawsuit after the NPS failed to adequately respond to the peti-

In parks where the Park Service has lawfully authorized use of off-road vehicles, the settlement requires the agency to reinforce its commitment to resource protection. Specifically, park superintendents’ power to terminate or suspend off-road vehicle use is reaffirmed, in cases of damage to park trails or other resources, or if a park doesn’t have sufficient law enforcement capacity to monitor and manage use. These parks must also display where off-road vehicles may lawfully operate.

As a result of the settlement, ten parks will become part of a national pilot program. Officers will conduct public outreach and increased enforcement over the next three years, including officer training and, hopefully, setting higher fines to create a deterrent. The 10 national parks in the pilot program are: Big Thicket National Preserve, TX; Death Valley National Park, CA; Joshua Tree National Park, CA; New River Gorge National River/Gauley River National Recreation Area, WV; Ozark National Scenic Riverway, MO; Parashant National Monument, AZ; Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation

12

The settlement should help the Park Service educate ORV users to address user conflicts and resource damage. Photo by Laurel Hagen.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

Utah County Loses Bid to Control Public Land Roads

I

n a May decision that may finally close one chapter in the ongoing battle over public land access, a District Court struck down an effort by a Utah county to assert rights-of-way over roads crossing federal lands.

Last year, public officials with the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, and nearby federal lands limited public access to protect resources, and Kane county responded by erecting signs declaring the roads open. The county based its claim on the antiquated RS 2477, arguing that it held valid rights-of-way. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance and The Wilderness Society filed suit to challenge the county. RS 2477 did, at one time, grant rights-of-way, but the law was repealed in 1976. Existing claims were grandfathered in, and many counties have tried to assert claims based on that fact. Then, in 2005, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that state law establishes the standard for ownership of roads. In Utah, that would require 10 years of continuous use prior to 1976. The court ruled that Kane County would need to prove this continuous use standard in order to establish a valid claim. In the absence of such a claim, the court ruled that the county’s actions violated the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, which holds that federal law trumps state and local law. “By placing signs within the monument, the county has encouraged, sanctioned and facilitated public motor vehicle use of federal lands that [the Bureau of Land Management] officially closed to protect the monument’s values,” said District Judge Tena Campbell.

Colorado Clamps Down on ORVs

Hatteras Decree Limits ORVs

T

hree popular areas in Cape Hatteras National Seashore have been closed to off-road vehicles under a consent decree signed by District Court Judge Terrence W. Boyle. The decree is the result of lawsuit filed last fall by a coalition of organizations including National Audubon Society, Defenders of Wildlife, and others. The suit contended that the National Park Service had failed to regulate off-road use along the seashore, although they had been required to do so since 1972. The court agreed, and also found that the NPS interim plan failed to protect wildlife, including shorebirds and sea turtles. A long-range plan has yet to be adopted, but will be drafted by a committee. Also named as defendants in the suit were the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Director of Cape Hatteras National Seashore. As we were going to press, new federal legislation was introduced to overturn this consent decree and allow ORVs back in the areas that were closed. We’ll keep you posted if this moves forward.

C

olorado Governor Bill Ritter recently signed into law a bill that allows state law enforcement officers to enforce laws on off-road vehicle use on federal lands. The first of its kind, this legislation should help boost efforts to control illegal off-road use. The Southern Rockies Conservation Alliance, Colorado Mountain Club, Colorado Wildlife Federation and others were key supporters and instrumental in passing this law — congratulations to them for a precedent-setting victory! The new law prohibits motor vehicle use on public lands unless land managers have authorized such use. Forest maps and signs will illustrate roads open to use; all other areas are off-limits. The bill also included increased fines, which were higher than the existing Forest Service fines. Interestingly, however, the federal agencies in Colorado were in the midst of a review of their ORV fines and raised them significantly shortly after the CO bill passed. Let’s hope these new deterrents and enforcement capacity will make a difference!

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

Signing ceremony for Colorado’s landmark law. Photo courtesy of Aaron Clark.

13

Bibliography Notes summarizes and highlights some of the scientific literature in our 15,000 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 Effects of Motorized Access on Wildlife in the Northern Rockies By Greg Peters

T

he U.S. northern Rocky Mountains cover a huge area of relatively pristine and undeveloped land, creating unique areas of core habitat for many important carnivore and ungulate species. However, many parts of this region also have a long history of resource extraction and road building. On Forest Service lands alone, there are more than 50,000 miles of roads. Today many areas in this region are being rapidly developed and critical wildlife habitats are increasingly being fragmented. In this paper, I review recent studies regarding the effects of roads and motorized vehicle access on carnivores and ungulates in the northern Rocky Mountains. Numerous other studies, outside the geographic focus area, are not addressed.

Ecosystem Effects

Overall ecosystem effects of motorized vehicles and roads are well documented. Roads contribute to habitat fragmentation, decreased habitat effectiveness, interrupted migration and travel patterns, increased human-wildlife encounters, and increased direct mortality (Havlick, 2002). While roads are linear and fragmenting, they do offer some level of predictability for wildlife. Off-road vehicles (ORVs), however, travel on trails or cross-country on snow or open landscapes, and are not generally predictable. This further decreases habitat effectiveness, and creates additional opportunities for direct collision and negative human-animal encounters (Havlick, 2002). ORV technology has advanced considerably in the last two decades, and machines can now travel much farther and faster than ever before. This obviously increases the ability of users to venture deeper into the mountains. As well, ORV ownership has skyrocketed in the last decade. As of 2003, there were approximately 36 million registered all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) and 12 million registered snowmobiles nationwide (Brininstool, 2006).

Black bear using restored road, caught on film by a Wildlands CPR remote camera.

Negative selection continued through the fall, when average road density for selected habitat was 0.34 km/km2. In addition, bears negatively selected for roads that had traffic counts of over 10 vehicles per day (Mace, et al. 1996). A study in the Badger-Two Medicine area of the Lewis and Clark National Forest in Montana found that bears selected against a 200-900m zone surrounding ATV trails and selected against a 400-650m zone surrounding single-track trails with some motorbike use (Graves, 2002).

Wolves

Grizzly Bear

Heavily studied in the past two decades, grizzly bears show behavior modification and mortality effects from roads and vehicle use (For a more comprehensive review see the RIPorter 13.1). In a study examining habitat selection, road density and vehicle traffic effects on female grizzly bears in the Swan Mountains of northwest Montana, Mace et al. (1996) reported that habitat selection decreased in direct proportion to road density. During spring, when bears are most vulnerable and when vegetation availability increased at low elevations, bears selected habitat with an average density of 0.52 km/km2. In summer, when vehicle traffic counts were highest, bears again negatively selected for areas with a higher road density.

Wolves have also been extensively studied in the northern Rockies. Most importantly for wolves is the direct correlation between mortality and roads. In a study on wolf dispersal from Glacier National Park, 21 of 25 dispersing wolves were killed by humans (15 shot, 4 poisoned, 2 trapped), and they were killed within 200m of a road or seismic line (Boyd and Pletcher, 1999). Whittington, et al. (2005) reported unpublished Parks Canada data that 43 wolves had been killed by vehicle collisions from 1994-2004 in Jasper National Park.

14

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

While studies in the Midwest suggest a 1mi/mi2 threshold for wolf persistence, wolves in the Rocky Mountains will often utilize habitat with higher road densities than in the Midwest (Claar, et al. 1999). Numerous studies from both the Midwest and the Rocky Mountains point out that wolves will generally select areas of higher road density when there is low human presence and select areas of lower road density as human presence increases (Fuller, et al. 1992; Whittington, et al. 2005; Boyd-Heger, 1997).

Canada lynx

Few studies address the effects of motorized vehicles on lynx in the northern Rockies, however, two recent studies report confounding results. A 2004 study in the Uinta Mountains of northeast Utah discovered that coyotes do utilize compacted snow trails caused by snowmobiles to access deep snow habitat preferred by lynx. The authors showed that 70-80% of coyote tracks were located in areas that had snowmobile trails present over 60% of the time (Bunnell, et al. 2004).

Elk using restored road on the Clearwater National Forest; captured by a Wildlands CPR remote camera.

A 2007 study, however, reported little interspecies competition between lynx and coyotes. Conducted in the Seeley Lake area, a popular snowmobile destination in northwest Montana, researchers concluded that although coyotes did use compacted snowmobile trails more than expected, it was unlikely that the trails strongly affected interspecies competition (Kolbe, et al. 2007).

Wolverine

There is a limited amount of data regarding wolverines and motor vehicles; however, there are comprehensive habitat and mortality studies that can be used to extrapolate vehicle effects on wolverines. A study of wolverine habitat use in central Idaho found that wolverines generally prefer high elevation habitats throughout the year and in areas with high roadless percentage (81% roadless in study area), they did not select negatively against roads (Copeland, et al. 2007). A study in British Columbia concluded that female wolverines negatively selected for habitat in areas that had helicopter and backcountry skiing and for areas that had been logged while positively selecting for roadless areas (Krebs, et al. 2007). A study in Montana concluded that trapping is a significant source of mortality for wolverines. Of the 14 known mortalities during the study period (2001-2005) nine were from trapping. Roads and trails allow access for trappers and thus act as a significant impediment to wolverine population viability (Squires, et al. 2007).

Elk

Nearly all the scientific literature agrees that increased road densities result in decreased elk populations (for further review, see Rowland, et al. 2003). In a seminal study, Lyon (1983) stated that at road densities of 1 mi/mi2 effective elk habitat was reduced by 25%. At road densities of 2 mi/mi2 effective habitat decreased by 50%, and at road densities of 6 mi/mi2 elk use of suitable habitat declined by 75%. Other studies corroborate a decrease in elk populations, success of elk hunting, and increased poaching as road densities increase (Gratson and Whitman, 2000; Canfield, et al. 1999). Perhaps the most informative study on elk and ORVs was conducted in the Starkey Experimental Forest in northeast Oregon. Wisdom et al. (2004) subjected the elk to a series of disturbances by all terrain vehicles (ATVs), mountain bikes, horseback riders and hikers in a controlled experiment. Probability of elk flight response for ATV, mountain bike and hiking disturbances was 0.65 when the disturbance was at close range

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

(under 500m), and 0.55 for horseback riders. Beyond 500m, probability declined for hiking and horseback riding, but remained high for ATV and mountain biking until distance increased to 1500m. Additionally, elk moved more when subjected to ATV and mountain bike activity than horseback or hiking (Wisdom, et al. 2004). A Yellowstone National Park study reported generally minimal behavior response by elk to over-the-snow activity in the park. However, the authors acknowledged that behavioral responses varied depending on number of participants, number of animals in a group, location of animals (meadow, forest, geothermal habitats), and interaction times (White, et al. 2005). Additionally, some studies indicate that elk non-behavioral responses to snowmobiles in Yellowstone National Park are significant. A 2002 study reported that fecal glucocorticoid levels (a measure of stress) paralleled snowmobile activity and were higher for snowmobiles than for wheeled vehicles (Creel, et al. 2002).

Conclusion

Motor vehicles affect wildlife on both an ecosystem and individual scale throughout the northern Rocky Mountains of the U.S. While additional research is needed to examine the particular effects on specific species and populations, almost all scientific evidence points to increased habitat fragmentation, decreased habitat suitability, direct mortality effects, and increased flight response across species and habitats. As motor vehicles, particularly offroad vehicles, continue to penetrate areas of historically secure habitat, wildlife will continue to feel negative effects. — Greg Peters is a University of Montana Environmental Studies graduate student and currently an intern with Wildlands CPR. He initially conducted an assessment on this topic for American Wildlands.

15

— continued from previous page —

References Boyd-Heger, D. 1997. Dispersal, genetic relationships, and landscape use by colonizing wolves in the central Rocky Mountains. Dissertation, University of Montana, Missoula, MT. Boyd, D., and D. Pletscher. 1999. Characteristics of dispersal in a colonizing wolf population in the central Rocky Mountains. Journal of Wildlife Management 63(4):10941108. Brininstool, J. 2006. Off-Road vehicle emissions and their effects on human health. Road RIPorter, Spring Equinox Edition, Vol 11 # 1. Wildlands CPR. Bunnell, K., J. Flinders, M. Wolfe, and J. Bissonette. 2004. Quantifying the impacts of coyotes and snowmobiles on lynx conservation in Utah and West. The 84th American Society of Mammalogy Annual Meeting Abstracts. Canfield, J., J. Lyon, M. Hillis, and J. Thompson. 1999. Ungulates. Pages 6.1-6.25 in Joslin, G. and H. Youmans, coordinators. Effects of Recreation on Rocky Mountain Wildlife: A Review for Montana. Committee of Effects of Recreation and Wildlife. Montana Chapter of the Wildlife Society. Claar, J., N. Anderson, D. Boyd, M. Cherry, B. Conard, R. Hompesch, S. Miller, G. Olson, H. Ihsle Pac, J. Waller, T. Wittinger, and H. Youmans. 1999. Carnivores. Pages 7.17.63 in Joslin, G. and H. Youmans, coordinators. Effects of Recreation on Rocky Mountain Wildlife: A Review for Montana. Committee of Effects of Recreation and Wildlife. Montana Chapter of the Wildlife Society. Copeland, J., J. Peek, C. Groves, W. Melquist, K. McKelvey, G. McDaniel, C. Long, and C Harris. 2007. Seasonal habitat associations of the wolverine in Central. Idaho. Journal of Wildlife Management 71(7):2201-2212. Creel, S., J. Fox, A. Hardy, J. Sands, B. Garrot and R. Peterson. 2002. Snowmobile activity and glucocorticoid stress responses in wolves and elk. Conservation Biology 16(3):809-814. Fuller, T., W. Berg, G. Radde, M. Lenarz, and G. Joselyn. 1992. A history and current estimate of wolf distribution and numbers in Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 20:42-55. Gratson, M. and C. Whitman. 2000. Road closures and density and success of Idaho elk hunters. Wildlife Society Bulletin 28(2):302-310. Graves, T. 2002. Spatial and temporal response of grizzly bears to recreational use on trails. M.S. Thesis, University of Montana, Missoula. Havlick, D. 2002. No Place Distant: Roads and Motorized Recreation on America’s Public Lands. Island Press. Washington DC. Kolbe, J., J. Squires, D. Pletscher, and L. Ruggiero. 2007. The effect of snowmobile trails on coyote movements within lynx home ranges. Journal of Wildlife Management 71(5):1409-1418. Krebs, J., E. Lofroth, and I. Parfit. 2007. Multiscale habitat usage by wolverines in British Columbia, Canada. Journal of Wildlife Management 71(7):2180-2192.

16

Off road vehicles often conflict with quiet users as well as wildlife. Photo by Erin Thompson.

Lyon, J. 1983. Road density models describing habitat effectiveness for elk. Journal of Forestry 81(9):592-595. Mace, R., J. Waller, T. Manley, J. Lyon, and H. Zuuring. 1996. Relationships among grizzly bears, roads and habitats in the Swan Mountains Montana. The Journal of Applied Ecology 33(6):1395-1404. Rowland, M., M. Wisdom, B. Johnson, and M. Penninger. 2005. Effects of roads on elk: Implications for management of forested ecosystems. Pgs. 42-52 in Wisdom, M.J, technical editor, The Starkey Project: a Synthesis of Long-Term Studies of Elk and Mule Deer. 2004. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, Alliance Communications Group, Lawrence, Kansas, USA. Squires J., J. Copeland, T. Ulizio, M. Schwartz, and L. Ruggiero. 2007. Sources and patterns of wolverine mortality in western Montana . Journal of Wildlife Management 71(7):2213-2220. White, P.J., T. Davis, and J. Borkowski. 2005. National Park Service Report: Wildlife Responses to Winter Motorized Recreation in Yellowstone. Yellowstone Center for Resources; Montana State University, Bozeman, MT. Whittington, J., C. St. Clair-Cassady, G. Mercer. 2005. Spatial responses to wolves to roads and trails in mountain valleys. Ecological Applications 15(2):543-553. Wisdom, M., H. Preisler, N. Cimon, and B. Johnson. 2004. Effects of off-road recreation on mule deer and elk. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resource Conference 69.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

Report Documents Emissions and Health Impacts of California ORVs

M

otorized off road vehicle use in California releases as much greenhouse gas as burning 500,000 barrels of oil each year — equivalent to more than 1.5 million car trips from San Francisco to Los Angeles — according to a report released by the Center for Biological Diversity and the Clean Air Initiative. Fuel to Burn: The Climate and Public Health Implications of Off-Road Vehicle Pollution in California is the first report to assess the impacts of off road vehicle use on human health and global climate change. According to the report: • Recreational off road vehicles — including dirt bikes, all-terrain vehicles, and snowmobiles — consume 26 million gallons of gasoline each year in California; • Pollution from these vehicles has doubled in the past 15 years. Some off-road vehicles emit more pollution per hour than 30 automobiles;

When the dust settles, the health impacts of off-road vehicles are both significant and adverse. Wildlands CPR file photo.

• The state of California contributes to the problem by providing financial support and permits to federal land-management agencies that encourage off-road recreation on their lands. California has among the poorest air quality in the nation and is home to 13 of the 20 counties most at risk of health impacts from smog. Off-road motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles produce 118 times as much smogforming pollution as modern cars on a per-mile basis. Still, California continues to exempt the most polluting off-road vehicles from state air-quality laws. The report recommends: • Reducing emissions from off-road vehicles to at least 1990 levels by 2020 with further reductions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, to be consistent with the Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32) and a gubernatorial executive order; • Requiring that federal agencies applying for state funding and permits adequately address the greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution associated with off-road vehicle use; • Eliminating loopholes that allow continued use of polluting off-road vehicles that fail to meet state emission standards; and

The Center for Biological Diversity is a national nonprofit conservation organization with more than 40,000 members dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places. The Clean Air Initiative, a project of the American Lung Association of San Diego & Imperial County, is dedicated to improving the air quality and health of residents in Imperial County and the Mexicali border region through education, advocacy, and support. Its members include health care agencies, nonprofit organizations, environmental agencies, and Imperial Valley community members. For more information contact: Chris Kassar, Center for Biological Diversity, (520) 609-7685 Monique Lopez, Clean Air Initiative, (760) 554-9476

• Rejecting federal permit applications for continued or expanded offroad vehicle use on public lands in areas that do not meet air-quality standards.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

17

Best Management Practices for Off-Road Vehicles By Adam Switalski and Allison Jones

M

anagement of off-road vehicles (ORV) is becoming increasingly difficult as more people recreate on forestlands (including federal, state, and private timberlands). While ORVs have a disproportionate impact on the environment compared to many traditional forms of recreation, no universal set of guidelines exists for their management. Additionally, with travel planning continuing across Forest Service lands and other forestlands, a consistent set of guidelines for planning and managing ORVs is greatly needed. Wildlands CPR and the Wild Utah Project have established a set of best management practices (BMPs), consistent with current forest management policy and regulations, entitled “Best Management Practices for Off-Road Vehicle Use on Forestlands – A Guide for Designating and Managing Off-Road Vehicle Routes.” As retired Forest Service Deputy Chief, Jim Furnish, states in the Preface: “BMPs are intended to provide a science-based consensus view of what works best in dealing with specific management challenges. Their value is that they eliminate the need for everyone to invent the wheel over and over again. BMPs are tried and true, realistic, cost effective, and practical. They allow us to consolidate learning and profit from the experience of others.” In this document, we first briefly discuss the pertinent laws and regulations that pertain to ORV use and management. Following that is the presentation of the BMPs themselves broken down into the following major categories: (1) forest soils, (2) vegetation, (3) wildlife, (4) special ecosystems, and (5) quiet users. The actual BMPs are separated into “Planning and DecisionMaking BMPs,” “Implementation BMPs,” and “Monitoring BMPs.” Justification (such as references to the scientific literature) of the BMPs immediately follows the BMP bullets in each major resource category. We close with a discussion of how managers can apply these BMPs in their decision processes, and needed future research on the social and ecological impacts of ORVs. These guidelines will help managers designate appropriate routes, close inappropriate routes, and manage ORV use to reduce use conflicts and cause as little harm to the environment as possible. With a well-planned ORV

18

Art by Laurel Hagen.

route system that is fully enforced, use conflicts can be greatly reduced, and wildlife and their habitats can be protected. This document is not designed to address policy questions around offroad vehicle recreation and whether or not it is a legitimate use of public lands. Instead it is intended to guide managers in those situations where policy makers have decided that off-road vehicles will be allowed. Additionally, like all other science-informed management directions, the use and implementation of these BMPs must include adaptive management. Finally, effective implementation of these BMPs must be accompanied by adequate funding and staff levels in order to ensure that necessary monitoring and legal enforcement are carried out. If these BMPs are followed, forest managers will be able to determine over the long-term whether or not it is possible to accommodate off-road vehicle recreation while still protecting natural resources and quiet recreational activities. Land managers should be open to whatever the results of monitoring show, including the potential that long-term studies may show that off-road vehicle use is not an appropriate use of some forestlands. Following is an excerpt from the BMPs for “forest soils.” To view the full set of BMPs visit: http://www.wildlandscpr.org/ORV-BMPs — Adam Switalski is the Science Coordinator for Wildlands CPR and Allison Jones is the Conservation Biologist for the Wild Utah Project.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

1.1 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR FOREST SOILS 1.1.1 Planning and Decision-Making BMPs for Forest Soils • • • • •

• • • •

Do not locate routes in areas with highly erodible soils. Locate routes only in areas with stable soils; avoid locating routes in areas with biological crusts. Do not locate routes to climb directly up hillslopes. Route grades should be kept to a minimum and not exceed a 15% grade. Do not locate routes above treeline or in other high elevation areas that are ecologically significant and/or especially prone to erosion. Locate routes a minimum distance (as listed below) from waterbodies and wetlands: • Fish-bearing streams and lakes – 300 ft. • Permanently flowing non-fish-bearing streams – 150 ft. • Ponds, reservoirs, and wetlands greater than one acre –150 ft. Do not designate new routes requiring stream crossings and prioritize closure, re-routing or creating bridge crossings for existing routes that have stream crossings. Do not locate routes in areas with soils contaminated by mine tailings, or mine tailings reclamation sites, at least until they are recovered, fully stable and able to sustain safe ORV usage. If route construction is necessary, reclamation activities should be completed prior to route construction. Close and restore routes that cause high levels of erosion (e.g., raise sedimentation above Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) and reduce native fish population potential). Require all motorized camping to occur in designated campsites. Reclaim undesignated motorized camping sites.

1.1.2 Implementation BMPs for Forest Soils • • • • • • • • • • •

Identify the type or types of soil and steepness in the area that is being affected by ORVs and use this information to prioritize mitigation efforts and create target management objectives to minimize erosion. Identify where waterbodies and wetlands are located, where routes cross them, and whether there are fish present. Prioritize stream crossing closures and route relocations, and if necessary determine appropriate sites for upgrades and/or bridge crossings. Ensure adequate maintenance of bridges and culverts on routes to help prevent unauthorized stream crossings that might damage soils, streambanks, riparian vegetation, etc. Estimate the average soil loss for areas that are currently and obviously negatively affected by ORVs using the Universal Soil Loss Equation. Close and restore routes if the soils are determined to exceed standards for tolerable soil loss. If closing or moving a particularly damaging route is not possible, mitigate erosion with waterbars or other erosion control measures. Close and restore areas that have become “mud bogging areas,” or are prone to “mud bogging.” Close and restore routes where it has been determined, through analysis, that cumulative impacts of erosive activities (e.g., ORVs combined with fire, livestock grazing, or other erosive stressors) are leading to a stream failing to meet erosion standards. Prioritize for closure renegade routes going directly up hillslopes, into wetland areas (including wet meadows), or adjacent to designated routes. Adaptively manage by closing or mitigating a damaging route if monitoring identifies that forest soil conditions are no longer in compliance with planning and decision-making BMPs.

1.1.3 Monitoring BMPs for Forest Soils • • • • • •

Monitor for the amount of erosion occurring on all routes (designated and renegade). Gather data needed for the Universal Erosion Soil Loss Equation. Regularly survey for and identify renegade off-route spurs. Map stream crossings without culverts or bridges and note stream sedimentation levels and visible soil/channel impacts in these areas. Identify areas of significant amounts of bare soil or route-widening along routes through photos and route width measurements. Monitor closed and restored routes to ensure the measures taken are effectively mitigating impacts to forest soils.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

19

The Citizen Spotlight shares the stories of some of the awesome citizens 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 Mark Agee, Road Removal Contractor By Cathrine Walters Adams

I

n the winter of 1995-1996 the Clearwater National Forest in Idaho experienced a dramatic rain-on-snow event that caused extensive flooding and more than 900 landslides. Due to a legacy of logging and associated road-building, some areas on the Clearwater had road densities as high as 40 miles per square mile. These roads were the cause of more than half of the 900 landslides in the region that year, several of which literally carried area residents’ homes off the mountains. The Clearwater National Forest (CNF) responded quickly, acquiring emergency federal funds from Congress to begin an extensive road decommissioning program with the help of the Nez Perce Tribe. To date, the agency, in partnership with the Tribe, has removed more than 600 miles of unused, unsafe, and ecologically harmful roads. Road removal provides high-wage jobs for local contractors, like Mark Agee, whose work restores watershed integrity and reduces the likelihood and severity of future landslides. Four generations of Agees have resided in the Clearwater Valley of north central Idaho, and most of this time Mark’s family has been in the cattle and farming business. Mark grew up in Kooskia, ID and later attended North Idaho College in Coeur d’ Alene for two years. After graduating he returned to his hometown and worked for 15 years in the timber and lumber industries. During this time Mark’s brother had been doing contract road maintenance work for the Forest Service, and in 1995 Mark decided to start his own excavation business. After the extensive flooding the following winter, Mark’s new business suddenly became very busy. There was a lot of opportunity for work cleaning up damaged forest and county roads. He began the summer of 1997 on the CNF reconstructing the main roads, and got his first road removal project that fall. On that project he worked with Forest Service employees Anne Connor and Christine Bradbury and learned a lot. Road removal was very different from anything he had done before, and he says it took him a long time to understand everything involved. “There is a lot more to road removal than just pulling the fill and recontouring the road prisms,” Mark recalls. Over the years he’s learned to properly remove a road, using techniques such as clump-planting (transferring adjacent vegetation to the newly restored roadbed to aid the establishment of native vegetation). Stream reconstruction with good grade control structures is also essential.

20

Photo courtesy of Mark Agee.

There is a lot more to road removal than just pulling the fill and recontouring the road prisms.

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

“I believe that the time has to be spent doing the best job possible to re-establish the vegetation and to make sure everything is done to prevent soil erosion into the streams to protect fish habitat and clean drinking water.” After removing nearly 150 miles of roads throughout his career on the Clearwater National Forest, Mark doesn’t believe that road removal should be thought of as access restriction, but rather as watershed and habitat improvement. “I feel that what I have done on the Clearwater has helped the water quality of this region, and promoted better habitat for fish as well as wildlife in general.” One of the steps to removing a road can require cutting down trees to gain better access for equipment. Mark has received complaints about this but says the vast majority of the trees that he removes could never attain a merchantable size due to the severe compaction of the roads. “A tree may be 10 inches dbh, (diameter at breast height) but has no tap root established and therefore can be tipped over very easily and would never actually mature. Coming from a timber-based community, I hear this comment continuously.” The Clearwater National Forest has always had hourly contracts for this type of work, but starting this year, they switched to a fixed price contract like most of the other forests in the region. Mark preferred the hourly contract because there was an inspector on site and he was only responsible for the equipment work, while the Forest Service and Nez Perce Tribe completed all the seeding and ground work. “I like to have an inspector on the site most of the time to discuss different ideas about how to get the best job done in the least amount of time. With the fixed price contract, I believe the quality of work can be compromised because of the lack of influence on the job site by the inspectors. It is very difficult to specify what methods and procedures should be used from site to site.” Mark says he has been fortunate to have had the privilege to work with people over the years like Anne Connor, Rebecca Lloyd (Wildlands CPR board member), Stephanie Bransford, and Phyllis Heath to name a new, who worked with him on the road removal and restoration projects. But he says it is still a learning process every year.

Photos of Doe Creek, restored by Mark in 2000. Above, road has been recontoured and clumps planted. Below, note the armored stream banks and rock weirs. Photos by Mark Agee.

“I took the Applied Fluvial Geomorphology class given by Dave Rosgen in 2001, and am very thankful that I did. I thoroughly enjoy doing stream channel reconstruction, and this class helped me tremendously. I strongly encourage anyone interested in this type of work to take the time and effort to attend this class.” Mark has no idea what the future has in store for road removal and restoration work, but says if there are projects to bid on, he hopes to keep doing this very worthwhile work for years to come. “I honestly feel that I am making a positive contribution to the land that I was raised in, and hope that my grandchildren can have the opportunities to enjoy this country as much as I have.”

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

21

T

he rivers are raging in western Montana and throughout the west, as spring runoff goes into high gear. Unfortunately this year’s heavy runoff also means more road failures — as evidenced by numerous stories from Washington and Montana in late May. While runoff may not be directly responsible for keeping us busy, there’s lots and lots happening in Wildlands CPR’s three offices.

Welcome

First, we’d like to welcome Franklin Seal as Wildlands CPR’s new Communications Coordinator. Franklin comes to us after five years at the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, where he was responsible for grassroots outreach and online organizing. Prior to that, Franklin worked as a reporter for the Moab, UT paper, and he spent many years advocating on other issues in the Pacific Northwest and in the southwest. He has a perfect background for this position, being intimately familiar with off-road vehicle problems and having extensive experience in both internet and print media. Franklin will be overseeing communications in all of our programs and offices. We’re absolutely delighted to have him on board, but you won’t find him in Missoula. With his roots in Moab, he’ll be working from there, in an office with our UT ORV Coordinator, Laurel Hagen. But he’s responsible for communications work on all of our programs, not just UT, so keep an eye out for his work! Greg Peters, who’s been working with us as an intern and a work-study student, will be conducting a research/organizing project for us fulltime this summer. Greg applied for a competitive scholarship at the Environmental Studies Department at the University of Montana and was awarded a Wyss Foundation Fellowship, which provides funding for him to work at a nonprofit for the summer, in addition to other funding during the school year. And Greg chose to work for us – yes! He’ll be working on a project to identify restoration opportunities on tribal lands in the intermountain and Pacific Northwest.

Spring runoff often reminds us of what’s wrong with roads. Above, a perched culvert prevents fish passage; below, a washout. Both photos by Adam Switalski.

We’d also like to welcome Cassidy Randall, Aaron Kindle and Geoff Fast. Cassidy is taking over all of the research and analysis of the FOIA materials we received from the Forest Service regarding their ORV and roads program. Aaron and Geoff are working on our watershed restoration citizen monitoring program on the Clearwater National Forest in Idaho. Aaron is responsible for organizing volunteers from MT to go into the field for this project. Geoff is handling all of the monitoring and data analysis. In addition, Friends of the Clearwater also partners with us on this project, and they have a new Americorps volunteer, Sarah Aguilar, who will be handling our field sites and volunteer recruiting near Moscow, ID for this same project.

Thanks

Many thanks to all of you who renewed your membership or donated in the past quarter. If you haven’t renewed yet, or if you’re interested in joining our monthly supporter effort, just click on the “join” button on our website, or send us a check! Your support makes all of this work possible! Thanks, too, to the Cinnabar Foundation for a grant to support our restoration program.

22

The Road-RIPorter, Summer Solstice 2008

Support Wildlands CPR Today!

We’ve made supporting 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: _____________________________

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.

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 2008

NOTE: If you would prefer to make an annual donation, 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

Photo by Dan Funsch.

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

The automobile, which began as a transportation convenience, has become a bloody tyrant, ... and it is the responsibility of the Park Service, as well as that of everyone else concerned with preserving both wilderness and civilization, to begin a campaign of resistance. — Edward Abbey; Polemic, Industrial Tourism and the National Parks (in: Desert Solitaire, 1968)

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