Summer So lstice 200 6. V olume 11 No . 2 Mojave Riparian Recovery ThreatenedBy Daniel Patterson and Dan Funsch Inside… Mojave Riparian Recovery Threatened, by Daniel Patterson and Dan Funsch. Pages 3-5 Biblio Notes: The Impact of Roads on Aquatic Benthic Macroinvertibrates, by Christine Morris. Pages 6-8 Regional Reports. Pages 9-11 Check out our website at: www .wildlandscpr.orgDepaving the Way, by Bethanie Walder . Pages 12-13 Citizen Spotlight: Glen Jensen. Pages 14-15 Get with the Program: Restoration and Transportation Program Updates. Pages 16-17 Policy Primer: Citizen Alternatives for Travel Planning, by Tim D. Peterson. Pages 18-19 Odes to Roads: The Deep Blue Breath of Wildness, by Phil Condon. Pages 20-21 Around the Office, Membership Info. Pages 22-23 The White Mountains of Mono Country, California. Photo by Daniel Patterson.
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.
P.O. Box 7516Missoula, MT 59807
(406) 543-9551
www.wildlandscpr.org
Director Bethanie Walder
Development Director
Tom Petersen
Restoration ProgramCoordinator
Marnie Criley
Science Coordinator Adam Switalski
NTWC Forest CampaignCoordinator
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 Lind- ner, Andy Mahler, Robert McConnell, Stephanie
Mills, Reed Noss, Michael Soulé, Steve Trombulak,Louisa Willcox, Bill Willers, Howie Wolke
In April, Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT) introduced legislation to allow motorized accessto 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 lawto change wilderness boundaries to allow for road use. Second, during the past few yearsCongress has been passing comprehensive land management bills that threaten the con-cept of wilderness as places free from motors. Senator Burns’ bill is a real danger to oneof the largest wilderness areas in the lower 48 states.
First, let’s look at the 2004 precedent. The Cumberland Island Wilderness is partof Georgia’s Cumberland Island National Seashore. This Wilderness Area was shrunk,partially “un-designated,” by a bill that allowed motorized recreational access to historicsites. The “Cumberland Island Wilderness Boundary Adjustment Act” mandates that fiveto eight round-trip rides be made available daily on two roads. It was passed as part of alarger “must pass” appropriations bill, and it set a dangerous precedent.
Second, several new land management bills (see RIPorter 9:4) (either proposed or en-acted) contradict the traditional concept of designated wilderness under the WildernessAct. For example, three new “wilderness” bills in Colorado provide legislatively protectedmotorized recreation opportunities (outside of the wilderness boundaries). Numeroussimilar bills are currently being debated in Congress.
Burns wants to change the Bitterrootboundaries to allow maintenance at 16 damsthat were constructed prior to the wildernessdesignation. He claims the bill is solely formaintenance and safety, but it would exempt
activities on the dams, lakes and rights of wayfrom the National Dam Safety Program Act (aswell as other environmental laws). The billwould allow unlimited motorized travel alongthe rights of way, not just motorized use fordam maintenance.
In 1997 the Forest Service determinedthat emergency measures were needed tomake the Bass Creek dam safe, and theyallowed water users to rebuild a road andrepair the dam with heavy equipment. Theagency has repeatedly made provisions formotorized “emergency” dam access without
special legislation. This bill is not justifiable,it is simply a direct attack on The WildernessAct.
Senator Burns has feigned a safety con-cern while actually pushing motorized accessinto this incredible wilderness. While the billis unlikely to pass Congress if debated on itsmerits, if it were attached to an appropria-tions bill or some other must-pass legislation,it could quickly become law. For more infor-mation, see page 15 or visit our website.
Bass Creek dam, in the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness. Photo courtesy of Montana Trout.
“With Friends Like That...”BLM Threatens<Mojave Riparian Recovery
By Daniel Patterson and Dan Funsch
For a few precious years, two of the nation’s finestspecimens of desert riparian area have beenprotected from off-road abuse. In hard fought
battles that began nearly a decade ago, the Centerfor Biological Diversity (“the Center”), Friends of theInyo, the Sierra Club of California, and their allies wonprotections for the Mojave Desert’s Furnace Creek andSurprise Canyon. Now, the Bureau of Land Manage-ment (BLM), the Inyo National Forest, and a small butvocal community of off-road enthusiasts are threaten-ing the recovery of both these unique areas.
Furnace Creek drains the eastern side of themagnificent White Mountains in Mono County, while
Surprise Canyon cascades down from the PanamintRange of Death Valley National Park into the BLMCalifornia Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) in InyoCounty. At the behest of off-roaders, BLM and theInyo National Forest are considering allowing off-road vehicles to ‘mud bog’ in Furnace Creek and toonce again open Surprise Canyon to off-road vehicleuse. This would rewrite two success stories of desertriparian restoration, and lead to the quick degradationof water quality and wildlife habitat. The issue hasrecently attracted the attention of California’s OHVCommission, as well as California’s Senators Feinsteinand Boxer.
Furnace Creek Background
Furnace Creek is a beautiful perennial streamdraining the arid east side of the White Mountains, onthe boundary between the Mojave and Great Basindeserts, containing some of California’s northernmostJoshua Trees. This slow moving creek creates raredesert wetlands and nurtures a mature forest of gigan-tic cottonwoods and water birch thickets. It is hometo the Mono Basin sage grouse, which the Center haspetitioned for Endangered Species Act protection,and is a rich part of the desert web-of-life. The areaprovides important habitat for neo-tropical migratorybirds, such as yellow and MacGillivray’s warblers, yel-low-breasted chats and lazuli buntings, and supportsmarshes of cattails and sedges. The health of thisriparian area is also vital to local deer populations,raptors, mountain lions, bobcats, and quail.
Furnace Creek’s lower section is within the BLMCalifornia Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) andmanaged by the BLM Ridgecrest Field Office, while itsupper length lies within the Inyo National Forest. Anold “road” up Furnace Creek washed out sometime
in the early 80’s, but natural reclamation by willows, cottonwoods,water birch, cattails and sedges was not enough to keep off-roadvehicles, jeeps & motorcycles out. Vehicles punched through thecreek, shrubs, bogs and all, leaving a muddy mess in their wake. Off-roaders wanted the road rebuilt, while conservationists argued thearea should be closed to off-road vehicles to facilitate the canyon’snatural recovery. In 2003, both the Inyo National Forest and BLMfound that the off-road vehicle damage was legally unacceptable andissued an interim closure for the area.
Looking up a waterfall along Surprise Canyon. Photo by Daniel Patterson.
Like Furnace Creek, Surprise Canyon is managed by the RidgecrestBLM office as part of the CDCA. It the most productive spring-fed streamin the entire Mojave Desert: it is fed by Brewery Spring within DeathValley National Park, and Limekiln Spring. Surprise Canyon is home to
the endangered Inyo California towhee and endemic Panamint alligatorlizard, and it is potential habitat for endangered riparian obligate birdssuch as the Southwestern willow flycatcher and Least Bell’s vireo.
For years, BLM had allowed unregulated extreme off-road vehicleuse of Surprise Canyon. Off-road vehicles regularly winched-up water-falls, cut native vegetation and spilled oil & gas into the water. The dam-age was so bad that at one point BLM stated: “The canyon riparian zonecurrently does not meet the BLM’s minimum standards for a properlyfunctioning riparian system due to soil erosion and streambed altera-tions caused by off-highway vehicle use.”
In 2000, the Center for BiologicalDiversity, Public Employees for Envi-ronmental Responsibility, and SierraClub filed a lawsuit against BLM in the
Northern District of California, seekingto close the canyon to off-road vehicles.Then in 2001, as part of a settlementagreement, BLM published a protectiveclosure notice in the federal register,which banned motor vehicle use in thecanyon at least until BLM completedits CDCA Plan amendment. The vehicleclosures were to be a top option consid-ered by BLM in the CDCA Plan.
Re-opening Old Wounds
Recently, a handful of extreme
off-roaders started a move to againopen Surprise canyon to off-road traffic.They hope to ride through and winchup the waterfalls, despite the greatdamage this would cause to naturaland recreational values. Many good-sized riparian trees – cottonwoods andwillows – would have to be removed.The Park Service and BLM are prepar-ing an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) to address options for the area,which will be presented in the form ofan amendment to the CDCA Plan. Whilethe Park Service appears to oppose
re-opening the area to off-roaders, BLMseems intent on allowing the off-roaddestruction.
In Furnace Creek, a similar initia-tive by off-roaders would re-open thearea to allow “mud bogging,” where off-road vehicles drive through fragile wet-lands. This would impair water qualityand sensitive wildlife habitat and turnback the clock on the natural restora-tion that has been occurring since theclosure. The Inyo NF and RidgecrestBLM office are now considering options
for Furnace Creek. They released anEnvironmental Assessment (EA) earlyin 2006 and analyzed six alternatives toeither permanently close — or realignand improve the road.
“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 riparianlandscapes...”
— California OHV Commission
Rare desert stream beds at the mouth of Surprise Canyon. Photo by Daniel Patterson.
The State of California addressed the issuein late 2005 by adopting a new policy to protectcritically endangered desert streams. Recognizingthat desert riparian areas have declined by over90 percent in California, the California Off-HighwayVehicle Commission (OHV Commission) passed a
policy declaring:
“Desert riparian lands should be conservedand restored, and protected in their natural state.Off-road vehicle recreation should not be expanded,encouraged, or maintained in fragile desert riparianlandscapes. It is the policy of the Commission thatabsent extraordinary and demonstrable need, itwill not fund or support any grants or cooperativeagreements which will directly or indirectly encour-age, increase, or maintain off-road vehicle use in orthrough the bed, bank, or channel of any existingdesert riparian botanical area. The Commissionshall maintain a list of priority Desert Riparian lands
and shall evaluate the list at least every five yearsto maintain the integrity of these protected areas.The Division shall not solicit or approve any grant orcooperative agreement which will develop or rees-tablish off-road vehicle use in a desert riparian areaunless exempted from this policy by noticed vote ofthe Commission.”
While the state OHV Commission does not havemanagement authority over either Furnace Creek orSurprise Canyon, their strongly worded statementlends support to the effort to protect these areas.Shortly after the OHV Commission acted, BLM’s Cali-fornia Director wrote a letter opposing the policy.
Next to join the debate were California Sena-tors Feinstein (D) and Boxer (D). In a letter in December 2005, theyrequested that the BLM and the Park Service support the permanentclosure of Surprise Canyon above Chris Wicht Camp, the terminus ofan access road. Their letter cited the area’s “rare and remarkable”resources, the presence of endangered species, and the availabilityof alternative destinations for off-road vehicle riding. They alsopointed out that while the 1994 California Desert Protection Actomitted a narrow “cherry stem” of the canyon from Wilderness des-ignation, it did so to allow potential access to mining claims, not toauthorize recreational off-road vehicle use.
Help Protect These Desert Riparian Treasures
While awaiting the release of decision documents for the Fur-nace Creek Road Environmental Assessment (EA) and the SurpriseCanyon EIS, the Center for Biological Diversity is organizing alliesand preparing for possible legal action should it be needed. TheCenter submitted joint comments on the Furnace Creek EA alongwith the California Wilderness Coalition, Friends of the Inyo, andPublic Employees for Environmental Responsibility. Meanwhile,over near Surprise Canyon, the Center is working closely with localresidents who realize that they cannot take clean water and natural
quiet for granted. They vow to take direct action ifnecessary to keep off-road vehicles out of the canyon.Please lend your support to the campaign to protectthese unique areas by contacting the Center for Bio-logical Diversity.
For More Information
Read the California OHV Commission Policy onDesert 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.htmJoin the campaign by contacting the Center for
Bibliography Notes summarizes and highlights some of thescientific literature in our 10,000 citation bibliography on the
physical and ecological effects of roads and off-road vehicles. Weoffer 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.
Sedimentation is widely acknowl-edged as a major cause of deg-radation of instream habitats
(Wood et al. 2005). During rain storms
and snowmelt, dirt and gravel roadsbleed sediment into ditches that oftendrain into streams. These roads are amajor source of stream sediment loads,especially harmful fine sediments, androads contribute more sediment tostreams than any other land manage-ment activity (USDA 2000). Sedimenta-tion is directly related to a decreasein benthic macroinvertebrate densityand a change in diversity accordingto a number of studies. In this paper Ireview some of the impacts of sedimen-tation on benthic invertebrates and ex-
plain how examining macroinvertebratediversity can help determine overallaquatic ecosystem health.
Overview of ImpactsWood and Armitage (1997) define
four primary ways in which fine sedi-ments impair macroinvertebrate diver-sity and health: 1) altering substratecomposition and changing its suitabilityfor some taxa; 2) increasing drift dueto sediment deposition or substrate in-stability; 3) affecting respiration due tosilt deposition on respiration structures
or low oxygen concentrations associ-ated with silt deposits; 4) impedingfilter feeding by increasing suspendedsediment concentration, reducing thefood value of periphyton, killing aquaticflora, and reducing the density of preyitems. In addition, through drift causedby scouring the streambed, macroinver-tebrates can become more susceptibleto predation or experience damagedrespiratory systems (Newcombe andMacDonald 1991).
Roads are also respon-sible for chemical contamina-tion of streams. For example,Forrow and Maltby (2000)
investigated the mecha-nistic basis for reducedleaf processing in a streamcontaminated with motorway(superhighway) runoff. Theyfound the feeding rate ofGammarus pulex (Amphipo-da), the dominant detrivoreat the site, was significantlyreduced downstream of themotorway discharge. Ap-proximately 70 percent ofthe reduction in feeding ratecould be accounted for by
the direct effects of exposureto contaminated sediment.
Increased stream temper-ature and reduced dissolvedoxygen content of streamscan also be attributed to roadactivities such as the clearingof stream-side vegetation andthe input of sediments. Finesediment reduces dissolvedoxygen content of the affected stream as suspended solids absorb heat from sun-light and increase stream temperature. Temperatures greater than 21oC (70oF) canseverely stress most coldwater macroinvertebrates (Frondork 2001).
Using Macroinvertebrates for Stream AssessmentsBioassessment of rivers and streams can reveal water quality and stream
ecosystem impairment. Aquatic benthic macroinvertebrates are especially usefulindicators as each species has a specific tolerance for water conditions (Frondork2001). These aquatic biota are affected by the physical, chemical and biologicalconditions of the stream and may show impacts from habitat loss not detectedby traditional water quality assessments. As monitors of environmental quality,macroinvertebrates can reveal episodic as well as cumulative pollution and habitatalteration. The use of macroinvertebrates as bioindicators has been shown to beone of the most reliable and cost-effective assessment tools of water and habitatquality in streams throughout the world (King et al. 2000).
The Impact of Roads on Aquatic Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Using Bioassessments asIndicators of Stream Health
By Christine Morris
High school students learn the importance of macroinvertebrates in stream monitoring. Photo by Adam
Macroinvertebrate assess-ment is crucial for determiningaquatic ecosystem health inroaded landscapes. The presenceof roads has been shown to behighly correlated with changes inspecies composition, populationsizes, and hydrologic and geomor-phic processes that shape aquaticand riparian systems (Trombulakand Frissell 2000). Macroinverte-brate diversity and abundance areaffected by roads; their physi-cal and behavioral changes canpinpoint sources of road-causedhabitat impact.
Various models have beenused to assess macroinvertebrateresponse to road induced aquaticchanges. The heterogeneity ofstream ecosystems, the variableresponses of macroinvertebrates,and the differences between
agency models suggest that analy-sis of the reference conditions andthe model used is essential in interpreting bioassessmentresults. Though impact is evident, collaboration betweenagencies and citizen scientist working groups to define modelstandards is needed for remediation of problems indicated bybioassessment results.
EPT IndexThe most general macroinvertebrate assessment model
uses the EPT index. This index claims that although differentinsect taxa vary widely in their sensitivity to sedimentation,the taxa from the orders Ephemeroptera (E), Plecoptera (P),
and Trichoptera (T) behave similarly. However, a taxonomicgroup can exhibit a great deal of heterogeneity (Lenat et al.1981), so an assessment method like the EPT may be insensi-tive to changes in species composition unless composition isaltered along with overall taxa richness (Hawkins et al. 2000).
Multimetric and multivariate approaches can increase amodel’s accuracy. These models evaluate the sampled com-munity by comparing observed conditions to what conditionsor taxa are expected to occur in the absence of disturbance.The sampling method is important to consider as well. Gradi-ent sampling designs have been shown to be more sensitiveand powerful statistically than designs based on randomallocation of samples (King et al. 2000).
The type of model used in macroinvertebrate assessmentsignificantly affects determination of water quality impair-ment. Identifying the specific impact on a macroinvertebratepopulation may also be difficult due to the geomorphologicaland geochemical controls on the physical and chemical char-acteristics of streams. Many of the environmental variablesare interrelated (Griffith et al. 2001) and as a result, com-munity assemblages will be correlated with these variables,though species distributions may be directly affected byonly one or a subset of the variables (Griffith et al. 2001). Inaddition to the physical variations that may influence data
acquisition and interpretation, state agencies use differentmethods and models to biologically assess water quality.(Barbour et al. 1999).
Multimetric AssessmentsUS EPA Region IV has suggested adopting national
multimetric assessment methods, sharing information on suc-cessful approaches to decision criteria, developing regionalreference conditions across political boundaries, and devel-oping shared ecological databases. They have also initiatedcooperative efforts to increase exchange of biological data in
shared ecoregions or basins. Conducting side-by-side assess-ments with multi-agency projects and using a single methodwould also assist in stream classification and developingregional reference conditions by ensuring that differences inassessment results are a consequence of natural differencesin biotic communities and not investigator bias (Housten etal. 2002).
ConclusionRoads cause a variety of impacts on stream ecosystem
health and water quality. The use of macroinvertebrate as-sessment can reveal these impacts if properly conducted.Careful environmental analysis of the site, data comparisonto reference sites and species-specific response models can
provide accurate assessment of stream impairment andcan generate predictions of macroinvertebrate responseto road-caused impacts. Comparison of macroinvertebrateassessment results based on methods and models collectedby various citizen groups and state agencies will facilitate anaccurate understanding of road-caused impacts on streamhealth.
— Christine Morris is a graduate student in Environmental Studies at the University of Montana.
Water quality degradation due to roads is not often apparent to the casual observer, so it is important to
rely on indicators such as macroinvertebrates. Photo copyright Mark Alan Wilson.
Barbour, M. T., J. Gerritsen, B. D. Snyder, and J. B. Stribling.1999. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for use inStreams and Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, benthicmacroinvertebrates, and fish. EPA 841-B-99-002. SecondEdition. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofWater, Washington, DC.
Forrow, D. M., and L. Maltby. 2000. Toward a mechanisticunderstanding of contaminant-induced changes indetritus processing in streams: direct and indirecteffects on detrivore feeding. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 19(8):2100-2106.
Frondork, L. 2001. An Investigation of the Relationshipsbetween Stream Benthic Macroinvertebrate AssemblageConditions and their Stressors. Thesis for VirginiaPolytechnic Institute and State University.
Griffith, M. B., P. R. Kaufmann, A. T. Herlihy, and B. H. Hill.2001. Analysis of macroinvertebrate assemblages inrelation to environmental gradients in Rocky Mountainstreams. 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 modelsfor 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 macroinvertebratestream based bioassessment methodologies. Ecological
Indicators 1(4):279-292
King, R. S., K. T. Nunnery, and C. J. Richardson. 2000.Macroinvertebrate assemblage response to highwaycrossings in forested wetlands: implications forbiological 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 asa measure of cumulative effect of logging. Environmental
Management 19(4):609-621.Mebane, C. A. 2001. Testing bioassessment metrics;
macroinvertebrate, sculpin, and salmonid responsesto 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 ecologicaleffects of roads on terrestrial and aquatic communities.Conservation Biology 14(1):18-30.
United States Department of Agriculture. 2000. Forest ServiceRoadless Area Conservation Rule: Final EnvironmentalImpact Statement.
Wood, P. J., J. Toone, M. T. Greenwood, and P. D. Armitage.2005. The response of four lotic macroinvertebrate taxato burial by sediments. Arch. Hydrobiology 163(2):145-162.
Wood, P. J. and P. D. Armitage. 1997. Biological effects offine 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.
On Friday April 28th, a 15-member federal panelgranted Forest Guardians $360,000 under the Col-laborative Forest Restoration Program (CommunityForest Restoration Act, Pub. L. No. 106-393) to decom-mission and close excessive roads on the Santa FeNational Forest in New Mexico. The Santa Fe NationalForest has the highest road density of any forest inthe Southwest Region. The federal grant is unique in
that it greatly expands the concept of forest restora-tion in the Southwest beyond tree-cutting.
High road densities degrade water quality, com-pact soils, fragment wildlife habitat, and contribute tofire ignitions during inappropriate weather conditions.The project will eliminate these negative conse-quences, improving forest health and water quality fordownstream users such as land grant communities,municipalities, acequia (irrigation) associations, andacequia systems.
Under the terms of the grant, Forest Guardianswill work with several collaborators, including BillyCordova Logging Inc., Coronado High School, and theCoyote Volunteer Fire Department to restore foreststhat were heavily logged and roaded over the last cen-tury. The goal is to rehabilitate 20 miles and 10 streamcrossings. Road decommissioning and revegetationis expected to cost $5,000 per mile and $3,000 perstream crossing. The project will also help develop asustainable forest restoration industry in the area.
Forest Guardians Awarded Collaborative Road Decommissioning Grant
Off-road vehicle tracks in a high alpine meadow. Photocourtesy of Forest Guardians of Santa Fe, NM.
New Federal Policy Aides StatesIn Claiming Roads (RS 2477)Outgoing Interior Secretary Gale Norton signed a
“secretarial order” reinforcing states’ and counties’ rightsto claim roads on federal land as their own, and maintainor expand them. The policy will apply to roads on allpublic lands, including national parks and wildlife refuges.
The order effectively repeals Bureau of Land Man-agement rules, which, since 1997, required states andcounties to show proof of construction in order to claim aroad under RS 2477. Now, counties need only prove roadclaims under state laws.
Norton’s order reflects a court ruling last fall thatupheld the rights of several Utah counties to grade roadsacross the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument.Under the ruling, neither the state nor the federal govern-ment can act unilaterally in changing the size or use of aroad.
States’ rights advocates praise the policy as a vic-tory for local control, while environmental groups areconcerned that the order will lead to increased devel-opment and access for off-road vehicle use on publiclands. “There are red flags all over this,” said SouthernUtah Wilderness Alliance Director Heidi McIntosh. “The
biggest red flag is that the trails and other routes that arenow closed to vehicular traffic will be turned over to thecounties, who will in turn try to turn them into highways.”
No Progress In Snowmobile Emissions Since 2001
A Yellowstone National Park study has concludedthat even the cleanest snowmobiles have failed to meetprojected improvements in emissions. The study dem-onstrates that snowcoaches are up to 41 times cleanerthan the most environmentally-friendly snowmobiles in
the Park. Yellowstone asked snowmobile manufacturersto reduce carbon monoxide emissions by 70 percent (rela-tive to 1999 two-stroke engines), but no 2005 snowmobilehas met that goal.
Yellowstone National Park is working on an envi-ronmental impact statement that will call for improvedtechnology, but many are unsure if snowmobile manufac-turers can be made to comply. Emissions are expected toimprove when cleaner technologies are developed.
Off-road vehicle scars on a vegetated sand dune, Santa Fe National Forest. Photo by Chris Kassar,Center for Biological Diversity.
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 AlgodonesSand Dunes in southern California’s Sonoran Desert. The area ishome to several threatened and endangered species, includingPeirson’s milk vetch, desert tortoise, and flat-tailed horned lizard.
In 2000, 50,000 acres of the 180,000-acre dune area were set asideand designated off-limits to off-road vehicle use. This reprieve hasallowed endangered wildlife to begin to recover. The BLM, however,recently released a new plan for the dunes that would allow off-roadvehicles in protected areas. The Center for Biological Diversity andother groups sued the agency.
The court ruled that BLM’s proposed management plan vio-lated federal statutes including the Endangered Species Act and theNational Environmental Policy Act. For now, these dune areas willcontinue to be free of motorized use.
Proposed Off-Road Use Along Alaska’s Dalton HighwayStruck Down
A bill that would have opened the land alongAlaska’s Dalton Highway (see RIPorter 11.1 ) to off-roadvehicle use died in the Alaska Legislature May 2nd.The bill, sponsored by Rep. Ralph Seekins (R-Fair-banks), would have allowed off-road vehicles andsnowmachines in the area. It generated firm opposi-
tion from a broad swath of Alaska interests, includingthe Northern Alaska Environmental Center, the NorthSlope Borough and the Alaska Trucking Association.There was concern that motorized use in the areawould have negative effects on wildlife, and could cre-ate dangerous conditions for truckers using the road.
Similar proposals have been submitted in Alaskaseveral times before, without success. The proposal’ssponsor vowed to resurrect the bill next year.
Victories
Gallatin National Forest MayDecommission Old Logging Roads
The Gallatin National Forest in Montana is proposing to decom-mission 47 miles of old logging roads and a 1.2 mile stretch of anunauthorized off-road vehicle route in the Bangtail Mountains, north-east of Bozeman.
Many of these roads cut through land formerly owned by BigSky Lumber. Forest officials have known for years that the roads arecausing severe erosion, and that siltation in nearby streams is aboveallowable levels. Westslope cutthroat trout inhabit the area. TheForest Service now has the money for the project, and expects to getstarted in the summer of 2006. Environmentalists and motorized useadvocates seem to agree that the project is a good one.
Plan To Reopen Florida Forest To Off-Road Vehicles Rejected
A plan submitted by Florida’s Southwest Division of Forestry to
allow off-road vehicle use in Southern Golden Gate Estates has beenrejected by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The 55,000-acre Es-tates area is part of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan,intended to mitigate some of the damage inflicted to the Evergladesfor decades. The plan is overseen by the Army Corps of Engineers.
The Corps rejected the proposed re-opening of at least 12 milesof trails to off-road recreation. Other proposals such as a shootingrange and cattle grazing were similarly rejected. The plan also gener-ated criticism from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The sensitivearea has been closed to off-road vehicle use for some time, but waspreviously a haven for off-road vehicle users and gun enthusiasts.
An ATV rider ignores an “area closed to motorized vehicles” sign. Photo courtesy of the Center for Biological Diversity.
A dam at the edge of Canyon Lake in the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness. Photo courtesy of Wilderness Watch.
Legislation would allow more than
100 miles of road building, unlimited motorized use.
Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT) has introducedlegislation (S.2633) that would allow dam owners inMontana’s Bitterroot Valley to build roads and useunlimited amounts of motorized equipment to accessand maintain 16 dams in the Selway-Bitterroot Wilder-ness. The bill would allow roads to be built wheretrails now exist in ten canyons, most of which areentry points into the 1.3 million-acre Wilderness.
Burns’ bill would:
• Grant unrestricted rights-of-way (ROW) upto 120 feet wide where trails now exist, and up to 500feet from the high-water mark around the dams andlakes. The bill allows dam owners to sell the ROW toanyone, which could lead to resort home develop-ment.
• Exempt activities on the dams, lakes andrights-of-way from the Wilderness Act, National Envi-ronmental Policy Act, National Dam Safety ProgramAct, or any federal law to protect fish and wildlife ormaintain water quality.
• Allow unlimited motorized travel along therights-of-way and unlimited use of motorized equip-ment at the dams.
• Strip Forest Service jurisdiction from thelands and give it to the state. The dam owners wouldnot be liable for any claim or damage resulting fromtheir operation of the dams, except where one couldprove negligence of the owner.
Burns’ Bill Threatens Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness
The bill would strike a blow to the Wilderness Act and could setthe stage for road-building in other areas of the National WildernessPreservation System. Furthermore, the bill is entirely unnecessary.The Wilderness Act recognizes valid rights of water users to main-
tain dams in the Wilderness while preventing degradation of wilder-ness character. The Forest Service should assist water users infinding wilderness-compatible, non-motorized ways to maintain thedams…as it has been done for the past 100 years.
Alert
• Write or call Senator Burns and tell
him what you think of his dam bill. Urge him toencourage the Forest Service and water users toseek wilderness compatible, non-motorized solu-tions.
• Write or call your own senators andcongresspersons and make them aware of yourconcerns.
Contact Information
Senator ____________United States SenateWashington, DC 20510(202) 224-3121 (Capitol Switchboard)
www.senate.gov
Representative ______________U.S. House of RepresentativesWashington, DC 20515(202) 224-3121 (Capitol Switchboard)www.house.gov
For more information contact Wilderness Watch.Visit their website at www.wildernesswatch.org.
It was almost exactly ten years ago(August 1996) when the WildlandsCPR board realized that we couldn’t
just focus exclusively on providingactivists with legal, scientific and tech-nical information about roads and off-
road vehicles. We discussed how criti-cal it is for people to understand WHYroads have ecological and economiccosts, WHY we have too many roadsand not enough roadless lands; WHYwildlands should be restored throughroad removal; and WHY off-road vehiclerecreation is damaging. After all, ifpeople don’t understand why some-thing is a problem, they are unlikely todo anything about it.
That fall we launched an essaysection in our newsletter to start tobuild real understanding about theproblems with roads and off-roadvehicles, and the opportunities for realwildland restoration. Our first essaywas written by one of our advisoryboard members, Howie Wolke. In hisessay, “Aliens Unlock Secrets of theRoad,” Howie theorized that if alienswere observing the United States, “theymight easily conclude that roads – fromsuperhighways to bumpy dirt tracks– have a deep religious significance toour society. Why else would humanscrisscross the entire landscape withthem?” Later in his essay, he concludes
that our religious-like zeal to buildroads is driven by our desire to controlnature, “We fear what we can’t control,and we can’t control nature withoutroads and their trappings.” Howie’s es-say was terrific, and it set the stage forthe next ten years of incredible essaysabout the problems with roads andoff-road vehicles, and the values andimportance of watershed restoration,roadless wildlands and more.
Wildlands CPR Announces
A Road Runs Through It By Bethanie Walder
“Wilderness: A Reminder” is a wood engraving by Claire Emery. A Road Runs Through It: Reviving Wild Places is illustrated withEmery’s stunning wood engravings. Emery is an artist and natural-ist who focuses on conveying the beauties and mysteries of naturethrough art and education. She has illustrated publications forclients including W.W Norton, Montana Audubon, U.S. ForestService, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, California State Parks,Mountain Press, and Orion magazine. Visit her website at http:// emeryart.com.
Several years ago, we started an ef-fort to compile some of the best essaysinto a collection that we could makemore widely available than our news-letter. Last year we found a publisher,Johnson Books, and the collection isbeing published this summer. Entitled
A Road Runs Through It, it contains 28essays from an amazing array of writ-ers. Some of the essays are reprintsfrom our newsletters over the past tenyears. Some are reprints from otherbooks, and quite a few were writtenjust for this collection. Tom Petersen,Wildlands CPR’s Development Direc-tor, took on the task of shaping thiscollection of essays into a meaningful,coordinated book about roads, off-roadvehicles and watershed restoration.For the past several issues of The Road
RIPorter we’ve been printing abridgedversions of these new essays, includingpieces by Phil Condon, Janisse Ray andDave Havlick. We’ve printed them to
tickle your interest, and we hope you’llpick up a copy of the book to read theessays in their entirety. In additionto those authors, the book contains aforeward by Annie Proulx and essays byPeter Matthieson, Barry Lopez, EdwardAbbey, Derrick Jensen, Stephanie Mills,Mary Sojourner, Katie Alvord and manymore fine authors.
Several of these authors will hostreadings in their home towns once thebook is published this summer. It’s ourhope that A Road Runs Through It will
help expand the debate around roads,off-road vehicles and restoration. Itpresents an opportunity for readersto carefully consider the impacts ouractions have. As Howie said so manyyears ago, “As society matures beyondits lingering frontier mentality, perhapswe’ll loosen our white-knuckled grip onnature. Maybe we’ll realize that moreroads (and dams, clearcuts, strip malls,human protoplasm…) make our worldpoorer, not richer. … Perhaps we’llbegin to restore a balance, a life affirm-ing partnership with the world from
whence we came. A much wilder worldthan the one in which we now live.”
And Howie’s right. Ten years agothe National Park Service was the onlyagency routinely restoring wildlands byremoving unneeded, ecologically-dam-aging roads. In the time since, we’veseen the Forest Service state that theyshould remove up to 186,000 miles ofroads from national forest lands, andwe’ve seen them invest in some of that
much needed work. We’ve seen thePark Service expand some of its roadremoval programs, and we’ve seen
all three land management agenciesconsider new approaches to off-roadvehicle management (albeit significantflaws remain). Granted, funding forforest restoration is currently tied upin nationwide debates over fire andlogging, limiting investment in roadremoval, but we’re working on that.
While it might be easy for a re-source organization like Wildlands CPRto focus our efforts on WHAT can be
done to address road and off-road vehi-cle problems, we won’t be satisfied untila larger and broader number of people
understand WHY off-road vehicles androads are a problem. As Aldo Leopoldonce said, “recreational development isa job not of building roads into lovelycountry, but of building receptivity intothe still unlovely human mind.” A Road
Runs Through It attempts to build thatreceptivity, with thoughtful, provoca-tive and creative literary essays. Wehope you enjoy reading it as much aswe’ve enjoyed putting it together.
To Purchase A Road Runs Through It :
Call Johnson Books toll-free: 1.800.258.5830Mention 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 ex-pensive there, Wildlands CPR doesn’t make as much per book. So give
Johnson Books a call to help support Wildlands CPR. Thank you!
In 1994 Glen Jensen bought 270 acres of land bordering Arkansas’ OzarkNational Forest. By 2003 he and his wife had saved up enough to buildtheir 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 let-ter informing him that the Forest Service was proposing to designate 74 milesof trail in his backyard as off-road vehicle (ORV) routes; directly impacting aquality 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 naturalhabitat. One of his favorite things to do is to listen to nature sounds, but Glensays the noise and disturbance created by off-road vehicles cause the wildlifeto disappear. “From my experience, deer in the woods become completelynocturnal, the bear will move out and turkeys will nest elsewhere…I’ve seenturkeys abandon nests due to off-road vehicle disturbance.”
Currently, some hunters and hikers use the 74 miles of trail, but thetrails are at least 30 years old, overgrown and have been mostly reclaimedby the forest. With all the downed trees and limited access, off-road vehiclesgo somewhere else. But if the Buckhorn OHV Trail goes through the For-est Service would clean up the old trails, create three miles of new trail andconstruct three new trailheads — one of which would be 1.5 miles from theJensen’s home. With the three county roads around his home creating a tri-
angle of access points, there would be a constant stream of off-road vehiclesnear his property. “We live here because of the solitude and quiet. If the For-est Service puts an off-road vehicle track here it destroys our way of living. Sothe only choice is to fight it or leave…and I don’t want to leave.”
So fight it he did. First Glen preparedcomments on the proposed trail. He learnedthat motorized vehicle use would be un-restricted, the Forest Service had fundingonly for trail construction (not upkeep),there would be no dedicated law enforce-ment, no published regulations for the areaand no dedicated management resources.“There’s only one Forest Service law enforce-
ment officer responsible for 450,000 acresin three counties, he said ‘there’s no way hecan police the activity.’” When Glen askedabout enforcement he was told the ATV clubswould police themselves.
Concerned about this and other issues,Glen commented that the proposed trailalong the north boundary of his propertywould also disturb wildlife. He expressedhis concerns over the county road use andmaintenance, trash dumping and littering,the project’s funding, maintenance and noise,dust and water quality impacts.
A few months later Glen received a Deci-sion Notice from the Forest Service with aFinding of No Significant Impact. However,they did consider the section of proposedtrail that ran along Glen’s northern propertyboundary, and moved it farther north. WhileGlen appreciated that, it was the only con-cern they addressed, so he decided to file anappeal and found an environmental law firmto assist him.
While Glen waited for his appeal to beprocessed, he researched more of the proj-ect. He contacted organizations and individu-als who commented on the original proposal.He contacted his state senator, state repre-sentative and Governor, and he called U.S.Senators Mark Pryor (D) and Blanche Lincoln(D). Sen. Pryor sent someone out to walk-through Glen’s property and asked him toput on paper what kind of proposal he wouldaccept should the project go through. Glendecided he would like to see the trailheadproposed 1.5 miles from his home removed.
Senators Lincoln and Pryor both wroteletters to the Forest Service relaying Glen’sconcerns.
Near the end of January 2006 Glenreceived a letter stating that his appeal wasaccepted and that he should receive a replywithin three months. One week later he gotanother letter saying that the Forest Servicehad decided to go forward with the project.Glen called the Regional Office: “You toldme this would take until March. I thoughtsomeone would come out to look at it…re-view maps…and a few days later I receivethis letter? That shows me you didn’t reviewmy appeal.”
Undeterred, Glen researched furtherand came across another project proposedfor the same area: The Pine Mountain Dam.The dam would provide area residents ayear round supply of water to combat pastshortages. Glen compared maps and foundthat the Buckhorn OHV Trail would cross the
river upstream of the proposed dam, whichhe thought could potentially have an impacton the water quality of Lee Creek, the sourcedownstream residents were planning to useas their drinking supply.
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 Corpsof Engineers had put up $350,000. Glen called State Representative BeverlyPyle (R) and asked her to send a letter about his findings. Glen also wrote toMichael Sanders, the supervisor of the Ozark-St. Francis National Forest. Inshort order, Glen received a response from the Forest Service saying theywere pulling the Buckhorn OHV Trail project until further analysis could becompleted.
Glen was thrilled to get the news. Although the success was only tempo-rary, Glen figured he had two to five years until the Forest Service could com-plete 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 ofInformation Act request to release the names of those who commented on theproposal and to see the sources of project funding. He found out that only 39people commented on the proposal, and he called them to try to collaborate.Glen credits the non-profit environmental law firm, Wildlaw, for valuable as-sistance, in particular, their publications that offered advice on Forest Serviceregulations and how to prepare for litigation. Glen also recommends gettingon the Forest Service mailing list for projects in your area. “Don’t get taken bysurprise,” he says.
Glen’s inspiration comes from going out into the woods and listening tonature’s sounds. “I go back and forth on the off-road vehicle trail and I some-times think it won’t be that bad. But then I sit in the woods listening to thebirds and the squirrels…hear hens clucking on a nest behind me…and then Ihear a four wheeler four miles down the road…and that’s just one.”
Glen isn’t sure what the future holds for the Buckhorn OHV Trail. “If theproject goes through I will submit comments, file an appeal and go to federalcourt if I have to. If it ends, well, then that’s it.” As of now Glen’s passion hasforced him to use his personal money to fight his cause, “Right now I’m tryingto sell 121 acres to fund this fight and I’m taking money out of my 401k to dothis.” But Glen believes it’s all worth it, “If they put the off-road vehicle trailin I can’t hunt. I can’t hear the gobble of turkeys over the noise of off-roadvehicles. It will take away my freedom to pursue what I consider to be one ofthe most important activities in my life.”
— Cathy Adams is the Wildlands CPR Program and Membership Associate.
Off-road access points often become a conduit for the illegal dumping of garbageand debris. Photo by Glen Jensen.
Off-road impacts to soils, water and solitude areamong Glen’s concerns. Photo by Glen Jensen.
Wildlands CPR’s Transportation Program ispleased to announce that we have awarded stra-tegic mini-grants ($3,000-$5,000) to activists in thethick of off-road vehicle planning. On-the-groundfieldwork is expensive and difficult to fund, butcritical considering that desk-bound land managersare often unaware of the devastating impacts thatunmanaged off-road vehicle use has wrought on
their watch.
Wildlands CPR was uniquely positioned todispense aid to groups working to restore na-tive ecosystems and recreational balance on ournational forests, thanks to support from the 444SFoundation.
Early this spring, Wildlands CPR asked lo-cal conservation groups to submit proposals forfunding to advance both proactive and defensiveefforts to implement the new Forest Service off-roadvehicle rule. The response was overwhelming.We received 22 proposals requesting about four
times the funding we had to give. All the proposalswere excellent, and it was truly a heart-wrenchingprocess to decide who would make the final cut. Inthe end, we chose to fund those groups that dem-onstrated the closest adherence to our three goals:projects that will address immediate threats andopportunities related to the implementation of thenew Forest Service ORV rule in western national for-ests; projects that will advance a proactive litigationstrategy to uphold the Executive Orders as forestsbegin to implement the rule; and projects that couldtest a proactive zoning approach to route designa-tion as part of the implementation of the new ForestService rule.
We awarded mini-grants to Washington-basedConservation Northwest, The Three Forests Coali-tion (Utah) and Great Old Broads for Wilderness,Los Padres Forest Watch in south central Californiaand The Upper Gila Watershed Alliance in New Mex-ico. In addition, we funded an independent projectto investigate the dubious legality of the notoriousPaiute ATV system in central Utah. Please join withus in wishing these groups a safe and productivefield season!
Ecosystem Management Decision Support
Workshop
Adam helped organize a Forest Service Regional TrainingAcademy workshop on using Ecosystem Management DecisionSupport (EMDS) in transportation planning. EMDS is a GIS-basedsystem that has been used as a transparent tool to prioritizeroad removal and designate off-road vehicle routes. FraserShilling (UC Davis), Brian Muller (CU Denver), and Paul Burgess(Redlands U) led the workshop along with Mark Jensen (FS Re-gion 1 Analyst). The workshop was attended by about 25 peoplefrom the Forest Service, Washington Department of NaturalResources, Bureau of Land Management, University of Montana,Environmental Protection Agency, and private consultants.
Information requests
Adam continues to provide citizens, activists, scientists, andmanagers with scientific information on roads, road removal, andoff-road vehicles. Recent information requests came from theUniversity of Uyo (Nigeria); Colorado Environmental Coalition;Utah State University; The Nature Conservancy; the Heritage For-est Campaign; the Nez Perce Tribe; National Parks ConservationAssociation; Five Valleys Land Trust; The Wilderness Society; andconcerned citizens in the U.S. and Chile.
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.
The Restoration Program has been in high gear thisspring on the local, regional and national levels. Locally,Marnie devoted time to the Governor’s Restoration Forum inBillings, Montana June 8-9. Montana’s Gov. Brian Schweitzeris very interested in pursuing a restoration economy, andMarnie worked with members of his staff to help coordinatethis Forum. One key theme of the event was investing inrestoration work in Montana. Wildlands CPR intern BreeannJohnson finalized a paper that addresses this issue, and Mar-nie presented the paper at the Restoration Forum. More than300 people attended the extremely successful event.
Regionally, Marnie continues her involvement with theHells Canyon Collaborative. The Collaborative finalized a
charter and is now focusing its attention on roads analysisand transportation planning. Wildlands CPR will bring FraserShilling to the next collaborative meeting on June 20 (Fraserhas utilized the Ecosystem Management Decision SupportSystem (EMDS) to conduct roads analysis on the TahoeNational Forest). It is possible the Forest Service, with as-sistance from the Collaborative, will utilize EMDS to conducttransportation planning and roads analysis within the HellsCanyon National Recreation Area. Marnie also led a success-ful roads workshop for the Northeast Washington ForestryCoalition, which is in the process of writing a collaborativeroads policy for the Colville National Forest.
Nationally, Marnie and the National Forest RestorationCollaborative are planning a trip to Washington DC in lateJuly to meet with public land agency personnel about col-laborative restoration efforts related to roads, weeds and fish.This trio will focus on successful collaborative efforts that gobeyond just logging and fire issues.
Citizen Science on the Clearwater National Forest
Adam continues to support citizen science monitoringon the Clearwater National Forest, working with Len Broberg(University of Montana Environmental Studies Director) and
Anna Holden (UM graduate student and Volunteer Coordina-tor). Adam helped Anna develop outreach materials, increaserecruiting, and prepare for teaching at Kamiah High School.Anna’s abstract was accepted for an oral presentation at theSociety for Conservation Biology’s (SCB) annual meeting inSan Jose, CA this summer. She will present methods for orga-nizing citizen science volunteers, as well as some preliminarymonitoring results. Adam is helping her key out tracks andanalyze data for the presentation. For more information orto get involved, contact Anna at: [email protected].
The Natural Trails & Waters Coalition has organized four workshops on “advocacy through authenticcollaboration” this quarter. The workshop prepares participants to (1) assess a forest’s goals and methodsfor 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 work-shops once the Forest Service and BLM announced their intention to employ “collaboration” for many ofthe scores of travel planning and off-road vehicle route designation processes that are expected to takeplace in the coming years. We have partnered with grassroots conservation organizations who have hostedthe 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 Coalitionat 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 onMay 11 to in Sacramento. Friends of the Routt Backcountry, a member of the Backcountry Snowsports Alli-ance, 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 Mexicoworkshop, for example, is that the 13 conservation/quiet recreation groups who attended have now formeda statewide coalition to address off-road vehicle issues. The Center for Biological Diversity is coordinatingthis 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 LakeCity. The Coalition will arrange for up to three more collaboration workshops in the coming months.
The Policy Primer is a columndesigned to highlight the ins & outs of a
specific road or off-road vehicle policy. If you have a policy you’d like us to investi-
gate, let us know!
B
ecause travel planning has significant environ-mental consequences, it constitutes a major
federal action subject to the National Environ-mental Policy Act (NEPA). This means that citizenshave the opportunity to submit alternatives forconsideration in a draft environmental assessment(EA) or draft environmental impact statement (EIS).Many travel planning processes produce a range ofalternatives that favor motorized recreation at theexpense of solitude, natural quiet, and resource andwildlife habitat. Depending on the political climate,agency employees themselves may even advocateexpanding motorized route networks.
Often, a token “conservation alternative” willbe alarmingly similar to the agency’s proposedaction. In this scenario, a true conservation alterna-tive formulated by citizens is indispensable. It iscritical to get involved early, determine what theagency’s alternatives will look like, and plan yourown alternative based on true conservation values.It is also critical to meet with the Forest Serviceearly to understand their format and timelines tomake sure they will accept and analyse your alterna-tive. Knowing conditions on the ground, as wellas thoughtful data gathering and GIS analysis, arekey to building a successful conservation-orientedalternative.
There are a number of ways to complete the GIS portion of build-ing an alternative, and rather than producing a specific set of instruc-tions, this primer offers an overview of the technical process below. Animportant note: it is advantageous to utilize a GIS technician who isfamiliar with the issues related to travel planning, and who knows thelands they will be mapping.
There are essentially three major phases to building an alternativefor transportation planning: data gathering and analysis, construct-ing and analyzing an alternative, and advocating for your alternative.Additionally, if certain routes are well-known for inciting user conflictor damaging resources, provide specific information on why the routesshould be closed to motorized use as early in the process as pos-sible. This will help to take the worst offenders “off the table.” Includephotographs and a 1:24,000 quad map displaying their location, andGPS coordinates if practical. This information is the most effective ineliminating “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 150-
foot 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 otherquiet 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 forsubmission to the agency prior to construction of your alternative.
Step 2: Obtain all of the available GIS data relevant to travel plan-ning from Forest Service planners, agency GIS staff, your state’s wildlifedivision, and USGS.
Using GIS to Build Citizen Alternatives for Travel Planning
By Tim D. Peterson
Editor’s Note: This policy primer is abbreviated from amore detailed guide on citizen alternatives, available
on our website at www.wildlandscpr.org.
Deep ruts from an illegal, user-created route onthe Wasatch-Cache NF, UT. Photo courtesy of the
Forest Service data may be posted on the forest’s website. A re-cent ruling by the 9th Circuit re-affirms that GIS data qualifies for a FOIAfee waiver. Some forests have their own GIS websites, and a call or visitto the relevant agency GIS technician should produce a list of cover-ages maintained by the agency. Be aware of what datasets are called,and request them by name. For example, most forest’s coverages oftimber sales are called “activities,” not “timber sales.” Some forestsmay have edited or expanded available coverages based on input fromagency specialists.
You will need data on geography and administrative designations,roads, topography, forest cover, wildlife and wildlife habitat, sensitivespecies, soils, vegetation types, and much more. Please contact Wild-lands CPR for a complete list.
Step 3: Layer the datasets and criteria to identify those routes thatappear to meet and those that violate established criteria.
Step 4: Take maps to meetings with engineering staff and “olo-gists” from the Forest and District levels to ask them to identify theroutes and areas they are concerned about due to problems with userconflict, 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 datasetsthat should be used.
Step 5: Based on GIS analysis and hot spots identified by ForestService staff, prioritize and target ground-truthing fieldwork to get ad-ditional information, such as:
•The level at which inventoried roads are maintained: be they forpassenger vehicles, high clearance trucks, off-road vehicles, or be theyclosed, or revegetated (some or all of this info may be available in GISform 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 condi-tions (such as those provided by Wildlands CPR, http://www.wildland-scpr.org/resourcelibrary/misc/Monitoring.htm, or Great Old Broads forWilderness, http://www.goginer.org).
Building a Conservation Alternative In GIS
When constructing an alternative in GIS, be sure to code yourdesignations in the same terminology as the Forest Service. Obtain thelist of classifications that the agency is using. Terms such as “obliter-ate,” “open yearlong – no restrictions,” “seasonal closure,” and “NMTrail” may be used. If your terms match, the Forest Service will be ableto 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 basedon the criteria you defined in phase 1. The result will produce a newroads coverage that will be flagged for conflict with one or more ofthe established criteria. These conflicting routes are the first draft ofroutes 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 withthe screens. (For example, an interstate highway may be flagged manytimes, but cannot be closed by this process.)
Step 3: Carefully examine critical summer andwinter range for game species, and code seasonalclosures for routes in conflict. Again, this may beimpractical for some arterials and collectors.
Step 4: Review your designations route-by-route, using your preset screens and any photos oradditional relevant information. Make sure all routesegments are coded correctly, as small mistakesnow can lead to big headaches later in the process.
Step 5: Rejoin cut route segments so the totalnumber of segments matches the agency’s data.
Step 6: Assess the maximum possible “distancefrom roads” in your alternative, the “conservationalternative” and the preferred alternative. Calculate1/2 mile, 1 mile, 2 miles, 3 miles, 4+ miles from roadsin GIS, (there are a number of ways to accomplishthis.) Construct tables and maps displaying this in-formation. The results are often shocking, and haveimpact with the public and agency personnel. (Forexample, even with many route closures, most areasof the forest are still likely to be within two miles ofa road).
Advocating For Your Conservation Alternative
Step 1: Submit your alternative to the FS in atimely manner. Urge them to fully analyze it in theDEIS. If you have followed the steps above to assure
consistency, there should be little argument thatanalysis isn’t feasible.
Step 2: Build a grassroots campaign to garnersupport for your alternative. Generate media, lettersto the editor, and meetings with the Forest Servicefrom community leaders and activists.
—Tim Peterson is the Wildlands CPR Transportation Policy Coordinator.
Protection from off-road vehicles has allowed vegetationto 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.
writing contest on the Internet. Sponsored by Brit-ish Shell Oil, it offered a prize of twenty thousandpounds, and the question under consideration was “Do westill need nature?” I tried to write a line or two or five, dispir-ited by the question and distrustful of its context. I wantedto believe the question was only intended to provoke, but Ididn’t enter the contest. I don’t know anyone who did.
That contest theme still comes back to me now andagain, especially when I talk with someone who strikes me asif he might take the question seriously. Yet given who’s outthere cutting on all the cutting edges, those who seem to pullthe rest of us along like so many field hands picking up thegleanings, 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 oth-ers have articulated both of these ideas better than I can, butin 2005, on the racing curve of change we’re still trying tocomprehend as history, it’s likely good for each of us to takeanother 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 lati-tude in Montana, it’s difficult to feel coherent or logical, formore than a few minutes or a few sentences at most, aboutanything. Half a decade after the second coming didn’t comeand the calendar crash didn’t crash, on this mind-muddled,bloody-handed, and soon-to-be unthermostatted planet, co-herence feels close to impossible. The center is long loose—at worst gone, at best invisible—and the circumference, nowsurmised from sketchy evidence somewhere, I’m sure, to beonly an erratic ellipse, won’t hold either.
I slide to sleep most nights with a daylong brew of toomuch information and too little wisdom, in a slosh and surfeitof forlorn facts and faiths, trusting my dreams to the deep
blue breath of wildness. And pressed, I find my waking selftrusting truth deeper than logic and rationale, traces fromwaymarks along the paths I’ve come, most often found onfoot and among trees, soil, and stone, alongside free-mov-ing water, and beneath wide skies of all shapes and colors.Behold, the world. And I believe our species, we humans, arethe beholden.
. . . . .
The day was too hot for bushwhacking but that’s what Iwas doing. I’d just cooled off in Rattlesnake Creek right whereBee Creek comes in. I nestled among wet stones, only myface, chest, and toes above water, as wands of sunlight waftedthrough cottonwoods. In ten minutes my jaw chattered andmy shins ached. I was so cold I started hiking Bee Creek.
About the time I ascended into a hillside ravine of perma-nent mid-day shadow, the low arching limbs had me on handsand knees, half in the trickle creek, half out. I smelled a mix ofdusts 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 bymolecule. When I came to thickets of coarse green straws,horsetail scouring-rushes, I stopped to sit on a boulder white-
The Deep Blue Breath of Wildness By Phil Condon
Editor’s Note: The following is an abbreviated version of the full essay in- cluded in A Road Runs Through It (See Depaving the Way on pages 12-13).
South San Juan Wilderness, Colorado. Photo copyright Tim Peterson.
gray-green with lichen. It’s impossible to movethrough the world without your weight fallingon other life. The question, I guess, is how to beaware of it, how to move and carry it througha living world. It’s so easy to throw our weightaround, but throw it around enough and that’sall we see, the world a mirror to our own pound-age and force: tires and fumes, the blade and thedynamite, a bottomless concrete kiln and count-less culverts.
As quickly as I’d chilled in the creek, Iheated up in the rough, arbored crevice of BeeCreek. Ninety-five in the shade, I guessed, weath-er to stay still in. I slowed my breath, listening tothe midday wind in the pines above the waterysilence. It’s a different sound in hot light than atcool night, higher-pitched and more uniform. Iwaited for nothing in particular, just glad to beout there alone. Except for the jets I expected,six miles up, and except for my breath, it wasfree of human sound. Learning time.
Nothing in particular came along soon
enough, though, in the form of a whirr that couldhave been more wind but wasn’t. A humming-bird whizzed by into the maze of a still-bloom-ing syringa bush and then perched. Stunning.I’d seen them perch and tuck wings only a fewdozen times in my life. This one seemed waytoo small, with its wings settled, to ever fly fastor far. And then more surprise: it had settled inright next to another who was already there ap-parently. For how long I didn’t know.
The two sat an inch or so apart five feetfrom my forehead. I was sure they were black-chinned hummingbirds, but I couldn’t see
enough color to tell male from female. I tried notto tremble with my breathing, but somethingtold me they knew I was there and were will-ing to sit still that close to me if I was willing todo the same. What did I look like to them? Tooimpossibly big for locomotion of any kind? Eachof us lived and moved in a world scaled beyondthe other’s understanding.
Then, transcending my speculations, why Iremember all this enough to tell happened. Theyturned, one to the other, their beaks in profileseeming as narrow as tenpenny nails and as longas the birds were tall. I took this in, made my
mental comparisons, just in time to see the birdon the right open its beak wide, maybe two inch-es, while the one on the left moved its closedbeak down and into the other’s. Something rarewas happening in that four o’clock heat on asteep slope in western Montana, and I wantedto slow it down but couldn’t. The first bird keptpoking its long beak all the way down into thesecond’s throat, and I could think, of course,only of what I really know, which is love, andsex, and eating, and I wondered if I was seeing
two mates or two siblings or a parent with offspring. The breezewinked sunlight between the arms of Douglas fir and fingers ofriver birch for a long clock-gone moment, and then it all stopped;the beaks closed up and the birds turned back, both facing meagain. Just as I decided that, yes, it must be feeding, the firstbird lifted, its wings a dynamo blur again, and hovered off todisappear in green. I wanted to feel lonely for the one remainingbehind, or for myself, but before I could do either, the secondone’s wings changed too. It rose, turned, and vanished.
Both birds seemed about the same tiny size, no clear distinc-tion, and I wasn’t sure who was feeding whom, one regurgitatinga nectary syrup or mashed insects for the other or one retriev-ing food from the other’s throat. I couldn’t tell the feeder fromthe fed, but maybe that’s just a line the mind draws through thefleshy fabric of wild time where every living thing, and maybeevery dead thing, too, is both, over and over again.
I’m sure somebody somewhere knows, in general, what’slikely, what’s known, about what I saw, but no one really doesbecause those two very particular hearts the size of peas beatingtwo hundred times a minute, those tiny moments with wings,showed me something one time only and then took it with themback into their folded forest life.
No matter how I name and number, it still comes out thesame: four o’clock, Bee Creek, ninety-five degrees, forty-twohundred 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 MontanaSurround , he is a winner of the William Faulkner Award for Creative Writing.
This new book written by ecologists, plan-ners, and social scientists from around the worldreviews the impacts of transportation in an in-creasingly globalized world. The book takes on aholistic view of transportation and addresses theimpact of road, rail, ship and aircraft transport
in all environments. Adam Switalski, our ScienceCoordinator, co-authored a chapter addressingthe impacts of motorized and non-motorizedrecreation on the environment. In this chapter,entitled “Environmental impacts of transportrelated to tourism and leisure activities,” Daven-port and Switalski synthesize the most currentresearch on the impacts of recreation rangingfrom kite surfing to snowmobiling. To see anabstract, table of contents, and to order thisbook go to: http://www.springer.com/west/home/environment?SGWID=4-198-22-107940445-0
We’ve had an early heat wave here in Montana, with
May temperatures in the 90s. Our gardens aregrowing, the rivers are practically over-flowing andwork, well, work is positively crazy as we prepare for summerfield seasons, travel planning on a grand scale, the MontanaGovernor’s Restoration Forum, and the publication of our newbook, “A Road Runs Through It.” The book is the culminationof years of work, and we’re really proud of it. A big congratula-tions to Wildlands CPR’s Development Director, Tom Petersen,for making this happen, and especially for editing the book. Wehope you’ll decide to get a copy for yourself, and some for yourfriends, too.
Preparing for the book release has been a big project thisspring, and we’d like to once again thank all of the authors whowrote essays for the book. We’d especially like to thank ClaireEmery, who came in at the last minute and created six stunningwoodcut engravings to use as illustrations. We will be makingprints of these woodcuts available for sale, both as wall hangingsand as notecards. If you’re interested in viewing Claire’s designs,please visit our website. And thanks Claire, for all your incred-ibly hard, speedy, and beautiful work on the woodcuts.
Speaking of thanks, we’d like to extend a big thank you tothe Firedoll, Cinnabar, Patagonia and National Forest Founda-tions for generous grants to support our work. Both the NationalForest Foundation and the Cinnabar Foundation have awardedWildlands CPR challenge grants. If you are interested in helpingus meet either of these challenges, we would certainly appreci-ate it. The Cinnabar Foundation grant ($5,000) is for supportof all of our programs, while the National Forest Foundation($6,150) grant is for our citizen monitoring on the ClearwaterNational Forest. Both grants provide a one-to-one match, so ifyou send us $100, we’ll receive another $100 from the challengegrant. 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
Sign up for citizen monitoring on theClearwater National Forest!
Wildlands CPR has partnered with the University of Mon-tana, Clearwater National Forest, and Nez Perce Tribe to moni-tor the effects of forest restoration in the Clearwater NationalForest. With the help of citizen scientists, we will be monitoringhow fish, wildlife, and habitat recover following road decommis-sioning. Monitoring will take place from early spring until earlyautumn. Training and transportation are provided. There willbe several trips, so contact Anna Holden, volunteer coordinator,for a schedule. For more information or to become a volunteerthis summer for Wildlands CPR, please contact Anna at 406-543-9551 or email her at: [email protected].
Yucca flower. Photo by Gary M. Stolz, U.S. Fishand Wildlife Service.
* The Card Security Code (CSC) is usually a 3 - or 4 - digit number, which isnot part of the credit card number. The CSC is typically printed on the back of a credit card (usually in the signature field).
Please include a voided check. All information will be kept confiden-
tial. Transfers will be processed on the first Friday of each month, orthe 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
