Road RIPorter 5.1

8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 5.1

1/16

IThe Road-R PorterBimonthly Newsletter of the Wildlands Center for Preventing Roads. January/February 2000. Volume 5 # 1

conti nued on page 8

The engines roar travels for

miles. Blue, acrid exhaust lin-

gers in the air long after they

have past. The ruts left behind by

their tires, the crushed vegetation and

the overrun m eadows remain scarred

for decades, if not centuries. Off-roadvehicle (ORV) impacts to wildlife and

wild ecosystems go far beyond aesthet-

ics and scrape at the integrity of our

public lands.

On December 8, 1999, W ildlands

CPR, The Wilderness Society and more

than 100 other organizations, repre-

senting over one and a half m illion

people, presented a rule-making peti-tion to the Forest Service to completely

overhaul the management of ORVs

nationwide. The petition was filed

under the Administrative Procedures

Act and requires a formal response

from the Forest Service.

The Pet it ionUnder the Adm inistrat ive Pr oced ures Act (APA), citizens

are allowed to petition fede ral agencies to chan ge the ru les

un der wh ich they operate. Wildlands CPR, The Wildern ess

Society and others used the APA to file the ORV rule-making

petition with th e Forest Service. The petition is a formallegal document that includes detailed information regardingan issue and a request to th e responsible federal agency that

they take remed ial action.

Our petition p rovides a detailed an alysis of the imp actsof ORVs on National Forest lands. The pe tition begins with

an explan ation of our requ ests for rule-making changes. Itthen covers: the mu ltitude o f laws applicable to ORVs on

pub lic lands; the specific environ men tal impacts of ORVs to

soil, vegetation, wildlife, pollution, and pub lic safety; an dthe site specific imp acts of ORVs on selected Nationa l

Forests throu ghou t the system. It conclude s with an an alysisof the relief we request. An on line version of th e Petition is

available on o ur web site at:

http://www.wildrockies.org/WildCPR/.While the ecological impacts of ORVs are significant

and un iversal, near ly regardless of ecosystem typ e, eachNational Forest has implemented different management

pra ctices to deal with the m. The Hoosier National Forest in

Indiana an d the Mono ngah ela National Forest in WestVirginia are the on ly forests that h ave chosen to p rohibit

ORV use within their bo un daries. Forests like the Stanislausin California allow practically free reign by ORVs throughout

mu ch of our land. And wh ile the Shawne e National Forest

in Illinois doesnt allow ORVs within its boundaries, this was

Stuck in t he mud w ith nowhere to goa just fate.

Howard W ilshire photo.

Groups File Petitionwith Forest Service to

Overhaul ORV Regs

Mired in mur ky m anagement met hods,

Feds must make modifications asmandat ed by APA


2/16

The Road-RIPorter January/February 20002

WildlandsWildlandsWildlandsWildlandsWildlands CCCCCenter for PPPPPreventing RRRRRoads

Wildlands Center for PreventingRoads works to protect and restorewildland ecosystems by preventingand removing roads and limitingmotorized recreation. We are a

national clearinghouse and networ k,providing citizens with tools andstrategies to fight road

construction, deter motorizedrecreation, and promote road

removal and revegetation.

Main OfficeP.O. Box 7516

Missoula, MT 59807(406) 543-9551

[email protected]/WildCPR

Colorado OfficeP.O. Box 2 353

Boulder, CO 80306(303) 247-0998

[email protected]

DirectorBethanie Walder

Development DirectorTom Youngblood-Peterse n

Office ManagerCate Campbell

Int erim ORV Camp aignCoordinator

Jenn ifer Feren stein

Motor ized Wreck-RecreationProgramJacob Smith

NewsletterJim Coefield, Dan Funsch

Interns & VolunteersCarla Abrams, Noelle Brigham,

Jennifer Browne, Chuck Irestone,Katherine Postelli, Scott Thomas,

Board of DirectorsKatie Alvord, Sidney Madd ock,

Rod Mondt, Cara Nelson,Mary O'Brien, Cindy Shogan,

Scott Stouder

Advisory Committ eeJasper Carlton, Libby Ellis,

Dave Foreman, Keith Hammer,Timothy Hermach,

Marion Hourdequin, Lorin Lindner,Andy Mahler, Robert McConnell,

Stephanie Mills, Reed Noss,Michael Soul, Dan Stotter,

Steve Trombulak, Louisa Willcox,Bill Willers, Howie Wolke

From the Wildlands CPR Office...

c 200 0 Wildlands CPR

November an d December were incredibly busy mon ths for Wildlands CPR. In

addition to seeing more th an a years worth o f work culmin ating into a pe tition to

chan ge ORV ma nagem ent on the Nation al Forests, we also were wor king on th ingslike road rem oval in th e Dragoon Mountains. Needless to say it was fun , but we were

thankful when things slowed down over the holidays.

And now we are thr illed to invite you to read o ur seco nd special issue of theRoad-RIPorter. This issue is focu sed exclusively on wha ts been going on w ith ORVs

over the past year, and wher e were head ed for in the u pcom ing year. We ho pe youenjoy it and well be back to our

regular repor ting in th e next issue.

ThanksThough Thanksgiving was a bit

ago, we certainly feel like we ow e a lot

of thanks to a lot of people for making1999 so successful. In addition to all

the grants and individual donations we

received, we were also blessed withmany, many dedicated volunteers and

interns throughout the course of theyear. We cou ldnt have don e it

without their help. For this mon th,

wed like to give special thanks to allthose of you who m ade year end

contr ibutions, as well as the New Landand 444S Foundations.

WelcomeWe exten d a big welcome to ou r

temp orary ORV Camp aign CoordinatorJen nifer Feren stein . Jen s worke d with

us on ORVs and o ther issues in th e past

and is no stran ger to Wildlands CPR orconser vation work in general. Shell be

working closely with Jacob to coord inate ou r ORV work and we are th rilled to h aveher on b oard. In addition, Kather ine Postelli has joined our Missoula office as an

intern. Many of you spoke with her in December when we were working on the ORV

petition. Kather ine is doing a variety of things for us, from scientific research towriting comm ents on road issues.

New Resources for Road Ripper sConcu rrent with th e release o f our Forest Service Petition, Wildlands CPR

prepared a new report called, Roaring f rom the Past: Off-Road Vehicles on Am ericasNational Forests . This report is the culmination of a years worth o f research abo ut

ORV man agemen t on all National Forests in th e coun try. The repo rt is available fromour o ffice, or can b e downloade d from ou r website. Speaking of websites, we have

added a n exten sive section dealing with the ORV petition an d repo rt, including our

database o f ORV man agemen t on ea ch Nationa l Forest an d the text of the p etition

itself. Please check it out at h ttp://www.wildrockies.org/WildCPR/.If you a re interested in getting mo re involved in fighting ORVs in you r com mu -

nity, please con tact Jacob at ou r Boulder office or Jen nifer in ou r Missou la office. We

look forward to hearing from you.

The Natural Resour ces Defense Coun cil has just released a new p ublication,Endof the Road. The Adverse Ecological Impacts of Roads and Logging: a Compilation of

Independently Reviewed Research. This 130 page boo k is filled with information andcitations. You can get a copy by send ing $10.50 (CA residents ad d 7.5% sales tax) to

NRDC at :

NRDC Publication s Dept.40 West 20 Street

New Yor k, NY 10011

In this Issue

Rule-Making Petit ion p. 1, 8-9

DePaving the Way, p. 3

Bethanie Walder

Odes to Roads, p. 4-5Tom Youngblood-Petersen

Field Notes, p. 6-7

Regional Reports & Alerts

p. 10-11

Bibliography Not es p . 12-14D. J. Schubert a nd Jacob Smith


3/16

The Road-RIPorter January/February 2000 3

These Trails are made forWalkin Those Rigsare made for Roads

For yea rs I have been asking peop le, tellingpeop le, begging peo ple to call off-road vehicles

(ORVs) just th at, off-ROAD veh icles. Most

pub lic land man agemen t agencies, however, havefollowed th e lead of th e ORV users an d ar e calling

them off-HIGHWAY vehicles (OHVs). But it seems tome th at the m ajority of the problems they cause

occur off the road, no t just off the highway. And I

won der, have I been mistakensh ould we accept thismore ben ign m oniker and join our op position in

calling the se vehicles off-highway vehicles? Do wehave more com mon ground than I ever realized?

Vehicles cause significant

and synergistic detrimentalimpacts to soil, water, air an d

wildlife when driven off theroad. The U. S. Geological

Survey studied 500 soil types

in various clima tic zone s andfoun d th at virtually all were

vulnerable to ORV damage.

ORVs com pac t soils, alter soilperm eability, cau se severe

rutting, de stabilize so il, an dcause erosion. Eroded soils

impact aqu atic systems by

ending up in creeks, streamsand rivers. Chan ges to soil

quality and qua ntity affectvegetation, wildlife an d en tire

ecosystems.

ORVs crush, trample,bruise, shred , tear and destroy

trees, shrubs and other plants.ORV disturbances make it

easier for n on-n atives like

knapweed an d other weeds to become established.

Seeds are carried by ORV tires an d ch assis, whichthen disturb th e soil and deposit the seedperfectcond ition s for spread ing exotics into w ild places, off

the road.

ORVs imp act wildlife directly and in direc tly,both o n an d off the road. ORVs can run over wildlife

and th ey often are displaced from their important orcritical habitat. Finally, ORVs increa se wildlife

habitat fragmen tation and degradationcausing som e

of the mo st significant impacts durin g the wintermo nth s whe n w ildlife struggle to survive.

ORVs are highly polluting, especially those

powered by two-stroke engines. They spew carbon

mo noxide, polycyclic a rom atic hydr ocarbon s, MTBE,particulate matter, and o ther p ollutants into the air

and w ater. They can leak oil, antifreeze, and oth er

fluids on to the so il and vegetation or into water.Many of these pollutants settle on snow and then

release toxic discharges into our stream s during thespring thaw. They can settle on the soil or vegetation

and ru n off dur ing a rainstorm or flood. This canrelease a significant amo un t of toxic chem icals into

waterways in a shor t period of time.

ORVs cause significant an d m easurable im pactswhen used ON the road as well. The air and water

pollution, spread of non -native species, noisepollution and h abitat fragme ntation are still present,

thou gh perh aps at reduced levels. And tha t doesnt

even take into account the overwh elming ecologicaleffects of the roads th emselves.

So whats the big deal with calling these th ingsoff-highway vehicles? For star ters, it certainly soun ds

like they cause less dam age. Are mos t ORVs really

used on or off Forest Service roads? In man y states,ORVs are nt street legal and it is illegal to use th em

on ro ads. The state of Monta na, for exam ple,chan ged their regulations in 199 9. Now it allows

ORVs on specifically de signated , low stand ard and

low mainten ance roads. National Forests in Montana ,there fore, now allow these vehicles off the highw ay

and on som e of the roads.

And wh at abou t all those great sp ort utilityvehicle advertisements showing them ripping across

deserts, tearing through streams an d scaling m oun-

tain s? Hardly worth y of the m on iker Off-HIGHWAY.If the ORV comm un ity wants to define th eir

mach ines as off-highway instead of off-road vehicles,then th ey should keep their vehicles on roads. While

the impacts of roads are extremely detrimental, atleast its a little bit easier to m anage th e land if you

can m anage the vehicles and the roads they are on.

Is there a place for these vehicles off the r oad onNational Forest lands? The answer to th is question

depends on whether th e various and particularimpacts of ORVs are acceptable un der the m and ate

of the Forest Service. And w hile recreation is one of

the mu ltiple u ses th e Forest Service is legallyobligated to provide and m anage, they arent man-

dated to allow recreational activities that destr oy theintegrity of forest ecosystem s. (Though, of course,

this hasnt stopped them from doing just that)

We can on ly conclude th at all motorized vehiclesshou ld be required to stay on roads. To put it simply,

trails are for feet (people/animals) and roa ds are formo tors. If there mu st be mo torized recreational

vehicles, let their user s have their wish, rena me th em

off-highway vehicles, and keep th em, always, on aroad. If they wan t to drive off the ro ad, then let their

nam e stay the sam e, and reflect what it is that theyactually are doing.

If there mus t be

motorized recreational

vehicles, let t heir usershave their wish,

rename t hem off-

highway vehicles, andkeep t hem, always, on

a road. If t hey want todrive off the road, then

let their name stay thesame, and reflect

what it is t hat they

actually are doing.

By Bethanie Walder


4/16


he color ph oto of a wh ite-haired, grandmotherly

woman took up a third of the front page in a recent

issue of The Missoulian (reprinted from the LosAngeles Times). Her wizened han ds were p laced with

exasperation up on her weath ered face. This long-time residen t of Elko Coun ty Nevada w as frustrated

with recen t actions by th e Forest Service to close the

one an d half-mile Jarbidge Road. The caption? Iwas born her e before tho se Forest Service boys were

even b orn the elderly woman said, If I could, Idspan k them all over for trying to close our road. It

just makes m e so m ad.

The article described the reported hardships ofthe community, now that the road was closed. The

road h ad been used to access wilderness trips

popular to out-of-state hu nters an d oth ers, bringingbusiness to th e area. Locals used the roa d to carry

them back to their favorite hun ting or fishing spots.

The grandm other liked to go back there too. Others,fueled by rhetoric of the sagebrush rebellionthose

rebels attem pting to privatize na tional lands, or todictate man agemen t of those lands by local govern-

men ts or individualswere trying to rebuild the road

themselves.Two oth er ph otograph s on e of Wildlands CPR

staff and Board, and an other o f the culvert cruising

high scho ol studen ts featured in th e Fall 99 Road-

RIPorter appeared o n the pages of a different

pub lication. It had been illegally hijacked from OURweb p age by an off-road en thu siasts web site. The

web p age featured caption s reading, Just Anoth erEnvironm ental Hate Group, an d True Arrogance

teaching hypocr isy and elitism. Below the ph oto of

the students it read, Led by their High School ScienceTeacher, teen road obliterators and anti-ORV zealots

pause by the motor vehicles they use in daily life.

WCPR wishes that motor vehicles (yours and mine) are

eliminated from public lands while they, in their elitism

are allowed to drive to the trailhead.

The last exa mp le of mis(sed)-inform ation is

the reaction to Wildland s CPR and The WildernessSocietys recen tly filed petition to the

Forest Service calling for more strictly

regu lated ORV use. We received m anyema ils, some calling us eco-nazis or eco-

terrorists. Som e (to put it mildly) wishedvehement failure on our endeavors. Most

of the ph rases were som ething like,

Youre loc king us ou t of the forests, orYou jus t wan t to take away o ur r ights.

My point in these scen arios, theJarbidge road, the photographs of

Wildlands CPR staff, Board, and high

school students, and th e extremereaction to the Forest Service hark s back

to an old western saying. Just the facts,maam.

Readers of theMissoulians article

finally get the factsbu ried on page

two, if they read th at far. The reason th eroad h ad been closed in the first place was repeatedwash ou ts. The old gullied Fores t Service (rea d

public) road was du mp ing large amo un ts of

sedimen t into the Jarbidge River. The Jarbidge ho ststhe south ernm ost distinct population segment of bull

trout (Salvelinus confluentus), which recently waslisted as a th reatened species (see RIPorter, 4.6).

The U. S. Fish a nd Wildlife Service said th is fish

population was in imminent danger of extinction,due in pa rt by debris torrents, flooding from rain on

snow events, extremely steep slopes and e rodible

By Tom Youngblood-Petersen

Odes to Roads

The Facts maamJust the Facts

T

To all Road-Ripp ers do not be dis couraged ort hreatened by empt y name-calling, hollow

information, redundant rhetoric, or sensationalist

journalism. Keep educating people about why w ewant t o close and remove damaging roads, and

regulate t he booming use of ORVs continue t o

sp eak for t he wild, shadow-zip ping fish, t hesecret ive padding of bobcat, t he richness of our

soils, and the purit y of our wat ers.


5/16


soils on and a bove the South Canyon Road. Nowhe rein the ar ticle did it mention the fact that (now ex)

Forest Super visor Gloria Flora had worked ou t a

comprom ise with irritated residents to keep the roadopen to all-terrain veh icles (ATVs). The y no t on ly can

walk or horseback up th e mile and h alf road, but canaccess it on their ATVs.

Whats at stake here is greater than mo torized

access. A pop ulation of wild and beau tiful trout,flashing their sheen ing bodies as they rise for caddis

flies, could becom e extinct.What impression does the media give the reader

of the Jarbidge road issue? Mainly, that th e elderly

grandm other lost her road, and the Forest Serviceand all those wh o advocate for keeping the washed

out road closed to sustain bull trout in th e Jarbidgeare far an d away the b ad guys, deservin of a

whipp in. As usual, the m edia is focusing on the

controversy, no t the issue.Other sagebrush rebellion advocates across the

West have rallied to the locals cause by starting ashovel brigade, with the goal of sen ding 10,000

shovels to the Elko Coun ty Cour thou se. One prom i-nen t northwest Montana timber compan y owner wasshown on a regional TV news broadcast brandishing

a shovel signed by Montana Lieutenan t GovernorJudy Martz, who curren tly is runn ing for Governo r.

These individuals are de fying the federal

governm ents reasoned decision not to rebu ild theroad, an d a Federal Judges restraining ord er against

the locals who started to rebuild the roa d them selves.

Does Mon tanas Republican Gubern atorial cand idatereally advocate defying federal laws, agency deci-

sions, and legal proclamations? Or is it just a sen sa-tionalist ploy designed to play on the em otions of

those less informed?

Likewise, the o ff-road enth usiasts web page isdevoid of the facts abou t Wildlands CPR and the high

schoo l students work on road closures, focusinginstead on sen sationalist journalism an d n ame-

calling. The stu den ts teacher laughed o ff the web

page, seeing it as a great teach ing opp ortun ity,showing how information gets skewed, twisted and

used for ones own purp oses.We aren t talking abo ut ba nn ing vehicles, or

even off-road vehicles, from th e face of the earth

(although thats n ot such a bad idea). Yes, many o f us

use our vehicles, like those an ti-ORV zealot s, thehigh school students, who drove on existing roads

(not off-road) to volun teer par t of their summ er

vacation helping th e Forest Service inventory blown-out cu lverts an d ro ads on the Lolo National Forest in

Montan a. Even so, the students research m ightshow that some of the roads they drove on should be

removed.

Finally, the ugly emails weve received about theORV petition m iss the point, failing to look at why

Wildlands CPR, the 100 other groups th at signed thepetition, and countless other Americans are con-

cerne d abou t the rapid an d ramp ant growth of ORVs.

The facts d o n ot re volve arou nd CLOSING pu bliclands. The facts are the serious an d lasting ecological

effects of motorized recreation, documented throughreams of (factual) scientific literature: the effects of

crashing thro ugh trou t-filled streams; of dashing up

snowfields home to lynx, wolverine, and b obcat; andthe effects of crushing fragile desert landscap es

which take centuries to re cover.So I say to those that th ink som ething is being

taken from them a m ile and half road, a motorizedplay place, their right to go an ywh ere, anytime onan ORVplease co nsider this fact: There Is Enou gh.

Eno ugh m oney in Ame rican pockets for some to h avethe luxury of buyin g a $6,000 ATV; enou gh dem oc-

racy in ou r coun try wher e we can op enly, intelli-

gently, and tru thfully discuss hard issues without fearof censorship or retaliation; and m ore than enough

roads on our p ublic land s (even if we remove

thou sand s of miles of destructive, poor ly maintainedone s) to drive and dr ive an d drive.

To all Road-Rippers and peop le who ch oose tospeak for those that cannotthe bull trout, the

bobcat, our precious waters, soil, and airthis dictum

is for you: hold firm . Do not be discouraged orthreatened by empty name-calling, hollow informa-

tion, redundant rhetoric, or sensationalist journalism.Keep edu cating people abou t why we want to close

and remove dam aging roads, and regulate the

boom ing use of ORVs. You m ust con tinue to spe akfor the wild, shadow-zippin g fish, th e secretive

padd ing of bobcat, the richness of our soils, and th epur ity of our waters.

All we wan t are the facts m aam, just th e facts.

Bull trout. Oregon Dept. Fish and Game drawing


6/16


Instructions and Notes for

Filling Out the Form:

1. Is this route o fficially recognized by the

agency in its form al travel system?2. Precise and accura te location inform ation

is critical.3 5. It is impor tant that these question s be

answered con sistently in a given inven -

tory.6. To answer this you prob ably will need an

official agency travel map. In some casesthe route designation on the travel map is

different from that in th e Land Manage-

men t Plan; it is ideal to check both .

7 & 8, 10 & 11. In addition to checking theapp ropr iate box(es), the m ore detail thebetter.

9. Self explanatory.

12 13. It is impor tant these questions beanswered consistently. Supporting

photographs or videos are extremelyhelpful, as can be d etailed informa tion

about th e impacts.

14 15. It is very imp ortant to documentinstances where motorized recreationists

are creating new trails and crossingwaterways. The mo re inform ation you

can ob tain abo ut the location an d level of

impacts, the better.16 - 17. The more detail you can include

about wildlife and other impacts thebetter.

7. Ecosystem typ e (check all that ap ply):

woodlan d ____ old growth/late-successional forest ____ other forest ecosystems ____

grasslan d ____ wetlands ____ alpine ____

other/additional description: ________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

8. Terra in (check all tha t app ly):

steep ____ rolling ____ flat ____ dry ____ wet ____ un stable ____ stab le ____

additional: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

9. How deep is the snow? less than 6" ____ between 7" and 12" ___ between 1' and 3' ___ deepe r than 3' ___

10. Travel route design: across the slope ____ up an d down th e slope ____

comments: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Snowmobile Environmental Impact Inventory Form

Name : _________________________ Date: ____________

Day of Week/Time: _____________________

1. Is this a system or non-system (e.g., user-created) route? ________________

2. Loca tion : roa d/tra il #s: _____________________________________________

site location on trail:

____________________________________________________________________

(and) Town ship /Range/Section (if no n-system r ou te):

____________________________________________________________________

(or) GPS coordin ates (UPM pre ferred)

____________________________________________________________________

3. How inten se is the sn owmo bile activity?

light _____ mo dera te _____ he avy _____

4. How good is the com pliance with spe ed limits?very high _____ high _____ mode rate _____ low _____ very low _____

5. Is there non -motor ized activity on th e same route?light ____ mo dera te ____ he avy ____

6. Is the use consistent with the rou te designation? yes _____ no _____

If not, h ow is it incon sistent?

____________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________


7/16


11. Proximity to n otable habitat features:perimeter bisecting throughout photo#

wetlands: _____ _____ _______ ____old growth forest: _____ _____ _______ ____waterways/riparian areas: _____ _____ _______ ____meadows: _____ _____ _______ ____alpine areas: _____ _____ _______ ____known wildlife migration corridors: _____ _____ _______ ____known wildlife foraging areas: _____ _____ _______ ____known wildlife denning/nesting areas: _____ _____ _______ ____other sensitive habitat areas: _____ _____ _______ ____archaeological/historical sites: _____ _____ _______ ____

Explain: (inc lude wh ich wildlife spe cies are presen t) ___________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

12. Soil impacts: photo #s ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ light ____ moderate ____ heavy ____

Is the soil surface visible? Describe: _______________________________________________________________

Is th ere eviden ce of soil d isturb an ce? Describe : _____________________________________________________

Is th ere eviden ce of com pact ion? Describe: ________________________________________________________

13. Vegetation impacts: photo #s ____ ____ ____ ____ light ____ moderate ____ heavy ____

Is th ere visible d am age to tree s/large shr ubs? Describe : _________________________________________________________________

Is there visible damage to smaller vegetation? Describe: _________________________________________________________________

Comments: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

14. Trail creat ion: ph oto #s ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____Are n on -system /side tra ils being cre ated (is use occ ur ring o ff of system routes )? ____________________________________________

Description/comments: ____________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

15. Stream cro ssings: ph oto #s ____ ____ ____ ____ ____Is there evidence of illegal stream crossings or travel through riparian areas? _________________

If yes, describe the impacts: _________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

16. Wildlife imp acts: ph oto #s ____ ____ ____ ____ ____Is there any eviden ce of direct mortality (roadkill)? ____________________________________________________________________

What sp ecies and h ow m any individuals of each? __________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Have y ou obse rved any ha ras sment o f wildlife? Describe:_______________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Have you obse rved any effects o f sn owm obile n oise o n wildlife? _________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

17. Describe other impacts (e.g., pollution; poaching; illegal firewood cutting; collecting of plants, animals, artifacts, etc.):

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

18. Additional comments: ___________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Please attach add itiona l pages explaining your com me nts as necessar y.Please se nd to: Wildlan ds CPR, P.O. Box 23 53, Boulder, Colorad o 80 306 -2353

For co pies o f WCPRs ORV inven tory sh eets, con tact on e of ou r offices.


8/16


requ ired by a court order, rather th an by their choice. And th eShawnee is working to address the courts concerns and

reopen the gates.

National Forest Management of ORVs..In October 199 8, Wildlands CPR submitted a Freedom of

Inform ation Act (FOIA) request to every Forest in the U. S. to

gather information that would help us understand their ORVman agemen t. All but 6 respond ed, though few were fully ableto answer ou r five question s.

The information we received clearly demonstrates that

curren t ORV man agemen t is failing to protect th e natu ralresources of the Nationa l Forests. User conflicts aboun d, and

agency monitoring and enforcement lag behind violations.Here are a few exam ples:

71% of the responding Forests provided some record ofresource da mage or m otor vehicle violations. Reports

included: dama ge to Forest roads an d trails; improp er useof Forest trails; natura l resource dam age; illegal use o f

vehicles off-road; and violations of standard s for n oise,

smoke, safety, or State law. 66% of the respondents identified user conflicts with

ORVs, including n oise, safety, an d resource disturban ces. Only 6% of the Forests provided a record of adequate

mo nitoring as reque sted in th e FOIA letter for every year

from 1987-1998. 46% of the Forests either reported n orecords relevant to m onitoring or replied in a man ner that

left it undetermined whether th ey had conducted adequatemo nitoring. Anoth er 43% of the Forests did not reliably

monitor ORV impacts.

96% of the National Forests responded to the FOIA requestwithin ten mon ths. 41% of those responding open their

trails to vehicles wider than 40 inches. 30% ma nage trails

as closed to mo torized use unless signed open . 30%consider trails open to motorized use unless posted closed.

39% of the Forests responded in a m anner that made itimpossible to determ ine their guiding principles of trail

man agement. Although in 1988 th e 40-inch rule change

was proposed to eliminate confusion and law enforcementdifficulties for the Forest Service, the agencys nationwide

policy toward m otorized use of trails is still characterizedby confusion rather than informed cooperation.

A detailed exa mina tion of 59 of the m ost com plete FOIArespon ses found th at ORVs caused m any adverse impacts on

Forest Service land, including r esource dam age, soil erosionand comp action, wildlife imp acts, vegetation dam age, wetland

and riparian area impacts, sedimen tation an d water quality

impacts, illegal trespass, trail widening, un auth orized trailconstruction, weed proliferation, damaged cultural resources,

and vandalism. While man y Forest responses includeddisconcerting inform ation ab out ORV problem s, we have

included just a few e gregious q uotes.

For exam ple, a 1998 m onitoring repo rt from the WayneNational Forest included the following statemen t:

Whether we look at the designated trail system or

the non-ORV m anagement areas, we have n o controlover off road vehicle use. We install signs and they are

ripped out. We erect barriers and they are removed or

ridden around. We rehab areas and they are violated

again and again. We provide virtually no law enforce-

ment presence on t he Forest when use is highest.

Whether it is the Wayn e or any oth er Forest, the

concept of off-road vehicle is contrary to the mission

of the National Forests. We cannot , regardless of

dollars, maintain t rails t hat w ill not erode into our

streams. And we cannot control users equipped with

vehicles designed to go on all types of terrain.

continued fr om page 1

The petitioners have provided the

Forest Service wit h an opport unity todevelop more effective and enforceable

regulations for dealing with ORVs onNat ional Fores t lands.

Now t he Fores t Service mus t fulfill

t heir obligation to prot ect t heAmer ican publics resour ces from

unnecessary and unacceptableenvironmental degradation.

Is the Forest Serv ice in a rut over t his issue? You can help by sending off a

letter to Chief Dombeck ! Big Cypress National Preserve, Bear Island Trail

Sys tem . Florida Biodiversity Project photo.


9/16


Relief requested:

1. Motorized vehicle use shall be restricted to

federal, state, and dedicated coun ty roads an d to thoseroutes designated an d posted by the USFS as open to

specific vehicle types after comp letion o f environm ental

impact an alysis that includes p ublic notice and involve-

men t, and is consistent with the m anagement provisionsrequested in this petition . The use of motorized vehiclesoff roads or designated routes sh all be proh ibited.

2. The USFS must demonstrate that any existing orprop osed o ff-road vehicle use will not result in ad verse

environmental impacts before such use will be permittedor allowed to continu e. The designation o f ORV routes

mu st be based on sp ecific criteria that include, but are n ot

limited to: proh ibiting the designation of routes insensitive h abitat areas; siting of specific rou tes to m ini-

mize erosion; maintenance an d protection of importantwildlife dispersal corridors; and protection of migration

routes and calving ground s.

3. The following shall not be categorically excluded

from environmental analysis under the National Environ-me ntal Policy Act: designation of travel routes for m otor-

ized vehicle use; construction of ORV routes and facilities

intended to sup port such use; upgrading, widening, orothe r m odification o f existing facilities or rou tes; issuan ce

or re-issuan ce of ORV-related Spe cial Use Perm its; andsimilar pro jects. All of these kin ds of pro jects will be

subject to the ap peal regulations at 36 CFR 215.

4. The use of motorized vehicles on USFS lands

shall be permitted only to the extent th at mon itoring ofthe impacts an d enforcement of restrictions on that use

are funded an d implemented. No new motorized routes

may be designated, upgraded, or con structed until andun less all existing routes have been subject to environ-

mental impact analysis and monitoring plans have beenprepared and approved.

5. The use of motorized vehicles shall be prohibitedon Forest Service lands in legislatively or administratively

proposed wilderness areas and other w ilderness qu alitylands, including inventoried roadless areas and other

areas with roa dless values.

While resource dam age is a significant p roblem, user

conflicts and flagrant violations of ORV regulations wereram pan t. This exam ple from the Wh ite River Nationa l Forest

come s from a Forestry Techn icians report r egarding illegalmo torized use beh ind a closed gate in th e Hagerm an Pass area

(7-18-93):

At t his tim e th e third motorcyclist was

heading down the road I stepped away f rom t he

Forest Service truck on the edge of the road and

mot ioned with both of m y hands, one with a portable

radio, for him to stop. The mot orcyclist accelerated and

went past me. The dune buggy was 20 seconds behind

the motorcycle. I again m otioned with my hands for

the dune buggy to stop but t his time I stepped furt her

into the road as to be sure there w as no way he could

miss seeing me. The dune buggy made no att empt at

slowing down along the n arrow road as he w as

approaching me. I needed to step off t he road to avoid

being stru ck by the dune buggy

Wildlands CPRs rese arch found that ORV man agemen twas both in effective and inco nsistent. As a result, the petition-

ers requested th e Forest Service to take some p reliminary step s

toward correcting this problem. While the rule changes werequ ested would no t ban o ff-road vehicles on all National

Forest lands, they would stop ORV use from all but specificallydesignated roads and m otorized routes (see sidebar). The

petitioners ha ve provided the Forest Service with an o pp ortu-

nity to develop mo re effective and en forceable regulations fordealing with ORVs on National Forest lands. Now the Forest

Service m ust fulfill their o bligation to protect th e Americanpublics resources from unn ecessary and unacceptable

environm ental degradation.

What can you do?Write a letter to Forest Service Chief Mike Dombeck and cc

that letter to your Forest Sup ervisor and to your Con gressionaldelegation. Make sure they un derstan d that you wan t ORVs

man aged an d regulated on National Forest lands. See the ORVRulemaking Petition Alert on page 11 for details.

ORV tracks in the Canaan Valley, West Virginia.

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service photo.

Mark Alan Wilson photo.


10/16


Regional Reports & Alerts

Judge Declares

Temp orar y Snowm obile

Ban in Denali Illegal

A temporary ban on sn owmobileuse in th e two m illion acre old park, at

the core of Denali Nation al Park, wasoverturned last month. The temporary

ban , issued last February, did not ap plyto the four m illion acres ad ded to the

Park in 1980. The court struck down

the temporary ban for two primaryreason s. First, it ruled that th e Park

Service failed to define a nd adequ atelyaddress the use of snowmobiles for

traditional activities, which is pro-

tected by th e Alaska National InterestLand s Conser vation Act. Second, the

court foun d that th e agency failed todetermine how man y snowmobiles use

the Park and what harm they may cause.

The Park Service plans to ho ld pub lichearings this month on a prop osed rule

to permanen tly ban sno wmobiles fromthe old par k, and is studying the effect

of this ruling on the prop osal.

Comm issioner s Halt

ORV Use to Protect

Water Quality

Coun ty Com missioners in BoulderCoun ty, Colorado voted un anim ously

last week to close a county road p opu lar

with m otorized recreationists. Becauseof the roads num erous creek crossings

and ORV use on the surrou ndinghillsides, motorized access to the r oad

has resulted in substan tial water qua lity

degradation in Jame s Creek, the p rimarywater source for the moun tain commu -

nity of Jame stown.The James Creek Watershed

Initiative (JCWI), in p artn ersh ip with the

Environm ental Protection Agency an d

the Colorado Division o f Wildlife, formore than three years has been collect-ing data confirming the water qu ality

degradation (and its relationsh ip to ORV

access to the road). Jame stown residentswere especially concerned b ecause of

increased water treatmen t costs for thecommunity, and repeated violations of

federal water quality standards under

the Safe Drinking Water Act. A varianc efor two and a half times th e turbidity

standard was issued in June 1997, andano ther variance for five times the

standard (the largest such variance in

Colorado) was issued in 1999. JCWIvolunteers also had visually documented

habitat damage to riparian areas andmea dows along Jame s Creek.

Although the road is primarily

located on Forest Service land, an d th eagency objected to the closure, the

County Comm issioners felt the hum an

health concerns an d econom ic costs toJam estown ou tweighed the agencys

concerns about m otorized access.Proponents of the road-closure also

pointed to improved n on-motorized

recreational opportunities in the area

should the road be closed to motorizedvehicles.

Half of Closed Roads

on t he Lincoln NF

Remain Open

A study by Forest Guardiansconcluded that motorized vehicles

continue to use over half the roadsadm inistratively closed to m otorized use

on th e Linco ln Nation al Fores t. The

study evaluated closures on 131 miles ofroad on the sou th-centr al New Mexico

forest. The study also foun d eviden cethat soil erosion from ro ads is polluting

the water an d vehicle use is causing an

exotic weed invasion. The studyrecomm end s that the Forest Service:

doesnt construct any new roads; reducelogging, motorized recreation, an d

grazing; and r ely on effective closure

meth ods wh en closing roads to vehicles.

A 1997 survey by Forest Guardians

of the Carson Nation al Forest in n orth -

ern New Mexico reach ed similarconclusions. More than on e-third of the

closed roads effectively remainedopen . This study also found eviden ce of

water quality impacts from roads

constru cted too close to waterways.

Braving a blizzard to

boldly bash through

the bush. SREP

photo.

Uninventoried ORV trail at Pearl Creek on the

White River National Forest. R. Compton photo.


11/16


Whit e River NF Releases Draft Forest Plan

The 2.27 million acre White River National Forest isamo ng the n ations most h eavily visited forests an d con tains

som e of Colorados m ost spectacu lar scener y. The White River

is a major destination for dispersed recreationists around thecoun try, including backcou ntry recreation travel in the Maroon

Bells and Eagles Nest Wilderness. It is the states center ofdeveloped recreational activity and host to m ore than 60% of

Colorados an nu al down hill skiers (and over half its ski areas).

The White River NF has released and is accepting pu bliccomm ent on its draft Forest Plan. Because th is plan will guide

Forest ma nagem ent for the ne xt ten to fifteen years, publicsupp ort for strong con servation m easures is critical.

The draft Plan has som e important p rovisions to control

mo torized r ecreation including restricting ORVs to designatedroutes an d proh ibiting off-road m otorized travel. The d raft

Plan also would create large non -motorized areas outside ofdesignated wildern ess. This is the first revised Forest Plan in

Colorado tha t includes such provisions.However, the dra ft Plan still needs significant im prove-

men ts. For instance, it would allow motor ized use in so me

roadless area s. The plan also wou ld legitimize som e illegal,user-created m otorized routes. The Plan would pro tect less

than 16% of roadless lands on the Forest. Under the Plan,

mo re than half the existing roadless areas could be lost tologging an d road building. Finally, wh ile th e dr aft Plan wou ld

limit ski areas to the ir existing pe rm it boun daries, this stillprovides for hu ge expan sions into cr itical wildlife ha bitat and

construction of new aerial tramways that would connect

virtually every ski area in th e I-70 cor ridor.In your com men t letter, please make the following poin ts:

Commend the Forest Service for restricting summer ORVuse to designated routes, but ask that they impose the sam e

restriction on snowmobiles. Urge the Forest Service to close ALL roadless areas to ALL

motorized recreation. Insist that the Forest Service obliterate ALL 500+ miles of

user-created m otorized routes, and that m onitoring an d

enforcement efforts be greatly en hanced. Urge the Forest Service to recomm end ALL 300,000 eligible

roadless acres for Wilderness d esignation. Demand that they prohibit ALL future ski area expansions,

including the construction of connecting aerial tramways.

Voice your strong support for the Conservation Alternative(Alternative I).

You can obtain a copy of th e draft Plan by calling th e

White River National Forest at (970) 945-2521 o r from their

web site at www.fs.fed.us/r2/whiteriver/plann ing.html. Com-ments are due FEBRUARY 9, 2000. Please send comments to:

Martha Ketelle, Fores t Supe rvisor

White River National Forest

P. O. Box 948Glenwood Springs, CO 81602

For m ore info, contact Sloan Shoema ker at the Aspen

Wilderness Workshop, 970-544-9509.

ORV Rulemaking Petit ion

On Decemb er 9, 1 999, Wildland s CPR, The Wildern essSociety, and more than 100 other organizations submitted a

rulem aking petition asking the Forest Service to stren gthen its

regulations pertaining to the m anagem ent of off-road vehicles.The u se of ORVs on Forest Service lands is, in m any case s, out

of control, and the agency has been unable or unwilling to domu ch abou t it. These imp roved regulations would clarify the

Forest Services du ty to: m anage ORVs p rude ntly an d ca refully;

ensure th at natural values and non -motorized recreation arenot ad versely imp aired; and en sure th e use of ORVs is accom-

pan ied by fully-fun ded mon itoring and en forcemen t. Specifi-cally, the petition req uested th e following chan ges to the

current ORV management framework:

Motorized vehicles are only allowed on system roads and

trails designated an d posted as open for specific vehicletype. Cross-coun try travel by mo torized vehicles is

prohibited. Designation of ORV routes can only occur where the Forest

Service can d em onstrate th at use o f the rou te by ORVs will

not cause adverse environmen tal impacts. Designation of ORV routes, upgrades of existing routes to

accomm odate n ew or additional ORV use, and co nstru ction

or u pgrades of facilities for ORV use mu st be fully an alyzedun der the National Environm ental Policy Act

ORV use is prohibited unless adequate monitoring andenforcem ent of the u se and its impacts is fully imp le-

mented

ORV use is prohibited in legislatively or administrativelypro posed wildern ess areas, inventoried roadless areas, and

other a reas with roadless values, except on roads for wh ich

their use h as been formally designated.

The science and th e law are clearly on ou r side. However,it is critical that th e Forest Service unde rstands th at pu blic

opinion is on ou r side as well. Please send a letter to theForest Service Chief suppo rting the rulem aking petition. In

your letter, please ma ke the following points:

Give specific examples of unacceptable ORV use, user

conflicts and/or impacts o n yo ur National Forest(s). Formo re inform ation abou t a specific forest, go to Wildlands

CPRs ORV Monitoring website at

http://www.wildrockies.org/WildCPR/ Give specific examples of how the Forest Service in your

region is incap able or un willing to fully addre ss ORV use. Urge Chief Dombeck to adopt the management measures

requested in th e rulemaking petition.

Please send your letters as soon as possible to:

Michael Dombeck, Chief

U.S. Forest Service

14 th an d Inde pen den ce Ave., S.W.Washington, D.C. 20250

Please send a cop y of your letter to your in dividual Forest

Supervisor and to your Congression al delegation.

Action Alert s


12/16


Bibliography Notes

The noise of off-road vehicles is

among their least-endearing

qualities to hikers, mountain

bikers, and other non-motorized

recreationists. The noise of

ORVs can do more than sim ply

annoy humans, however. ORV

noise can cause s ignificant

adverse impacts t o wildlife in at

least two ways. First, exposure

to ORV noise can result in

hearing impairment or even

loss, with severe consequences

for animals dependent on their

sense of hearing for finding

prey, avoiding predators, and interacting with

other individuals of the same species. Second,

wildlife exposed t o ORV noise oft en experience

stress and other disturbance effects.

Over t ime, such impacts can lead to alteredmovement patterns, behavioral changes, and

long-term stress impacts, all with potentially

significant adverse results.

Hearing Imp airm entAnima ls exposed to ORV noise o ften suffer fro m impaired

hearing. Studies have documen ted hearing loss caused by thenoise o f dun e bu ggies, dirt bikes, and other ORVs that is

inflicted on a wide range of species, including Mojave fringe-

toed lizard (Bond ello et al. 1979, Brattstrom an d Bondello1983 ), kangaroo rat (Lucken bach a nd Bury 198 3), and b irds

(Marler et al. 1973). Several studies have repor ted bleeding

ears and nasal passages after exposure to ORV activity (e.g.,Gibson et al. 1975 reporting on sm all mam mals).

Hearing impairme nt an d loss, unsurp risingly, is a veryserious con cern for mo st wildlife species. Loss of he aring

sensitivity can lead to increased exposu re to predation ,increased difficulty killing prey, an d o therw ise significant

disruptions in predator-prey relationships (Bondello and

Brattstrom 1979 , Memp his State University 1971). Theimpairment o f intraspecific comm unication is another serious

concer n (Luz and Smith 1976, Lucken bach 1 975, Luckenbach1978 , Weinstein 1978 ). Specific prob lems can include the

inability to recognize mating signals, warning calls, and calls

by juveniles (Mem ph is State Univer sity 1971). Gibson e t al.

(1975), for instance, reported that small mammals became

un usually aggressive and disorien tated after being exposed tothe Bars tow to Las Vegas m otorcycle race.

Disturbance and StressThe results of disturb ance an d stress-related impacts can

take longer to m aterialize but are n o less significant. Wildlife

disturban ce by ORVs is a serious p roblem for man y species,

and ORV no ise is clearly a major comp one nt of these d istur-ban ce imp acts. Put simp ly, noise can stress (and th us ad-

versely impac t) wildlife (Aun e 1981, Baldwin 1970, Burger1981, Bury 198 0, Jeske 1985 , Vos et al. 198 5, Ward et al. 1973 ).

Wildlife exp osed t o n oise can suffer high levels of physiologi-

cal stress even if they appea r to fully adapt to th e no ise (Aun e1981, EPA 1971). One po tential outcom e of disturban ce effects

is displacemen t. When a species is dependent on a n arrowrange of h abitat characteristics, displacement into marginal or

even un suitable habitat has lasting effects on su rvival and

pro ductivity. This is true, for instance, for the kangaroo ra t(Dipodomys sp.) (Brattstrom and Bondello 1983).

Some research has pa rceled out the effects of noise,how ever, and drawn atten tion to specific ways in wh ich

exp osu re to ORV no ise adversely affects wildlife. An Environ-

men tal Protection Agency (1971) repor t argues tha t noise actsas a ph ysiological stressor pro ducing cha nges similar to

exposure to extreme heat, cold, pain, and other h igh-stressenvironm ental conditions. One consequ ence is the alteration

The Impacts of Off-Road Vehicle Noise on WildlifeBy D. J. Schubert and Jacob Smith

Barstow to Las Vegas cross country race, early 70s.

Howard Wilshire photo.


13/16


of wildlife beh avior. For instan ce, Dufour (197 1) con clude d

that ch ron ic expo sure to ORV noise m ight resu lt in p hysiologi-

cal and beh avioral chan ges, warn ing that these effects areprobab ly cumu lative. Manci, et al. (1988 ) reports th at at noise

levels above 90 decibels mam mals m ay retreat, freeze orbecom e startled. Brattstrom and Bond ello (1983 ) repor ted that

amphibians, reptiles, and mammals suffered deleterious

effects from mod erate exposu re to ORV noise. These effectsincluded ph ysiological and beh avioral hear ing loss and th e

misinterpretation of impor tant environm ental acousticalsignals.

For so me species, the n oise of ORVs can directly interfere

with critical life history behaviors. For instance, early summ erthun derstorms provide an essential environmen tal cue for the

Couch s spad efoot toad (Scaphiopus couchi). The toads,inha bitants of the arid south western U.S., emerge from their

burrows to mate an d lay eggs, and the larvae are born and

undergo metamorp hosis. All this occurs when the presence ofthun derstorms indicates that the approp riate temperature

cond itions exist (to ensu re both su itable conditions for toadsurvival and adeq uate availability of prey) and th at m oisture,

ano ther critical ingredient, is sufficient (McClanah an 1967 ).

The toad can m istake the th un dering of ORVs across the deser tfloor for the sou nd of early summer thun derstorms, however,

and em erge during the wrong season and in th e absence ofwater (Brattstrom and Bon dello 1983 ), with significant adverse

impacts to the p opu lation (McClanah an 19 67, Brattstrom an d

Bond ello 1983). Although th e mech anism s may vary, a widerange of species may suffer from such impacts. Rennison and

Wallace (1976 ) repor t the disrup tion of courtsh ip and breedin gby deser t birds as a result of ORV noise ex posu re.

The timing of the ORV use can play an imp ortant r ole as

well. Eisenberg and Isaac (1963) reported th at infant survivalof kan garoo rats is jeopardized by ORV use b ecause a dults

locate their offspring by respo ndin g to repea ted scratch-whin es. ORV use dur ing the late winter an d spring, before the

offspring have dispersed, poses th e greatest threat. Similarly,

whe n th e peak of ORV activity occurs during th e peak of lizardreprod uctive activities, repr oductive success can b e redu ced

(Mayhew 1966 a, 1966b ).Long-term exposure to the stress of ORV activity (of which

ORV no ise is typically a major com pon ent), is linked to

nu merou s health problem s. Baldwin and Stoddard (1973) notethat n oise exposu re is linked to stress, ulcers, tension , and

W hen evaluating t he potent ial

impact s of ORV use on w ildlife, t he

effects of noise m ust be considered.Although most of the research into

t he mechanisms of noise imp acts have

been conduct ed on desert w ildlife, theconsiderable liter ature on dist urbance

effects across ecosy st em t yp esst rongly suggest s t hat s imilar impacts

occur in w idespr ead fashion.

coron ary disease in hu man s, suggesting that similar effects

might m anifest in wildlife species as well. Rats exposed to

high no ise levels suffered impacts which include d reducedbody weight, increased h eart rate, and th e shrink ing of ovaries

and kidn eys (Geber an d And erson 19 67).

ConclusionWhen evaluating the po tential impacts of ORV use on

wildlife, the effects of noise must be co nsidered. Although

most of the research into the mech anisms of noise impacts

have been conducted on desert wildlife, the considerableliterature on disturbance effects across ecosystem types

stron gly suggests that similar impacts occur in widesp readfashion. The specific impact concer ns discussed above are

exacerbated by four additional ch aracteristics of ORV no ise.

For on e thing, ORV noise is loud and , unde r ma nycond itions, can travel long distances (e.g., Rennison and

Wallace 1976). For ano ther, a great deal of existing ORV useoccurs in fragile habitats, such as dese rt and wetland ecosys-

tems, wh ich often are ho me to wildlife species that are

especially sensitive to noise and other human disturbance.Many sp ecies live in and are relatively adap ted to quiet

environ men ts, and ORV noise often grea tly exceeds am bientdecibel levels. Third, althou gh the displacem ent effects of

noise disturba nce can be severe, many wildlife species are

limited in their ability to relocate to avoid ORV impacts.Finally, rapidly advancing ORV technology allows for ever-

greater pen etration into wild and sensitive habitats theblan ket o f ORV no ise grows ever -larger.

Literature Cited

Aune, K.E. 1981. Impacts of Winter Recreationists on Wildlife in

a Portion of Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. Thesis,

Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, USA.

Baldwin, M.F. 1970. The Off-Road Vehicle an d Environm en tal

Quality: A report on t he Social and Environm enta l Effects

of Off-Road Vehicles, Par ticularly Snowmobiles, with

Suggested Policies for their Control. Conservation

Foundat ion. Wash ington, D.C., USA.

Baldwin, M. F. And D. Stoddard Jr. 1973. The Off-Road Vehicle

and Environm ental Quality. Pages 8 -27. Second Edition.

The Conservation Foundation, Washington, D.C., USA.

Eureka dunes, East Bishop, California. Howard Wilshire photo.


14/16


Bonde llo, M. C. and B. H Brattstrom . 1979. The Experim ental

Effects of Off-Road Vehicle Sounds on Three Species of

Desert Verteb rates. Fullerton, CA, Departm ent of

Biological Sciences, California State Univers ity.

Bondello, M. C., A. C. Huntley, H. B. Cohen, and B. H.

Brattstrom . 1979. The Effects of Dune Buggy Sounds on

the Telencephalic Auditory Evoked Response in the Mojave

Fringe-Toed Lizard, Uma scoparia . Riverside, Californ ia,

U.S. Bureau of Land Management, California Desert

Program. Contract CA-060-CT7-2737.

Brattstrom, B.H. and M.C. Bondello. 1983. Effects of off-road

vehicle noise on desert vertebrates. In R.H. Webb and H.G

Wilshire, editors. Environmental effects of Off- Road

Vehicles: Impacts and Management in Arid Regions.

Springer-Verlag. New York, New York, USA.

Burger, J. 1981. Effects of Human Disturbance on Colonial

Species, Particularly Gulls. Colonial Waterbirds 4:28-36.

Bury, R.B. 198 0. What we know an d do not kn ow about off-

road vehicle impacts on Wildlife. R.N.L. Andrews an d P.

Nowak, editors. Off-Road Vehicle Use: A Managem ent

Challenge. (Univ. Of Michigan Extension Service) Michigan

League. The University of Michigan, School of Natural

Resources. USDA The Office of Environm ental Quality.

Dufour, P. 1974. Effects of Noise on Wildlife and Othe r

Anima ls. Mem phis State University and United StatesEnvironmental Protection Agency.

Eisenberg, J.F., and D.E. Isaac. 1963 . The rep roduction of

heteromyid rodents in captivity. J. Mammal . 44:61-67.

Environmen tal Protection Agency. 1971. Effects of Noise on

Wildlife and Other Animals. Prepa red by Mem phis State

University under Contract 68-04-0024, December 31,

1971.

Gerber and Anderson. 1967. Cardiac hypertrophy due to

chronic audigenic stress in the rat (Rattus norwegians

albinus) and rabbit (Lepus cuniculum). Comparative

Biochemistry and Physiology 21:273-277.

Gibson , J., H. Blend, and B. Brat tstrom . 1975 . Sound Levels

Transm itted into Burrows of Desert Mamm als. Fullerton,

California, California State University, Departments ofPhysics and Biology.

Jeske, C.W. 1985. Time and Energy Budgets of Wintering Ring-

Necked Ducks Ayatha Collaris (L.) in North-Central Florida.

Thesis. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.

Luckenbach, R.A. 1975. What the ORVs are doing to the

desert. Fremontia 2(4):3-11.

Luckenbach, R.A. 1978. An ana lysis of off-road vehicle use on

desert avifaunas. In Transactions of the 43rd North

Ame rican Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference.

Wildlife Management Institute, Washington, DC.

Luckenbach, R.A., an d R.B. Bury. 1983. Effects of off-road

vehicles on the biota of Algodones Dunes, Imp erial

County, Californ ia. J. Appl. Ecology 20:265-286.

Luz, G.A., and J.B. Smith. 1976. Reactions of pron ghornante lope to helicopter overflight. J. Acoustical Society of

America, 59:1514-1515.

Manci, K. M., D. N. Gladwin, R. Villella, an d M.G. Caven dish .

1988. Effects of Aircraft Noise and Sonic Boom s on

Domestic Animals and Wildlife: A Literature Synthesis.

Fort Collins, CO, U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and

Wildlife Service, National Ecology Research Center.

Marler, P., M. Konishi, A. Lutjen , and M.S. Waser. 1973. Effects

of continuous noise on avian hearing and vocal

developmen t. Proceedings of the National Academ y of

Science, 70:1393-1396.

Mayhew, W.W. 196 6a. Reproduction in the arenicolous lizard,

Uma notata. Ecology 47:9-18.

Mayhew, W.W. 1966b. Reproduction in the psammophilous

lizard, Uma Scoparia. Copeia 114-122.

McClanahan , L. 1967. Adapta tions of the spade foot toad,

Scaphiopus couchi, to desert en vironmen ts. Comp.

Biochem. Physiol. 20:73-99.

Mem phis State Univers ity. 1971. Effects of Noise on Wildlife

and Other Anim als. Wash ington, D.C. U.S. Govern ment

Print ing Office. NTID300.5 .

Rennison, D.C. and A. Wallace. 1976. The Extent of Acoustic

Influence on Off-Road Vehicles in Wilderness Areas.

Departm ent of Mechan ical Engineering, University of

Adelaide, Australia, 19 pp.

Vos, D.K., R.A. Ryder, and W.D. Graul. 1985. Response ofbreeding great blue herons (Ardea herodias) to human

disturbance in north central Colorado. Colonial Waterbirds

8(1):13-22.

Ward, A.L., J.J. Cupal, A.L. Lea, C.A. Oakley, and R.W. Weeks.

1973 . Elk behavior in relation to cattle grazing, forest

recreation, and traffic. Proceeding of the Thirty-eighth

North American Wildlife Conference. 38:327-337.

Weinstein, M. 1978. Impact of Off-Road Vehicles on the

Avifaun a of Afton Canyon, California. Bureau of Land

Management. Departm ent of the Inter ior. Final Report

#CA-060-CT7-2734.

Swan View Coalition photo.


15/16


Wildlands CPR Publications: Road-Ripper's Handbook ($15.00, $25 non-members) A

comp rehen sive activist m anual that includes th e five Guideslisted below, plus The Ecological Effects of Roads , Gather-ing Informat ion wit h the Freedom of Informat ion Act , andmore!

Road-Ripper's Guide to t he National Fores ts ($4, $7 non-mem-

bers) By Keith Hamm er. How-to pro cedu res for gettingroads closed and revegetated, descriptions of environ men -tal laws, road de nsity stan dards & Forest Service road poli-cies.

Road-Ripper 's Guide to the National Parks ($4, $7 non-mem-bers) By David Bahr & Aron Yarm o. Provides backgroun don th e National Park System an d its use of roads, and o ut-lines ho w activists can get involved in NPS plann ing.

Road-Ripper's Guide to the BLM ($4, $7 non-members) ByDan Stotter. Provides an overview of road-related lan d an dresource laws, and det ailed discussion s for participating inBLM decision-making processes.

Road-Ripper's Guide to Off-Road Vehicles ($4, $7 non-mem-bers) By Dan Wright. A com preh ensive guide to redu c-ing the use an d abuse o f ORVs on p ublic land s. Includes an

extensive bibliography.

Road-Ripper s Guide to Wildland Road Removal ($4 , $7 non-members)By Scott Bagley. Provides tech nical inform a-

tion on road construction and removal, where and whyroads fail, and how yo u can effectively assess road rem oval

projects.

Trails of Destruction ($10) By Friends of the Earth and Wild-land s CPR, written by Erich Pica and Jacob Smith . This

repo rt explains th e ecological imp acts of ORVs, federal fund-ing for motorized recreation on p ublic land s, and the ORV

industrys role in pu shing th e ORV agenda.

Bibliographic Services:Ecological Impacts of Roads: A Bibliographic Database (Up-

date d Feb. 1998) Edited by Reed Noss. Com piled b y Dave

Augeri, Mike Eley, Steve Humph rey, Reed Noss, Paul Pacquet& Susan Pierce. Contains ap prox. 6,000 citation s includ-

ing scientific literature o n erosion, fragmentation, sedim en-

tation, po llution, effects on wildlife, aquatic an d h ydrologi-

cal effects, and other information on the impacts of roads.Use the ecological literature to un derstand an d develop roaddensity standards, priorities for road removal, and other

road issues.

Database Searches We will search th e Bibliograph y on thesubjects that interest you, and provide results in IBM or

Macintosh form at (specify software), or on pap er. We alsohave prep ared a 1-disk Bibliographic Summ ary with resu lts

for comm only requested searches. Finally, we offer the full

bibliography. However, you mu st ha ve Pro-Cite or a com -patible database pro gram in order to use it.

Bibliography p rices Prices are based on a sliding scale. Callfor details.

WILDLA N DS CPR MEMBERSH IP/ORD ER FORM

Please send this form and your check (payable to Wildlands CPR)to the address below. Thank you!

Wildlands CPR PO Box 7516 Missoula, Montana 59807

Prices include shipping: for Priority Mail add $3.00 per item;for Canadian orders, add $6.00 per item.

International Membership $30 MinimumAll prices in U.S. Dollars

Ask about reduced rates for items ordered in bulk.

Phone/E-mail

Affiliation

I want to join (or renew my membership with)Wildlands CPR:

Address

Name

Type of Member ship: Individual Organization

Other$30 standard

$50 business

$15 low-income

$100$250

Send me these Wildlands CPR Publications:

Qty: Title/Price Each: Total:

Total of all items:

/

/

/


16/16

Wildlands Center for Preventing Roads

P.O. Box 7516

Missoula, MT 59807

Visions...

Non-profit OrganizationUS POSTAGE

PAID

MISSOULA, MT 59801PERMIT NO. 569

The Road-RIPorter is print ed on 100% pos t-consu mer recycled, process chlorine-free bleached paper.

He [the trophy-recreationist] is themotorized ant who sw arms t he

continent s before learning to see his

own back yard, who consumes but

never creates outdoor satisfactions.

Aldo Leopold, Conservation Esthetic fromA Sand County Almanac.

Jim Coefield photo

Date post:	30-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	wildlands-cpr
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

Road RIPorter 5.1

Documents