THE WILD CASCADES - npshistory.comnpshistory.com/newsletters/the-wild-cascades/spring-2005.pdf ·...

THE WILD CASCADES � Spring 2005 ! 1

THE WILD CASCADESTHE JOURNAL OF THE NORTH CASCADES CONSERVATION COUNCIL SPRING 2005

Lewisia tweedyi on lower Mad River Trail KARL FORSGAARD

Coming soonThe NCCC�s book,

The Wilderness Alps:Crisis and Conflict in the North Cascades

(see page 4)

2 ! THE WILD CASCADES � Spring 2005

The North Cascades ConservationCouncil was formed in 1957 �To protect

and preserve the North Cascades� scenic, sci-entific, recreational, educational, and wilder-ness values.� Continuing this mission, NCCCkeeps government officials, environmental or-ganizations, and the general public informedabout issues affecting the Greater North Cas-cades Ecosystem. Action is pursued throughlegislative, legal, and public participation chan-nels to protect the lands, waters, plants andwildlife.

Over the past third of a century the NCCChas led or participated in campaigns to createthe North Cascades National Park Complex,Glacier Peak Wilderness, and other units of theNational Wilderness System from the W.O. Dou-glas Wilderness north to the Alpine Lakes Wil-derness, the Henry M. Jackson Wilderness, theChelan-Sawtooth Wilderness and others.Among its most dramatic victories has beenworking with British Columbia allies to blockthe raising of Ross Dam, which would havedrowned Big Beaver Valley.

MEMBERSHIP

The NCCC is supported by member duesand private donations. These support publica-tion of The Wild Cascades and lobbying activi-ties. (NCCC is a non-tax-deductible 501(c)4 or-ganization.) Membership dues for one year are:$10 - low income/student; $20 - regular; $25 -family; $50.00 - Contributing; $100 - patron;$1000 - Sustaining. A one-time life membershipdues payment is $500.

!

The North Cascades Foundation sup-ports the NCCC�s nonpolitical efforts. Dona-tions are tax-deductible as a 501(c)3 organiza-tion. Please make your check(s) out to the or-ganization of your choice. The Foundation canbe reached through NCCC mailing address:

North Cascades Conservation CouncilP.O. Box 95980

University StationSeattle, WA 98145-2980

NCCC Websitewww.northcascades.org

The Wild Cascades

Journal of the North Cascades Conservation Council

EDITOR: Betty ManningPrinting by EcoGraphics

The Wild Cascades is published three times a year (Spring, Summer, Winter).NCCC members receive this journal. Address letters, comments, send articles to:

The Wild Cascades EditorNorth Cascades Conservation Council

University Station, Seattle, WA 98145-2980

The Wild Cascades is printed on recycled paper with soy-based ink.

THE WILD CASCADES ! Spring 2005

In This Issue3 The President�s report � MARC BARDSLEY

4 The Wilderness Alps: Crisis and Conflict close to publication

5 NCCC and the North Cascades Institute�s Environmental Learning Center � AHistory � DAVID FLUHARTY

6 NCCC responds to Joel Connelly�s editorial opinion in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, April 25, 2005 � DAVID FLUHARTY

8 Upper Stehekin Valley Road NPS Management Options � DAVID FLUHARTY forNCCCCoon Run Stehekin Road Reroute � DAVID FLUHARTY for NCCC

10 NCCC Assessments of Forest Service EAs � MARC BARDSLEY

Helicopter use in rebuilding Milk Creek Bridge and Suiattle River Road �MARC BARDSLEY

11 Information Superhighway threatens Stehekin � CAROLYN MCCONNELL

12 DUSEL: Deep Underground Science and the Icicle Valley � WICK HAXTON

14 NCCC Position on DUSEL � RICK MCGUIRE

Tunnel affects water tables in ItalyNot Man Apart � HARVEY MANNING

15 Falling for the Cascade Agenda �DAVID S. BRODER

16 Crown Lakes to be added to Mount Si NRCA17 The Retreat from Fee Demo Begins

Fight RAT with Survey to Wild Wilderness18 Threat looming for the Boulder-White Cloud Mountains in the Sawtooth

National Recreation Area � MARC BARDSLEY

19 Happenings in Our National Forests � RICK MCGUIRE

Middle Fork Snoqualmie ATM Plan releasedPratt connector trail still loomingMiddle Fork �Trust Land Transfer� proposedSnoqualmie Tree Farm development rights purchasedLowe Creek Road EA releasedWild Sky Wilderness Bill awaiting action

20 Venting more fumes and steam than Mount St. HelensCommercializing Mount Rainier�s High Camp

21 Of Roads, Access and �Elitists� � TOM HAMMOND

Endangered Wildlife Threatened by Draft LegislationNationwide Alliance Kicks Off Campaign to Save Arctic Refuge

22 Book Review: Geology of the North Cascades; A Mountain Mosaic � POLLYDYER and HARVEY MANNING

23 Major Geological Events in the North Cascades � USGS Maps � H.M.24 Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Photo Exhibit at Burke Museum through

December 2005.


Founded in 1957SEATTLE, WASHINGTON

The President�s Report Spring 2005

NCCC Board

President

Marc Bardsley

Board Chairman

Patrick Goldsworthy

Vice President

Charles Ehlert

Treasurer

Tom Brucker

Secretary

Phil Zalesky

Bruce Barnbaum

Polly Dyer

John Edwards

Dave Fluharty

Karl Forsgaard

Kevin Geraghty

Tom Hammond

Kevin Herrick

Conway Leovy

Harvey Manning

Betty Manning

Carolyn McConnell

Rick McGuire

Thom Peters

Ken Wilcox

Laura Zalesky

One subject that always gets my goat is how to manage all the roads thatcrisscross our favorite mountainous areas. The majority of these roads were built manyyears ago to facilitate logging or, in some cases, mining. Their primary purpose today,it seems, is to provide access for recreationists. Everybody from hikers to ORV enthusi-asts uses these roads to get close to the places they feel like going. Having stated theobvious, I would also suggest that some of these folks feel that it is their God-givenright to go wherever a road has ever gone before. Any time there is a change to a roadsuch as a washout, the agencies insist that the public demands it be repaired immedi-ately. There is a lot of truth to that. Fortunately there seems to be little enthusiasmanymore for extending the roads. Just fix them, and quickly. The list of roads that haverecently washed out is endless: Mountain Loop Scenic Byway, Stehekin, Dosewallips,Whitechuck and Suiattle roads, and many others. Unfortunately, in many cases therepairs require unacceptable damage to the surrounding area.

The NCCC has often taken the position that if repairing or rebuilding a particularroad is not environmentally sound the road might be a candidate for conversion to atrail. In my experience, this usually becomes a lightning rod for emotional argumentand conflict. Many times, the hiker types are as vocal as the Sunday drivers when itcomes to driving in closer. They can�t accept the idea of walking further or taking anextra day out of their busy schedule to �do� a particular trip.

The environmental community needs to develop a consistent approach to road re-pairs. At the same time, an educational program for the public needs to be developed.Environmental groups need to convince the hiking/recreational groups that it is intheir best interest to expand hiking areas for the long term by converting roads to trails.At the same time, the Greens need to support efforts to expand trails into less sensitiveareas, close to population centers. All these groups in turn, need to acknowledge thatsome change to their lifestyle is inevitable. The expanding population cannot be for-ever squeezed into the same inventory of wild lands. A debate is needed to determinewhich roads are truly necessary to provide reasonable access to our natural environ-ment and which ones should be allowed to go back to nature. This debate will need toinclude enviros, short-range hikers, agencies, and, I suppose, the wheeled users. Thegoal must be to protect the natural resource and provide additional unroaded areas forrecreation and other values. Enough access must be retained to maintain a base ofconcerned user groups and also introduce others to natural areas for the �green bond-ing� experience. Environmentalists and the narrowly focused hiking and recreationgroups need to work together on this issue; they can�t afford to argue amongst them-selves.


NCCC ConservationHistory Book

Nears Completion

From the trenches of grassroots advocacy,the story of wilderness preservation and national park

politics in Washington�s North Cascades

We are pleased to say that we have nearly reached our fundraising goal forThe Wilderness Alps: Crisis and Conflict in the North Cascades, NCCC�snew book on the conservation history of the North Cascades.

We are hoping to raise the final $3,000 bythe end of July, shortly before we go topress. A big thank you to all who have

contributed so far.

Originally written by Harvey Manning, the manuscript has been fully up-dated to 2005. So that the book might inform and enlighten a wider audi-ence, we have added a little more background on some of the people, places,and events that were crucial to achieving park and wilderness protection.

The 448-page book includes dozens of historic black and white photosand maps, as well as two full-color sections highlighting the beauty of theregion.

As we move very close to going to press, you can help once more by send-ing your tax-deductible contribution to:

North Cascades Foundationc/o T. William Booth, Treasurer5521 - 17th Avenue NESeattle, WA 98105

Please indicate that your donation is for the �NCCC book.� To those whohave already contributed, again, thank you!

Watch for ordering information and a look at the cover in the next issue ofThe Wild Cascades.


NCCC and the North Cascades Institute�sEnvironmental Learning Center � A History

DAVID FLUHARTY

The North CascadesConservation Council isdelighted to welcomethe emergence from itschrysalis of the newNorth CascadesEnvironmentalLearning Center atDiablo Lake. It hasbeen a long time incoming.

The North Cascades Conservation Coun-cil is delighted to welcome the emer-gence from its chrysalis of the new

North Cascades Environmental Learning Cen-ter at Diablo Lake. It has been a long time incoming.

This blessed event started with NCCC chal-lenging Seattle City Light�s request to raise thelevel of High Ross Dam in the 1970s. NCCCconvinced parties that there was a better(cheaper) way to supply energy wants in Se-attle by making a long-term contract withCanada and avoiding the environmental im-pacts of raising the High Ross Dam.

When belated negotiations with Seattle CityLight over the relicensing of the Skagit RiverProject were revived by the Federal EnergyRegulatory Commission (FERC) in the early1990s, NCCC�s role as a dogged intervenor wasrecognized. The question on the table was,what were the continuing environmental im-pacts of the Skagit River Project and howshould they be mitigated?

NCCC was quite aware that the environmen-tal impacts of the Skagit Project should be miti-gated but what should that mitigation do? Wewere only too aware of mitigation in the formof picnic tables, children�s play areas, riverwalks, etc. What we wanted was meaningfulecosystem restoration.

How could we turn the opportunity to ob-tain significant environmental benefits frommitigation of the Skagit Project Dams?

Here is what happened. NCCC had ques-tioned the National Park Service granting of aconcession rights to a new company to oper-ate the Diablo Resort. We had also challengedthe National Park Service in its preparation ofits General Management Plan (GMP) that calledfor co-locating the North Cascades Environ-mental Learning Center with the proposedNewhalem Visitor Center (our concern was

that the area proposed for these two activitieswas undisturbed and that other sites were pref-erable). NCCC rationales were rejected in theGMP and other processes. (Hold that thought).

North Cascades Institute asked to becomean intervenor in the FERC process to relicensethe Skagit Project but it was denied that op-portunity on technical grounds. I well remem-ber how Saul Weisberg and I met one day andSaul complaining that North Cascades Insti-tute could not be an intervenor. Instead, heproposed to me that one of the mitigationsfor the impacts of the Skagit River Project mightbe in developing support for environmentallearning.

The Environmental Learning Center is thewonderful progeny of that discussion. NCCCwas able to convince Seattle City Light to takeover the failed NPS concessionaire option atDiablo Lake and to design a world-class ELC.

Thus, the ELC is a fusion of NCCC�s inter-ests to have meaningful mitigation and NCI�sinspiring idea.

Of course, we must recognize that tremen-dous support given to this concept by theSkagit River tribes, the National Park Service,the U.S. Forest Service and the Fish and Wild-life Service. NCCC used its intervenor statusto promote the ELC idea. SCL accepted theconcept and, despite many ups and downs,has done more than required in the FERCsettlement agreement to make the ELC a real-ity.

NCCC is proud to have used its intervenorstatus to support the North Cascades Institutein pursuit of the goal of a real EnvironmentalLearning Center in the center of the Cascades.We look forward to generations of students,graduates, and seniors engaged in learningabout the North Cascades.

Venture up the Skagit River deep intothe mountains. Hike beneath toweringcedars and fern-draped maples. Paddle acanoe on glacier-fed Diablo Lake. Learnwith scientists studying salmon andsongbirds, or paint Pyramid Peak bathed inevening light. Welcome to North CascadesEnvironmental Learning Center � our newfield campus in North Cascades NationalPark.

The Learning Center is a hub of discoveryfor all ages in one of the wildest, most bio-logically diverse landscapes in NorthAmerica. Here you can explore cascadingstreams and pristine peaks, wildflower mead-ows and old-growth forests, and a rich North-west history that includes more than 8,000years of Native American culture. Better still,you can join a community � expert teachers,intriguing new friends � dedicated to the ideathat learning together inspires stewardship.

North Cascades Institute operates NorthCascades Environmental Learning Center inpartnership with the City of Seattle and theNational Park Service. Modeling earth-friendly design and operations, the tree-shel-tered campus features 16 buildings clusteredon the north shore of Diablo Lake in NorthCascades National Park. Facilities include:

� Multimedia classrooms, a research libraryand aquatic and terrestrial labs

� Overnight lodging for 46 participants and12 graduate students and staff

� A lakeside dining hall with recycling/composting center

� An amphitheater, outdoor learning shel-ters and trails leading into the surround-ing wildlands

� A dock on Diablo Lake for paddling ad-ventures

� ADA-accessible facilities and paths alongthe lakeshore and nearby Deer Creek

Located along State Route 20 less thanthree hours northeast of Seattle, the Learn-ing Center provides access to destinationseast and west of the Cascade Crest, from thepine-studded sagelands of the Columbia Pla-teau to Puget Sound and the San Juan Is-lands. Yet, right out the front door, studentsneed only grab a paddle or lace up their bootstrings to head into the backcountry.

Journey into wild America. Discover theNorth Cascades.

FROM THE NORTH CASCADES INSTITUTEWEBSITE:

www.ncascades.org/learning_center

North Cascades Institute

NO

RTH

CA

SCA

DES

IN

STIT

UTE


In The Northwest: Rating the region�senvironmental activist groups

Joel Connelly

Seattle Post-Intelligencer columnist

Monday, April 25, 2005

[This article is excerpted.]

. . . . Here, then, is one longtimeobserver�s evaluation of the effectivenesson a range of the region�s enviro activistgroups. Ratings range from five tall ce-dars down to a stump.

Save Our Wild Salmon: Five trees . .

People for Puget Sound: Four trees,or maybe a pod of orcas. . .

Washington Conservation Voters:Three trees, one of them wind-sculptedin the form of a question mark. . . .

Sierra Club � Northwest Office:Three trees, down from four a few yearsago. . .

Western Canada Wilderness Com-mittee: Two trees . . .

North Cascades Conservation Coun-cil: One tree, and a dire need for seed-lings. �N3C� was instrumental in gettinga national park created in the �AmericanAlps� back in 1968.

In years since, however, its leadershiphas aged and the group has failed to re-new itself. Hence, its newsletter, The WildCascades, tends to be dominated by theold feuds of guidebook author HarveyManning and bluster against recreationuser-fees by a grim Oregonian namedScott Silver.

Disturbing and inexcusably, Manningused a recent issue to question the writ-ing and picture-taking abilities of his long-time, recently deceased �101 Hikes� se-ries co-author, Ira Spring.

Green Party of British Columbia: ABowron River-sized clearcut . . .

Parting kudos: Were they closer tohome, the Montana Wilderness Associa-tion and Southeast Alaska ConservationCouncil would both merit five-cedar rat-ings.

JOEL CONNELLY

First, Joel Connelly is out of touch with whatNCCC has done SINCE the establishment of thepark. He apparently has not checked in sincethat time unless you allow that he reads TheWild Cascades, and focuses on only one of theissues we report. And anyone who believes himis also out of touch. Yes, the NCCC Board isolder � and wiser. We also have some of thebest young advocates joining us, e.g., RickMcGuire, Karl Forsgaard, Carolyn McConnell,Kevin Geraghty, Ken Wilcox and TomHammond. According to Polly Dyer�s records,only three of the original Board remain, Polly,Patrick Goldsworthy and Phil Zalesky. The folksnow taking leadership roles in defending theCascades are a blend of the old, with theirknowledge of history, and the new, with theirexpertise, competence and energy.

I want to make it perfectly clear that I canrecognize we have our faults as an organiza-tion in some ideal sense. However, down onthe ground we are doing a lot more than isbeing credited. What we can and do accom-plish rests on volunteers taking the lead andfollowing up on issues. I think it a great com-pliment that Connelly includes us in the main-stream powerful organizations like the SierraClub and others in terms of our impact, yet tellsus that we don�t rate because we are old (he,too, is achieving this status as rapidly as all ofus). We cannot do everything, but we are do-ing the things we do quite well working towardpreservation of the Cascade Range.

Just review some of the things NCCC hasaccomplished SINCE the establishment ofNorth Cascades National Park Complex. WhileNCCC cannot claim entire credit for any ofthese, I list the things that would not have hap-pened if it had not been for NCCC involvement.

1. We would have cable cars all up and downRoss Lake had NCCC not intervened in the firstGeneral Management Plan (GMP) process af-ter the Park and National Recreation Areas weredesignated. NCCC, especially PatrickGoldsworthy, fought them back.

2. We would have had a lot of developmentin the Stehekin Valley if NCCC members hadnot fronted funds to purchase properties thatthe NPS did not have funds to purchase. Wehave kept the pressure on the Congressionaldelegation for Land and Water ConservationFund allocations to NOCA to allow purchasesfrom Willing Sellers whenever possible.

North Cascades Conservation Councilresponds to Joel Connelly�s editorial

opinion in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer,April 25, 2005

DAVID FLUHARTY

3. We have challenged Seattle City Light onraising High Ross Dam and this led to the SkagitEnvironmental Endowment Fund which fundsresearch on the North Cascades � give TomBrucker, Charlie Ehlert and our departed DickBrooks credit for this, and of course Margaretand Joe Miller for their study documenting theunique values of Big Beaver Creek.

4. NCCC stuck with the FERC relicensing ofthe Skagit River Project all the way to the Su-preme Court, lost that fight, and then joined indeveloping a different approach that has led toa 10.7 million dollar Environmental LearningCenter operated by North Cascades Institutestarting programs in July 2005.

5. As part of the same FERC settlement weobtained 17 million dollars for purchase of keyparcels of wildlife lands in the Skagit and SouthFork of the Nooksack rivers.

6. The NCCC challenge to High Ross and thesubsequent negotiated settlement formed thebasis for the new FERC Alternative Procedure,which has transformed the adversarial natureof most FERC relicensing nationwide. Youwould not know about this unless you studiedthe arcane FERC processes. It has been used inthe Lake Chelan and the Baker Lake Projectrelicensing.

7. NCCC challenged the very cursory Gen-eral Management Plan for the North CascadesNational Park Service Complex and forced aSettlement that has reverberated in the NationalPark Service. According to John Reynolds (theNPS Superintendent we sued), CharlesOdegaard, (the Regional Director we sued) andBill Paleck (the new super on the block) NCCCchanged the way the NPS did business on GMPs,i.e., they now realize that NPS planning requirespreparation of Environmental Impact State-ments. In other words, the NPS must be trans-parent in its decision-making processes andmust protect the resources while it plans forhuman �enjoyment�. A key element of thisSettlement is the High Lakes Management Plan,finally coming out this summer. Many of us havegrown grey hair as we track these processes.

8. NCCC was a leader in getting Wildernessdesignations in three national parks and numer-ous recreation areas in Washington 1988.

9. In the mid-1990s NCCC came close toachieving a goal of a transboundary NationalPark between Canada and the US and we have

Continued on page 7


not given up on expansions of national parkand wilderness for unprotected areas.

10. I could go on with a myriad of smallerissues, but I think that I have made my point.NCCC is not moribund. Maybe we are not theorganization that Joel thinks we should be.Maybe we do not live up to our own mem-bers� expectations. But, by golly, we are doingour darndest on the things we care about.

Right now let�s look at what is on the NCCCaction agenda. There is the invaluable leader-ship Karl Forsgaard is giving to Dark Divide,ORV, and outfitter issues. Look at the leader-ship Rick McGuire and Kevin Geraghty are giv-

ing to Mid-Fork Snoqualmie and Wild Sky Wil-derness (plus the Sauk, Suiattle, White Chuckareas). Look at the expertise and vigor thatCaroline McConnell brings to Stehekin issues.Ken Wilcox is getting the NCCC book The Wil-derness Alps: Conservation and Conflict in theNorth Cascades into publication and NCCC andNCF funds are putting our pocketbooks to ourbelief system. We are challenging the NationalPark Service on incredible land exchanges atsignificant expense. We are pushing to closethe Stehekin Road and other washed-outmountain roads where Mother Nature has in-dicated we should. Just this week a two-volume

North Cascades National Park Service ComplexMountain Lakes Fishery Management EIS with826 total pages has just landed on my thresh-old. NCCC has 90 days to respond. We�d bet-ter stop looking back and get cracking!

Keep on reading The Wild Cascades and keepon thinking about what we are doing, who isdoing it and what more we could do if we hadadditional resources and volunteers to carry theballs that need to be carried.

Forgive me if I have overstated anything ex-cept my confidence in NCCC, its Board and itsmembers and their commitment to preservingthe Cascades.

Recent Awards given to NCCC Board Members


On February 8, 2005 the Na-tional Park Service (NPS) askedfor comment on potential man-agement options for the StehekinRoad between High Bridge andCottonwood Camp. Floods in1995 and 2003 severely damagedsections of the road. The firstflood forced road closure justnorth of Flat Creek since 1995 andthe second wiped out the road-bed at Car Wash Falls [mile 12.9]and damaged the road in manyplaces up to Bridge Creek [mile15.6]. Long-term Stehekin goershave watched bridges and roadbeds get washed out by the Cas-cade and Stehekin rivers for manyyears. We have often wonderedhow much it is worth to continueto maintain the Stehekin Roadand what alternatives are there tocontinual road repair. Now themagnitude of the damage hasgiven the National Park Serviceand the public an opportunity toreflect on what we would like thefuture of the upper Stehekin val-ley to be.

The National Park Service hasproposed four alternatives andrequested that the public supplyinformation on its concerns aboutthe options and to suggest addi-tional options for consideration:

1. Reopen the road to FlatCreek along its previous configu-ration � It is estimated that thiswould cost about $6.6 millionand require 70,000 cubic yards oflarge rock.

2. Reroute the road to accessCottonwood [e.g., below CarWash Falls place the road on thePacific Crest Trail which followsthe Old Wagon Road.]. Thiswould require that the Washing-ton Parks Wilderness Act beamended because designatedWilderness starts 50 feet on eitherside of the Stehekin Road.

3. Permanently close the roadjust below Car Wash Falls. [A park-ing lot, turnaround, etc., wouldbe developed].

4. Close the road above CarWash Falls as in Alternate 3 butseek to develop bicycle accessalong the non-wilderness roadcorridor.

Upper Stehekin Valley Road Management OptionsDAVID FLUHARTY

North Cascades ConservationCouncil responded to the requestfor assistance in further definingalternatives for management op-tions for the upper Stehekin Val-ley Road in the following way.

At this time, NCCC understandsthat you [the NPS] are seeking toscope out the alternatives and thatwe are not expected to supportor otherwise argue in favor of apreferred alternative. The key isto properly frame the action andthe analysis of alternatives. Wewould be pleased to expand onany of these points or make clari-fications as needed.

1. Broaden the Scope of Action.The stated scope of action is toonarrowly defined. This is not justabout replacing or not replacingthe upper Stehekin Valley Road.It is about planning alternative fu-tures for the upper Stehekin val-ley and the types of access for rec-reation, wildlife protection, Wil-derness management, etc., that ispresented by this turn of naturalevents. NCCC has long urged theNPS to consider alternative man-agement approaches to the uppervalley because of the significantopportunities that it offers forlow-elevation, flat walk-in camp-ing, etc. Regardless of the roadalternative that is ultimately se-lected through the Environmen-tal Impact Assessment process,the NPS should be consideringthese in light of a vision for howthe upper valley would be man-aged. In this regard, it is clear thatthe 1995 GMP and EIS statementfor management of the StehekinRoad must also be revised.

2. Consider an AdditionalRoad Terminus Option. The NPSis currently considering a majorrevamping of the area around theHigh Bridge Historic Ranger Dis-trict. One additional option forconsideration should be closingthe road at that point. There area number of excellent reasons forcombining the planning for aroad terminus at a point wherethe NPS has traditionally had amanagement presence. HighBridge seems a logical terminusof the road for administrative andinterpretive purposes. It mini-

mizes the need to develop furthervisitor services, e.g., parking andturn-around facilities, toilets, etc.,at points farther up the road.

3. Consider Deleting NPS Pro-posed Alternatives 1 and 2. Theenvironmental impact analysis re-quired for major federal projectsunder the National Environmen-tal Policy Act seeks that the agencyanalyze a wide suite of alternativesbut allows for the agency to de-termine practicability as one cri-terion in putting bookends on thebreadth of alternatives consid-ered. It is wasteful to use tax dol-lars to analyze alternatives that arenot practical. According to costestimates displayed in the requestfor comments, the $6.6 million-dollar price tag for rebuilding theroad [Alternative 1] and the un-stated but likely high cost of re-building the road as seen in Al-ternative 2 are not in the practi-cal range. Further, the environ-mental impacts and costs of miti-gating these alternatives are enor-mous [that is 14,000 one-waytrips on the Stehekin Road bydump trucks capable of carrying10 cubic yards of large rock pertrip plus more trips for finer ma-terial]. Thus, it does not seemthat the NPS is required to con-sider these further. Finally, NEPArequires that Alternatives underconsideration are legal. Alterna-tive 2 is illegal under the 1988Washington Parks Wilderness Actas pointed out in the documentrequesting comment. In justify-ing why an alternative is includedor excluded the NPS must only ex-plain the basis for the exclusionand why that is reasonable.

4. Consider Restating Alterna-tive 4. The current alternativeseems to place a priority on ac-commodating one form of use,i.e., bicycles, over other forms ofaccess. NCCC understands thatbicycles are not permitted in Wil-derness, thus, this alternativeseeks to evaluate the feasibilityand costs associated with provid-ing this specific form of access.NCCC would request that thestatement be broadened to in-clude comparison of the bikeroute with routing suitable forother means of access.

5. List of Issues for Analysis.NCCC concurs with the partial listprovided [Wilderness, Threat-ened and Endangered Plant andAnimal Species, Visitor Use andHistoric and Prehistoric Re-sources]. Others that should beconsidered relate to the first pointmade by NCCC above relative toalternate goals and policies formanaging the upper Stehekin Val-ley area without road access.Similarly, the role of the NPS andprivate operators for public trans-portation services/shuttle servicesshould be revisited in light ofchange in access. Further, the roleof public transport in the interpre-tation of the Stehekin Valleyshould be evaluated. Compatibil-ity of visitor uses and visitor safetyare also important elements. Abil-ity to administer and consistentlyenforce management require-ments in an expanded upper val-ley configuration must be part ofthe evaluation.

In light of each of the alterna-tives it would be useful to evalu-ate the continuing erosion of theroad bed with respect to contri-bution to downstream sedimen-tation and geohazard to deter-mine if measures are necessary toreduce these hazards, i.e., puttingthe road no longer maintainedinto a long-term stable �restored�condition, removing culverts, etc.

Other issues that require analy-sis include social/cultural impactsto residents and visitors of chang-ing the terminus of the upperStehekin Road. Most importantly,the economic costs and benefitsof the project should be identified� especially in light of the ex-tremely high costs under severalof the options and the yet un-stated costs of annual mainte-nance.

Conclusion. NCCC looks for-ward to working with the NPS inevaluating the future for the up-per Stehekin valley. The naturalprocesses are reasserting theirdominance in this area and fore-closing options. At the same timethese natural processes are givingthe NPS a unique opportunity toplan for a new way of protectingand enjoying the area.


North Cascades ConservationCouncil submitted a version thesecomments on the EnvironmentalAssessment to Restore Vehicle Ac-cess on the Stehekin Valley Roadat Coon Run (Mile 9.1-10.2) inLake Chelan National RecreationArea.

We concurred with the NationalPark Service determination thatAlternative D is preferred. Con-struct an Upper Road Reroutearound the Coon Run Washout ifit can be accomplished as de-scribed and with the environmen-tal impacts assessed. We note thatthis is a more expensive routingthan the others but we wouldagree that it is more consistentwith the NPS goals of removingfacilities from the floodplain andother natural hazard areas.

NCCC has not had an oppor-tunity to visit the routes of thevarious alternatives to formulate

Coon Run Reroute

its own assessment of these im-pacts; therefore we are relying onthe information from the EA inmaking this determination. Sat-ellite photos of the area docu-ment the effect of fire manage-ment thinning, which obviouslylessens the specific impacts onvegetation and habitats from roadconstruction.

Lack of specificity in the EAgives some concerns about thefollowing points that we cannotresolve relative to Alt. D:

1. Restoration of the old road-bed is mentioned but not well de-scribed. What would be done andwhat is a time frame provided forwhen this would occur?

2. Two culverts are mentionedas part of Alt. D and their place-ment is indicated on the site mapon p. 6. These culverts are onlydescribed as �large� on the map.

Upper Stehekin Road atCarwash Falls after a 90�sflood.

SANDY WALKER PHOTO

3. Alt. D notes that it willtraverse a �debris cone� but doesnot mention the source of thedebris or whether it indicated ex-posure of the roadbed togeohazard.

4. The new Coon Run bridgeis defined as a �minimum� 50 footstructure. What would be the�maximum�?

5. There is scant discussion ofthe effect of the �causeway� at theupper end of the project and howthe road would interact with thehydrological features.

6. Is it correct to understandthat the terrace cut and the cause-way fill results in more or less abalance of material? Also, doesthe approximately 900 cu.yd. sur-face gravel from a non-localsource mean that additional ma-terial from the existing gravel pitis not required for the project?

NCCC is concerned that thisroad project is segmented froman overall assessment of hydrol-ogy and transportation on a wa-tershed-scale. This piecemeal ap-proach may be expedient in termsof decision-making but a detailedlong-term assessment is to be pre-ferred.


NCCC assessments of Forest Service EAsMARC BARDSLEY

Lowe Creek Easement forLongview Fibre

May 2, 2005

Mr. Don MaksAttn: Lowe Creek Easement Snoqualmie RangerDistrict450 Roosevelt Ave. E.Enumclaw WA 98022

Dear Mr. Maks:

I am writing to comment on the EA for theproposed Lowe Creek easement for LongviewFibre company on road 6030. The North Cas-cades Conservation Council (NCCC) stronglyopposes granting Longview Fibre an easementto use this former road, most of which has longreverted to the status of trail.

We believe rebuilding this road for the useof Longview Fibre is a terrible use of taxpayer�smoney. There is no public need for this road.Longview Fibre can well afford to develop othermeans of access to its properties. Your pro-posed action seems to be entirely designed tocut costs and generate profits for Longview Fi-bre, all at public expense. The EA fails utterlyto demonstrate any public benefit from thisaction, and fails to disclose and discuss the veryconsiderable public costs which will result. Atthe very least, a full Environmental Impact State-ment must be done to adequately disclose themany adverse effects of this project.

You claim that increased mileage of roads fordriving will be a major benefit. This is ludi-crous. There are plenty of opportunities fordriving in the Skykomish district and elsewhere.What is lacking is low elevation walking oppor-tunities. Your proposed action will eliminateone of very few low elevation walking oppor-tunities within a riparian environment in theentire central Cascades.

There is very little discussion of the manyproblems which will result from rebuilding aroad here. There is no adequate discussion ofthe likelihood of more �dispersed recreationsites� forming, and the damage these will cause.There is no discussion of the likelihood of ve-hicles driving through the sensitive spawningbeds of lower Lowe Creek. There is no discus-sion of the dangers of meth labs, toxic wastedumping, and general lawlessness which willresult. The Skykomish district does not haveadequate personnel to police the roads cur-rently open to vehicles, yet here you are pro-posing to add more mileage. Presumably, roadmaintenance would be paid by Longview Fi-

bre, not the USFS.

Your entire action here seems tailored for theexclusive benefit of Longview Fibre. The EAdoes not establish any public need for or ben-efits from this action. We urge you to adoptthe No Action alternative, and cancel this projectentirely. Marc Bardsley, President North Cas-cades Conservation council

Lake 22 TrailheadPerry Creek

May 17, 2005

Ann RisvoldDarrington Ranger District1405 Emens St.Darrington Washington 98241

Dear Ms. Risvold:

The North Cascades Conservation Council ishappy to comment on your proposed plans tomodify parking areas in the Lake 22 and PerryCreek areas.

Lake 22 Trailhead Parking Area upgrades:

1. We understand that day use in this area isvery high and that there is a perceived need foradditional parking. Our concern is that theamount of natural vegetation to be disturbedby this project should be minimized. We com-mend the USFS for proposing to leave all largetrees. We would also recommend that any in-creased parking area not be paved. The up-graded parking area at the Big Four trailhead isclearly overbuilt and should not be used as amodel in this area.

2. We support the preferred plan that wouldmake minor changes to the existing lot includ-ing removal of existing boulders and somebrush to increase the number of parking spotsby a modest amount. We also think the idea toconstruct a connector trail with Gold Basin MillPond is a good one. We suggest that upgradesto the GBMP parking area be deferred until evi-dence is collected that people will actually useit, rather than continue to park along the high-way.

3. It is also suggested that additional analy-sis be given to the upgrade of parking and safetyconsiderations at the Hemple Creek area. Ourobservations are that the area is little used andthat a more efficient use of already disturbedforest area would be to channel people andtheir cars into this area, rather than disruptionof further forest areas. A cross walk and warn-ing signs might allow quite a bit of reasonableparking.

Perry Creek TrailheadModifications:

1. We support the concept of pulling back theexisting Perry Creek Trailhead to the area of theMountain Loop.

2. Has the USFS explored the possibility ofdeveloping a parking area at the start of the PerryCreek Road and then converting the entire roadto a trail? Could this idea be stretched to in-clude the Big Four Parking lot as part of thedevelopment?

3. The value we hope to promote is minimiz-ing the conversion of lowland forests to park-ing areas. If it is possible to combine parkingareas while at the same time efficiently provid-ing reasonable recreational amenities, thatshould be the ultimate goal for both the agen-cies and the concerned public.

Thank you for your efforts to provide an en-vironmentally sensitive approach to upgradingrecreational facilities on the Mt Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest.

Helicopter use inrebuilding Milk Creek

Bridge and Suiattle RiverRoad

May 19, 2005

Mr. Jon Vanderheyden, District Rangerc/o Carol GladsjoDarrington Ranger DistrictDarrington, WA. 98241

Dear Ms. Gladsjo,

The North Cascades Conservation Council(NCCC) thanks you for the opportunity to com-ment on the proposed use of helicopters to re-build the bridge on the Milk Creek Trail overthe Suiattle River, as well as the proposed trailre-route of the Suiattle River Trail. We offer thefollowing comments:

Suiattle River BridgeBridge work over the Suiattle for the MilkCreek Trail #790

While we normally oppose any use of mecha-nized equipment in a designated wildernessarea, the NCCC is amenable to case-by-caseevaluation of such use. The reasons for usinghelicopters to facilitate bridge reconstruction arecompelling enough that in this particular case,

Continued on page 11


It�s almost enough to make a person a right-

winger: a community doesn�t want a service,

but the government is going to pay a corpora-

tion large sums of money to bring the service

to the community. Worse, the public is going

to see its money spent on a project that will

harm the community and the environment of

a nationally protected place. Meanwhile, the

project cranks forward inexorably, leaving few

opportunities for the public to have any say in

the matter.

Thanks to well-meaning New Deal policies

and the 1996 Telecommunications Act, phone

service is made available to even the most re-

mote communities, such as Stehekin, within the

North Cascades National Park Complex. Thatmysterious Universal Service Fee we pay on ourmonthly telephone bills goes toward a fund to

provide service where it isn�t otherwise profit-able to do so�such as Stehekin. It doesn�tseem to have occurred to those who drafted

these policies that there might be communi-ties that, far from being denied phone service,choose to do without it. Lack of phones, alongwith inaccessibility by road and spectacular wild

beauty, is what makes Stehekin the magicalplace it is. Although a Chelan Mirror articlegushed that Stehekin residents �crave commu-

nication,� with few exceptions, the commu-nity doesn�t want phones. A survey conductedby residents found that of 70 year-round resi-

dents queried, 42 of the 48 who responded saidthey did not want phone service. For the firsttime, the North Cascades Conservation Coun-

cil and Stehekin Heritage, a group of Stehekin

residents long opposed to Park Service enforce-

ment of environmental laws in Stehekin, find

themselves united on this issue.

So far that is being treated as irrelevant, be-cause there is a great deal of money to be made.

An entity called Weavtel has proposed to install

phone service in Stehekin, using the Universal

Service moneys. The company has been pre-

approved for loans from the U.S. Department

of Agriculture�s Rural Utilities Service and ap-plied for grants from the FCC�s Universal Ser-

vice Administration Corporation. Thanks to

these promises of money, any bank will lend

Weavtel virtually unlimited amounts of money.

Rumor in Stehekin has it that the Weavtel con-

tracts with these federal agencies are on a

Halliburton-style �cost-plus� basis. I have not

yet gotten confirmation of this from the bureau-

crats in D.C., but it would explain some of

Weavtel�s practices in Stehekin. The company

has already acquired property to build a call

center. In clearing the property, it has been

accused of illegally cutting trees from both sur-

rounding private land and public land. It may

well have to pay fines to the Park Service and

restitution to the private owners, but if its con-

tracts are cost-plus, such fines perversely will

add to, rather than subtract from, its profits. This

bodes ill of its future behavior, if the company

digs lines throughout the valley and constructs

several large towers, as proposed.

The best hope of forestalling this unwantedproject is thanks to the National Environmen-tal Policy Act�s requirement for public input. The

Park Service recently issued an environmentalassessment of the project. Because the phoneproject would involve laying lines through Park

Service property, the Park could stop the projectby denying permission to do so. Although aswe go to press, the deadline for comments wasJune 30, the NCCC and others are requesting

extensions, to allow for all to weigh in on thisimportant matter. Read the assessment onlineat the Park Service�s planning and public com-

ment website,

http://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?projectId=12528.

Request that the Park Service deny Weavtelpermits to build this project.

Unfortunately, as written, the assessment ig-

nores the real issues. This project would for-

ever alter the environment of the valley, chang-

ing the character of a place set aside by Con-

gress as a place apart. A major reason the Parkwas created was to prevent plans to put a road

into Stehekin; installation of a branch of the

information superhighway would be just as

much of a threat to the valley. Park Service hasthe authority to grant rights-of-way for utilities,

but it has a responsibility first to protect the

land under its jurisdiction as Congress man-dated. This project would threaten the valley�s

wildness and the community�s character, there

is no need for it and no demand for it. The ParkService has no reason to grant the permits and

every reason to deny them. Help convince them

of this.

Information Superhighway Threatens StehekinCAROLYN MCCONNELL

we support the plan as put forth.

We strongly encourage the Forest Service torestrict flying to mid-week (not Friday throughMonday) and make every effort to reduce thenumber of flights if at all possible. Please notethat our support of this plan is by no means anacceptance of wilderness helicopter use in gen-eral, or in any other specific proposal.

Suiattle River Trail #784 re-routeWe acknowledge the use of the rock-drill

might reduce environmental impact by reduc-ing the numbers of people, and the time spent,but we question the scope of the project in thefirst place.

As one of our board members pointed out,it is interesting that kilometers of tunneling forrailroads was successfully completed morethan a century ago without the use of modernrock-drills. The North Cascades ConservationCouncil questions the need to re-route the trailto a position that requires such extensive blast-ing, especially considering first area (�reloca-tion A�) is 2,666 feet in length. This is one-halfmile. The second re-route (�relocation B�) isone-half mile past relocation A. It seems thatthe two relocations are proximate enough tocombine and perhaps alleviate the need for somuch blasting.

Additionally, consideration should be givento a narrower trail prism in the re-route areasto reduce the amount of blasting.

The use of mechanized equipment in a wil-derness area for the sake of expediency is nota legitimate reason to employ such equipment.We do recognize the benefits of such tools inthis instance, but believe the job can be donewith far less drilling and blasting than is cur-rently proposed. As noted before, we are will-ing to examine exceptions (the use of mecha-nized equipment) on a case-by-case basis inwilderness areas; and in this case we believe acompromise can be achieved that reduces theneed for rock-drilling equipment, and in do-ing so mitigates the impact on the wildernessresource.

Thank you for the opportunity to commenton the proposed plans. We look forward toworking with the U.S. Forest Service to pre-serve and protect our natural resources in thefuture.

NCCC assessments of ForestService EAsContinued from page 10


Deep Underground Science and the Icicle Valley� DUSEL �

WICK HAXTON

We are grateful to the NorthCascades Conservation Councilfor the opportunity to provide an-other perspective on the DeepUnderground Science and Engi-neering Laboratory. DUSEL-Cas-cades is a proposal by the Univer-sity of Washington, on behalf of 39educational institutions, to createa new laboratory to advance ourunderstanding of basic physics andastrophysics, to inventory the mi-crobial life that thrives in the deepsubsurface, to study the subsurfaceprocesses that influence surfacehydrology, biology, and geochem-istry, and to design ultrapure ma-terials important to future micro-electronics.

Some of the research is drivenby intellectual curiosity. We havediscovered, over the past severalyears, that all of the matter famil-iar to us � the earth, our sun, anddistant galaxies � accounts foronly 4% of the total mass and en-ergy of our universe. The remain-ing 96% is �dark,� unknown andinvisible, but coexisting with us.We know of its presence throughits gravity � an invisible hand thathas shaped the form of everythingwe see in the night sky. We believeit will be possible to identify thismatter by building a new kind ofobservatory deep underground,away from the effects of cosmicrays that interfere with observa-tions on the surface of the earth.

Other research is immediatelyrelevant to the stewardship of ourworld. DUSEL will allow earth sci-entists to conduct long-term stud-ies of the changes occurring insubsurface water and in the cyclingand transport of carbon and nitro-gen. The Cascades site will providethe first opportunity to monitorthe hydrology of an entire moun-tain ecosystem over a multi-decadeperiod. Such information is crucialin helping policy-makers under-stand and respond responsibly tothe changes mankind is inducingin the environment.

Mount Cashmere in the MountStuart batholith is one of six pro-posed DUSEL sites now underconsideration by the National Sci-ence Foundation, the federalagency that would sponsor thelaboratory. The site�s remarkabletopography resulted from ice-ageglaciers sawing into the heart ofthis granite mass, creating theIcicle Valley. The batholith is alsohome to seven tunnels, includingthe 8-mile Great Cascade Tunnel,the nation�s longest; the 5.3-mileunlined Pioneer Tunnel, a remark-able geological laboratory for as-sessing properties of the deeprock; and the Snow Lakes watertunnel, an excavation on the ridgethat includes Mount Cashmere.The competence of the granite, theunusually favorable access, and theexceptional engineering and geo-logic databases were the reasonsthe Cascades site was identified ina national search.

When the site was identified, theUW began a program of outreachto the public. Our discussions in-cluded local and state-wide envi-ronmental and recreation groups,local communities, residents livingalong Icicle Creek Road, groupsconcerned with watershed stew-ardship, and local educators andtheir students. Meetings occurredas town forums, in the homes ofresidents, and with public agen-cies. UW graduate students visitedlocal schools to discuss science,and school groups toured our fa-cilities at the UW. Over 80 publicmeetings were held in the past 1.5years. A comprehensive �pre-pro-posal� � a 300-page document de-scribing the project�s scientific andeducational motivation, construc-tion plan, timeline, permitting pro-cess, and mitigation plan � wasprepared for and released to thepublic in May 2004. Our groupincorporated into the pre-pro-posal many community sugges-tions for avoiding and mitigatinglaboratory impacts and for inte-

grating DUSEL into the commu-nity. Examples of the latter includeimproved public transportation,public-private partnerships for cre-ating affordable housing, and pro-grams to address specific educa-tional needs in Chelan County.The pre-proposal became the ba-sis for a Citizens Advisory Commit-tee study of DUSEL-Cascades,which in turn led to a recommen-dation by the Port of Chelan, theCounty�s economic developmentagency, to encourage proponentsto submit a proposal to the NSF.

The UW�s public outreach isperhaps unique among large de-velopment projects in that the UWsought public input at the earliestpossible stage, at the time basicproject concepts were in develop-ment. Our intent was to invitepublic participation in the concep-tual design of the project, so thatthe project could reflect a largervision of Chelan County�s future.We continue to hope that thesesteps have laid the foundation forwelcoming scientists and studentsto the County as new neighborsand friends.

The DUSEL-Cascades proposal,submitted to the NSF on 28 Feb-ruary 2005, describes three com-ponents:

� A very deep, ultraclean under-ground laboratory would be builtunder Forest Service land by tun-neling three miles from IcicleCreek Road to Mount Cashmere.The laboratory at the tunnel endswould house several observatoriesthat pipe data to the surface by fi-ber. In response to communityrequests to minimize impact, allutilities and parking would be un-derground, and dark skies wouldbe maintained. The most visiblesurface feature of the laboratorywould be the 20-foot tunnel open-ing in a rock face. Scientists andstudents would be transportedfrom the science campus to thelaboratory by electric shuttle, as

internal combustion engines arenot compatible with thelaboratory�s cleanliness standards.

� A science campus, to be builton a commercial site in the county,between the towns of Peshastinand Leavenworth. This is the maincenter of activity. The campuswould be a regional model for(LEED certifiable) sustainability.The conceptual design, by the ar-chitectural firm Mithun Partners, ismodeled after IslandWood, theenvironmental learning center onBainbridge Island. The sciencecampus would provide office, re-search, and administrative facilitiesfor about 35 permanent and 100visiting scientists (faculty, post-doc-toral researchers, and graduateand undergraduate students) andabout 65 support staff (computerstaff, technicians, machinists,draftsman, secretarial support).Typically two-thirds of the supportstaff for such a facility are hiredfrom the local community. Manyof the students would be Washing-ton residents.

� A visitor center, to be sited ei-ther near Leavenworth or else-where in the county, to focus onK-12 teacher enhancement, K-12and public outreach, distance edu-cation, and university/local collegepartnerships to increase access tohigher education in an under-served region of our state. The pro-posed facility is modeled afterBerkeley�s Lawrence Hall of Sci-ence. We estimate that the centerwould draw approximately250,000 visitors per year. Currenttourism in Leavenworth accountsfor about 1.1 million annual visi-tors. There are opportunities forcoordinating visitor center activi-ties with those of two other areascience-oriented facilities, the newAudubon Center and the NationalFish Hatchery.

The institutions responsible forDUSEL � the National Science



Foundation and the University ofWashington � have exemplaryrecords of working for the publicgood. The National Science Foun-dation, the proposed DUSEL spon-sor, has supported basic researchand education within America�scolleges and universities for thepast 55 years. It is deeply involvedwith the training of undergradu-ate and graduate students as sci-entists, and with public educationprograms to help equip citizens tomake informed decisions in an in-creasingly technical world. TheUW will hold the US Forest Serviceuse permit for the undergroundlaboratory, build and maintain thescience campus and visitor center,and be responsible for health,safety, and the environment. Itsoversight committees will be pub-lic and include citizen representa-tion. The UW has an establishedrecord for responsible oversight:of the university�s 27 off-campusresearch facilities, approximatelyone-third are operated on USFS,National Park, or other public/tribal lands under similar use per-mits.

The UW recognizes that 2.6years of DUSEL construction willhave temporary negative impactson the Icicle Valley. The rock haul-age will increase traffic on theCounty and USFS portions of IcicleCreek Road by 4% and 16%, re-spectively. Five miles of USFS road-way must be strengthened in con-junction with the burying of apower transmission line and fibercommunications. During con-struction a staging area will beneeded near the portal, locatedoutside a nearby riparian area by acreek that has been proposed forrecreational designation.

We have approached these prob-lems on several levels. Direct miti-gation includes all feasible engi-neering steps to reduce impacts.In the case of the trucking, this in-cludes modern trucks using low-sulfur fuels, careful scheduling andcaravanning of trucks, preserva-tion of quiet hours, covered loads,and wheel washes. While roadbedimprovements are necessary, the

USFS believes the project requiresno widening or straightening ofthe roadway. Representatives ofthe Access Fund, a climbing advo-cacy group, have agreed to helpthe UW inventory roadside climb-ing rocks, to help guard againstany construction-associated dam-age. We will encourage Icicle resi-dents to take advantage of ourburied power line to remove ex-isting overhead power lines thatdetract from recreational areas likethe Snow Lakes trailhead. The por-tal area, until recently in privatehands, was clearcut before it wastransferred to the USFS. We haveproposed extraordinary steps, de-scribed in the pre-proposal, tominimize the size of the stagingarea and the visibility of the con-struction, so that our work doesnot exacerbate past damage. Theportal is on an existing USFS road:no new road construction is re-quired.

In addition, the UW has beenworking with major environmen-tal groups to formulate a broaderplan for mitigation to compensatefor our use of the national forest.We are advocating the expansionof the DUSEL electric shuttle sys-tem to include recreational usersof the valley. The goals are to re-duce traffic and parking while im-proving air quality, which is impor-tant to DUSEL. We are also work-ing to forge a partnership withexisting lands programs to reducefuture development on private in-holdings within the national for-est.

We believe the proposal to siteDUSEL on national forest land isfully consistent with the intendedpurposes of these public lands.Public science and education,along with scenic, recreational,historic, and wilderness values, arecited as justifications for preserv-ing and protecting public lands, inthe major founding statutes. TheNorth Cascades ConservationCouncil�s mission �To protect andpreserve the North Cascades� sce-nic, scientific, recreational, edu-cational, and wilderness values�also acknowledges these pur-

poses. During its expected 40-yearoperational lifetime, DUSEL willhave little impact on other usersof the national forest. Laboratoryactivities will be undetectable fromthe surface, apart from the imme-diate vicinity of the portal. Eventhere, DUSEL will not significantlyrestrict any other public uses.When DUSEL is finished, the usepermit will require us to removeall evidence of our use. Finally, asignificant portion of DUSEL re-search � its hydrology and asso-ciated environmental science, itsinventory of subsurface microbiallife � will provide new knowledgeimportant to the stewardship ofpublic lands. It is likely that someof this research will strengthen ar-guments for such preservation.

There have been claims of haz-ards associated with DUSEL thathave, in our view, misled andfrightened members of the public.We have not yet applied for per-mits or entered into the public re-view phase of the project. Whenthe review phase begins, the agen-cies charged with protecting pub-lic lands and public welfare willrationally evaluate all such claims.We emphasize that the purpose ofDUSEL is to create an environmentcompletely devoid of the trace ra-dioactivities and other contami-nants found everywhere on theearth�s surface. Furthermore,safety and environmental stan-dards for university research are farmore stringent than those of thecommercial world. Double con-tainment of all fluids has been aUS scientific standard for two de-cades: this is the reason we havebeen able to work for the past fiftyyears in a variety of US under-ground sites without any environ-mental incidents. Finally, we stressthat the materials used under-ground are generally benign andcan be found in virtually every ur-ban physics department and inmany hospitals. The noble gasseswe use are minor components ofair and do not react. The mosthazardous material is scintillatorfluid, a hydrocarbon similar togasoline. Far more hazardous

materials, in far larger volumes,with far less monitoring are trans-ported by truck and rail throughvirtually every community everyday. This includes the 50 tons ofgasoline carried in the tanks of the1100 cars that travel along theIcicle daily.

A previous NCCC newsletter(The Wild Cascades) included anarticle from the Icicle Valley Pro-tection Alliance, a group that wasformed to oppose DUSEL. We be-lieve that article is misguided:DUSEL�s educational and scientificobjectives and our individual re-sponsibilities to preserve and pro-tect public lands are compatiblegoals. There is much to be gainedfrom working together to reachthese goals, as the project evolves.This evolution includes a verythoughtful process for indepen-dent review and evaluation of theproject, with full public participa-tion, as established by NEPA andSEPA. This will provide a factual,unbiased examination of all as-pects of the project. The processis designed to be fair to the appli-cants while also safeguarding pub-lic lands for the use of current andfuture generations. The UW hopesNCCC members will recognizeboth the importance of basic re-search and education to society,and the extent of our efforts towork cooperatively with the envi-ronmental and recreational com-munities.

Our group would welcome op-portunities to talk with the NCCCor with its individual members.

The DUSEL-Cascades Office

Box 351273

University of Washington

Seattle, WA 98195-1273

(206) 897-1755

www.int.washington.edu/DUSEL/cascades.html

Continued from page 12


The North Cascades Conservation Councilcannot and does not lay claim to the scientificcompetence to pass judgment on the Univer-sity of Washington�s proposed Deep Under-ground Science and Engineering Laboratory onstrictly technical matters. We cannot saywhether the attributes of the proposed MountCashmere site are superior to those of com-peting sites as regards the scientific objectivesof the laboratory. Such judgments are for Dr.Haxton�s scientific peers, and the National Sci-ence Foundation, which will decide whetheror not this site has more to offer than the com-peting proposals.

NCCC has not taken any formal position foror against the DUSEL project, but it is probablyfair to say that most of the Board members ob-ject to the placement of such a facility below afederally designated Wilderness, in this case theAlpine Lakes Wilderness. A sister group, theAlpine Lakes Protection Society, has decided toformally oppose it. The backers of the MountCashmere proposal say that the facility will bedeep underground, as its name implies, andthere will be no visible evidence of it aboveground in the Wilderness. Maybe so, but it willnonetheless be there, and will set a bad prece-dent for not only the Alpine Lakes but all otherWildernesses. DUSEL is big science, and wereit proposed for somewhere else NCCC wouldlikely wish it well. But it is proposed for belowa Wilderness, which designation is supposedto be the strongest and most permanent landprotection in American law. If Big Science canbend the rules to dig below a Wilderness, thenwhy not Big Mining? Or anyone else?

We have yet to be convinced that the needfor this facility, in this place, is so overwhelm-

Proposed NCCC Response to DuselRICK MCGUIRE

ing as to justify bending the Wilderness Act toaccommodate it. Mount Cashmere is not theonly competitor as a DUSEL site. There areother places, such as existing deep mines inSouth Dakota and Colorado, outside of Wilder-ness areas, which are also contenders for host-ing the facility. It stands to reason that it maybe less expensive to use existing mines ratherthan digging a brand new tunnel, and it maybe that these sites raise fewer objections fromnearby residents. We can�t offer any expert opin-ion on the suitability of the rock at the compet-ing sites for shielding the facility. That job isfor the National Science Foundation, and Con-gress, who will judge the competing proposalson their scientific merits, and economics.

The DUSEL proposal has generated plentyof local opposition from people who object toit not only because of the intrusion into theWilderness, but because of the increased traf-fic, noise, possible pollution, and other ill ef-fects which it may produce. There is a strong,and growing, feeling that Leavenworth and theIcicle Valley in particular is not the right placefor such a large facility.

It is not necessary to repeat all the argumentsagainst DUSEL here, but check out the excel-lent website of the Icicle Valley Protection Alli-ance, www.iciclevalley.org.

Dr. Haxton is an articulate proponent ofDUSEL, and obviously believes that MountCashmere is the best place for it. We have yetto be convinced. We believe that the other pro-posed sites deserve full investigation. It�s veryunlikely that NCCC will endorse constructionof such a facility beneath a federally designatedWilderness.

The Anchorage Daily News reported in Junethat Rich and Kathy Huffman, kayaking theHulahula River, were in their tent, in their sleep-ing bags, when they were victims of �a rare, un-provoked attack by a predatory grizzly.� BruceBartley of the Department of Fish and Gamesaid, �It just hardly ever happens.� North SlopeBorough Search and Rescue tracked and killedthe bear and took the body to Fairbanks for anecropsy to try to determine why the bear didit.

Some years ago a National Park ranger no-ticed an abandoned kayaker camp on the salt-water, investigated, and found nothing left ofthe missing kayaker but his feet � in his boots.Tracked and killed, the responsible bear wasfound to be very skinny, which led officials tospeculate that it was hungry. The Hulahula bearwas a healthy, well-fed 300 pounds and onlyincompletely devoured the Huffmans.

The News said that about six people a yearare injured by bear attacks in Alaska, two-thirdsof them hunters. Every other year, on average,a death results, as when a brown bear is sur-prised in wilderness (the reason some hikerswear �bear bells� on boots) or is protecting itsyoung or a fresh kill.

Bartley pointed out that attacks are few, �Con-sidering there are people all over Alaska�s bearhabitat, some 35,000 or so brown bears andthree times as many blacks. If they wanted toeat you, they would. We�d lose an Alaskan ev-ery day of the week.�

Alaska loses hundreds of bears a year, theslaughter rate always spiking after a widely pub-licized attack. Every killing or wounding inAlaska stirs atavistic furies in other states. The�wildlife recovery zones� proposed for theNorth Cascades embody a central ethic of �wil-derness� as defined by mainstream environ-mentalism. However, in eddies and backwa-ters linger what might be called �Red State en-vironmentalists� who believe wild animalsshould be permitted in the domain of hardhat-maintained trails only if they behave themselves.

Rebel yells are heard insisting that the Na-tional Wilderness Act of 1964 be amended toencompass Wilderness With Wheels. So toothere is a cry to establish Wilderness WithoutBears.

To which the proper response is: �Shame.�

� H.M.

NOT MAN APARTA Grizzly Story

Tunnel affects water tables inGran Sasso region of Italy

In 1993 a highway tunnel and adjacent neutrino lab were dug through the GranSasso mountain range in central Italy. What was perhaps unanticipated is that the tun-nel and lab act as a drain for the water table of the mountain. Ten workers were killed bythe outpouring and the water table in the mountain was dramatically lowered by 800meters, to the tunnel level. The tunnels empty 3050 liters of water per second from themountain. Three rivers with their source on the mountain have reduced flows: the TavoRiver by 70%, the Tinno River by 16% and the Enel River by 18%, as certified in March1999 in a National Geologic Service report.

Deep lab nuclear physicists at Gran Sasso are pushing for a third tunnel to satisfygrowing demand for new scientific experiments there. But the communities that havelost their water say no, joining environmental groups and agencies in the �Committeefor the Protection of the Waters of Gran Sasso. �On December 20, 2003, protests by1500 people in Pescara, 700 in Teramo and 100 in L�Aquila said �No� to a third tunnel atGran Sasso. In 2001 there were 10,000 protesters in Pescara, 7000 in Teramo and 1000in L�Aquila. Yet, they say, the scientists continue to push for their lab expansion.


DAVID S. BRODERSyndicated Columnist,Seattle Times

SNOQUALMIE, WASH. � When summer

visitors come to the viewing platform to see

Snoqualmie Falls, one of Washington�s main

tourist attractions, few of them realize they are

also looking at an example of a unique and

successful land-management and planning ex-

ercise.

The falls are backed by over 100 acres of lush

and unscarred green forest, once destined for

commercial and housing development by

Puget Western Inc. and the city of Snoqualmie.

But the Cascade Land Conservancy, a privatenonprofit, stepped in and bought the prop-erty for $13.3 million.

It was something of a gamble, said conser-vancy president Gene Duvernoy, because thesum was twice the net worth of his organiza-

tion. �We were a little over our skis,� he said.But having nursed the organization throughits first four years from its start in 1989, work-ing out of the attic of his house, the former

New Yorker was accustomed to improvising.

His strategy was to �solve the problem byenlarging it.� He first approached

Weyerhaeuser, which had recently built 3,000homes on a nearby tract.

Duvernoy struck a deal. The conservancy

went to the city fathers and persuaded themto let Weyerhaeuser build Phase 2 now, rather

than wait 20 years in return for the company

financing the percent of the purchase price of

the tract behind the falls. He then went to King

County officials and got them to transfer de-

velopment rights on 3,000 acres of land along

Highway 18, that the county wanted to pro-

tect, to the Phase 2 land, allowing more den-

sity of housing. The county in turn transferredthe 3,000 acres to the conservancy for safekeep-

ing.

When Duvernoy walked me through the

transaction on a recent visit to the falls, he

called it a �win-win-win-win deal� for the city,

the county, the company and his own agenda.It reflected �the unbridled strain of civic com-

mitment in our region, with progressive busi-

ness leaders, talented elected leadership andengaged citizens,� he said.

Now, the conservancy is testing that com-

The Cascade Land Conservancy �Falling for the Cascade Agenda

mitment with an enormously ambitious plan,

made public last month, called the Cascade

Agenda. The plan, looking ahead to a century

of growth expected to double the population

in a four-county region, aims to make almost

1.3 million acres of forests, farms and stream

beds in the cascades foothills � an area 24

times the size of Seattle � permanently off-lim-

its to developers. And it aims to foster the

healthy growth of the cities and towns within

the region.

The agenda, hammered out in a year-long

series of community forums, relies less on regu-

lation than on market-based tools, notably

swaps of development rights of the kind exem-plified by the Snoqualmie transactions.

The project is expensive � about $7 billionin current dollars � because it requires com-pensating landowners who give up develop-

ment rights on their property. But the creatorsof the blueprint say it can be financed in phasesby boosting the annual local and state govern-

ment expenditures for conservation, now esti-mated at $50 million a year, to $70 million.

Because the acquisition of developmentrights would ideally come in the early stages of

he process, the conservancy is backing legisla-

tion in Congress that would allow groups like

itself to issue tax-exempt bonds. Bills for that

purpose have passed both the House and Sen-

ate, but never reached the President�s desk.

While the emphasis is on preserving the natu-

ral environment that accounts for the region�s

appeal, and the farms and orchards that were

there long before such industries as Boeing and

Microsoft appeared on the scene, the agenda

recognizes its essential urban component.

�We can only succeed at this conservation

vision if our cities and towns really become

magnets for our region�s future populationgrowth,� Duvernoy wrote in a recent newspa-per op-ed. �If cities and towns truly become

family-friendly, with good roads and schoolsand nearby jobs so that we want to live withinthem and not outside them, the pressure on

our critical landscapes will be at a level ourmarket-based strategies can manage.�

The scale and ambition of this project makeit nationally significant. That it has even the

possibility of success speaks volumes about thecharacter of this region and its leadership.

The Past is Present on SiDuring the Great American Burn of 1910, when it seemed all

the forests of the West were in flames, and the U.S. Forest Servicetook on its fire-suppression mission (for which we now are pay-ing the piper), Mount Si was burned bottom to top, except for thegrove that survived at Snag Flats. The new forest we see at theparking lot could pass for 120-year-olds. Up higher, some doesn�tlook a day over 40. At the very high end, trees established slowly,essentially meadow colonization, as is still going on east ofTeneriffe.

�KEVIN GERAGHTY


SEATTLE � Cascade Land Con-servancy (CLC) and Commis-sioner of Public Lands DougSutherland today announced thepurchase of the Crown LakesProperty for inclusion in the Mt.Si Natural Resources Conserva-tion Area (NRCA). The property,nearly a full section of land (597acres), is unique in having a west-facing basin that contains threelarge alpine lakes, Lake Moolock,Lake Nadeau, and SMC (short for�South Meandering Corner�)Lake, immediately accessible tothe Seattle metropolitan area.

�This property will be a popu-lar addition to the Mt. Si conser-vation area, and will be an excel-lent complement to the Moun-tains to Sound Greenway,� saidSutherland. �I am proud of themany groups and of my staff whomade it possible to add this pieceto the dwindling legacy of unde-veloped forestland in KingCounty. Conservation lands andworking forests help preserve theimportant balance between thenatural landscape and developedland in areas that are rapidlygrowing.�

The property is highly prizedfor its recreation and habitat val-ues, scenic lakes and spectacularviews that span the SnoqualmieTree Farm, the cities of Bellevueand Seattle, all the way to theOlympic Mountains. The prop-erty offers connections to theMiddle Fork Snoqualmie recre-ation area and the Alpine LakesWilderness Area. This acquisitionwas achieved through a partner-ship between the Department ofNatural Resources and CascadeLand Conservancy.

�The Mount Si NRCA is a re-gional treasure that we in KingCounty have an opportunity toenjoy every day,� noted KingCounty Executive Ron Sims.�Crown Lakes is an incredible ad-dition to the system of conserved

Crown Lakes to be added toMount Si Natural Resource Conservation Area

Nearly 600 acres with three lakes will provide habitat and scenic views in popular recreation area

lands in our community.�

The land was purchased fromCrown Lakes, LLC, for$4,250,000. Funds for the pur-chase come from WashingtonWildlife and Recreation Program(WWRP) land acquisition grants.CLC has been negotiating thepurchase of this property for sev-eral years. In August, CrownLakes, LLC finally agreed to sellthe property, with the require-ment that the transaction beclosed by mid-December and thatthe Crown Lakes LLC retain lim-ited rights to remove talus rockfrom a 30-acre area isolated fromthe majority of the property by aprominent ridgeline.

In a step that recognizes thechallenges now faced by publicagencies in funding land manage-ment, CLC and State DNR havecommitted to a collaborative ef-fort to steward the property andcreate trail linkages to publiclyaccessible trailheads in the area.

�Crown Lakes merits the high-est level of stewardship,� saidGene Duvernoy, President ofCLC. �The DNR�s Natural AreasProgram staff are expert in caringfor our state�s most fragile eco-

Mount Baker Wild! Summer HikesThe summer hiking schedule for Mount Baker Wild! and sign-up details are available at: www.mtbakerwild.org. Or give KenWilcox a call at 360-733-7014 for more information. Hikes arefree and open to the public as always.

You can also volunteer on the website to help out with a varietyof tasks, such as tabling at events or easy data collection whileyou�re on the trail. Mount Baker Wild! is dedicated to winningpark or wilderness protection for most remaining roadlessareas in the region, including Sauk Mountain and the largestblock of unprotected roadless area (mostly old-growth forest)remaining in the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest.

View from Sauk Mountain �KEN WILCOX

systems � we are honored tohave an opportunity to collabo-rate with them in the care of thisspectacular property.�

Cascade LandConservancy

Cascade Land Conservancy is aprivate, nonprofit land trust work-ing in King, Snohomish andPierce counties in Washington. It

collaborates with individual land-owners, organizations, and localgovernments to protect and stew-ard the Puget Sound region�s wet-lands, shorelines, forests, wildlifeand rare plant habitat, stream cor-ridors, and urban open spaces.Established in 1989, it has pro-tected thousands of acres of land,and are currently negotiating toprotect many thousands more.


June 17, 2005

WASHINGTON � The ForestService is eliminating $5 and $10recreation fees it charges at about5300 picnic areas and trailheads� including 69 in Washington �after outdoor enthusiasts andWestern lawmakers complained.

Ken Fischman of Sandpoint,Idaho, said the governmentshouldn�t charge fees for visiting

The Retreat from Fee DemoForest Service Cuts Fees at Sites

Western Washington Trailheads, Picnic Areas Benefit

any national forest since peoplepay taxes to maintain them.

�These fees discriminateagainst low-income workers andfamilies,� said Fischman, who be-longs to a coalition of outdoor en-thusiasts, environmentalists andsportsmen circulating a petitionurging Congress to repeal thefees. Legislatures in at least threestates � Oregon, Montana and

Colorado � have passed similarresolutions.

Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), alongtime critic of the fee program,said he was �vehemently opposedto the Forest Service charging citi-zens to park at undevelopedtrailheads with a dirt pullout, onebattered picnic table and a de-crepit outhouse.�

Interior and Forest Service of-ficials acknowledged that the fees� instituted on a trial basis in1996 and renewed every twoyears since � are unpopular.

A law pushed by the Bush ad-ministration and signed by thePresident in December grantedlong-term authority for the once-temporary fees at recreation sites.

The FS�s implementation oftheir new Recreation Access Tax(RAT) is not going well for them.On some National Forests, suchas the Deschutes here in Oregon,as many as half of all fee sites failto meet the requirement set forthin the law. Simply put, the FS iscurrently charging fees at recre-ation sites where it has NO au-thority to do so. In so doing, theFS is defying the intent of the USCongress who, many will recall,gave the recreating public its as-surances that fees would only becharged Where, When and If cer-tain specified requirements weremet.

Many in Congress have an in-kling that problems exist, but noone yet knows the full extent towhich the FS is abusing the RAT.That�s where we need your help.We�d like your assistance ingroundtruthing this ever-conten-tious and always-unpopular pro-gram!

Appended is a easy-to-completesite survey. Every time you visit aFS fee site, please complete a freshform. You can print and mail themto me or you can use e-mail, if youprefer. It matters not how you getme the info, but it is vital that asteady steam of completed sur-veys begins to flow quickly and

Help Fight RAT by Completing and Mailing FS Site Surveysto Scott Silver, Wild Wilderness

Survey of U.S. Forest Service Recreation Fee Sites(Instructions: CHECK ALL APPLICABLE RESPONSES)

Site Name: _________________________________________________

Name of National Forest: _____________________________________

Location: __________________________________________________

Is site used for: Camping Trailhead Picnicking OHV/4WD Use Hiking Boating General Access Other

IF �Other� describe __________________________________________

Yes No Is this site a �destination� visitor or interpretivecenter? IF YES, does it provide a �broad range� of interpretive services,programs and media? Yes No

Is this site a: National Conservation Area National Volcanic Monument

Does this site have the following? Designated developed parking Permanent toilet facility Permanent trash receptacle Interpretive sign, exhibit, or

kiosk Picnic tables Security services

Does this site encompass: Multiple access points A travel corridor Multiple �sites�

Does this site in effect charge a fee for: General access or entrance Dispersed or backcountry areas Roads or trails Sole access to a river, trail, lake

Does this site in effect charge a fee for: Solely driving, walking, boating, horseback riding or

hiking through the area without using the facilities and services

Does this site in effect require a fee for: Parking, undesignated parking, or picnicking along roads or trailsides Camping at undeveloped sites Use of overlooks or scenic pull-

outs Yes No Are there non-fee access points or non-fee recre-

ation areas within 1/4 mile?

Date of site survey: __________________________________________

Your name and contact information: ___________________________

__________________________________________________________

continues to flow throughout thesummer of �05. I will make cer-tain that this valuable informationfinds its way into the right hands.

Please help, please forward thismessage as you wish � andthanks so much!

�SCOTTScott Silver

Wild Wilderness, 248 NWWilmington Ave., Bend, OR

97701

541-385-5261,[email protected],

www.wildwilderness.org


The North Cascades ConservationCouncil normally focuses on issues di-rectly related to the Cascade Mountainsof Washington. There are good reasonsfor this and we have developed a repu-tation for �watching the store� with ourfriends in other environmental groups.Occasionally an issue comes along out-of-state or out-of-our-area that will havea direct impact on our own North Cas-cades. Unfortunately, one of these is-sues has popped up.

In the middle of Idaho is an area many of ushave probably heard of or perhaps visited onceor twice. It is the Sawtooth National RecreationArea. A portion of this NRA is composed oftwo subranges of mountains called the Boul-der and White Clouds Mountains. When theNRA was created in 1972, Congress designatedabout half the Boulder-White Clouds as a Wil-derness Study Area. In 1987 and 1989, the USFSand BLM recommended that about 250,000acres be designated wilderness. In 1983 Idahocitizens proposed a Wilderness area of 460,000acres, later upgraded in 1990 to about 500,000acres. For many of the usual reasons, none ofthese proposals resulted in even one acre ofcongressionally mandated wilderness.

In May of 2005, local Idaho CongressmanMike Simpson introduced HR 2514, aka Cen-tral Idaho Economic Development and Recre-ation Act (CIEDRA). This bill would, amongother things, designate somewhat less than300,00 acres of Wilderness, memorialize off-road vehicle use in much of the remainder, takeaway federal water rights and, possibly the mostdisturbing, give away up to 3,000 acres of fed-

Threat Looming for theBoulder White Cloud Mountains � Sawtooth NRA

MARC BARDSLEY

eral land to local governments for resale todevelopers. The federal land involved in thegiveaway, as you might expect, just happens tobe in prime wildlife habitat.

A few environmental organizations such asthe Wilderness Society and the Idaho Conser-vation League have endorsed the bill but withqualifying statements that some of the moreegregious problems remain to be worked dur-ing the legislative process. Many other localand regional organizations have come out inopposition to CIEDRA. It is understandablethat groups fighting for wilderness all theseyears feel pushed into the position of wantingprotection for at least some of the area. Wehere in our part of the Northwest certainlyknow that feeling. We can imagine the feelingof helplessness as ORVs continue to run ram-pant in these pristine areas of Idaho. The urgeto sacrifice forever a bit of a great place in or-der to save the rest could be very tempting.

The precedent here must not be overlooked,however. Giving away existing federal land,some of it purchased recently for its wildlifevalues, in order to get something very differ-ent in return, is a dramatic change in a strategy.The strategy that has worked for the conserva-tionist movement over the years has been tocompromise with the other side by acceptingless than what we want, with the right to goback later and fix the problem. Giving the landaway means it is unlikely to ever be available.It takes little imagination to see this exact sce-nario taking place in one of our local economi-cally challenged rural areas.

The NCCC has determined that it is thebest interests of our region to opposeCIEDRA and the concept of land giveawaysfor certain congressional promises that wehave now seen can be taken back quite eas-ily. Consequently, the NCCC has signedon to an open letter to Congress that op-poses the Central Idaho Economic Devel-opment and Recreation Act (HR 2514).

If you are as upset by this precedent-set-ting land grab as I am, please write to yourcongressman and oppose HR 2514 unlessmajor revisions are made to change ORVuse, protect federal water rights, and notgive away federal Land.

This 8.3 acre parcel of public land in the Sawtooth National Recreation Area was purchasedby U.S. taxpayers in 1989 for preservation. Under the CIEDRA, this land would be privatizedas would a total of 2,000 to 3,000 acres.

Photo � JOHN OSBORN, M.D., courtesy Western Lands Project

For more information:

Western Lands Project

PO Box 95545

Seattle, WA 98145-2545

Phone 206-325-3503

Fax 206-325-3515

www.westernlands.org


Middle Fork Snoqualmie ATM Planreleased

The Snoqualmie district of the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest has released thelong-awaited revised Decision Notice for theMiddle Fork Snoqualmie Access and TravelManagement (ATM) plan. Regular readers ofThe Wild Cascades will recall that efforts to getthe ATM plan out have been ongoing for sometime, and it is the product of many hours ofhard work, both from stakeholders (includingNCCC), and by Forest Service personnel, whodeserve a big thank-you for seeing this effortthrough.

The ATM plan will shape the future of thetransportation infrastructure in the Middle Forkvalley. The centerpiece of the ATM is the con-version of the Middle Fork road above DingfordCreek into a multi-use trail. This will turn eightmiles of dusty, potholed road into a new low-elevation trail, giving access to the upper MiddleFork valley. In addition, it will close off a num-ber of spur roads leading to the river that havebecome squalid, muddy messes. The MiddleFork trail between Taylor River andHardscrabble Creek will be opened to moun-tain bikes every other day for a three-year trialperiod.

NCCC and other organizations recom-mended that the Middle Fork road be convertedto trail beyond Taylor River. Although this willnot happen as part of the ATM, the plan none-theless represents a huge step forward for thevalley, which has in the past been plagued bydumping, vandalism and wild shooting.

Pratt connector trail still loomingNCCC board members recently met with

Forest Service personnel from the SnoqualmieRanger District to discuss the Pratt connectortrail project, which would build a new trail onthe southeast side of the lower Middle ForkSnoqualmie from Taylor River down to the PrattRiver valley. NCCC and other organizations,such as the Alpine Lakes Protection Society,oppose this trail project, and would like to seethe Pratt remain as it now is: close by, yet re-mote and difficult to access, an undisturbedrefuge for wildlife. The Pratt valley is a remark-ably lonely place � very close to Seattle and I-90, yet hard to get to because one must fordthe Middle Fork Snoqualmie River to reach thePratt trail. The ford is difficult in spring, whenthe habitat value of the Pratt (only 900 feet inelevation at its mouth), is highest for species

Happenings in Our National ForestsRICK MCGUIRE

such as bears emerging from hibernation. Itis easy in the fall, when bears and other specieshave moved to the high country. It�s a near-perfect setup for both animals and humans.

NCCC advocates putting wildlife needs aheadof human recreational desires, and is urgingthe Forest Service to leave the Pratt as is, andinstead build new trails to middle-elevationviewpoints near Taylor River. NCCC membersand others have made numerous field trips toinvestigate trailbuilding opportunities in theTaylor junction area of the Middle Fork valley.These trips have led to the discovery of a num-ber of extraordinary places where new trailscould be built without going in to a big �blankspots on the map,� as the Pratt connectorwould. A system of ledges on the lower andmiddle slopes of Garfield Mountain � the�Garfield Balconies� � have superlative viewsup and down the scenic Middle Forkvalley. Other similar places are also found onlower Quartz Mountain, and on �StegosaurusButte,� a knoll which stands above the MiddleFork just south of where Taylor River joins it. New trails built to these places would have farfewer adverse impacts on wildlife habitat, andwould likely be far more popular than a traildownvalley to the Pratt. The new Middle Forkcampground is currently under constructionnear Taylor River, and trails to nearby view-points would provide splendid opportunitiesfor campers and all other users to enjoy the�backyard wilderness� of the Middle ForkSnoqualmie.

NCCC views the Pratt connector project as atest case for the habitat protection efforts whichhave been put forth as part of the North Cas-cade Grizzly Bear Recovery Area, which encom-passes all federal lands north of I-90. The Prattvalley has some characteristics which make itnear-unique in the Cascades. Although thereare other big, low valleys, such as Big BeaverCreek and Thunder Creek, both of those val-leys are far back into the mountains and havemore severe climates and much more snowcover (in �normal� years, at least,) than thePratt. The Baker River and Boulder River val-leys are perhaps climatically more similar, butboth of those are steep, narrow valleys, and theBoulder has a heavily used trail. The lowerPratt is big and broad, has a true lowland cli-mate, and together with the nearby areas onthe southeast side of the Middle ForkSnoqualmie above and below it, offers un-matched �core security habitat.� NCCC hopesto keep this lonely valley as it now is, and towork with the Forest Service and other groupsto develop many new trails in other nearbyplaces.

Middle Fork �Trust Land Transfer�Proposed

The Washington State Department of Natu-ral Resources manages a number of pieces ofland in the lower Middle Fork Snoqualmie val-ley, including some spectacular groves of old-growth spruce and cedar. This DNR land isintermingled, often confusingly so, with U.S.Forest Service lands. The King County Districtof DNR has proposed a �trust land transfer�,whereby these lands would transfer out of the�trusts� which are supposed to make moneyfor the state, and become designated as Natu-ral Resource Conservation Areas. This wouldmean that they would no longer be in dangerof being logged, a big step toward guarantee-ing that the Middle Fork remains wild. Thestate legislature must approve the transfer. Weand other groups are working to make thetransfer a reality.

Snoqualmie Tree FarmDevelopment Rights PurchasedAt the western foot of the Cascades, stretch-

ing from North Bend to the Snohomish Countyline, the former Weyerhaeuser �SnoqualmieTree Farm� (now owned by John Hancock Tim-berlands,) is the last big piece of relatively flat,undeveloped land in King County. These landsare just west of the Alpine Lakes area, and muchof the areas is in the North Fork Snoqualmiewatershed, a little known place considering itsproximity to Seattle. Conservationists have longworried that suburban sprawl would spreadeast from the main Snoqualmie valley and over-whelm the place, turning King County intoanother Los Angeles, with development all theway from Puget Sound to the wall of the Cas-cades. But because of King County ExecutiveRon Sims, and others in the King County gov-ernment, there is now no need to worry. KingCounty recently purchased the �developmentrights� to 90,000 acres of these lands, insuringthat they will remain as commercial forestlandrather than fall victim to yet more sprawl.

The mountains of the Alpine Lakes area ofthe central Cascades will thus retain a greenbuffer to the west, thanks to the farsighted ac-tions of Sims and his administration. An ear-lier effort to save the area from development,the �Evergreen Forest� initiative, failed to get abill through Congress which would have al-lowed it to issue tax-exempt bonds to purchasethe property outright, with the bonds paid offthrough receipts from low-intensity logging.



Most of the land in question has been loggedtwo or even three times, and it�s fair to say muchof it has a rather bleak appearance after re-peated, short rotation cuttings. But, as the oldsaying goes, �the worst clearcut is better thanthe best subdivision.� It may be difficult toappreciate that concept as one surveys the lu-nar aftermath of high intensity logging in thisarea, but it is nonetheless true. Trees will likelygrow back as long as there is some soil, butpavement is forever. Perhaps one day anothereffort will be successful in purchasing full �feesimple� ownership. The $22 million dollarswhich King County paid for the developmentrights will keep King County from turning intoone endless sprawl, and will keep open theoption to fully preserve the place, which wouldbe forever lost were it subdivided and sold offfor residential development.

Lowe Creek Road EA ReleasedThe Forest Service has released an Environ-

mental Assessment for the rebuilding of an old,long vanished road at Lowe Creek, on the southside of the South Fork Skykomish river fromMoney Creek downstream about four miles. The old Lowe Creek road washed out severaldecades ago, and the lands on the south sideof the river where it would be rebuilt have goneback to nature, and are the only part of the oth-erwise heavily developed South Fork Sky val-ley where one can go from river to mountaintopwithout crossing an active road. The area wasrailroad logged in the early20th century, and isnow reforested with attractive, naturally regen-erated 80-year-old second-growth forest. LoweCreek itself has a large delta where the creekmeanders, with some of the best salmon spawn-ing reaches in the Snohomish watershed.

This beautiful place may now have a roadpunched through it, built largely at taxpayers�expense by the Forest Service for the exclusivebenefit of the Longview Fibre company. Longview Fibre owns some lands in the IndexCreek area which it wants to log. Rather thanrebuild an old bridge across the South ForkSkykomish, Longview would prefer that theForest Service build a road through the LoweCreek area so that it can log its lands morecheaply. The Forest Service has put forth anastonishing proposal to build this road at pub-lic expense, claiming that the public will ben-efit from new opportunities to drive on dirtroads. They are proposing to spend publicmoney to build this new road for Longviewwhen they cannot even maintain the hundredsof miles of logging roads which already criss-cross the Skykomish Ranger District.

This new road would indeed provide oppor-tunities � for meth labs, recreational �mud-ding�, and driving directly through the pristinespawning beds of Lowe Creek. Not only would

it destroy a beautiful area of re-wilding nature,it would also be one of the most appalling ex-amples of corporate welfare ever seen in theCascades. Longview Fibre would be able tolog its lands with less expense than providingits own access. The Forest Service says thatreducing costs for Longview means that theyshould build a road through this wild area, paidfor by the public. NCCC and other groups dis-agree, and are preparing for a major effort tostop this giveaway of public money, and keepLowe Creek wild.

Wild Sky Wilderness Bill AwaitingAction

The Wild Sky Wilderness bill, which wouldpermanently protect 106,000 acres of moun-tains and lowland forests in the Skykomishwatershed north of Highway 2, has passed theSenate Natural Resources Committee, and isawaiting action in the House of Representa-tives. The bill has twice passed the full Sen-ate, but has yet to get past House ResourcesCommittee chairman Richard Pombo, who as-serts that only fully pristine places can be des-ignated Wilderness. But good things take time,and Senator Patty Murray, and CongressmanRick Larsen, the bill�s chief sponsors, havevowed to keep trying, for however long ittakes. Wilderness protection has never beena job for those with short attention spans, oraddicted to quick results.

Continued from page 19

Mount Rainier Park ConcessionsVenting more fumes and steam than

Mount St. Helens�Parks ... have always been subject to at-tack by despoiling gain-seekers and mis-chief-makers of every degree from Satanto Senators, eagerly trying to make every-thing immediately and selfishly commer-cial. � JOHN MUIR

Actually, it is too late for you to comment onthe further commercialization of the facilitiesat Mount Rainier�s Camp Muir. Deadline wasJune 15! (You likely know that the Muir highcamp is the most used by climbers that ascendThe Mountain.)

Too bad the questionnaire represents a fore-gone conclusion to the Park�s Commercial Ser-vices Plan, and is another sorry example of theselling of access to our public places... pay yourfee to the concessionaire and you are in. Go asan independent and there will be no room atthe inn. In my opinion, the questions repre-sent what the commercial services want. Whatyou see in the thinly veiled questions will bethe end result.

For what it will accomplish (i.e., nothing), atleast have the perverse pleasure in completingand submitting the questionnaire.

� SCOTT SILVER

Commercializing Mount Rainier�sHigh Camp

Camp Muir QuestionsMount Rainier now acceptingcomments on Camp Muir PlanningProcess

Key questions the park would like public in-put on:

1. How should the park best modify existinguses of structures or provided new structuresat Camp Muir to fulfill the intent of the Com-mercial Services Plan in providing a variety ofguided climbing visitor experiences?

2. How should structures at Camp Muir serveday use visitors?

3. Should there be separation at Camp Muirbetween guided public visitors and indepen-dent public visitors?

4. Should the public, guides and clients sleepin built structures or in tents?

5. Should cooking shelters be provided atCamp Muir to reduce potential hazards associ-ated with visitors sleeping and cooking in thesame structure during inclement weather?

6. How can the park provide better informa-tion o Camp Muir visitors to ensure they areinformed of potentially hazardous conditionsduring inclement weather?

7. Can multiple concessionaires share thesame facilities or should separate facilities beprovided for each concessionaire?

8. If new structures are to be built at CampMuir should they be for the public or for con-cessionaires?

9. Should potable drinking water that meetsWA State Public Health Department/EPA �En-hanced Surface Water Treatment Rule� be avail-able to concessionaires� guides and clients?

Submit your comments in writing to:

Superintendent, Mount Rainier NationalPark, Tahoma Woods, Star Route, Ashford WA98304 OR VIA EMAIL [email protected].


I�ve heard much use of theterm �elitist� to describe propo-nents of wilderness, and by exten-sion, those opposed to allowingmotorized recreation on certainareas of public land. While I fullysupport and petition for protec-tion, expansion, and creation ofnew wilderness areas, I havenever considered myself an elit-ist, so I figured I�d better find outexactly what the word means.

According to Webster�s Dictio-nary, elitist means: �Someonewho believes in rule by an elitegroup.� And a follow-on: �agroup of persons who by vir-tue of position or educationexercise much power or influ-ence <members of the rulingelite> <the intellectual elitesof the country>�

Well, this certainly does notdescribe me, or pretty much any-one I know in the hiking or climb-ing community. Nor does it de-scribe those who share a love ofthe woods and an appreciationfor intact ecosystems, or evensimple peace and quiet. Indeed, Iwould contend that the oppositeis true: those who wish to accessevery bit of public land (especiallythose via a machine with an in-ternal combustion engine) fit thedefinition of elite, considering theinfluence the extractive industries(timber and oil), as well as theORV manufacturers, exert onpolicy makers in our government.One need look no further thanthe numbers: those in powerhave determined over history touse over 90 percent of the landfor things other than roadless/wil-derness area, leaving less than 10percent as �protected�. When Ihoist a pack on my back thatweighs upwards of 70 lbs for a fewnights in the backcountry, I hardlyconsider myself elite. This is es-pecially true when I�m workingmy way along a snowy road onskis, only to have a snowmobilezoom past me in a cloud of poi-son exhaust and deafening noise.

Who is elite? I know for surewhen I work my way up a ridge,folks in the valley enjoying them-selves can�t hear my gaspingbreaths, footfalls, and thrashing inbrush. Yet even a single dirtbikeor snowmobile makes their pres-ence known for miles around.Amazing how only one or twopeople can affect miles ofbackcountry, and every person, beit a hiker, a climber, or even a fam-ily out for a picnic, with their ac-tions. Which of us is exercisingmore �power or influence�? Whois elite?

One would think that in ourdaily lives, filled with automo-biles, trucks, aircraft, and the like,a person would have their fill ofvehicles and noise. Apparentlynot, as people demand they beallowed to access the backcountryby every motorized means pos-sible, even at the cost of whatmakes the backcountry uniqueand desirable in the first place. Iknow for a fact one cannot enjoythe backcountry for what it is froma car, or a snow machine, or adirtbike. I know because I havespent a great deal of time hikingroads that I have also driven andsnowmobiled.

When I drive a machine what Ihear are tires on gravel, the roarof the engine. What I feel are thefocus and concentration requiredto keep a vehicle pointed in theright direction. There is no ap-preciation for the roar of water-falls, the sound of birds, thechanging views as one works upa valley. I remember once I hikedthe Cascade River Road for morethan 10 miles � it was closed atHard Creek due to snow cover-ing the road. I�d driven the roadperhaps 50 times over the previ-ous 10 years, but when I hiked it,I felt like I was in a place I�d neverseen. To see Mt. Formidable risethrough the trees, to encounterthe N. Fork Cascade River, to seeMt. Torment rising precipitouslymore than a mile above the valley

at points along the road was (andis) simply spectacular. I ended upcamping right on the road�it wasone of the most scenic and enjoy-able valley camps I�ve had thepleasure of visiting. I didn�t feelelite as I finally shed my pack af-ter that trip, but I did feel blessedto have experienced the CascadeRiver in a manner not recognizedby many these days. I consideredthe people who would be drivingWinnebagos up to the road endafter the snow melted to be muchmore elite than sweaty, sore me.Indeed, just this past weekend, Itook a novice up the N. Fork Cas-cade River. It was a perfect intro-duction for a backcountry expe-rience, as the road was gated atMilepost 21. The hike to the roadend provided changing perspec-tive and views of the finger gla-ciers of Johannesburg, the roar ofa hundred waterfalls all aroundus, and a peaceful lunch belowCascade Peak. We spent sunsetperched on boulders next to

Of Roads, Access, and �Elitists�TOM HAMMOND

Endangered WildlifeThreatened by Draft

Legislation� DEFENDERS OF WILD-

LIFEDespite the overwhelming sup-

port of protections for endan-gered species by the majority ofAmericans, a powerful member ofCongress has written draft legis-lation that would undermine thelaw that protects endangered ani-mals from extinction. The pro-posal, penned by Rep. RichardPombo (R-California), wouldundermine the Endangered Spe-cies Act and punch loopholes inthe law for the benefit of oil, tim-ber and mining companies andreal estate developers. Visitwww.saveesa.org to learn moreabout how you can join the fightto save rare creatures from the fi-nality of extinction.

Nationwide AllianceKicks Off Campaignto Save Arctic Refuge

It�s crucial that the public real-ize that the fight to save the ArcticNational Wildlife Refuge in Alaskafrom oil and gas drilling is notover. With that in mind, a broadcoalition of religious, conserva-tion and other organizations, in-cluding Defenders, recentlylaunched �Arctic Refuge Ac-tion��a summer-long nationalgrassroots and media campaignto save the refuge. The final votein Congress that will decide thefate of the refuge will likely be inSeptember. Please visitwww.savearcticrefuge.org tokeep updated on the events of thecampaign and to take action tosave one of America�s last andgreatest truly wild places.

Midas Creek, the sounds of waterand life all around us. No hop-ping out of the car for a snapshotand then a hasty departure. Iimagine we never would haveseen the two bear cubs wrestlingon an avalanche fan ofJohannesburg had we been in acar that evening.

Roads have their place. Andtheir place is not in headwatersof watersheds that so many crea-tures, including humans, dependon for our very lives. Roads haveno place on steep ridge lines toallow cars to access the subalpineor alpine. I�m not advocating clos-ing the Cascade River Road, atleast not below the Eldoradogravel pit, but I am hopeful wecan all recognize the value of landfor what it really is and act to pre-serve what little we have left thatis roadless. Imagine a place ofpeace. Your favorite place ofpeace. I have to believe therearen�t roads involved. If there isa road there, that road is gated.


John [Dyer] has been reading itand I have gone through it. This story of

the geology of the North Cascades in Section I,and in Section II the �Geologic Notes for Pointsof Interest� describe where to see (hike to) ar-eas for particular types of geologic sites androcks, etc. Makes me wish I was getting outinto the hills.

The section with maps and color photos, inaddition to black and white drawings through-out, makes it most understandable.

� POLLY DYERNCCC board member and wife ofJohn, who led some of the toughestpitches on the first ascent of Shiprock,with Dave Brower

Rowland and I were members ofthe committee of editors that produced

the first edition of Freedom of the Hills, 1960.He was among the disciples of Peter Misch whoworked under the master to puzzle out themysteries beneath the greenery and whitery ofthe North Cascades.

In 1963 the Literary Fund Committee of TheMountaineers was proud to publish by him andthe late Dwight Crowder a book that in my per-sonal judgment is the �deepest� hiking guideever done � Routes and Rocks: Hiker�s Guideto the North Cascades from Glacier Peak toLake Chelan.

I say �is.� The correct verb is �was.� Its in-tention was to bring public attention to theheart of the national park proposal by the NorthCascades Conservation Council etc. The For-est Service, though unable to kill our park wasable to get Senator Jackson & Company to helpthem pull the �cowbird trick,� which is to kicksome other bird�s egg out of the nest and sub-stitute its own.

This by no means dimmed the luster ofRoutes and Rocks. Yet the very qualities thatmade it so beloved were all too successful inattracting boots. One year I was driving homefrom the hills, spotted a youth hitchhiking,picked him up, learned that he was a guide forsomething called �Outward Bound.� This com-

Looking northeast from Sauk Mountain at high peaks, mostly in North Cascades National Park.

BOOK REVIEW

mercial enterprise was in process of casting its�adventure� web over the whole financially ex-ploitable world, including the North Cascades.The hitchhiker showed me the manual issuedhim by The Company. Yes, none other thanR&R.

Alerted to what we had done, we put thebeauty out of print. Too late. Outward Boundcranked up its photocopy machines and (ille-gally, I might add) re-published the book. Ex-amine its current schedule. Compare to R&R.The language of their brochure, details of theirtrips. . . .

Thus the birth of our awareness of a threatto �deepness� that has emerged as comparableto the trail motorcycle.

Happily, Rowland has given us a new bookthat embodies much of the best in the old �we are pleased, too, that the memory of his oldpartner Dwight lives on in the drawings by hisdaughter.

� H.M.

Geology of the North Cascades; A Mountain Mosiac

Rowland Tabor and Ralph Haugerud, drawings by Anne Crowder. The Mountaineers, 1999, 2002


Major Geological Events and Maps in the North Cascades

View south from Spider Mountain to Le Conte Glacier spilling down off Old Guard and Sentinel Peaks.

Name ____________________________________________________

Address __________________________________________________

City _______________________ State _______ Zip ___________

Phone ____________________________________________________

Membership ApplicationBe part of the North Cascades Conservation Council�s Advocacy of the North Cascades.Join the NCCC. Support the North Cascades Foundation. Help us help protect North Cas-cades wilderness from overuse and development.

NCCC membership dues (one year): $10 low income/student; $20 regular; $25 family;$50 Contributing; $100 patron; $1,000 sustaining. A one-time life membership dues pay-ment is $500. The Wild Cascades, published three times a year, is included with NCCCmembership.

Please check the appropriate box(es):I want to join the NCCC

The North Cascades Conservation Council (NCCC), formed in 1957, worksthrough legislative, legal and public channels to protect the lands, waters, plantsand wildlife of the North Cascades ecosystem. Non-tax-deductible, it is supportedby dues and donations. A 501(c)4 organization.

I wish to support NCF

The North Cascades Foundation (NCF) supports the NCCC�s non-political legaland educational efforts. Donations are tax-deductible as a 501(c)3 organization.

This is a NCCC Membership NCCC Renewal Membership Gift NCCC$ _______

This is a Donation to NCF NCF $ _______

Total $ ______Please cut, enclosecheck and mail form

and check to:

NORTHCASCADES

CONSERVATIONCOUNCIL

Membership ChairL. Zalesky

2433 Del Campo Dr.Everett, WA 98208

Geological Map ofthe Sauk River30-by-60-MinuteQuadrangleby R.W. Tabor, D.B. Booth,J.A. Vance, and A.B. FordU.S. Geological Survey,Geologic InvestigationsSeries I-2592, 2002

Geologic Map ofthe Mount Baker30-by-60-MinuteQuadrangle

by R. W. Tabor, R.A.Haugerud, Wes Hildreth,and E.H. BrownU.S. Geological Survey,Geologic InvestigationsSeries, I-2660, 2003

If you�ve got a vacancy onyour living room wall of 3-1/2 x4 feet, you can spendmany happy days studyingthe breathtaking many-colored map of the SaukQuad: the mélange blocks west and east of theStraight Creek Fault, the mafic amphibolite andintrusives of the Dead Duck pluton.

If you have two such vacancies, you can fur-ther astonish and enrapture your guests withthe map of the Mount Baker Quad: the North-west Cascade System, the Easton MetamorphicSuite, the Chilliwack Group, the Oligocenetonalite of the Chilliwack batholith.

Each map has an explanatory pamphlet thatcould be dangled by a string for easy reference.

The Sauk Quad pamphlet has as epigraph apassage from The Hollow Hills, Mary Stewart,1973:

But lower, in every dip and valley, the

forest is dense, of trees crowded and

hugely grown, impassable with under-

growth as tightly woven as a fisherman�snet. Here and there, unnoticed until you

tumble across them, are crags and boul-

dered screes of rock thickly clothed with

thorn and creeper, invisible and deadlyas a wolf trap.


THE WILD CASCADESJournal of the North Cascades Conservation CouncilPost Office Box 95980University StationSeattle, Washington 98145-2980

ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED

Non-Profit OrganizationU.S. POSTAGE

PAIDSEATTLE, WA

PERMIT No. 8602

Scenes from the ArcticNational Wildlife Refuge.

Above: An arctic fox on thecoast, right by the ocean

where Bush wants to drill.

Right: Kongakut River.

� JONATHAN ROSENBLUM

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Photo ExhibitBurke Museum, Seattle � through December 2005

The Burke Museum in Seattle is presentingthe photo exhibit Arctic National Wildlife Ref-uge: Seasons of Life and Land, by SubhankarBanerjee.

The exhibit, which created such a controversyat the Smithsonian in Washington, D.C., is pre-sented here with the original titles restored.

The exhibit will run through December 31,2005. There will be a series of presentations bysome of the book�s authors, as well as lectureson monthly themes of arctic animals, nativecultures, migrations, energy and climatechange.

The program schedule is available atwww.washington.edu/burkemuseum.

Date post:	18-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	4 times
Download:	0 times

THE WILD CASCADES - npshistory.comnpshistory.com/newsletters/the-wild-cascades/spring-2005.pdf ·...

Documents