road riporter 4.4
Post on 30-May-2018
219 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
1/16
IThe Road-R PorterBimonthly Newsletter of the Wildlands Center for Preventing Roads. July/August 1999. Volume 4 # 4
conti nued on page 4
As m omen tum builds for protectingthis uniqu e resou rce, pressure s to develop
also have intensified. The Chu gach
Alaska Corpo ra tion (CAC), a for-p rofitnative corporation created pursuan t to the
Alaska Native Claims Settlemen t Act,continu es to press th e U.S. Forest Service
for a logging road r ight-of-way across the
Delta. At the sam e time, com me rcialfisher man , governm ent officials, and
some CAC shareh olders no w believe th ecorporation would be much better off
selling a conservation easement than
logging its inh oldings.
Teeming w ith w ildlife, Alaskas Copper River Delta is now threatened by massive
roading and resource extraction. Photo courtesy of National Wildlife Federation.
Where the Copper River sp ills int o t heGulf of Alaska, it forms an immense
wet land ecosys t em of almost
unparalleled productiv it y, a vast deltasupp ort ing an incredible array of ter rest rial,
aquatic and avian species.
Framed by ser rated peaks, and adorned w it h
drift ing columns of glacial ice, the Copp er RiverDelta (Delta) defines an uncompromising
wildness.
Wetland Wilderness
or Paradise Lost?
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
2/16
The Road-RIPorter July/August 19992
WildlandsWildlandsWildlandsWildlandsWildlands CCCCCenter for PPPPPreventing RRRRRoads
Wildlands Center for PreventingRoads works to prot ect and restorewildland ecosystems by preventingand removing roads and limitingmotorized recreation. We are a
national clearinghouse and netw ork,providing citizens w ith tools and
strategies t o fight roadconstruction, deter motorizedrecreation, and promote r oad
removal and revegetation.
P.O. Box 7516Missoula, MT 59807
(406) 543-9551
wildlandsCPR@wildrockies.orgwww.wildrockies.org/WildCPR
Utah Office2056 E. 33rd St. #1
Salt Lake City, UT 84109(801) 487-8900
wcpr@xmission.com
Colorado OfficeP.O. Box 2353
Boulder, CO 80306(303) 247-0998
prebles@ibm.net
DirectorBethanie Walder
Development DirectorTom Youngblood-Peterse n
Office Manager
Cate CampbellORV Camp aign Coordinat or
Scott Groene
Motor ized Wreck-RecreationProgramJacob Smith
NewsletterJim Coefield, Dan Funsch
Interns & Volunteers
Andy Geiger, Julia Hathaway, Chuck
Irestone, Karen Verm ilye
Board of DirectorsKatie Alvord, Mary Byrd Davis,
Sidney Maddock, Rod Mondt,Cara Nelson, Mary O'Brien,Tom Skeele, Scott Stouder
Advisory Committ eeJasper Carlton, Libby Ellis,
Dave Foreman, Keith Hammer,Timothy Hermach,
Marion Hourdequin, Lorin Lindner,Andy Mahler, Robert McConnell,
Stephanie Mills, Reed Noss,Michael Soul, Dan Stotter,
Steve Trombulak, Louisa Willcox,Bill Willers, Howie Wolke
From the Wildlands CPR Office...
Cyclists, hikers, ho rseback riders an d oth ers are o ut in th e field, all over th e
cou ntr y, sur veying roads. Activists in New Mexico, Colorad o, Mon tan a and
Arizona, to n ame a few p laces, are com pleting inventories of Forest Serviceand Bureau of Land Managem ent roa ds. Arm ed with th ese inventories, activists will
be working with land man agers to reduce the num ber of roads on public lands. Ifyour organ ization wou ld like to set up a road inventory pr ogram, please call our
office!!!
WelcomeA big welcome to sum me r intern s
Chuck Irestone and Julia Hathoway.
Julia comes to u s, perha ps a b it jaded,from too man y years on Capitol Hill.
After picking up a quick grad degree at
Yale, shes now land ed in Missoula an dwill help develop our r oads program
before she embarks on her next mastersdegree at the University of Mon tana.
Chuck is working with u s throu gh the
Patagonia intern s program. We firstworked with Chuck wh en h e was at the
Dillon Patagonia outlet, thou gh he n owworks for an outdoor store here in
Mizoo. Chu ck will be helping us ou t with
marketing and developing new publicinformation brochures and displays on
road rem oval. Welcome to both of you,
we cant tell ya how mu ch we app reciateyour h elp!!
ThanksSpeaking of Patagonia, more th anksto the Dillon, MT store for hosting their
fifth ann ual Brew-grass an d Chili-bag
Festival this July 24th . If you ll be in theDillon neighborhood, stop by for some
great hom e-brews, music and chili!!Proceeds will ben efit the local Human e
Society and Wildlands CPR.
We owe an enorm ous thank you to
return ed volunteer Andy Geiger for his h elp with o ur ORV FOIA (freedom of inform a-tion act) request an alysis. Because of his work and th e continu ing work of Jen
Feren stein, we should have a comp leted database analyzing ORV man agemen t on all
National Forests by m id-August. We plan to m ake all this inform ation available overthe web, so you can download the details on your forest and then get to work
improving man agement th ere.
Extra sp ecial thank s to o utfitter and guide Steve Allen for re quisitionin g several
significant don ations for our ORV program. Well put th ese and o ther d onation s togood use protecting wildlands from roads an d ORVs.
Finally, ma ny th anks to Carolyn Duckworth for her provocative essay, The Wolf
Road. Carolyn pain ts a somewh at different picture of roads than we have seen
before and we th ink this essay raises impor tant qu estions abou t roads, wildlife andour relation to both. Were interested in you r feedback.
In this Issue
Alaskas Copper River Delta
p. 1, 4-5Adapted from an article by Tony Terr ini
Depaving t he Way, p. 3
Bethanie Walder
Legal Notes, p. 6-7
Felice Pace
Odes to Roads, p. 8-9Caro lyn Duckworth
Legislative Updat e, p. 10-11
Bibliograp hy Not es, p . 12-13
Scott Bagley
Regional Report s & Alerts ,p. 14
New Resour ces for Road
Rippers, p . 14
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
3/16
The Road-RIPorter July/August 1999 3
Mitigate ThisBy Bethanie Walder
October 19 97, driving outside Park City, UT for our ann ual
Wildlands CPR board mee ting, we passed an interesting sign,
deer crosswalk ahea d. We looked at each other, confused, an dthen we saw it: a crosswalk painted on the road an d a deer
crossing sign. Is this some kind of joke, we wondere d? Unfortu-nately we didnt have a camera, because it wasn t a joke, real
transportation dollars were spent to p ut up these signs an d all
the wh ite lines. Real transp ortation dollars also were spen tfencing the m ule deer away from the rest of the road and
funn eling them in to the crosswalk. But there were no crossingguards and n o signs of cars slowing down. We wonde red aloud
if som ething as simple as this could really prevent mu le deer
roadkill? More imp ortantly, we wondered if mitigation could
replace road prevention or removal.Theres a moveme nt afoot to mitigate the impacts of
highways and roads on wildlife, to reconnect habitat using underpasses
and overpasses (or crosswalks), as if we could have our cake a nd eat it,
too. And w hile mitigation is critical, it only treats the sym ptom s of theproblem s caused by roads and highways. Preventing road constru ction
and rem oving roads are m ore effective ways to protect wildlife andwildlife habitat.
There are th ree main ways to m itigate the imp acts of roads: with
mitigation structures; mitigation banking, and; road prevention andrem oval. To date, most mitigation ha s emp loyed the first two options
building structures th at allow wildlife to cross a roa d, or reser ving landin one place to make up for degraded land elsewhere. Interest in road
rem oval is increasing, but it remains the least com mo n ch oice.
When the Trans-Canada h ighway in Banff National Park waswidened in the late 198 0s, wildlife and highway m ana gers developed
mea sures to reduce elk mortality on the new road. These includedinstalling eleven u nde rpasses within a 27 k ilome ter span of the highway
(Clevenger 19 98). The und erpasses m ostly were used by elk and deer,
but also by wolves, bears, coyotes and cou gars and oth er anim als. Whilethe structures did reconn ect habitat for elk and deer, they caused some
unintended effects, like temporarily increasing bighorn sheep mortality(sheep became trapped against the fences while trying to escape from
coyotes). In addition, several of the under passes are used by hum ans,
which deter wildlife. Since large carnivore use of un derp asses remainslow, even m ost mitigated roads con tinue to redu ce habitat con nectivity
for species such as grizzly bear an d wolves.Mitigation is not limited to wildlife road crossings. It can be
accom plished by dedicating to protection a cer tain type of hab itat, likewetlands. If a road will destroy x num ber of wetlands, then a developermay be required to protecty num ber of wetlands in return. In many
cases these wetland s are in a different place, and wh ile there m ay be nonet loss of h abitat, there is still an impact to wh atever species lived
within the destroyed wetland.
And w hat of th ose deer cr osswalks, how well are they working?While roadkill dropp ed 40% after installing them , overall highway
mo rtality increased be cause de er th at enter ed th e right-of-way (ROW) atthe crosswalk often stayed to forage. Only 16% o f the deer within the
ROW left via the on e-way gates that h ad been installed, leaving the d eer
highly vulnerable to traffic. In addition, vehicles did not slow down for
the cro sswalks, despite war ning signs (Lehn ert,
Romin and Bissonette 1996). On the other hand , the
crossing did not appear to disrupt seasonal migrationof mule deer, allowing those dee r which u sed the
crosswalk to travel between winter an d sum merranges. Transp ortation ma nagers also are investigat-
ing methods to solve some of the un forseen p rob-
lems.Even with m itigation efforts, roads con tinue to
cause pro blems. Som e of the mitigation itself leadsto wildlife problem s, like increased pred ation or
chan ged behavior. Other efforts do not effectively
mitigate the problem s roads cause. The types ofmitigation mentioned in this article are used on very
few roads, both b ecause of a lack of fundin g and afailure to understan d the impacts roads cause. In
addition, many extremely damaging roads were built
before hab itat fragmentation w as un derstood, and itsmu ch h arder to m itigate after a road is built. While
we can b e hearten ed by some mitigation successes,we mu st recognize the limited scope with wh ich
mitigation h as been ap plied, and the limited species
for which mitigation actually reconnects fragmentedhabitat.
Mitigation efficacy sho uld be evaluated on itsown m erits in situations wh ere road removal or
prevention is not an op tion. Creative mitigationshou ld be encou raged to devise mor e effectivesystems an d less obtrusive roads, such as elevating or
buryin g highways for m iles at a time. But in add itionto mitigation, it is critical to consider ways to limit
transportation needs in wildland ecosystems, and to
prevent u nn ecessary or extremely detrimental roadconstru ction, as well as promoting road rem oval as a
more perman ent solution.
References on page 11
Reprinted from Lehnert, Romin & Bissonette, 1996.
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
4/16
The Road-RIPorter July/August 19994
continued from page 1
BackgroundThe Copper River is located in rem ote sou th-centra l Alaska and, for
much of its length, forms the western boundary of the countrys largest
National Park, Wran gell-St. Elias. The St. Elias moun tains to the e ast ar ethe worlds tallest coastal range, capp ed by th e largest man tle of glacial
ice outside the polar ice caps and Green land.
At 700,000 acres, the Coppe r River Delta is the largest wetlan dscomp lex on the Pacific coast of North Amer ica, and it hosts an im pre s-
sive assem blage of fish an d wildlife. Consider ed by biologists to be o neof the most impo rtant shorebird habitats in the western h emisphere, the
Delta is a critical staging area for over 16 million shoreb irds and other
species of waterfowl. It supp orts world-ren own ed salmon run s and is ahaven for grizzly an d black bears, wolves, mou ntain goats, mo ose, mink,
wolverines, otters, sea lions, an d h arbor seals.Notwithstanding its harsh, untamed appearance, the Delta has
nurtured th e peop le of the Copper River basin for thousands of years.
Gener ations of Eyak Ind ians ha ve relied upon the bo un tiful fish an d
wildlife, and today, subsistence an d com mercial fishing are th e ma in-stays of the regions econo mic base. Most of the watershe ds pop ulationof abou t 5,000 lives in th e town of Cordova.
In 1907 Teddy Roosevelt created
the Chu gach National Forest to h elpprotect th e Delta and Prince William
Sound from un regulated coal miningand other developm ents. And today
the Delta is designated a Western
Hemisphere Shoreb ird ReserveNetwork Site, an em ph asis area in the
North American Waterfowl Manage-ment Plan, and a State Critical Wildlife
Habitat Area.
The Development ThreatAs Nation al Forest land , the Delta remains vulnerab le to governm ent
sub sidized logging, minin g, and o ff-road vehicle use, bu t the CACs plan s
to clear cut its inho ldings 30 miles east of the Copp er River presen t amo re imm ediate threat. To access the land , CAC has p ropo sed a 55-m ile
raised dirt and gravel roadw ay a road th at would sever as ma ny as400 stream s feeding the eastern Coppe r River region, degrading thou -
sand s of acres of tidal marsh es, wetland s, and sa lmon h abitat.
Despite the eno rm ity of this threat, the Forest Service recentlyentered into a m emorandu m of understanding with the Chugach Alaska
Corp oration allowing CAC to p lan an d de velop th e pr oject without a fullen vironm en tal imp act stateme nt as required by NEPA. CAC also per -
suaded Alaska Represen tative Don Youn g to in trodu ce a bill in Con gress,H.R. 3087 , that wou ld force th e Fores t Service to grant CAC a 500 -foot-wide road easement.
CAC has already obtained at least one Fish Habitat permit fromthe Alaska Departmen t of Fish and Gam e, allowing it to place a bridge
across the first stream in the pro posed road corridor. Anoth er 200 to
250 of th ese per mits will be requ ired, while filling streams or wetlandswill requ ire Section 404 Permits und er th e Clean Water Act. CAC ha s
stated that th e pr oject is exempt from th ese perm it requiremen ts, andthat they may proceed without them.
Shorebirds take to the sky over the Delta. Photo courtesy of
National W ildlife Federation.
Commercial fishermen, government officials, and
some CAC shareholders now believe the corporation
would be much bett er off selling a conservat ion
easement t han logging its inholdings.
Copper River Delta
Alaskas Copper River Delta
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
5/16
The Road-RIPorter July/August 1999 5
A Conservation AlternativeWorking together un der th e um brella of the Copp er River Delta
Coalition, fisher men , natives, environ men talists, and o rganizations like
the Nationa l Wildlife Federation com missioned an indep end ent an alysislast fall of CACs pr oposed logging project. Accordin g to ECONorth west
of Eugene, Oregon , CAC is actua lly likely to lose m on ey if it proceeds
with the p roject, due to the roads expen se and th e depr essed Asiantimber market. The report also emph asized the thr eat posed to the
areas world-famous salmo n fishery, a potential cost to the entire region.On the other hand, under a conservation easement, CAC would be
paid cash an d com mercial property in exchange for development r ights.
This option h as proven lucrative to other Alaska native corporation s indeals brokered by the Exxon Trustee Coun cil in recent years. Anoth er
advantage of selling a conservation easem ent is that revenu es would beexem pt from revenue -sharing provisions of the Native Claims Settleme nt
Act, which can gobble up a full 70% of the revenu es from timber or
mineral sales.Coalition p artne rs have impressed u pon federal officials the
impo rtance o f protecting the Copper River Delta, and ha ve ma deencouraging progress in recent m onths. One potential source of mon ey
to pu rchase th e con servation easemen t has emerged the ClintonAdministrations Lands Legacy Initiative, a $1.3 billion budget requestfor federal land acqu isition and ope n space pr otection. The Forest
Service now sup ports a con servation easemen t and has stated that itintend s to initiate negotiations with CAC as soon as th e road right-of-
way is granted, which could happ en early this summ er. In addition,
Alaskas spe cial assistant to th e Secretary of Interior h as said th e Deltashou ld be a priority un der the Lands Legacy Initiative.
Thousands of acres of marshes and wetlands are at risk from the proposed
road. Photo courtesy of National Wildlife Federation.
The Copper River drains the wild St. Elias mountain
range. Photo courtesy of National Wildlife Federation.
ConclusionEven if CAC abandon s its plan , the Copper River
Delta will someday su ccum b to overuse an d develop-men t un less we ch ange the legal status of the land
itself. The Delta is rich in oil, coal, timb er an dtour ism poten tial, creating a powerful incen tive for
exploitation a nd p rofit. Ultimately, protecting thisnational treasure will depend upon securing Wilder-ness designation or comparable conservation status.
This will requ ire broad-based o utreach a nd ed ucationto gain supp ort from native landowners, governm ent
officials an d th e Amer ican p ublic.
What You Can DoThe Chugach National Forest is now revising its
15-year Forest Plan, and your comm ents can helpconvince them to recomm end Wilderness status for
the Copper River Delta and its watershed. Pleasewrite to:
Chugach N.F. Super visor Dave Gibbon s
U.S. Forest Service3301 C. St., Suite 300
Anchorage, AK 99503
For m ore inform ation on the Copper River Delta,
call Scott Anaya at 907-258-4808, e-mail tocopp erriver@nwf.org, or visit www.nwf.org/
copperriver on the w eb.
Adapted from an article by Tony Terrini, Director of
the Alaska office of the National Wildlife Federation.
Ultimately, protecting this national
t reasure will depend upon securing
Wilderness designation or comparableconservation s tat us.
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
6/16
The Road-RIPorter July/August 19996
In an important case with far-reaching implications and a useful
precedent for road-rippers, the Klamath Forest Alliance (KFA)
recently won their lawsuit challenging ERFO-funde d road recon -stru ction on the Klamat h National Fores t (KNF). The District Court
decision, explained below, is the first major victory for con servationistswho h ave sought to stop ERFOs blanket exemption o f environm ental
reviews.
Background About ERFOAlmost every year a federal disaster is declared som ewher e in the
United States. Often, a National Forest is located within the disaster area .When this is the case, the Forest Service (FS) is eligible for funding from
the Federal Highway Adm inistration to repair road s dam aged durin g thedisaster event. This p rogram is known as ERFO or Emer gency Relief for
Federally Owned roads.
On Janu ary 1, 1997 a large, rain-on-snow event triggered over 724road failures on the Klamath National Forest. Forests th rough out
North ern California and South ern Oregon were affected. Disaster areaswere d eclared. The FS applied for over $10 0 m illion in ERFO funds for
Region 5 (CA), $30 million on the KNF alone.
By Federal Highway Administration regulations, ERFO projects canbe categor ically exclude d from NEPA. (Title 23 USC Sec.115 an d 117) As
a resu lt, the FS did not com plete Environm ental Assessmen ts or Envi-ronm ental Impact Statements for these road reconstruction projects,
even wh en extraordin ary circum stances existed, like the presen ce of
end angered sp ecies, steep slopes or u nstable lands. [In 1997, W ildlands
CPR was part of a lawsuit brought by t he Hells Canyon PreservationCouncil to challenge just this type of categorical exclusion under ERFO.
Gumboot Creek, in Hells Canyon National Recreation Area, was known
habitat for a federally listed Snake River salmon species. Unfortu nately t he
lawsuit failed, althou gh the decision rem ained unpublished and left the
door open for a successful challenge.]
Preparing to SueTen d ays after the storm and after having surveyed
extensive road failure and stream channel degradation inseveral watersheds, KFA wrote to Klamath National Forest
man agers urging them to con sider the extraordinary circum-
stance of over 300 roa d site failures and 50 0 m iles of streamchannel degraded by road-influenced debris torrents. We
suggested the FS view the storm dam age as an opp ortun ity todecom mission salmo n-killing roads for which fun ding levels
preclude adequ ate mainten ance. We suggested the FS un der-
take watershed-based EAs which wou ld consider transp ortationneeds an d environmen tal risks in order to decide which roads
to reconstruct and which roads to decommission. We evenprovided the man agers with an EA from the Mt. Hood National
Forest wh ich we suggested was a good m odel for how we
believed KNF man agers shou ld proce ed. However, FS man agersinstead decided to go into the back room an d sort the 724 road
sites into three categories. Where timber sale contr acts existed,
the contracts were modified an d the roads were
reconstructed immediately. The remaining roads
were sorted into two classes: on e large group w ouldbe repaired without environmental review; the
second smaller group would later be considered inEAs for decom missioning. In other word s, decisions
that would impact aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems
far into the future were made without analysis andwithout public input.
The LawsuitWith represen tation from th e Seattle office of
Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund, the Klamath ForestAlliance ch allenged o ver 100 of the sites wh ich the
FS had decided (behind closed doors and without
environm ental review) to rep air (KFA v. U.S. Fore stService, William M. Daley, and th e NMFS, Civ. S-98-
1451 WBS/GGH). Our la wsu it was filed in th e EasternDistrict of Californ ia and we drew William B. Shu bb
as the judge.
The sites we challenged were all on level 1 and 2roads (low ma intena nce levels and low recreation
value) which FS biologists had identified as likely toadversely effect coho salmo n, a sp ecies listed as
threatened un der th e ESA. The roads also were
located on steep, unstable slopes or in unstable
stream gor ges.Our lawsuit had th ree claims, one under the
Enda ngered Species Act, one u nde r the National
Environm ental Policy Act and one un der th e Adm in-
istrative Procedures Act. Under the EndangeredSpecies Act, we ch allenged both the Forest Service
Forest emergencies have been declared as an excuse to rebu ild many
roads that never should have been constructed in the first place. Photo
courtesy of Klamath Forest Alliance.
Federal Judge Halts Klamath Road ReconstructionA Precedent and a New Tool for Forest Activists
By Felice Pace
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
7/16
The Road-RIPorter July/August 1999 7
and National Marine Fisheries
Service for failing to imp lemen t
cond itions o f the biologicalopinion and incidental take
statemen t prep ared by NMFS forpost storm road recon struction.
Specifically, NMFS had imp osed a
man datory condition th at the FSfully con sider the ro ad decom -
missionin g op tion. NMFS isrequired to set terms an d condi-
tions wh en a take is author ized.
The entity autho rized to take thespecies (in this case the FS) is then
required to abide by the terms andcond itions in th e take perm it (see
Title 16 USC Sec.153 6(b)(4)).
Under the National Environ-mental Policy Act we challenged
the FS for failing to p repare anenvironm ental assessmen t. Our
argument was from Council of
Environmental Quality (CEQ) andFS NEPA regu lation s [See 4 0 CFR
Sec. 1507.3(b)(2)(ii), and FSM1909 .15 Sec. 31.1] These regula-
tions specify that road repair m ay
be categorically excluded fromcon sidera tion in an EA. However,
CEQ and FS NEPA regs alsospecify extraordin ary circum-
stances which, when they occur, require preparation o f an EA
for projects th at are ordinar ily categorically excluded fromthe Environm ental Assessmen t process. We argued that the
existence of an ESA listed species (specifically m ention ed as alikely extraordinary circumstan ce in both the CEQ and FS
NEPA regulations) and th e pr esence of steep, u nstable slopes
(specifically n oted in th e FS regs), me ant the FS was req uired
at least to prepare an EA prior to pr oceeding with th e repairs.Under t he Administrat ive Procedures Act (APA) we
claimed that both NMFS and the FS, by no t fully considering
the decomm issioning option, had acted in a mann er that was
arb itrary a nd capr icious in violation of th e APA (Title 5 USCSec. 706(2)(A).
The Opin ionJudge Shubb foun d against us on the ESA man datory
terms an d con dition s cause of action an d for us on the NEPAclaim finding the FS action arbitrary and capricious und er
the APA. The Court h eld tha t (t)he Fores t Services exp lana -
tion for its application of categorical exclusions ... runscoun ter to evidence in the ad min istrative record that certain
repair projects are likely to ad versely affect th e SONC cohosalmon . A determ ination th at a project is likely to adversely
affect a threatened sp ecies indicates a possibility that the
proposed action may have a significant effect on the environ-men t, such th at an EA would b e warranted . Slip Op. at 13 .
The judge en joined the Forest Service from going forwardon over 100 roa d rep air projects un til it com plies with NEPA by
prepa ring Environm enta l Assessmen ts. However, as is typical,
the cou rt did not specify how the FS sho uld organize therequ ired en viron men tal review. After discussions with u s, FS
man agers decided to p repare ranger district-wide EAs for
storm damage respon se actions
for the en joined sites as well as
other dam age sites which werelikely to adversely effect coho
salmon . These EAs are curr entlybeing prepared, and KFA will
review them carefully. The EAs
will be subject to appeal pu rsuan tto FS regulations a nd th ere are
indications that decomm issioningdecisions may be app ealed by
local anti-environmental groups,
includ ing People for th e USA. KFAwould likely intervene in any
app eals filed to prevent deco m-missioning.
ConclusionThis lawsuit sets an impo r-
tant p recedent in th e use of ERFO
fund ing. Prior to this suit theForest Service routin ely ignored
NEPA regulations by ca tegor ically
excluding n early every ERFO roadrep air project. While it is still
necessary to have extraordinarycircumstances to supercede a
routine CE, the legal teeth areno w on pap er. The Forest Service
ordinar ily receives $100-250
million in ERFO funding per year,which can be used to reconstruct roads to current standards or
to decomm ission roads dam aged in disaster events. Whilesom e recon struction m ay be n ecessary, it is still critical that
the FS analyze their impacts an d that th ey fully consider the
decom missioning option. ERFO regs are curren tly beingrewritten to specifically mention options for road decommis-
sioning and other treatmen ts in ad dition to road repair andrecon struction. Given the large need for decomm issionin g and
the relatively low level of Congressiona l funding for de com -
missioning, it is essential the FS view disaster events a sopportunities to decommission roads that pose significant
risks to the environmen t.One word of caution: ERFO cases tend to be wh at lawyers
call fact rich . If you ch allenge post-disaster ERFO recon -
struction, be prepared for long hours r eviewing docum entsand con structing (or interpretin g) databases. There is a
reward, however: youll learn m uch you d idnt know a bout th eroads o n y our nation al forest. Good Luck!
For m ore inform ation con tact Amy Sinden of Earthjustice
LDF at (206) 343-7340, Felice Pace at (530) 467-5291, or theKlam ath Fore st Alliance at PO Box 82 0, Etna, CA 960 27,
ph one & fax (530) 467-5405.
Felice Pace has lived in the Klamath Mountains in far northern
California (aka the State of Jefferson) for 24 years. For the past
15 years he has been a forest activ ist. Felice current ly
coordinates Klamat h River, salmon and water quality w ork for
the Klamath Forest Alliance. Until recently he also served as
KFAs ex ecut ive director.
Activist s now have an important legal tool to challenge ERFO-
funded roadbuilding projects. Photo courtesy of KFA.
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
8/16
The Road-RIPorter July/August 19998
Odes to Roads
The Wolf RoadBy Carolyn Duckwort h
The Wolf Road offers t he best wolf view ing in the
world. Hundreds of people can see t he wolves on anactive evening; t housands over t he summer
experience the thrill.
Acanid picks its way across th e
cobble, following the right ban k of
Soda Butte Creek. Lon g legs andpowe rful h ead : its Yellowstones top d og, the
wolf.
After hunting through a rainy dawn, her
fur is sopp ing, ears slicked back, tail a thinrod of wet and bo ne. She carr ies in h er
mouth a large lump of dark fur with fourtiny legs. Marm ot? Whatever, it will becom e
breakfast for the p ups in the Druid Packs
den.
The wolf climbs up th e ban k, emergesfrom sage, pauses, looks bo th ways, then
crosses th e road in five qu ick steps. She
disappears into sage on h er way to thehidden lake where they have had th eir den
for the past th ree years.
The lake is off limits to curious h um ans wh ile
the d en is active. Hopeful watchers wait both d awnand du sk along the road, hoping to see what I have
seen this morning.
Like most visitors to Yellowstone, wolf watche rs
seldom stray from pavemen t. We don t have to. Oneof the p arks main roads p rovides a viewing platform
that follows the length of the Lamar Valley, which ishom e to one wolf pack and tho usands of elk. For
mo st of the year, the Druid Pack nee d travel no
further than this valley for its food.
The Druid wolves usu ally ignore us tw o-leggeds
who lean against our cars with binoculars pressed
against our faces, or our bodies leaning into spotting
scopes. They traverse the valley, descen d to the riverand follow its banks, swim across, run , walk, sleep,
hu nt, kill, eat, and sleep som e mo re all within
view of human s on the road.
On an early summer evening when the wolvesare visible in the valley, cars pile into the overlooks,
park along the sh oulders, and p ause in m id shift.
Ooos, ahh s, and ch eers echo up and down th e valley,coup les hug in excitemen t, children skip with joy
back to the ir families as th ey see a wolf for the firsttime in their lives.
Something happ ens to these peop letha t is unu sua l for visitors to Yellowston e.
They don t just snap a picture or crossthe a nima l off their mu st see list, and
drive on to the n ext attraction. They
actually park their car s, get out, andwatch the animals for as long as th e
wolves are in sight.
Saturday n ight of Memorial Day
weeken d, 1999 , Rick McIntyre is stridingdown the road , talking into a radio, as we
pass h im in the Yellowston e Institute van. He doesn tglance at us, doesnt wave.
The gray wolfs return t o Yellowston e is a long awaited cause for
celebration. Photo by Kathy Mechtle.
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
9/16
The Road-RIPorter July/August 1999 9
Rick is the un official am bassador for
Yellowston es wolves. He travels th is road m orn ings,
evenings, and m any afternoons, talking with h un-dreds of people each day, thousands of people each
sum mer. He helps pe ople see the wolves, and he lpsthem understand the behavior they are witnessing.
Through h is efforts, Rick has helped build an
eno rm ous con stituency for the wolves all from theshoulders and overlooks of this road.
My group was retu rn ing to the institute from
even ing wildlife viewing outs ide of th e valley. Just a
half mile up the road, though, we had stopped towatch a dark gray wolf. Our headlights were amo ng a
string of winking red and w hite lights from m orethan one h undred vehicles crowding the sh oulders
and overlooks this evening for more than two miles
along the valley.
The Druid Pack had b een killing elk th is week inthe floodplain below u s. They return ed regularly to
ingest more meat an d carry the food internally back
to the p ups. This evening, the m eat conveyor was
Wolf 21. He was so full of elk m eat tha t he couldbarely trot yet he m oved up an d down the valley,toward the road an d back to the carcass, toward the
road, back to the carcass.
It was an un usual opportun ity to see one of the
wolves so close, but som ething was wron g.
Wolf 21 was pacing an d staring, looking at th e
people, at the cars, looking up and down the road,trotting constantly back and forth . He wanted to
cross the roa d, but couldnt. There was no room .
When we realized what was hap pening, we
drove on and got off the road as soon as we could.We passed Rick, and later found o ut he h ad been
trying in vain to con tact park law enforcem entrangers for help to con trol the traffic and clear a wide
crossing for the wo lf.
It was an unusual opport unity to s ee
one of the wolves so close, but
somet hing w as w rong.
Within an hou r, darkness took car e of the jam,
and Num ber 21 darted across the road and finally
headed ho me. He crossed the road at the same timeof day and near the sam e place where a wolf pup h ad
becom e a statistic in th e pa rks records. A few daysbefore Christm as, 1995, on e of the first pup s born in
Yellowstone was stru ck an d killed by a tr uck d eliver-
ing packages in th e par k. Ironically, his paren ts hadarrived in th e park via that very road.
The Wolf Road offers the best wolf viewing in
the world. Hundreds of peop le can see the wolves on
an active evening; thousan ds over the su mm er
experience the thrill. Each one of these peoplebecom es a supp orter of the wolves, of reintrodu ctionefforts, of Yellowstone. And sheer nu mb ers of
supporters made wolves possible here. The environ-
men tal impact statement about the reintroductionreceived a record nu mber o f commen ts more than
100,000 and m ost of them p ro-wolf. That stron gpub lic supp ort will be n eeded again as p olitical
forces ou tside Yellowstone try to control w olf
populations.
But wh at of our impacts on the Druid Pack? Aretravel disruption s once o r twice a week a serious
problem for them? Have pups gone h ungry because
of the traffic jams? Has a wolfs life be en shor tenedby the stress such as Number 21 endured? How man y
wolves have had close enco un ters with cars, and h owman y have died beneath o ur wheels?
Only the last question can be answered at thistime; the park doe s keep statistics on ro ad-
killed m egafauna. Seven of the eight wolveswho h ave died within the p ark were killed
by vehicles. But these othe r questions
who is searching for their answ ers? And h owman y of us prefer to pretend the qu estions
don t even exist?
That last question s an swer is all tooobvious.
Mine was one o f thirty cars back on theroad in the wet dawn of the next day.
Carolyn Duckwort h is a freelance writer
and editor w hose current work focuses on the
bison m anagement issu e in the Greater
Yellowstone Ecosystem .
Although highway mort ality can be quantified, the indirect im pacts of
this t ype of wildlife viewing are poorly underst ood. Photo by Mark Alan
Wilson.
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
10/16
The Road-RIPorter July/August 199910
Wanna Go For a Ride?As the U.S. Con gress takes up budget a nd spen ding bills this
sum mer, conservation activists are gearing up for the ine vitable struggle
to stop an ti-environm ental riders. These measu res, designed to circum-vent pu blic process, have become a ll-too-familiar in recen t years. Heres
a sum ma ry of developm ents in Approp riations legislation in th e U.S.
Senate and House.
U.S. SenateThe Senate Appropriations Committee met recently to mark-up the
Interior Appr opriations bill. The Senates allocations for Interiorspen ding ($13.8 billion) were far below th e Presidents request and still
leave natu ral resource agencies with serious fun ding deficiencies. Asexpected the Interior Approp riations bill is a vehicle for at least a dozen
anti-environmental riders:
1) Sec. 117: Allow Grazing Without Environm ental Review allows the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to reauthorize grazingperm its without National Environmen tal Policy Act docu me nts, Federal
Land Policy Management Act analysis or Endangered Species Act
requirements through FY 2000 or until the Bureau completes process-ing.
2) Sec. 124: Special Deal For Washington Grazing Interests
extends livestock grazing within Lake Roosevelt National Recreation
Area in Washin gton for 2 0 years, or until the en d of the grazing perm itholders lifetime, whichever is first.
3) Sec. 320 : Delay National Forest Planning halts the revision
of any forest plans n ot already und ergoing revision (except for th ose
legally mandated to complete their plans during calendar year 2000),un til final plann ing regulations are adop ted. This will pressure the
Forest Service to h astily prom ulgate new r egulations, rather thancarefully incorporating recomm endations developed by an independen t
Com mittee of Scientists. Sec. 321 would ha lt fun ding to carry out
strategic plann ing unde r the Forest and Rangeland Renewable ResourcesPlan ning Act (RPA).
4) Sec 325 : Divert Trail Fund for Forest
Health Logging allows the ten per cent roads
and trails fund to be u sed to imp rove forest healthcond ition s. Since the re are no restrictions limiting
the u se to no n-com mercial activities, and logging is
considered a forest h ealth activity, this fun d cou ldbe used to fund timber sales. This is a back door
meth od to fund m ore logging roads for salvage andcomm ercial timber o peration s. This rider also
eliminates the requiremen t that the roads and trailsfund be spen t in the same state the money is
generated in wh en used for these pu rposes.
5) Sec. 327: Tongass Red Cedar Rider
creates an incen tive to maximize timb er ha rvest onAlaskas Ton gass National Forest by leveragin g the
amo un t of Western Red Cedar available for expor t
against the percen tage of the Ton gass allowable salequan tity (ASQ) tha t is actua lly sold.
6) Sec. 328: Prevent Grizzly Bear Introduction
prohibits the Department of the Interior and other
federal agencies from spending funds to introducegrizzly bears in Idaho and Montan a without exp ress
written con sent of the governors of those two states.It requires federal agencies to get state perm ission to
implem ent a federal law on federal land s and sets a
broad precedent, both for other endan gered speciesrecovery actions and for all other federal laws.
7) Sec. 329: Undermine Science -based
Management of National Forest and BLM Lands
provides the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interiorbroad discretion to choose wh ether or not to collect
any new, and po tentially significant, inform ationconcerning wildlife resources prior to amending or
revising m anagem ent p lans, issuing leases, or
undertaking management activities.
8) Sec. 330: Interior Colum bia Basin Ecosys-
tem Project requires th e Secretaries to prepa re a
repor t prior to pu blishing the final EIS. This will
divert fund ing needed to comp lete the EIS andundermine the analysis of the ecological conditions
that p revail in the Interior Columb ia Basin du e to theexcessive logging an d grazing on federal lands.
9) Sec. 335: Stewardship End Result Contract-
ing Demonstration Project perm its the FS tocontract with p rivate entities to per form services toachieve land m ana gemen t goals in nation al forests in
Idaho an d Montana, and in the Umatilla National
Forest in Oregon. Drawbacks include: und efinedcomm un ity roles, lack of provisions for mon itoring
and oversight, and lack of a funding mechan ism.
10) Sec. 336: Weaken 1872 Mining Law
weaken s the 1872 Mining Law by exem pting minin goperations from toxic mining waste dumping
limitations on federal public land.
Legislative Update
Under one of t he proposed riders, trail fund revenues could be divert ed
into logging and roadbuilding under t he guise of forest health. File
photo.
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
11/16
The Road-RIPorter July/August 1999 11
On June 22, Congresswoman Lois Capps (D-CA) introduced legislation to
term inate th e par ticipation of the USFS in the Recreational Fee-Demon strationProgram . The bill (H.R. 2295 ), en titled the Forest Access Imm ediate Relief Act of
1999 , was referred to th e House Comm ittee on Agriculture and the Comm ittee on
Resources.To offset the revenu e lost by end ing particicpation in th e Fee-Demo pro gram,
the bill would pro hibit using approp riated funds to finan ce engineering fortimber sales. That is defined to include agen cy suppor t to plan, oversee design,
and adm inister road work fun ded by timb er purch asers. The bill directs the
agency, whe n ap praising timb er an d setting bids, to charge extra to cover the costof providing this supp ort.
In a related development on the fee-demo program, the Interior Appropria-tions Bill marked u p by the House will, once again, cut th e bud get of the US
Fore st Service (this time by $44 m illion). The bills langua ge also suggests tha tthe Recreation Fee Demo nstration Program , altho ugh well accepted by thepub lic, needs to be tweaked.
This seems to b e par t of an e ffort to force th e FS to develop pu blic land srecreation into a lucrative cash cow. It also reveals that Con gress is struggling to
deal with the fact that the gene ral pub lic refuses to accept this unsu ccessful and
unfair recreation fee-demo program.
What You Can DoWrite a letter to your r epresen tative pointing ou t that Congress shou ld not
cut the FS budget when th ere is so mu ch back-logged m aintenance to be don e.
Say it is wrong to sub stitute user-pay fu ndin g for allocated fund ing, and th atwith the p rojected budget surp lus, Con gress shou ld increase fund ing for recre-
ation and restoration on public lands.
11) Sec. N/A: Allows Oil Ind ustr y To Cont inue Underp ay-
ing Royalties delays the im pleme ntation of an oil valuation
ru le by the Mine rals Man agem en t Service (MMS). The MMSrule wou ld force the largest oil compan ies to stop u nde rpay-
ing, by $66- $100 m illion a year, the roya lties they owe th eAme rican p ublic for d rilling on pu blic land s.
U.S. HouseThe House Interior Appropr iation s Subcom mittee recently
met to mark-up its own Inter ior spending bill. The original
House spending levels ($11.3 billion) were drastically lower
than the Presidents request ($15 billion) and th e Senate levels(they were later raised to $14.4 b illion). The Presidents Land s
Legacy prop osal, like the Senate bill, received on ly half ofrequested amoun ts.
At pre ss time, the full House Approp riations Comm ittee ismee ting to mar k-up the Interior Approp riations bill. Several
anti-environmental riders are expected.
The Forest Services Fee Demon str ation program has
proven unpopular with recreationist s. Photo by Bill
Cunningham.
What You Can DoCall and write your Senators an d Representa tive (1-202-
224-3121) and tell them to oppose all anti-environmental
riders on the House an d Senate Interior Appro priations bills.Any attack on en viron men tal legislation sh ould be don e in full
pub lic view an d with full public discussion.
Write toRepresentative ________US House
Washington, D.C. 20015
Special thank s to Roger Featherstone and t he GrassRoots
Environmental Effectiveness Netw ork (GREEN) for t his report .
You can reach them at PO Box 40046, Albuquerque, NM 87196-
0046 (505) 255-5966 fax: (505) 255-5953
rfeather@defenders.org.
Bill Would End Forest Service Fee Demo Participation
Senato r _________US Sen ate
Washington, D.C. 20010
Clevenger, A.P. Permeability of the Trans-Canada Highway to
wildlife in Banff National Park: Importance of crossing
structures and factors influencing their effectiveness. 1998.
In: Evink, G.L., P. Garrett, D. Zeigler, and J. Berry,
Proceedings of the International Conference on Wildlife
Ecology and Transportation. FL DOT. FL-ER-69-98.
Tallahassee, FL.
DePaving the Way: References
Lehnert, M.E., L.A. Romin, and J.A. Bissonette. 1996. Mule Deer-
highway m ortality in Northeastern Utah: Causes, patterns,
and a new m itigative technique. In: Evink, G.L., P. Garre tt,
D. Zeigler, and J. Berry. Trends in Addressing Transportation
Related Wildlife Morta lity: Proceedings of the
Transportation Related Widllife Mortality Seminar. FL DOT.
FL-ER-58-96. Tallahassee, FL.
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
12/16
The Road-RIPorter July/August 199912
Bibliography Notes sum marizes and highlights some of the scientific literature in
our 6,000 citation bibliography on the ecological effects of roads. We offer bibliographic
searches to help activist s access important biological research relevant to roads. We
keep copies of most articles cited in Bibliography Notes in our office library.
Bibliography Notes
Desert Road Removal:By Scott Bagley
North Amer ican deser ts include th e warm Mojave,
Sonoran, an d Chihuahuan deserts, and the cold
Great Basin desert. Road rem oval in these areasrequ ires that special attention be given to the harsh climatic
cond itions. The climate o f the North American deser ts ischar acterized by h ighly variable precipitation , large diurn al
(day-night) variations in tem pera ture, low h um idity, and stro ng
winds. Precipitation occurs irregularly as shor t, high inten sitythu nde rstorms. Much of the water from these storms is lost to
surface run off, rather th an infiltrating into th e soil.
Widely spaced long-lived shr ubs pr edom inate in a patchyland scap e com posed o f islands of fertility (M.F. Allen 1988;
West 1988). Many desert herb s are foun d only beneath th eshrubs. What may appear to be a monoton ous terrestrial sea
of one species is actually highly diverse, but no t in theconven tional sense of species nu mb ers. Rather, there is a great
variation within sp ecies. Sagebru sh, for example, may h ave
only slight m orph ological variations across its range, but hasconsiderab le genetic variation. Successful revegetation
programs must account for this genetic variation.
Restor ing Deser t Ecosyst emsHalting road u se greatly imp roves desert ecosystems, since
mu ch of the degradin g influen ces of roads in deser ts relates to
hu man access. Natural desert recovery is extremely slow,however, reflecting the harsh environ me ntal conditions (Webbet al. 1983 ). Natural soil loosening depen ds on ph ysical
processes such as wetting/drying and freezing/thawing (esp.Great Basin d eser t), as well as biological activity. A variety o f
techniques enhance desert recovery, including those listed
below. The techniques are either mean t to improve thepoten tial for natural vegetation establishm ent or to im prove
success of active revegetation.
Decomp act Road Sur facesRoad surfaces must first be decompacted to a depth of
three or m ore feet to facilitate plant establishm ent. Deep
ripping imp roves infiltration an d percolation, an d facilitates
rapid root growth (Bainbridge an d Virginia 1990 ). Rippin g alsoincreases sur face roughn ess, which facilitates deposition of
blowing soil, organic material, seeds, and microsymb ionts(mycorrh izal fun gi and nitrogen-fixing b acteria).
Dig PitsExcavating pits of various sizes improves water availability
for plan ts (Bainb ridge and Virginia 1990). The pits collect
water and increase sur face roughness. A crew of four can digseveral hun dred in a day, using han d tools or power augers
(Patterson 1997).
Use Ver t ical MulchVertical mulching involves planting dead and down ed
plant mate rials into the ground (Patterson 19 97). Placing
vertical mulch (shru bs, cacti, grasses, etc.) helps camo uflage
closed roads, wh ich is especially impo rtant at ro ad take-offs toprevent access. Vertical mulch red uces wind speed, facilitates
depo sition of blowing soil and organic litter, and creates safesites for plant establishm ent. Some planted individuals
survive, providing an additional ben efit of vertical mulching.
Use Horizontal MulchPlacing piles of branches along slope contours enhances
desert recovery by obstructing surface water flow and creatingaerodyn amic drag. Researchers in Australia placed piles of
acacia branch es to m imic the natural landscape patchiness(Ludwig and Ton gway 1996 ; Ton gway an d Ludwig 1996 ), and
found that th is enhanced recovery by:
increasing water infiltration
increasing soil nutrients moder ating temperatures decreasing evaporative mo isture loss
increasing soil faun a (ants, mites, spiders, etc.)
creating favorable sites for peren nial plants protecting plants from grazing and browsing
creating safe sites for plants and an imals during drought increasing rates of biological processes
Apply this techn ique to road rem oval in your region bypiling branches from local shrubs an d other woody plants
along slope contours.
Harsh condit ions often belie the biological diversity of arid env irons.
Photo by Scott Bagley.
Creative Restoration Techniques
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
13/16
The Road-RIPorter July/August 1999 13
Direct SeedingDirect seeding is genera lly un successful in dese rt reveg-
etation pro jects, even w hen seeds are selected carefully andplanted prop erly; it is an ineffective deser t restoration strategy
(Bainb ridge and Virginia 1990 , Bainb ridge et al. 199 5). Desert
seeds gen erally have low viability an d ar e vulnerable todrou ght and an imals. If direct seeding is used, using local
mater ials and seed ing when precipitation is likely or when soilis moist will improve success (Bainbridge and Virginia 1990).
TransplantingTypical succession is virtually ab sent in North Amer ican
deserts (Vankat 1992 ). The species that colonize disturban ces
tend to continue to dom inate, as opposed to other regions,where plants often m odify conditions, making them more
favorable for other plants. For this reason, transplan tingdominan t shrubs provides great benefits for enh ancing desert
recovery. Once established, shru bs improve sites for new
plants by: trapping soil particles, organic matter, and
microsymbiont p ropagules increasing infiltration an d water storage in the soil
providing protection from the sun and wind
Dominan t desert sh rubs grow relatively well in nu rseries,
but m ay encounter ch allenges when planted in the field(Bainb ridge and Virginia 1990). Water ing increa ses survival,
but seed lings are still at risk from grazing an d browsing. Listed
below are some keys to successful transplanting. Large seedlings with extensive root systems sur vive
better, since they are better able to respon d to rain and u ptakenutrients.
Prun ing prior to outplan ting (planting in the field)
increases seed ling sur vival, since less sh oot tissue m ust besupported.
Inoculating seedlings with mycor rhizal fungi mayincrease su rvival and growth , since mycorrh izal fungi form
mutualistic associations with 90% or m ore of th e plant sp ecies
in arid and se miar id lan ds (E.B. Allen 1988 ). Comm ercialvarieties are available, but using local soil shou ld be em ph a-
sized to avoid introd ucing exotic fun gi to revegetation sites. Providing protection for newly established seedlings is
impo rtant to m inimize dam age from grazing pressure, high
winds, mo isture stress, and extrem e tempera tures. SeeBainbridge et al. (1995) for a discussion of o ptions for protect-
ing seed lings. Plantings based on natural successional processes
enh ance e stablishm ent p oten tial (M.F. Allen 1 988). Plantings
shou ld reflect the dispersed, patchy n ature of desert vegeta-
tion. Successful desert revegetation doe s not necessarily meana road has to be fully covered by vegetation.
Only seedlings from local sources should be used,
reflecting the great genetic diversity of dom inant sh rubs across
their ranges.
As an overall strategy to provide the greatest chan ce ofsuccessfully removing desert road s, use a combination o f the
above techn iques and ensu re that restored areas are no longer
accessed by off-roa d vehicles. If fun ding is no t available tofully remove a deser t road, con centrate th e available fun ds on
trying to cam ouflage road take-offs (jun ctions) to halt access.
ReferencesAllen, E.B. 1988. Some trajectories of succession in Wyoming
sagebrush grassland: implications for restoration. Pages
89-112 in E.B. Allen (ed.). 198 8. The Recon struction of
Disturbed Arid Lands: an Ecological Approach . Westview
Press, Boulder, CO.
Allen , M.F. 1988 . Below ground str ucture : a key to
reconstructing a productive arid ecosystem . Pages 113-
135 in E.B. Allen (ed.) 1988. The Reconstruction of
Disturbed Arid Lands: an Ecological Approach . Westview
Press, Boulder, CO.
Bainbridge, D.A. and R.A. Virginia. 1990. Restoration in theSonoran Desert of California. Restoration and Management
Notes 8(1): 3-14.
Bainbridge, D.A., M. Fidelibus, and R. MacAller. 1995.
Techniques for plant estab lishm ent in arid ecosystem s.
Restoration and Management Notes 13(2): 190-197.
Ludwig, J.A. and D.J. Tongway. 199 6. Rehabilitation of
sem iarid landscapes in Australia. II. Restoring vegetation
patchiness. Restoration Ecology 4(4): 398-406.
Patterson, D. 1997 . Personal comm unication. Consultant,
Round River Conservation Services, San Diego, CA.
Tongway, D.J. and J.A. Ludwig. 1996. Rehab ilitation of
sem iarid landscapes in Australia. I. Restoring p roductive
soil patches. Restoration Ecology 4(4): 388-397.
Vankat, J.L. 1992. The Natural Vegeta tion of North Amer ica: an
Introduction. Krieger Publishing Compa ny, Malaba r, FL.
Webb, R.H., H.G. Wilshire, and M.A. Henry. 198 3. Natural
recovery of soils and vegetation following hum an
disturbance. Pages 279-302 in R.H. Webb and H.G.
Wilshire (eds). Environm ental Effects of Off-road Vehicles:
Impacts an d Management in Arid Regions. Springer-
Verlag, New York, NY.
West, N.E. 1988 Interm ountain deserts, shrub steppes, and
woodlands. Pages 209-230 in M.G. Barbour and W.D.
Billings (eds. ). North American Terre stria l Vegeta tion.
Cam bridge University Press, Cam bridge.
Restoring roads in arid environ men ts requires special techniques. Photo
by Scott Moore.
Scott Bagley is author of The Road Rippers Guide to Wildland
Road Removal.
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
14/16
The Road-RIPorter July/August 199914
Regional Reports & Alerts
Bluewater Network Settles Jet Ski,Snowmobile Lawsuit
The Bluewater Network recently settled an on ging lawsuit against man ufacturersof two-stroke en gines, used in jet skis and snowm obiles. The group sued in Califor-
nia cour t conten ding pollution from two-stroke en gines violates the Californ ia SafeDrinking Water Act and exp oses peo ple to dan gerous levels of carbon m onox ide.
Defend ents nam ed in the suit were: Arctic Cat, Bom bardier, Mercury Marine/Brunswick, Outboard Marine Corp., Polaris Industries, Suzuki Motors, Tohatsu
Outboard Motors, and Yam aha Motors.
Provisions of the settlemen t include: ma nu facturers mu st place warning labelson each vehicle about th e effects of two-stroke engines; they m ust pay $12 5,000 in
legal fees and $1 75,000 to two en viron men tal group s fighting oil spills and o theremissions; two-stroke marine en gine sales will be termina ted in Californ ia by 2006
(the Air Board h as already preem pted th is, establishing 200 4); the ind ustry m ust
develop a two-stroke trade-in progra m for the Los Angeles area; and m isleading eco-labeling p rograms w ill be restricted.
In anoth er victory for th e Bluewater Network, earlier this m onth the Nation alPark Service (NPS) accepted th e Networks sn owmo bile petition an d agr eed to laun ch
an in-depth investigation into the damage snowm obiles cause park resources. Once
the review is comp leted, the NPS will make reco mm end ations on h ow to elimin atesnowm obile imp acts. The US Environm ental Protection Agency had agreed to the
request to set regulatory standards for snowmobile emissions.For m ore inform ation contact the Bluewater Network at 415-788-3666 (phon e)
or on th e web at: www.earth island .org/bw. ORVs Stopped
Activists on the Blacksburg-Wythe
Ranger District (Jefferson NationalForest), nor th of Blacksburg an d no rth o f
Wytheville, Virginia, r eport a victory in
their efforts to limit ORV-caused damage
of public lands.One o f the districts mo st contr over-
sial projects was a prop osed 12 -mile
ORV trail on Roun d Mounta in, in th e
Burkes Garden section of th e forest. TheORV trail would have been audible from
the Appa lachian Trail, just a cross th evalley. The trail was propo sed on q uiet
old woods roads and steep slopes
upstr eam from Hunting Camp Creek, aTMDL stream segmen t (protected u nde r
the Clean Water Act).On June 18, District Ranger David
Collins ch ose th e n o-build alternative,
citing po tential for tresspass on to privateland, ha zardous trail/road cro ssings,
potential impacts to n umer ous streamchann els on the side of the moun tain,
and overwhelming local opposition to
the m otorized trail.For more information contact
Sherma n Bamford of Preserve Appa la-chian Wildern ess (PAW), PO Box 1 3192,
Roanoke, Va 24031-3192 (540)982-0492.
Alliance Plans Annual Rendezvous
The Missoula, Mon t. based Allian ce for the Wild Rockies (AWR) will hold its
ann ual Wild Rockies Rendezvous on Septemb er 17-19. Held in the Rattlesnake
Moun tains at Snowbowl, just north of Missoula, Mon tana, this three d ay eventincludes han ds-on worksh ops, inform ative pane ls, live mu sic and m ore. This years
keynote ad dress will be delivered b y Martha Marks, president of Repu blicans forEnvironmental Protection.
Camp ing is free, food is available for p urch ase on -site, and registration is on ly
$10 for the weekend. See an on-line schedu le at www.wildrockies.org/awr. For m oreinforma tion an d to register, contact AWR outreach director Bob Clark a t 406 -721-
542 0, e-mail: bob clark@w ildrockies.org, or PO Box 8731 , Missou la, MT 5 9807.
Ruts like these, caused by illegal ORV use,
accelerate erosion and damage downslope
water quality. Photo by Cate Campbell.
Wildlands CPR will soon pub lish a n o n-line library of our extensive collec-tion of bibliograph y notes, legal notes, and field no tes. It will be po sted on the
world wide web an d fully inde xed to facilitate searches. Our goal is to get these
scientific, legal and field resources into th e h and s of road activists, where youcan p ut them to work fighting for road removal.
Wildlands CPR announces an internship opp ortunity working to fight the
specter o f indu strial recreation with Wild Wilderness in Bend, Oregon. Help getrid of bad recreation man agemen t, from ORVs to huge private campgrou nd s on
pu blic lands. For more informa tion con tact Scott Silver at 541-385-5261, or e-mail: ssilver@wildwilderness.org.
New Resources for Road-Rippers
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
15/16
The Road-RIPorter July/August 1999 15
Wildlands CPR Publications: Road-Ripper's Handbook ($15.00, $25 non-members) A
comp rehen sive activist m anual that includes th e five Guideslisted below, plus The Ecological Effects of Roads , Gather-ing Informat ion wit h the Freedom of Information Act , andmore!
Road-Ripper's Guide to t he National Forest s ($4, $7 non-mem-
bers) By Keith Hamm er. How-to pro cedu res for gettingroads closed and revegetated, descriptions of environ men -tal laws, road de nsity stan dards & Forest Service road poli-cies.
Road-Ripper 's Guide to t he National Parks ($4, $7 non-mem -bers) By David Bahr & Aron Yarm o. Provides backgroun don th e National Park System an d its use of roads, and o ut-lines ho w activists can get involved in NPS plann ing.
Road-Ripper 's Guide t o the BLM ($4, $7 non-memb ers) ByDan Stotter. Provides an overview of road-related lan d an dresource laws, and det ailed discussion s for participating inBLM decision-making processes.
Road-Ripper 's Guide to Off-Road Vehicles ($4, $7 non-mem-bers) By Dan Wright. A com preh ensive guide to redu c-ing the use an d abuse o f ORVs on p ublic land s. Includes an
extensive bibliography.
Road-Ripper s Guide to W ildland Road Removal ($4, $7 non-members)By Scott Bagley. Provides tech nical inform a-
tion on road construction and removal, where and whyroads fail, and how yo u can effectively assess road rem oval
projects.
Trails of Destr uction ($10)By Friends of the Earth and Wild-land s CPR, written by Erich Pica and Jacob Smith . This
repo rt explains th e ecological imp acts of ORVs, federal fund-ing for motorized recreation on p ublic land s, and the ORV
industrys role in pu shing th e ORV agenda.
Bibliographic Services:Ecological Imp acts of Roads: A Bibliographic Database (Up-
date d Feb. 1998) Edited by Reed Noss. Com piled b y Dave
Augeri, Mike Eley, Steve Humph rey, Reed Noss, Paul Pacquet& Susan Pierce. Contains ap prox. 6,000 citation s includ-
ing scientific literature o n erosion, fragmentation, sedim en-
tation, po llution, effects on wildlife, aquatic an d h ydrologi-
cal effects, and other information on the impacts of roads.Use the ecological literature to un derstand an d develop roaddensity standards, priorities for road removal, and other
road issues.
Database Searches We will search th e Bibliograph y on thesubjects that interest you, and provide results in IBM or
Macintosh form at (specify software), or on pap er. We alsohave prep ared a 1-disk Bibliographic Summ ary with resu lts
for comm only requested searches. Finally, we offer the full
bibliography. However, you mu st ha ve Pro-Cite or a com -patible database pro gram in order to use it.
Bibliography p rices Prices are based on a sliding scale. Callfor details.
WILDLA N DS CPR MEMBERSH IP/ORD ER FORM
Please send this form and your check (payable to Wildlands CPR)to the address below. Thank you!
Wildlands CPR PO Box 7516 Missoula, Montana 59807
Prices include shipping: for Priority Mail add $3.00 per item;for Canadian orders, add $6.00 per item.
International Membership $30 MinimumAll prices in U.S. Dollars
Ask about reduced rates for items ordered in bulk.
Phone/E-mail
Affiliation
I want to join (or renew my membership with)Wildlands CPR:
Address
Name
Type of Member ship: Individual Organization
Other$30 standard
$50 business
$15 low-income
$100$250
Send me these Wildlands CPR Publications:
Qty: Title/Price Each: Total:
Total of all items:
/
/
/
-
8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 4.4
16/16
Visions...
Non-profit OrganizationUS POSTAGE
PAID
MISSOULA, MT 59801PERMIT NO. 569
The Road-RIPorter is printed on 100% post-consumer recycled, non-chlorine bleached paper.
Wildlands Center for Preventing Roads
P.O. Box 7516
Missoula, MT 59807
You know what they say : t he biggest
difference betw een men and boys is
t he size of t heir t oys.
Radio advertisement promoting Kalispell
(Montana) motorized vehicle show.
A t ree grows in Brooklyn, so to speak.
Photoby
BethGraves.
top related