road riporter 10.3 autumn equinox 2005

Upload: wildlands-cpr

Post on 30-May-2018

216 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    1/24

    Autumn Equinox 2005. Volume 10 # 3

    Inside

    Check out our website at:www.wildlandscpr.org

    Victory in the Lost River Valley, byLahsha Johnston. Pages 3-5

    Policy Primer: Data Quality Act, byAmy Atwood. Pages 6-7

    Depaving the Way, by BethanieWalder. Pages 8-9

    Odes to Roads, by Scott Stouder.

    Pages 10-11

    Get with the Program: Restoration &Transportation Program Updates.Pages 12-13

    Biblio Notes: Roads in the BrazilianAmazon, by Adam Switalski.Pages 14-16

    Legislative Update: The HighwaySpending Bill. Page 17

    Regional Reports. Pages 18-19

    Citizen Spotlight: The Sky Island

    Alliance, by Cathy Adams.Pages 20-21

    Around the Office, Membership info.Pages 22-23

    Victory in the Lost River ValleyBy Lahsha Johnston

    The fragile apline meadows and grasslands of the Lost River Valley havebeen, for now, spared the intrusion of a motorized mega-route.

    Photo by Matt Leidecker.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    2/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 20052

    2005 Wildlands CPR

    Wildlands CPR works to protect and restorewildland ecosystems by preventing andremoving roads and limiting motorized

    recreation. We are a national clearinghouseand network, providing citizens with toolsand strategies to fight road construction,

    deter motorized recreation, and promote roadremoval and revegetation.

    P.O. Box 7516Missoula, MT 59807

    (406) 543-9551

    www.wildlandscpr.org

    DirectorBethanie Walder

    Development DirectorTom Petersen

    Restoration ProgramCoordinator

    Marnie Criley

    Science CoordinatorAdam Switalski

    Transportation PolicyOrganizer

    Jason Kiely

    Program AssistantCathy Adams

    NewsletterDan Funsch & Marianne Zugel

    Interns & VolunteersJess Bernard, Katherine Court, Sonya Germann,

    Laura Harris, Gordon Willson Naranjo

    Board of DirectorsAmy Atwood, Karen DiBari, Greg Fishbein,

    Jim Furnish, William Geer, Dave Havlick, Cara

    Nelson, Sonya Newenhouse, Matt Skroch

    Advisory CommitteeJasper Carlton, Dave Foreman,

    Keith Hammer, Timothy Hermach,Marion Hourdequin, Kraig Klungness, Lorin Lind-ner, Andy Mahler, Robert McConnell, Stephanie

    Mills, Reed Noss, Michael Soul, Steve Trombulak,Louisa Willcox, Bill Willers, Howie Wolke

    Lost River panorama. Photo by Matt Leidecker

    The times they are a changing (well, sort of), at the Federal Highways Department(FHWA). On August 10, 2005, the President signed the long-overdue, oft-extendedsix year federal highway spending bill. This bill includes one significant beneficial

    change from previous highways bills, continuing a trend toward more ecologically soundhighway planning that began in 1992. But it is also, as always, loaded with ecologicallydamaging pork projects.

    While we review key provisions of the bill on page 17, some overall trends are worthnoting here. For the first time, the new bill provides direct funding for wildlife cross-ing structures across highways. Such structures can increase habitat connectivity andreduce collisions saving both human and animal lives. The bill also provides funding toimprove fish passage under roads.

    These provisions are historic, though in truth, they are long overdue. Other coun-tries, including our immediate neighbor to the north, have far outspent and out-re-searched the United States in devising more effective mitigation structures to reduce theimpacts of roads on wildlife. On the bright side, numerous projects are now underway

    in the U.S., including the reconstruction of a road right here in Montana that will includemore than 40 wildlife crossing structures over a 60-mile stretch of highway.

    We will work with other conservationists to assess the true amount of funding avail-able for wildlife and aquatic mitigation, and to ensure that such money is used to developecologically sound structures that will help reduce the impacts of highways on wildlife.But it is important to remember that mitigation is not the same as prevention or restora-tion. Wildlands CPRs first priority will always be to prevent new road construction inecologically sensitive places, since mitigation can only reduce, but not eliminate, habitatfragmentation and other ecological impacts of highways.

    While the name is pretty: the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient TransportationEquity Act A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), the bill maintains the status quo onhighway spending and funds $24 billion worth of pork projects, while tossing a bone toconservation interests to address the impacts of some of these projects. Wildlands CPRworked with a small group of activists from Washington DC and the west to promote some

    of the good provisions, while also fighting the bad provisions in the bill. Unfortunately,we were not able to stop all of the funding for bad earmarks, including three ecologicallydevastating, and extraordinarily expensive projects proposed in Alaska. Our efforts nowwill turn to fighting the implementation of such projects..

    As we were going to press, the New York Times editorialized about one way we couldboth reduce the highway spending pork and help the victims of Hurricane Katrina. Theyrecommended that the states give back some of the earmarked pork project money al-located in SAFETEA-LU. We support the idea, and think its an ideal way for other statesto lend a financial hand to the Gulf Coast residents as they deal with the fallout of thehurricane, and for people throughout the country to show that we really can set priori-ties about whats important. We hope that some good can come from this tragic andtruly catastrophic event by helping Americans refocus our efforts on addressing poverty,injustice and environmental degradation right here in our own backyard. Our thoughtsand best wishes go to everyone affected by this storm.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    3/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2005 3

    Victory in the Lost River ValleyBy Lahsha Johnston

    continued on next page

    T

    he Lost River Valley is iconic of the Westsbroad, open valleys flanked by steep,dramatic mountain ranges. High elevation

    peaks dotted with snow fields and cirques holdingsmall lakes sweep down to sage and grass coveredhills. Below these majestic peaks, meandering riverchannels intertwine with meadows in this centralIdaho setting. And this summer, in a victory forrural values and quiet recreation, the Lost Riverand Pahsimeroi Valleys were spared from becominghome to the nations largest off-road vehicle routeand the first such route to propose state manage-ment of federal lands.

    Background

    In 2002 the Idaho Department of Parks and

    Recreation (IDPR) proposed the Lost River Trail, a460-mile off-road vehicle route to be built on publiclands managed by the Salmon-Challis National For-est and Bureau of Land Management (BLM). In addi-tion, the IDPR requested sole management authorityover a two-mile wide corridor the routes entirelength. The proposed route ran from the city ofArco north to Challis and beyond, and on both sidesof the Lost River Range, with two portions crossingthrough the heart of these mountains.

    Opponents succeeded in defeating this ill-con-ceived mega-route by working together. Cuttingthrough misinformation and rhetoric, The Wilder-

    ness Society and its Idaho allies revealed the uglyfacts: (1) the ecological and social impacts createdby increased off-road vehicle traffic would changethe way of life for area ranchers and residents; (2)the unfunded maintenance and enforcement coststo municipalities and counties, as well as federalagencies, greatly outweighed the cheery forecast ofthe benefits that a mega-route would bring to strug-gling rural economies.

    Considering the Impacts

    Our concerns over the off-road vehicle routeincluded impacts to the environment, wildlife,Wilderness Study Areas, noise, erosion, habitat frag-mentation, weeds, fire, water, route proliferation,enforcement, maintenance, monitoring, rehabilita-tion, and general route management including statecontrol. The effects of a route this large, however,go far beyond the immediate corridor and actualroute cumulative impacts to resources and otherforms of recreation enjoyed on adjacent publiclands would be significant and irreversible. Wealso knew there would likely be increased demands

    placed on federal agencies and local government services, conflictswith private property owners and recreation, and impacts to the localeconomy. Many people shared our concerns, but did not understandthe federal planning process and agency regulations that govern off-road vehicle use.

    Federal law requires preparing an in-depth analysis of the environ-mental, social, and economic consequences of any major federal actionin an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Such an analysis must in-clude consideration of alternatives to the proposal. Since the IDPR is a

    state agency they were not required to undertake this type of extensiveanalysis, however, because their proposal required the BLM and ForestService to sanction the route across federal land, we argued that an EISshould be prepared. When the federal agencies would not commit toan EIS, we made it very clear that we were prepared to seek immediatelegal recourse to force them to do so.

    An Agencys (Blind) Ambition

    The IDPR was convinced that if given the opportunity, they couldmanage off-road vehicle use better than the federal agencies. Theopinions of federal agency staff were mixed. Some thought that a des-ignated route would help resolve conflicts over increasing motorizedrecreation, or that money from the IDPR would provide resources to

    make up for decreasing federal budgets. And, since IDPR was propos-ing the route, state officials would bear the brunt of criticism andpublic scrutiny. Finally, no one had developed any alternatives to thelarge route concept. It was the only game in town.

    In addition to being the only alternative proposed, the IDPR calledit a demonstration project to be used to monitor, evaluate, and test po-tential management strategies for motorized recreation in the state ofIdaho. The IDPR identified the proposed Lost River Trail as the firstof several such demonstration projects around the state. Then last

    Rural values like peace, quiet, and (the lack of) traffic were all threatened bythe proposed route. Photo by Matt Leidecker.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    4/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 20054

    continued from page 3

    April the IDPR State Director, Rick Collignon, resigned. A big propo-nent of the Lost River Trail, he left behind a cash strapped agency withlow employee morale in a poor position to expand their manage-ment portfolio with the addition of a large off-road vehicle route.

    Selling Snake Oil

    The IDPR compared the Lost River Trail to the Paiute Trail in Utahin order to gain the support of business leaders. The Paiute Trail con-sists of 275 miles of designated routes and hosts an estimated 47,000ORV riders annually. Paiute Trail promoters steer riders to an addi-tional 2,500 trail miles on surrounding public lands, tying 16 local com-munities into the unofficial trail system. Similarly, IDPR called for theLost River Trail to link the communities of Arco, Mackay, and Challis,envisioning trail expansion to reach 12 more communities. And likethe Paiute Trail, the Lost River Trail was touted as a revenue sourceof millions for local economies by attracting riders from across thecountry. For a while, this promise of prosperity seemed to work. Forexample, the Custer County Commissioners were in favor of the routeand had been convinced it would be an economic savior to their strug-gling communities. But these comparisons were based on anecdotal

    opinions obtained from Utah businesses along the Paiute Trail, not onany economic data or analysis.

    Fuzzy Math

    The start-up budget for the Lost River Trail project was $172,500,to be used for parking, rest-rooms, information kiosks, cattle guards,signs, maps and fencing needs. As one local citizen estimated, Thecost of purchasing a special ORV guard or a standard 8-foot cattleguard and wings is somewhere between $500-800. Add an estimated$600/install for a backhoe, foundation material, hand labor, etc. Basedon the budget allocation, this citizen commented you will only haveenough money for five cattle guards. I can count at least 20 allotments

    along the proposed trail just from Arco to Willow Creek Summit thatwill be affected.

    In addition, the IDPR proposal called for onlytwo law enforcement officers to patrol the entire460-mile route. Local communities, counties, roadand fire districts were asked to provide mainte-nance, search and rescue, ambulance, fire, law en-forcement and manage access points with existingbudgets. The BLM and Forest Service would receiveno additional resources to manage thousands of

    new riders expected to use the route. And, humannature being what it is, those riders would also usethe more than 3,000 miles of routes accessible fromthe official Lost River Trail.

    Listening to the Locals

    In Idaho, The Wilderness Society has a reputa-tion for working with people in local communitiesthat are directly affected by federal policies. Bymeeting with small groups of ranchers and othercommunity leaders, we discovered ways to worktogether. Some of the first things we providedwere maps of the proposed off-road vehicle route.

    This helped us acquire very specific on-the-groundinformation as to the potential impacts of theroute. In return, we shared our knowledge and

    Information requested from theIdaho Department of Parks and Recreation (IDPR)

    Baseline data on wildlife habitat, noxious weeds, dispersed use, current use, and economic data Ground truthing data, surveys, and the methodology used for the 2002 surveys on potential trail routes IDPRs inventory of existing roads and trails and the GPS database of all routes that intersect the proposed trail IDPRs draft charter for the proposed Citizens Advisory Committee All documents relating to costs of the trail, including advertising, signage, enforcement, resource restoration,search and rescue, noxious weed control, education, trail maintenance, construction and reconstruction, monitor-ing, restrooms, parking, kiosks, and maps The IDPR 2002 budget, including funding and expenditures on motorized versus non-motorized recreation Cost estimates for county and local government services that IDPR expects these entities will absorb Letters of support from city, county and state officials Minutes, records, presentation materials and handouts from all inter-agency steering committee meetings All information gathered about the Paiute Trail ORV route

    Photo by Matt Leidecker.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    5/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2005 5

    expertise on federal land policy, agency planning requirements, andopportunities for public involvement. We concentrated our efforts oneducating those most directly affected, developing relationships withprivate property owners, ranchers, local governments, and communityleaders. We worked to dissuade the Forest Service and BLM of theirinitial support for the proposal. And, we organized a coalition of otherconservation, hunting, wildlife, and recreation interests. The IDPRabandoned the route proposal as a direct result of our efforts.

    Over the last few years we have developed a greater understand-ing of the values we share with many of the residents of these small

    communities. They value their way of life, which includes wildlife,peace and quiet, and low traffic. Everyone agrees that existing off-road

    vehicle use needs better management. Designating a 460-mile routethrough the heart of this remote landscape would not necessarilyresult in better management. Nor would it necessarily result in overalleconomic benefits to the local communities. Local citizens growingunderstanding of these threats prompted them to publicly oppose andthus help stop this proposal.

    In their own words

    Im a cattle rancher using the range in whichthis trail will be placed. We have to have anaverage of five years study to simply placea water trough or move a bit of fence. If thistrail is allowed with the minimal amount of

    study, I would seriously recommend that graz-ing permittees file suit against the BLM andForest Service for harassment and discrimina-tion between multiple use users.

    public comment sent to IDPREveryone agrees that existing off-road vehicle use

    needs better management.

    Do It Right the Next Time

    The BLM and Forest Service should completea comprehensive route designation process for alllands under their jurisdiction in the Lost River Val-ley. The agencies should work together to analyzethe environmental and social impacts of hundredsof miles of user-created renegade routes. We expectthat communities are looking at a variety of optionsto promote recreation and boost local economies our recommendation is for the IDPR to work withthem to develop a variety of sustainable recreationopportunities that take into consideration the qual-ity of life and values that are important to theserural residents. IDPR should also use the income

    they generate from off-road vehicle registrations toestablish a mandatory state-wide off-road vehiclesafety, education and enforcement program. Localelected officials such as county commissioners con-sistently receive complaints from private landown-ers and ranchers who experience off-road vehicletrespass spilling over from neighboring public lands.Federal land management agencies should negotiatecooperative agreements that fund county sheriffsto enforce off-road vehicle rules on federal publiclands. Working together we can find solutions thatare good for the landscape and the local communi-ties.

    Lahsha Johnston is the Regional ConservationAssociate in the Idaho Office of The WildernessSociety. Since 1995 she has worked closely withdiverse groups from other conservation, recreation,

    government, and other interests on a wide range ofissues and projects involving wilderness and publiclands management.

    For now, the Lost River Valley will be spared ORVdamage. Photo by Keith Hammer.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    6/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 20056

    Data Quality ActBy Amy Atwood

    Wildlands CPRPolicy Primer

    During the last five years, the Bush Administration has system-atically attacked scientific integrity in all aspects of govern-ment regulation. They have relied on junk science, innuendo,

    and anecdotes to support industry-friendly environmental policies orweakened environmental safeguards. This trend has only increased asthe Administrations friends have increasingly turned to a four-year-oldlaw with a misleading name, the Information Quality Act (IQA), in theirongoing effort to weaken federal environmental regulations.

    IQA in Theory and PracticeThe IQA (also known as the Data Quality Act), a seemingly in-

    nocuous law passed as a rider to a 2001 appropriations bill, requiredthe Presidents Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to establishguidelines for federal agencies to maximize the quality, objectivity,utility, and integrity of information that they disseminate to the public.OMBs guidelines were promulgated in 2002, and, in addition to requir-ing federal agencies to adopt their own IQA rules, require agenciesthat disseminate so-called influential information to provide a highdegree of transparency about data and methods to facilitate reproduc-ibility of such information by qualified third parties.

    In a few cases, the IQA has been rightfully used to stymie agen-cies reliance on clearly flawed data. In response to an IQA challengefiled by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER),the Fish and Wildlife Service was forced to acknowledge it had consis-

    tently relied on flawed habitat and population dataconcerning the habits of the highly endangeredFlorida panther. In addition, the Federal EmergencyManagement Agency routinely makes minor datacorrections as a result of petitions submitted to theagency pursuant to the IQA.

    In the overwhelming majority of cases, how-ever, the IQA has been used by industry groupsand political interests to challenge agency data thatsupports common sense regulation in many areas,including the environment and public health. Forexample, in 2003, the Salt Institute, an associationof salt producers and manufacturers, submittedan IQA petition to the Department of Health andHuman Services challenging dietary guidelines that surprise urged Americans to lower their intakeof salt in order to reduce the risk of hypertension.As another example, in deliberating whether to listthe greater sage grouse under the Endangered Spe-cies Act, Julie MacDonald, a Department of Interior(DOI) political appointee with no formal biologicaleducation or training, tried to quash data showingthat the greater sage grouse needs diverse sage-brush ecosystems to survive, on the basis that suchinformation violated the IQA.

    While the IQA cases brought by industry (on is-sues as varied as salt, asbestos and pesticides) haveweakened environmental and human health provi-sions, the few cases filed on behalf of the environ-ment have changed little on the ground. In the caseof the panther data, the FWS admitted the data wasflawed, but then announced that no agency decisionor biological review would be reexamined as a resultof PEERs ostensibly successful IQA challenge.

    Clearly, there are some problems with the IQA.

    In fact, these examples only hint at the Actsproblems and raise doubts about using the IQA atall as a tool to protect the environment. Rather, aserious overhaul or repeal might be in order. To be-gin with, the standards imposed on agencies by theIQA i.e., that they ensure the quality, objectiv-ity, utility, and integrity of information that theydisseminate to the public are utterly vague andtotally subjective. There is no direction as to what

    This Policy Primer is a columndesigned to highlight the ins &

    outs of a specific road or off-roadvehicle policy. If you have a

    policy youd like us to investigate,let us know!

    Good science shows the benefits of restoring roads through techniquessuch as installing this sediment wash. Is there a place for science inthe Bush Administration? Photo by Marnie Criley.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    7/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2005 7

    was actually intended by such terms, since the IQAwas passed as a rider to a 2001 appropriations billwithout any hearings or Congressional debate, andtherefore lacks any legislative history.

    In addition, when it comes to data that informsdecisions that impact the environment, the Act hasbeen read to impose higher standards for scientificinformation than those found in our nations exist-ing environmental laws. For example, the Endan-gered Species Act requires federal agencies to relyon the best scientific information available andto draw all inferences in favor of imperiled species.The best information available is not always peerreviewed. Yet, Ms. MacDonald interpreted the IQAto require FWS to rely on peer reviewed informationto support a listing of the grouse a much higherstandard that effectively put the burden of proof onthe species. For such species, just as with manyother environmental concerns, such ironclad dataare rarely available. Such an approach also conflictswith the so-called precautionary principle, argu-ably inherent in many of the nations environmentallaws and regulations, which requires that when

    probabilities cannot be calcluated with reasonableprecision, decisions that could lead to great harmshould be avoided.

    In addition, industry groups exploit the IQAs re-quirement that scientific studies must be reproduc-ible, by designing meaningless studies to confoundgood data within the literature. Such junk sciencewas used in an IQA challenge to the EPAs restric-tions on the pesticide atrazine, which was linkedto hormone disruption by separate studies in threecountries. Atrazines manufacturer conducted itsown studies that did not reproduce these results,and convinced EPA against restricting atrazines use.

    (The pesticide is banned in Europe because of itshealth effects.)

    Furthermore, at least two federal district courts

    have ruled that IQA challenges to the quality of in-formation disseminated by federal agencies shouldtake place only in administrative proceedings beforeagencies, and not in the courts, thereby seeminglyinsulating agency IQA determinations from judicialreview.

    Consequences of IQA LoopholesNeither the IQA itself, nor the OMB or other

    agency guidelines, provide a means for interested

    parties to defend the quality of information theysubmit to a federal agency when that informationis later attacked through an IQA challenge. Forexample, when the Partnership for the West a co-alition of western industries and economic interests attacked through an IQA challenge the quality ofinformation in the petition to list the sage grouseunder the ESA, the conservationist petitioners werenever so much as informed of the Partnershipschallenge, let alone afforded any formal opportunityto respond and defend the quality of the data sup-porting listing.

    These problems create a perfect storm of conditions for anyadministration to make politically convenient decisions that rewardfriends but which do not necessarily rely on the best data and informa-tion available. As PEERs Executive Director, Jeff Ruch, told a House

    Subcommittee in July, the IQA produces meaningful relief only if theagency feels like giving it.

    We should not be so innocent to think that unseemly use of theIQA wont happen. In February, PEER and the Union of ConcernedScientists released the results of a survey of FWS biologists, ecologists,and other science professionals, which revealed that over half hadbeen induced to reverse or withdraw scientific conclusions throughpolitical intervention by commercial interests. A similar survey ofscientists within the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administra-tion Fisheries Services produced similar results. It should also comeas no surprise that the IQA is supported by entities such as the SaltInstitute, Partnership for the West, and the Chamber of Commerce, thelatter of which testified before Congress in support of the IQA in July,

    or that the IQA has been strongly criticized by progressive groups andlegal scholars. OMB Watch released a report on the IQAs first year ofimplementation, and found the law to be riddled with problems. EvenPEER, one of the few non-industry organizations to use the IQA, toldCongress that it found the IQA to be flawed, only slightly effective, andprofoundly weak.

    Recommended ReformsOnly in the unlikely event that the IQAs many problems could be

    remedied through legislative action following informed debate andhearings in Congress should the IQA be given any legitimacy at all.Such reforms must include, at a minimum, clear standards for ensuringthe quality of agency-disseminated information, and provisions that al-low for judicial review of agency decisions made under the IQA, as well

    as for the participation of interested parties in the administrative pro-cess. If such reforms were passed following an informed debate, theIQA could become a powerful tool for any organization to participate inthe democratic process, and, presumably, could even result in higherquality information flowing from federal agencies. Until then, and per-haps even then, the IQA will remain a subjective, politically-driven, andexpensive albatross on an already-strapped federal government.

    Amy Atwood is a lawyer with the Western Environmental Law Centerin Eugene, OR. She is also a member of the Wildlands CPR Board of

    Directors.

    Bighorn sheep in Glacier National Park. Photo by Dan Funsch.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    8/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 20058

    Roaring Through the ParksBy Bethanie Walder

    During the brief moments of the 2004 presi-dential campaign that werent focusedon Iraq, the economy or terrorism, other

    issues got some mention including healthcare,education, and even the environment. One of thesafe environmental topics George Bush chose tospeak about was the National Parks. He explicitlydiscussed the need to fully fund the National Parksto address their maintenance backlogs and restorethese national treasures to their full glory. Now,nearly a year after the election, that funding hasfailed to materialize and the Bush Administration

    has largely ignored every National Park except Yel-lowstone while systematically promoting resourceextraction and privatization of other public lands.

    Unfortunately, the Bush Administrations truepriorities for National Park management becamepainfully clear last month. The Coalition of NationalPark Service Retirees (CNPSR) released a copy ofBushs proposed changes to National Park policies.His proposal would fundamentally change morethan 100 years of management direction. TheNewYork Times andLos Angeles Times both reportedon the revisions, which were prepared by the officeof Paul Hoffman, deputy assistant secretary of theInterior. Fran Mainella, Director of the National Park

    Service, reports to Paul Hoffman.

    According to CNPSR, the Department of the Interior (DOI) spenttwo years developing their proposed changes, which call for significantincreases in motorized recreation and decreases in environmental pro-tection. TheLos Angeles Times reported that the changes would allowsnowmobiles to travel over any paved road in any national park in thewinter; elevate certain activities already occurring in some parks, suchas grazing and mining, to park purposes which would ensure theircontinuation; and change the acceptable level of air quality from natu-ral background to air that has been altered by human presence.

    National Park OriginsThe National Park Service (NPS) and System were created by Con-

    gress in 1916 (even though the first National Park, Yellowstone, wasdesignated in 1872). Congress established the system to conserve thescenery and the natural and historic objects and the wildlife thereinand to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and bysuch means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of futuregenerations (16 USC 1). This conservation purpose was furtherclarified by Congress in 1978 and by the NPS in 2001 to ensure that itremained more important than other uses, so that park resources willbe available for future generations in perpetuity.

    New Direction for Parks?The proposed new policies would directly violate this Congressio-

    nal direction, though the DOI insists that the changes are minimal and

    would have little impact. CNPSR developed an excellent chart compar-ing the proposed changes to the 2001 policy language weve usedit to highlight a few of the changes that concern people interested inreducing the impacts of roads and off-road vehicles. For the full chart,go to http://www.npsretirees.org/index.htm

    Off-Road Vehicle Changes (Section 8.2.3.1)Former language that has been removed or reworded

    Within the National Park System, routes and areas may be des-ignated for off-road motor vehicle use only by special regulation, andonly when it would be consistent with the purposes for which the parkunit was established. Route and areas may be designated only in loca-tions in which there would be no adverse impacts on the areas natu-ral, cultural, scenic and esthetic values and in consideration of other

    visitor uses. As required by the Executive Order and the Organic Act,superintendents must immediately close a designated off-road vehicleroute whenever the use is causing, or will cause, unacceptable adverseeffects on the soil, vegetation, wildlife, wildlife habitat, or cultural orhistoric resources.

    Proposed new languageWithin the National Park System, off-road vehicle use that occurs

    on or over roads regularly used by automobiles shall be allowed andmanaged in the same manner as automobile traffic is managed, whilealso ensuring traffic safety. Off-road vehicle use on off-road routes orin off-road areas may be necessary, when consistent with park purpos-

    How far will the Bush Administration go toaccommodate motorized users? Widening a trail inGlacier National Park. Photo by Dan Funsch.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    9/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2005 9

    [The Bush Administrations]

    proposal would fundamentally

    change more than 100 years of park

    management direction.

    es, to provide opportunities for visitors to use andenjoy their parks. Off-road routes and areas may bedesignated for off-road motor vehicle use by specialregulation when consistent with park purposes andpublic safety and in such manner as will not causethe impairment of resources or values. The criterialisted in section 8.2 should also be applied to deter-mine whether off-road vehicle use may be allowedon off-road routes or in off-road areas. As requiredby the Executive order and the Organic Act, super-intendents must first manage off-road vehicle use,and, if necessary, prohibit off-road vehicle use, onoff-road routes or in off-road areas to provide forpublic safety and prevent impairment of resourcesor values.

    Analysis of the ProposalThis example highlights the profound change

    that DOI envisions for off-road vehicle recreationin the parks. The original policy allowed off-roadmotorized use by special regulation only, and onlyif it was consistent with the purposes for which thepark unit was established. The proposed policy al-lows off-road vehicle use throughout the system onroads used by automobiles, and suggest that suchuse could be managed like automobiles. This isproblematic in part because most states dont allownon-street legal vehicles to travel on regular roads,and off-road vehicles typically are not street legal. Itmay be part of a broader trend, however, as manystates have changed regulations to allow off-roadvehicles on public land roads.

    Even more disturbing is the suggestion that off-road use may be necessary to enjoy the parks. Thisbold language would practically give off-road vehicleriders a designated right to drive in national parks.It is unclear how the parks or the courts woulddetermine when off-road recreation is necessary,but in desert parks of the southwest with many dirtroads, like Death Valley, off-road vehicle enthusiastscould make significant claims.

    Finally, the proposed language is completelyinconsistent with the off-road vehicle Executive Or-ders, and perhaps also the Park System Organic Act,because it directs Park Superintendents to manageoff-road vehicle use and only prohibit it to preventimpairment of resources or values. The ExecutiveOrders are very clear that off-road vehicle use hasno primacy, and, in fact, can only be permitted whenconsistent with maintaining environmental, culturaland historic resources.

    Tip of the IcebergThis is just one small example of the policy changes proposed by

    the DOI. The changes for regulating snowmobiling are similar to those

    for wheeled off-road vehicles. In addition, the proposal would make iteasier to build roads in national parks, harder to designate wilderness,and harder to protect natural quiet, wildlife habitat and other resourc-es if protection interfered with visitor enjoyment. The proposedchanges would also allow increased mining, cell phone towers, andlow-flying tour planes (some of these are allowed in some parks, butthey are heavily regulated). Adding insult to injury, the proposed rulescurtail the Park Services ability to use science as a management toolwhile simultaneously promoting the sale of religious materials in parkstores and removing references to evolutionary processes.

    Time to RespondThe proposal is extremely audacious and was met with immediate

    and harsh criticism from the seven regional directors of the NPS. The

    NPS then appointed a panel to work out compromise language with theDOI. Was, then, the initial proposal intended to make any compromisechanges to the policy seem more reasonable? It is unclear whether ornot Paul Hoffman will accept the compromise language, which has notyet been made public. Nonetheless the direction is clear the BushAdministration intends to reduce protection for National Parks.

    With National Parks now under direct attack, it is clear that noth-ing is sacred to this Administration. While the American public isstruggling to deal with a failing economy, a devastating war in Iraq,continuing attacks on civil liberties and rising energy prices, the Ad-ministration is busy dismantling Americas natural heritage. If we sitquietly by and do not fight back, in a few short years we may no longerrecognize our own backyard. For more information about these pro-posed policy changes, or to get involved with efforts to maintain exist-

    ing park protections, please visit http://www.npsretirees.org/index.htm

    ReferencesBarringer, Felixity. 2005. Top Official Urged Change in How Parks Are

    Managed. The New York Times. 8-26-05.Cart, Julie. 2005. Controversy Over Plans for Changes in U.S. Parks. Los

    Angeles Times. 8-26-05.Coalition of National Park Service Retirees. 2005. Analysis of Draft NPS

    Policy Changes. http://www.npsretirees.org/05 0826-ANALYSISofNPSmgmtpolicies.htm (posted 8-26-05).

    Mountain goats and other wildlife are being increasingly pushed to the edge tomake room for motorized vehicles in our national parks. Photo by Dan Funsch.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    10/24

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    11/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2005 11

    After Mike finished his drink andhis story I stepped outside of the tent.The night air reminded me of othertimes and other wilderness hunts.

    For a quarter of a century myfather, brother, uncle and I hunted elkand deer in Idahos Frank Church Riverof No Return Wilderness. One morningI left camp before daylight and walkedup a steep trail to a point we calledFire Knob. As the first light awakenedacross the land I found myself sur-rounded by elk. They were skylinedabove me, their long necks silhouettedagainst the light blue of the pre-dawnsky. Thinly screened by trees, I shrunkbehind a windfall as two cow elk tooktentative steps toward me and stopped.The days first sun hit the tops of thepine trees. The air slowed. The worldyawned. Then the primal scream of abull jolted the mountain awake.

    He bugled from the heavy timberon top warning the cows not to wander.But they, and the wind, continued todrift downhill. Frozen, I was suspendedhalf crouched and half standing whilethe bull battered a hapless pine sapling.My feet tingled toward numbness andmy legs began to tremble as minutescrawled by. But my focus was riveted toa sunlit opening the bull had to cross toretrieve his wandering harem. He did.

    The herd bolted at the shot, butthe bull lay where he had fallen. As I

    walked up to him his liquid brown eyesglazed to black glass. After leaning myrifle against a tree I knelt on the groundbeside him. Fresh green strips of treebark clung to the thick base of hismahogany rack. The warm morning airreeked of pine resin, elk and fresh earth.I reached down and touched him, andthe years Id spent wandering and hunt-ing in wild land flooded my conscious-ness like a tide.

    Images of other elk Id hunted,horses Ive loved, and the faces of fami-

    ly and friends with whom Id shared thewilderness blurred my emotions. I kneltbeside the dead elk with my eyes closeduntil my only tangible thought wassimple gratitude for being a free personon this earth. I stood up, shrugged outof my pack and pulled my hunting knifefrom its sheath. Its familiar heft and thepragmatic need of caring for the meathelped settle my emotions.

    But this elk - this being - was morethan a piece of meat and I wasnt ableto render him to components quite yet.I looked at his teeth. Some were miss-ing. All were worn down from wintersof stripping aspen bark and scrap-ing bunchgrass from snow-coveredhillsides. He was connected to thesemountains. Here was his place. As Ilooked out over the rolling spruce andpine carpet that buckled and broke intoridges and canyons, I knew for certainthat he knew this land with more detailand intimacy than I could understand.

    I call the hill Fire Knob because awild fire swept over it years ago. Todayits covered with mixed bunchgrassmeadows and clumps of jackpine. Theknob is really just a hump west of TheLong Ridge and The Meadow. Its just alittle north - actually an extension - ofThe Brushpatch. Those names identifyplaces where Id spent my Septembers

    for over 20 years. Theyre geographicalblurbs on mental maps that exist on nopaper. But they do exist.

    The elk, deer and grouse who liveon Fire Knob know where it is. Themoose and elk who spend summer daysdeep in The Brushpatch know everytrail leading to The Meadow where theyfeed at night. The wolves, cougars andblack bears know every ridge, trail andcreek that binds the land and its intri-cate web of life together. Human hunt-

    ers have mentally weaved the drain-ages and ridges together into personaltreasures they revisit each autumn.

    The animals know these placesbecause its their home. Humans knowthem because the Wilderness Act forcesus to travel slow and watch the land.

    These old memories, and Mikesnew ones, flowed through my mindlater that night as I lay in my sleepingbag listening to rain on the canvas roofand dry pine crackling in the stove.

    Are you worried about packing themeat out tomorrow? I asked.

    No. We have plenty of time. Mikeanswered in the darkness.

    Thats right, I thought. We do havetime. Time to pack the elk out. Timeto reflect on the absolute privilege of

    being a hunter and a free person onthis earth. And time to be thankful thatsomebody before us had the foresightto preserve a small space in the worldas wilderness.

    Scott Stouder lives in Pollock, Idaho.He is the Western Field Director forTrout Unlimited and works to protectroadless public land in Idaho. This essayis excerpted from a longer piece in ARoad Runs Through It, a Wildlands CPRanthology to be published in 2006.

    Photo by Dan Funsch.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    12/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 200512

    Transportation Program Update

    The Transportation Program focused its efforts thissummer on building our organizing, policy, and informationcapacity in anticipation of the coming wave of travel planningon national forests.

    Building Capacity

    Anticipating the revised off-road vehicle regulations,many national forests have already begun designatingsystems of roads, motorized recreation routes, and foot andhoof trails. Once the new rule is finalized, we expect evenmore forests to conduct such travel planning. To prepare,Wildlands CPR worked this quarter to increase funding for

    grassroots conservation efforts, leverage outside trainingresources, and craft a strategy to best support planning thatwill determine whether our forests become motorized play-grounds or serve as refuges for native plants and wildlife, andsafe, quiet places for humans to recreate lightly on the land.

    Early in the summer, Wildlands CPR assisted eleven con-servation organizations in their attempts to secure fundingfrom the National Forest Foundation. Over half were awardedgrants to address unmanaged off-road vehicle recreation,with projects ranging from citizen monitoring to facilitatingcollaboration. One successful grant came from the NaturalTrails and Waters Coalition (NTWC, of which Wildlands CPRdirector Bethanie Walder is a co-chair). The matching grantwill enable the NTWC to partner with the University of Virgin-ias Institute for Environmental Negotiation to offer trainingson effective collaboration. The workshops will be offeredto representatives of conservation organizations, off-roadvehicle clubs, a diversity of forest users, and agency plan-

    ners. The Coalition will offer the workshops in 5-8 states overthe next year in response to the Forest Services insistence onusing collaboration to inform travel planning decisions de-spite the agencys lack of expertise and financial commitmentto these potentially nebulous and provincial processes.

    The NTWC also received a grant from the Harder Founda-tion that will allow Wildlands CPR to place TransportationOrganizer Jason Kiely on loan to serve as the CoalitionsForest Campaign Coordinator. In this capacity, Jason willprovide training, consultation, technical and other supportto travel planning initiatives in three to six targeted states.In this vein, Wildlands CPR continues to aid the efforts ofthe Three Forest Coalition in southern Utah to secure travel

    and forest plans which will protect native plants and wildlife,preserve natural quiet, and secure safe and quiet trails. Wild-lands CPR is now in the process of hiring someone to replaceJason.

    From Grassroots Contact to Scientific

    Research

    Over the summer, we enjoyed the help of intern GordonWillson Naranjo, who conducted a survey of 1,100 citizensthat had commented on the Forest Services draft off-road ve-hicle rule. As a result, we garnered more than 100 responsesand 60 new members. Perhaps more importantly, we con-nected many of those respondents with nearby grassrootsorganizations and provided materials to help those folkschallenge off-road vehicles.

    This summer we contracted with Noah Jackson to updateour bibliographic database on the ecological effects of roadsand off-road vehicles. The database now contains more than12,000 citations on impacts. As we went to press, we werepreparing to upload the new database (and new software) toour website. Check it out at www.wildlandscpr.org.

    Trying to reach a place of responsible travelmanagement?... Expect delays. Here, road crewsrepair Glaciers Going To the Sun Road.

    Photo by Dan Funsch.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    13/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2005 13

    Restoration Program Update

    Wildlands CPR continues our proactive restoration workwith on-the-ground, collaborative road removal projects. Inparticular, Marnie Criley worked this summer to advance twoefforts in the inland northwest.

    Lolo Creek, Western Montana In June SungnomeMadrone, from Northern Californias Redwood CommunityAction Agency, gave an inspiring restoration workshop in thecommunity of Lolo, Montana. The workshop excited com-munity members about road restoration, and was followedwith a field tour of potential road removal sites on upper LoloCreek in the Lolo National Forest. Wildlands CPR is a keymember of a group that is meeting to discuss funding oppor-tunities and road removal priorities: their proposal includesdecommissioning some 80 miles of road and removing orreplacing 21 culverts in order to improve water quality andfish habitat. The project has an estimated cost of $3 million.The Forest Service is eager to work with conservationistsand the community of Lolo to make this project happen, andthey recently released an Environmental Assessment, so staytuned.

    Hells Canyon, Northeastern Oregon On August 22,Marnie attended a meeting in Enterprise, Oregon to discussrestoration within the Hells Canyon National Recreation Area.The meeting led to the formation of a collaborative withrepresentation from environmental and community forestrygroups, the local Resource Advisory Committee and theNez Perce Tribe, among others. The fledgling collaborativewill take on a small project to build trust (possibly a culvertreplacement) and then hopes to move on to a much largerproject like transportation planning and road removal priori-tization.

    Separate from that meeting, Wildlands CPR is workingwith the Nez Perce Tribe to host a roads workshop in theHells Canyon region this fall to introduce the ecological andeconomic benefits of road removal to the local community.

    Tribal Road Removal Internship The RestorationPrograms summer intern, Laura Harris, did a great job ofmapping where tribal and forest service lands overlap, andconducting preliminary research into which tribes might beinterested in establishing road removal programs similarto the Nez Perce and Karuk Tribes. We hope to find a Na-tive American intern to follow up on Lauras work. If you oranyone you know might be interested, please contact MarnieCriley at [email protected].

    Supporting Restoration with Science

    Science Coordinator Adam Switalski continues to pro-mote road removal as a key component of wildland restora-tion and provide citizens with the latest research on roadsand off-road vehicles. He has recently given presentationsat scientific conferences and is coordinating road removalresearch projects in Idaho and Montana.

    ConferencesAdam attended the Rockies Wildlife Crossing Field

    Course in Payson, AZ where hesat on a panel entitled Wild-life Linkage Approaches: Land Conservation and Manage-

    ment. He spoke on integrating road removal into mitiga-tion, and had many valuable conversations with engineersand biologists. Afterwards, Adam attended the Spine of theContinent Workshop to strategize how to implement WildlandNetwork Designs (WNDs).

    Adam also attended the Society for Conservation Biologyconference in Brasilia, Brazil, where he presented a study hecoauthored with Lisa Eby of the University of Montana onstream habitat restoration following road decommissioningon the Flathead National Forest. The conference was verywell attended (1,500 people from 60 countries), interesting,and productive.

    Citizen Science on the Clearwater

    With the help of our Development Director Tom Petersonand others, Wildlands CPR received continued funding fromthe National Forest Foundation for our citizen science pro-gram on the Clearwater National Forest (CNF). With fundingsecured, Adam and Katherine Court, a University of MontanaEnvironmental Studies (UM EVST) graduate student, boughtfield sampling supplies, identified monitoring sites, and beganmonitoring. They have already caught tracks or photos ofbear, deer, elk, moose, squirrels, and voles. Additionally,Hank Green (UM EVST) has developed an online data formfor citizen scientists to enter data and conduct basic analysisremotely. We plan to continue collecting data until the snowfalls: if you would like to assist us please contact Katherine [email protected].

    Wildlife on the FlatheadAdam also worked with Sonya Germann (UM Forestry

    student) this summer on a project exploring the impact ofroad removal on wildlife (particularly grizzly bears) on theFlathead National Forest. She used techniques similar tothose Wildlands CPR tested on the CNF on open, removed,and slated to be removed roads. Adam and Sonya are work-ing with UM Forestry professors Dan Pletcher and KerryForesman to finalize the results of the research.

    Marnie Criley at the U.S. Society of Ecological Economicsconference.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    14/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 200514

    Bibliography Notes summarizes and highlights some of thescientific literature in our 10,000 citation bibliography on the

    physical and ecological effects of roads and off-road vehicles.We offer bibliographic searches to help activists access

    important biological research relevant to roads. We keep copiesof most articles cited in Bibliography Notes in our office library.

    The Ecological Effects of Roads in theBrazilian Amazon:Current Status and Prospects for the Future

    By Adam Switalski

    Home to almost 15 percent ofthe worlds plants and animals,Brazil is the most biologically

    diverse country on the planet (Le-

    winsohn and Prado 2005). While thegreat Amazon rainforest is probably itsmost well known ecosystem, BrazilsAtlantic Forest and Cerrado regionsare considered hotspots, some of theearths most biologically rich places.Additionally, the Pantanal in southernBrazil is the worlds largest wetland(about the size of Colorado). Withinthe Amazon, Brazil sustains over half ofthe worlds remaining tropical rain-forest. Unfortunately, it also has theworlds highest rate of forest destruc-tion (seven football fields per minute;

    Laurance et al. 2001). Roads are keyto this destruction and are providingconduits for logging, forest fragmenta-tion, and access deep into the heart ofthe Amazon.

    Brazil has an ecological researchbase which exceeds that of any othertropical country. This year, Brazilhosted the annual meeting of the Soci-ety for Conservation Biology and thejournal Conservation Biologydedicatedan entire special section on Brazilianconservation. In this paper, I review theresearch on the ecological impacts of

    roads in the Amazon and comment onthe state of conservation in this mega-diverse country. With over $40 billionin planned infrastructure improvementsin the next decade, Brazils naturalheritage is at risk as roads chip away atthe largest rainforest on Earth.

    DeforestationThe environmental and social costs

    of roads in Brazil did not gain attentionuntil the building of the trans-Amazo-

    nian highway. Originally built for military purposes, by 1984 some 160,000 migrantswere colonizing the interior Amazon each year (Shankland 1993). While develop-ment agencies hoped to bring lifestyle-improving economic activities to inacces-sible areas, they quickly found they had no control over the volume and nature of

    migration (Dobias and Talbott 2001). Four years later, a fifth of the surroundingrainforest had been destroyed and 85 percent of the indigenous population haddied from violence and disease (Shankland 1993). Following the construction of thetrans-Amazonian highway, annual deforestation rates increased from a backgroundlevel of 1,216 km2 per year in 1976 to 13,955 km2 per year in 1984 (Fearnside 1987).

    The most obvious result of the trans-Amazonian highway was intensive loggingand conversion of the rainforest to ranches and cropland. Several studies havesince documented increased deforestation following Amazon road building (Fearn-side 1987, Carvalho et al. 2001, Laurance et al. 2001, Nepstad et al. 2001, Steiningeret al. 2001). In fact, Laurance et al. (2002) reported that highway proximity was thesingle most important predictor of deforestation. Furthermore, more than two-thirds of the deforestation in the Amazon has occurred within 50 km of major pavedhighways (Nepstad et al. 2001).

    FragmentationIn addition to deforestation, much of the remaining Amazon is fragmented and

    prone to edge effects. One study found that edge effects impacted an area morethan 150 percent larger than the area actually deforested (Skole and Tucker 1993).An additional million hectares of forest are selectively logged each year as well

    The ecological effects of roads in the Amazon are far more profound thanthe obvious visible scars. Photo by Adam Switalski.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    15/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2005 15

    (Nepstad et al. 1999). Fragmented forests experience dramatic changes in forestdynamics, structure, composition, and microclimate resulting in a high vulner-ability to drought and fire (Laurance et al. 2000). If this trend continues, Nepstadet al. (2001) warns that forest conversion could transform half of the Amazon intofire-prone scrub vegetation and cattle pastures.

    Fragmented forests directly affect wildlife as well. For example, a study foundthat Amazonian birds rarely crossed a road that received only 6-10 vehicle passesa day (Laurance et al. 2004). Even overgrown sections of the road were rarelycrossed by solitary understory bird species. Another study found that closingroads showed a potential to restore bird movement: mixed-species flocks readilycrossed a closed road while avoiding open roads (Develey and Stouffer 2000).

    OverhuntingRoad building allows greater hunter access and can have dramatic effects on

    wildlife populations. Roads reduce transportation costs and create a commer-cial demand for forest resources beyond local subsistence needs (Lorenzen andAlmeida 2005). Intensive hunting can completely extirpate game species that havelow reproductive rates. For example, Peres (1991) reported that populations ofthe endangered Humboldts wooly monkey were quickly wiped out once access isopened by new roads.

    While the road density of the Amazon is only 0.0085 km/km2, Amazonian hunt-ers are willing to wander far from the road to kill preferred game species (Peres andLake 2003). Accordingly, Peres and Lake (2003) found that populations of preferred

    species were much lower close to access points (roads and rivers). Furthermore,Peres and Lake (2003) argue that 100 percent of the Amazon would be accessible tohunters if road densities increased to 0.119 km/km2. This is particularly disturbingbecause what appear to be pristine forests from satellite images may be absent ofkey wildlife species.

    RoadkillIn addition to building new roads, a current trend in Brazil is to pave existing

    roads. Paving roads allows access throughout the wet season, as well as increasingtravel speed. With increased access and speeds, roadkill also increases. Recent re-search is exploring wildlife/vehicle collisions. Gordo et al. (2005) collected roadkillon a remote Amazon highway where only 200 cars pass each day. Over five years,they collected over 2,400 birds and mammals killed on a 120 km stretch of road.Studies in other parts of Brazil also found high rates of roadkill following road pav-

    ing (e.g., Coehho et al. 2005, Bueno et al. 2005). Proposed strategies for mitigatingwildlife/vehicle collisions include signs and driver education (Bueno et al. 2005) aswell as wildlife passages and speed reducers (Coelho et al. 2005).

    ChallengesSince the building of the trans-Amazonian highway, dozens of studies have

    documented the social and environmental impacts of roads in Brazil. The lessonsare being applied around the world, except, unfortunately, in Brazil. In December2004 Peru and Brazil agreed to build the transoceanic highway, which would stretchfrom Perus Pacific ports across the Andes and Amazon to the Atlantic (Brandon etal. 2005). Additionally, the governmentsAvanca Brasil(Advance Brazil) programincludes $40 billion for infrastructure in the Amazon to meet a perceived need totransport soybeans (Laurance et al. 2002). It would include paving over 7,500 km ofhighways and greatly expanding the Amazon road network (Laurance et al. 2002).

    Avanca Brasilwill nearly double the forest area within 50 km of a paved roadand result in an estimated 120,000 - 270,000 km2 of deforestation in the coming 2-3decades (Nepstad et al. 2001). In addition to deforestation,Avanca Brasilwill ex-pand the logging industry, increase forest fire, and affect indigenous and biologicalreserves (Nepstad et al. 2001). While the official justification is to reduce the costof transporting soybeans, the deforestation and other impacts may not be worththe benefits to this small segment of society.

    Hope for the futureThe predicted loss of the integrity of the Amazon may be averted. Pressure

    from the international community and foreign investors can greatly influence plan-ning and environmental assessment (Laurance et al. 2002). Additionally, coopera-

    tive resource management programssupported by wealthy nations and non-governmental organizations may help.Some 350 indigenous and environmen-tal groups work in Brazil, and many ofthese are oriented towards sustainabledevelopment or indigenous commu-nities (Anon 1999). Additionally, aninternational initiative for Amazonianconservation entitled, Pilot Programto Conserve the Brazilian Amazonincludes land use planning, extractiveand Amerindian reserves, ecologicalcorridor systems, applied research, andcapacity building for local governments(Laurence et al. 2000).

    ConclusionIt has been well documented that

    increased transportation infrastructureaccelerates migration and deforestationin the Amazon. The Amazons popula-tion has increased ten fold since the1960s, and it has the highest defores-tation rate in the world. While someroad construction has been preventedthrough environmental protest, thepressure to build roads continues. Withonly one percent of the Amazon of-ficially protected (Peres and Lake 2001)and an estimated 80 percent of Amazontimber harvested illegally without anyenvironmental control (Abrzmovitz1998), it is essential that roads beprevented in the most pristine places.Hopefully, decision makers will chosea sustainable path for the most biologi-cally diverse forest in the world.

    Adam Switalski is Wildlands CPRsScience Coordinator and recentlyattended the Society for Conservation

    Biology annual meeting in Brazil andwitnessed firsthand the impacts of roadsin the Amazon.

    Increased access leads directly to increasedhunting and poaching. Photo by Adam

    Switalski.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    16/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 200516

    Anon. 1999. Pilot Program to Conserve the Brazilian RainForest: Annual Report on Progress. World Bank,Brasilia, Brazil.

    Abramovitz, J. 1998. Taking a Stand: Cultivating a NewRelationship with the Worlds Forests. World WatchInstitute, Washington, D.C.

    Brandon, K., G.A.B. Da Fonseca, A.B. Rylands, and J.M.C.Da Silva. 2005. Introduction to special section:Brazilian conservation: challenges and opportunities.Conservation Biology19(3): 595-600.

    Bueno, A., S.C.S. Belentani, and M.C. Ribeiro. 2005. Wildliferoad mortality in Tringulo Mineiro, southeastern Brazil.Abstracts of the 19th Annual Meeting of the Societyfor Conservation Biology, July 15-19, Brasilia, FederalDistrict, Brazil.

    Carvalho, G., A.C. Barros, P. Moutinho, and D.C. Nepstad.2001. Sensitive development could protect the Amazoninstead of destroying it. Nature 409: 131.

    Coelho, I.P, A. Kindel, and A. Coelho. 2005. Vertebrate

    road-kills in two highways crossing the Mata AtlanticaBiosphere Reserve in southern Brazil. Abstracts of the19th Annual Meeting of the Society for ConservationBiology, July 15-19, Brasilia, Federal District, Brazil.

    Develey, P.F., and P.C. Stouffer. 2005. Effects of roads onmovements by understory birds in mixed-species flocksin Central Amazonian Brazil. Conservation Biology15(5):1416-1422.

    Dobias, R.J., K. Talbott. Environmental and socialconsiderations in the development of the greaterMakong subregions road network. 2001. Pages 258-280in I.A. Bowles and G.T. Prickett, editors. Footprints inthe Jungle. Oxford University Press, New York.

    Fearnside, P.M. 1987. Deforestation and international

    development projects in Brazilian Amazonia.Conservation Biology1(3): 214-220.

    Gordo, M., E.M. Venticinque. 2005. Cryptic effect of roads inthe Amazon: Quantification of the fauna mortality fromrunning over on highway BR-174. Abstracts of the 19thAnnual Meeting of the Society for Conservation Biology,July 15-19, Brasilia, Federal District, Brazil.

    Laurance, W.F., H.L. Vasconcelos, and T.E. Lovejoy. 2000.Forest loss and fragmentation in the Amazon:implications for wildlife conservation. Oryx34(1): 39-45.

    Laurance, W.F., A.K.M. Albernaz, and C. Da Costa. 2001. Isdeforestation accelerating in the Brazilian Amazon?

    Environmental Conservation 28: 305-311.Laurance, W.F., A.K.M. Albernaz, G. Schroth, P.M. Fearnside,

    S. Bergen, E.M. Venticinque, and C. Da Costa. 2002.Predictors of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon.

    Journal of Biogeography29: 737-748.Laurance, S.G., P.C. Stouffer, and W.F. Laurance. 2004. Effects

    of road clearings on movement patterns of understoryrainforest birds in central Amazonia. Conservation

    Biology18(4): 1099-1109.

    Lewinsohn, T.M., A.V.L. Freitas, and P.I. Prado. 2005.Conservation of terrestrial invertebrates and theirhabitats in Brazil. Conservation Biology19(3): 625-631.

    Lorenzen, K., O.T. Almeida. 2005. Commercial fisheries andcommunity-based management of floodplain lakes:modelling the impacts of the Cuib-Santarm Highway,BR-163. Abstracts of the 19th Annual Meeting of theSociety for Conservation Biology, July 15-19, Brasilia,Federal District, Brazil.

    Nepstad, D.C., A. Verissimo, A. Alencar, C. Nobre, E. Lima,P. Lefebre, P. Schlesinger, C. Potter, P. Mountinho, E.Mendoza, M. Cochrane, and V. Brooks. 1999. Large-scale impoverishment of Amazonian forests by loggingand fire. Nature 398: 505-508.

    Nepstad, D., G. Carvalho, A.C., Barros, A. Alencar, J.P.Capobianco, J. Bishop, P. Mountinho, P. Lefebre, U.Lopes Silva, and E. Prins. 2001. Road paving, fire regimefeedbacks, and the future of Amazon forests. Forest

    Ecology and Management154: 395-407.Peres, C.A. 1991. Humboldts wooly monkeys decimated by

    hunting in Amazonia. Onyx25(2): 89-95.Peres, C.A., and I.R. Lake. 2003. Extent of nontimber

    resource extraction in tropical forests: accessibilityto game vertebrates by hunters in the Amazon basin.Conservation Biology17(2): 521-535.

    Reid, J.W., and I.A. Bowles. 1997. Reducing the impacts ofroads on tropical forests. Environment39(8): 10-35.

    Shankland, A. 1993. Brazils BR-364 highway a road to

    nowhere? The Ecologist23(4): 141-147.Skole, D., and C.J. Tucker. 1993. Tropical deforestation and

    habitat fragmentation in the Amazon: satellite data from1978 to 1988. Science 260: 1905-1910.

    Steininger, M.K., C.J. Tucker, J.R.G. Townsend, T.J. Killeen, A.Desch, V. Bell, and P. Ersts. 2001. Tropical deforestationin the Bolivian Amazon. Environmental Conservation 28:127-134.

    References

    Another road to nowhere sustainable in the Brazilian Amazon.Photo by Adam Switalski.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    17/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2005 17

    Legislative UpdateA Close Up Look at the Highway Spending Bill

    By Wildlands CPR staff

    Below is a summary of some provisions of the highway spendingbill signed by the President on August 10: the Safe, Accountable,Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act A Legacy for Users

    (SAFETEA-LU). This information comes from several sources, includingJosh Burnim of American Wildlands and Michael Replogle of Environmen-tal Defense (environmentaldefense.org/go/transportation). Because thebill contains so many provisions this summary is far from comprehensive;for the entire bill, go to http://www.house.gov/rules/109textTEALU.htm

    Negative Provisions

    Forest Highways

    Sec. 1101. Authorization of Appropriations (Title I, p. 17)Funding for Public Lands Highways starts at $280 million per year in

    2005 and increases to $300 million per year by 2009. Of this, the For-est Highways program receives 66%, or an average of $188 million/yearthrough 2009. This funding is used to upgrade regular forest roads topaved, high speed forest highways, increasing environmental impacts.However, a new provision allows $10 million per year to be used to im-prove fish passage, $20 million for maintenance, and $1 million for increas-ing hunting and fishing signage. (Title I, p. 113).

    Recreational Trails Program

    Section 1109 Recreation Trails (Title 1, p. 54)Funding for trails will increase from its current rate of $50 million

    per year to $85 million by 2009. While some is dedicated to nonmotor-ized trails, the bulk goes to motorized trail development. This programreceives much support from the motorized and nonmotorized recreation

    communities, making it a very difficult appropriation to challenge.

    Changes to Section 4f of the Transportation Act

    Sec. 6009. Parks, Recreation Areas, Wildlife and Waterfowl Refuges and His-toric Sites (Section 4f and 106) (Title VI, p. 96)

    Section 4(f) was one of the strongest components of the US Depart-ment of Transportation Act of 1966. It provided control against roads thatwould affect public parks, recreation areas, wildlife or waterfowl refuges,or historic sites. (Reasonable alternatives had to be chosen, or mitigationwas required.) The new regulations are weakened to allow the Secretaryof Transportation to find that a project has de minimis impact if it willnot adversely affect the activities, features, and attributes of the park,recreation area, or wildlife or waterfowl refuge eligible for protection...Fortunately, the definition of de minimis impact is restrictive and there

    are requirements for public notice and comment every time the new demininis exemption to 4(f) protections is used. The minimization of impactsremains intact.

    Changes to NEPA ImplementationSection 6002 of the final bill (Efficient Environmental Reviews for

    Project Decisionmaking) limits the consideration of alternatives in high-way project environmental impact statements (EISs), further eroding theNational Environmental Policy Act. It also limits the timeline (180 daysfrom a record of decision) for challenging those EISs, forcing people to filequick lawsuits rather than negotiate for better projects.

    Bad Projects FundedThe final bill earmarks funding for eco-

    logically devastating projects throughout thecountry for example, constructing a road toJuneau, Alaska, and constructing the GravinaBridge in Alaska. Both communities are alreadywell served by the ferry system. For a listing ofearmarks, go to Taxpayers for Common Sense:www.taxpayer.net/transportation/safetealu/states.htm.

    Positive Provisions

    Wildlife Crossing Structures and Fish Passage

    Funding from the following programs cannow be used to pay for wildlife crossing struc-tures and/or fish passage:

    Sec. 1401. Highway Safety ImprovementProgram, 148(a)(3)(B) Inclusions: Measures to re-duce wildlife-vehicle accidents (Title I. Subsection

    D, p. 4). The total program is $1.25 billion, and aportion can be used to add or retrofit structuresto reduce animal/vehicle collisions.

    Sec. 1113. Surface Transportation Program.Transportation Enhancement Activities (Title I,

    p. 65). A portion can be used to reduce wildlifemortality and maintain habitat connectivity; alsoto address water pollution from highway runoff.

    (Total TE funding about $650 million/year)Sec. 1119. Federal Lands Highways. Forest

    Highways (Title I, p. 114). Passage of aquatic spe-cies. $10 million per year can be used for fishpassage.

    Non-native invasive species

    Sec. 6006. Environmental Restoration andPollution Abatement; Control of Noxious Weedsand Aquatic Noxious Weeds and Establishment of

    Native Species (Title VI, p. 90). Funding is nowavailable to control noxious weeds and to estab-lish native vegetation in highway projects.

    Increased funding for mass/alternative transitSec. 3021. Alternative Transportation in Parksand Public Lands (Title III, p. 176). Funding couldbe used for trams, pedestrian/bicycle trails, etc.and is focused on energy efficient alternatives.

    Sec 1807. Non-Motorized Transportation PilotProgram. While not related to wildlands, this sec-tion funds implementation and monitoring fora comprehensive non-motorized transportationnetwork in four U.S. cities.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    18/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 200518

    Western states are scrambling to deal with PresidentBushs new Roadless Rule, which gave state governors 18months to design proposals to either protect roadless acresor open them up to development.

    On June 8 Colorado Gov. Bill Owens signed legislationcreating a committee to advise state and federal officials onthe states 4.4 million acres of roadless forests. The 13-mem-ber task force will field public sentiment and forward theirfindings to the governor, who then will take the plan to theDepartment of Agriculture (USDA), which retains the final say.

    Utah is taking a decidedly different tack, one that hasenvironmentalists worried. Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. said he willnot petition the USDA to protect Utahs four million roadlessacres, but instead let the Forest Service address the issuethrough its forest management plan revisions, which are on-going in four of Utahs six national forests. But environmentalgroups argue that declining to formally protect roadless areaswill invite development.

    In Montana, Gov. Brian Schweitzer wrote a stronglyworded letter to Bush, saying that Montana has insufficientresources to evaluate and establish a roadless plan for thestates 6.4 million acres of federal roadless lands. He alsotook issue with the fact that the USDA retains final author-ity over proposals, writing, In other words, Washington hasthe final say, not Montanans. Nonetheless, Gov. Schweitzeris planning to submit a petition. Washington Gov. ChristineGregoire is planning to petition for protection of most, if notall of her states roadless areas.

    Finally, an attempt by the Wyoming Outdoor Council andseven other environmental groups to repeal Bushs RoadlessRule was dismissed by a federal court. The groups hopedto have the Clinton-era Roadless rule reinstated, but since

    a replacement rule has already been adopted, the panel ofthree judges ruled the appeal irrelevant. Attorney Jim Angellof Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund said the appeals courtdecision does not end the fight but only clears the decks forfuture battles.

    The first battle started when the Attorneys General ofCalifornia, Oregon and New Mexico filed suit against the BushAdministration for repealing the 2000 Roadless Rule. Thestates argued that the repeal was illegal because of insuffi-cient analysis of the new rule.

    An economic study released in mid-June by officialsin Montanas Gallatin National Forest found that proposedrestrictions on motorized use in the forest would not havea negative impact on the areas economy. The study alsofound that nonmotorized users generate nearly twice asmuch spending as motorized users: $7.3 million in spendingsupporting 330 jobs versus $3.9 million in economic activityand 185 jobs for motorized use. Forest recreation in generalwas found to be a minor player in the economies of the threecounties that contain the Gallatin National Forest, making upless than 2 percent of the overall economy.

    Gallatin officials ordered the study after fielding concernsfrom the public and Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-MT., that limitingmotorized recreation would impact the regions economy. A

    Forest Service economist and a social scientist performed theresearch, based on a yearlong visitor survey in the Gallatin aswell as state, federal and academic data about the area. Thestudy is now part of the environmental impact statement thatconsiders the Gallatins proposed closures, which forest of-ficials say are needed in the face of growing use.

    The study breaks down peoples activities in the forest,and finds that the vast majority prefer nonmotorized usage: hiking and walking make up 29.1 percent; relaxing accounts for 10.6percent; hunting is 9.2 percent; downhill skiing is 8.2 percent; snowmobiling is 7.8 percent; fishing is 6.6 percent; developedcamping is 4.5 percent; viewing natural features is 3.7 percent; nonmotorized water use is 3.2 percent; and viewing wildlife is2.9 percent.

    For more information, please visit http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/gallatin/?page=/projects/travel_planning

    Gallatin Study Finds Motorized Restrictions Wont Hurt Economy

    Roadless Roundup: Western StatesReact To New Rule

    Unlike motorized restrictions, clogged culverts do drain the federaltreasury. Photo by Marnie Criley.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    19/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2005 19

    New Washington Law PermitsUnlicensed Off-Highway Vehicles

    A new Washington law would permit riders of unlicensedoff-highway vehicles to use forest roads and trails, andmanagers on national forests in Washington are studying theissue to gauge whether and where such vehicles might be

    appropriate. Until now, all vehicles used on forest roads wererequired to be licensed and street legal, but the new legisla-tion distinguishes these roads from streets and highways andmakes it legal to mix both licensed and unlicensed vehicleson forest roads.

    The Collville National Forest in eastern Washington hasbeen piloting a consensus-based collaborative process todetermine which roads previously open only to high-clear-ance trucks and jeeps may be suitable for ATV and dirt bikerecreation. Initially, the forest considered making a blanketdecision to open more than 2,000 miles of these roads tomotorized recreation. However, the statewide organizationConservation Northwest engaged diligently throughout theprocess, successfully limiting the designation to 450 miles ofroads open to off-road vehicle recreation.

    Other state legislatures have passed similar legislationor are considering allowing off-road vehicle recreation onroads designed for passenger vehicles; recreation managersin some of those states similarly have advanced this idea.Washington may set a precedent for when, where, and how toallow ATV and dirt bike recreation on unimproved roads.

    Elsewhere in Washington, Okanogan and Wenatchee Na-tional Forests Supervisor Jim Boynton approved vehicle clo-sures in several parts of the Milk Pond complex after illegaloff-highway vehicle users turned much of the area into mudbogs over the Memorial Day weekend. Maybe thats whatpeople need to see that this kind of behavior can forceclosures, said acting Naches District Ranger Jodi Leingang.

    How Many is a Few Bad Apples?The off-road vehicle community frequently laments the

    irresponsible behavior of a few bad apples who ride off ofdesignated routes. Organized motorized recreation groupsconsistently state that this minority of riders give the sportan undeserved black eye. However, two recently reportedstudies suggest that a majority of off-roaders, not just a few,violate commonly known rules in forests that have limitedvehicle use to designated routes only and that prohibit cross-country travel.

    3rd annual Quiet CommotionCitizen Conference

    October 14-15, 2005

    Come join us in beautiful Crestone, Colorado at theColorado College-Baca Campus surrounded by thejagged peaks of the Sangre De Cristo range to the eastand the San Luis Valley to the southwest.

    The Quiet Commotion is a weekend forum for human-powered recreationists to gather and exchangeexperiences, share inspiration, and learn skills fromnational experts to enable effective advocacy forprotecting the quiet non-motorized experience in theplaces we cherish.Organizations and individuals throughout the SouthernRockies are providing expert knowledge, materials, and

    experience. We will learn about what works and whatdoesnt, acquire essential skills for being an effectiveadvocate, and strategize how we are going to preservequiet use. We will have a few plenary sessions to set thestage, and then will learn through hands-on field tripsto the BLM lands in the San Luis Valley.

    For more information and to register:visit www.southernrockies.org or contact Aaron Clark

    303-324-7031, or [email protected]

    The first study was commissioned in 2001 by the Colo-rado Coalition for Responsible OHV Riding. In that studyMonaghan and Associates found that as many as two-thirds ofoff-roaders deviate from the sanctioned routes some of thetime despite knowing that going off the route is not correctbehavior. The study reports that an estimated 15-20% ofColorado users strictly follow safety and environmental rulesand never go off the trail, while a similar range of 15-20% ofthe states OHV users frequently break the rules and often gooff-trail.

    A similar study, completed in 2002 by the University ofUtahs Institute for Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, sur-veyed summer off-road vehicle riders for their riding prefer-ences and practices. Of the ATV riders surveyed, 49.4% preferto ride off established trails, while 39% did so on their mostrecent excursion. Of the dirt bike riders surveyed, 38.1%prefer to ride off established trails, while 50% did so on theirmost recent excursion. Significant portions of federal publiclands in Utah still allow for cross-country travel, which mayaccount for much of this off-trail use. Nonetheless, thepreference and practice point to an enforcement challengefor those public land managers attempting to limit off-roadvehicle recreation to designated routes only.

    Thanks to Colorado Mountain Club for information about

    the Colorado study.Despite this research, a group of off-roaders, environmen-

    talists and public officials in Colorado recently launched aneducational campaign intended to keep off-road riders fromveering off-routes and destroying habitat and roadless areason public lands.

    Photo courtesy of Bureau of Land Management.

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    20/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 200520

    The Citizen/Organizational Spotlight shares thestories of some of the awesome activists and

    organizations we work with, both as a tribute to themand as a way of highlighting successful strategies and

    lessons learned. This issue we focus the spotlighton an organization for the first time. Please e-

    mail your nomination for the Citizen Spotlight [email protected].

    It is said you can walk from Mexico to Canada in a day if youre visitingthe beautiful region of the Sky Islands encompassing southeast Ari-zona, southwest New Mexico and northern Mexico. A hiker can literally

    begin their trek in the desert, pass through chaparral, meander into oakwoodlands and finish in a spruce fir forest in less than five miles.

    The Sky Island region encompasses 70,000 square miles of some ofNorth Americas most diverse ecosystems. There are about 40 Sky Islandmountain ranges in all, connecting the temperate Rocky Mountains inthe north to the sub-tropical Sierra Madre Occidental in the south. Thisunique overlap of ecosystems generates a diverse range of habitats fromtemperate to tropical, inhabited by wildlife from wolves to parrots. Isolat-ing these islands in the sky are seas of desert and grasslands, creatingsome of the most important wildlife corridors in the country.

    Locals and visitors alike have long known the value and beauty ofthe area, but to scientists and conservationists it is much more than just

    a pretty place. In 1991, a proposal by the U.S. Forest Service to turn theCoronado National Forest into a National Recreation Area (NRA) had manycitizens and scientists concerned. A small group was so concerned thatthey launched a group to help protect it.

    The Sky Island Alliance (SIA) was formed in 1992 to protect and re-store the native biological diversity of this rich landscape by launching analternative proposal that placed emphasis upon landscape-level planningand bioregional reserve design. Matt Skroch, Executive Director of SIA,says an National Recreation Area would emphasize industrial recreationover natural resource protection. The bio-regional reserve process contin-ues today, representing one of the nations first case studies of large scalereserve design implementation.

    Our approach is to see the region as awhole, connecting our conservation actionsto the larger picture of regional, and in ourcase, continental landscape connectivity, saysSkroch.

    The Sky Islands underscore the impor-tance of landscape connectivity because, whiletopographically isolated from one another, theyare biologically very much connected. Largemammals such as black bear, jaguar, Mexicangray wolf, mountain lion and bobcats requiremore than one Sky Island range to maintain pop-ulation viability. In fact, these far ranging mam-mals often move from range to range, dependingupon wildlife corridors between our mountainislands. That, Skroch says, is why we cantmanage areas in a piecemeal fashion, and whyit is critical to deal with habitat fragmentation,including that caused by roads. Though private,federal, state, and locally owned land creates amanagement mosaic, wildlife travels acrosslandscapes in what makes the most biologicalsense. Therefore landscape-level planning thatconnects habitat patches is recognized as animportant component to any conservation plan.With the region being home to the United Statesmost diverse populations of reptiles and mam-mals, about 4,000 plant species, and more thanhalf of all the breeding birds in North America,it creates an urgency for SIA staff, scientists,and citizens to push forward with conservationaction.

    Sky Island Alliances proposed interconnect-ed conservation area is now in the implementa-tion phase, and quickly on its way to becominga reality. The organization focuses on protect-ing the core habitat patches often existing orproposed Wilderness Areas and the wildlifecorridors in between.

    Because Mexico hosts almost half of the Sky

    Island region, SIA also dedicates time to con-servation challenges along the border. Skrochsays that one unique problem the region faces isimmigration policy, and that with increased mili-tarization of our southern border we are quicklypinching off movement patterns of importantspecies traveling across the border.

    While Sky Island Alliance has an eightperson staff, it also has an extremely large volun-teer pool that extends the organizations reachand ability many-fold. In the past five years SIAhas worked with more than 1,200 volunteers,

    The Sky Island AllianceBy Cathy Adams

    Photo courtesy of Sky Island Alliance.

    Organizational

  • 8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 10.3 Autumn Equinox 2005

    21/24

    The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2005 21

    Photo courtesy of Sky Island Alliance.

    who have donated more than 40,000 hours sup-porting SIAs mission and programs. In the mid-1990s SIA started their volunteer program withroad monitoring efforts on the Coronado, withassistance from Wildlands CPR. After severalyears of inventorying the location and impactsof roads throughout the Coronado, SIA startedworking with the forest to determine whichroads to close and obliterate. Then in 1999, SIAinvited Wildlands CPR to lead a road decom-missioning workshop for SIA volunteers. SIAhas since been able to share their road decom-missioning and other volunteer expertise withnumerous other groups in their region. Theyvegotten 45 miles of roads closed and restoredon the Coronado and Gila National Forests, inaddition to many roads in the BLM Las CienegasNational Conservation Area.

    But their volunteer program goes far be-yond road issues. Volunteers help map potentialwilderness areas by completing surveys, assistin identifying landscape linkages by recordingwildlife tracks and sign, and directly engage inrestoration efforts such as road removal, ripar-

    ian vegetation projects, and wildlife reintro-duction programs. However, these volunteersarent just tossed into the woods with a note-book and pen; SIA hosts an intensive five-daytraining workshop taught by regional wildlifeexperts and staff. By incorporating volunteersinto almost every program, Sky Island Allianceachieves a level of public participation rarelyseen in other places.

    We accomplish three things with our vol-unteer program Skroch says. We cover moreground in our inventory and restoration proj-ects, educate the public with first hand experi-ence of conservation issues facing our region,

    and build a critical advocacy pool for conserva-tion campaigns.

    SIA also works with locally elected officials, businesses and communi-ty groups. Over the last two years, theyve spearheaded the Friends of theTumacacori Highlands, a coalition of more than 120 local businesses andorganizations proposing to designate portions of a Sky Island as Wilder-ness. The Tumacacori Highlands campaign is lead by Congressman RaulGrijalva and when designated by Congress, will establish the first wilder-ness on Arizona National Forest lands in more than 20 years.

    Regardless of what the conservation challenge is, Sky Island Alliancetakes a pragmatic, practical approach to finding a solution. Sometimesworking with land agencies and sometimes working against, their missionto protect and restore landscapes and wildlife in the region goes unde-terred. By integrating volunteerism,