road riporter 6.4

8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 6.4

1/14

IThe Road-R PorterBimonthly Newsletter of the Wildlands Center for Preventing Roads. July/August 2001. Volume 6 # 4

continued on page 4

Abuse of PowerBushs

Energy

Plan

Paves

Road to

Ruin

Bethanie Walder

Q. What do you get when you mixrolling blackouts in California, aGeorge W. - Dick Cheney White

House, and national media hysteria?

A. An energy crisis, of course. Andthe solution to this crisis thatGeorge W. favors, at the behest ofhis understudy and other financiers,is increased domestic energy

production.

Photos courtesy of the Oil and Gas Accountability Project (OGAP).

While the reality of an energy crisis is debatable,the Bush Administration is hell-bent onincreasing domestic energy production, and

their plan will devastate wildlands not just in the U.S., butthroughout the continent. For example, the environment ofAlberta Canada continues to be ravaged by natural gasproduction for insatiable Americans.


2/14

The Road-RIPorter July/August 20012

2001 Wildlands CPR

WildlandsWildlandsWildlandsWildlandsWildlands CCCCCenter for PPPPPreventing RRRRRoads

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

national clearinghouse and network,providing citizens with tools and

strategies to fight roadconstruction, deter motorizedrecreation, and promote road

removal and revegetation.

Main OfficeP.O. Box 7516

Missoula, MT 59807(406) 543-9551

[email protected]

Colorado Office2260 Baseline Rd., Suite 205

Boulder, CO 80302(303) 247-0998

[email protected]

DirectorBethanie Walder

Development DirectorTom Petersen

ORV Grassroots AdvocateRonni Flannery

ORV Policy CoordinatorJacob Smith

Roads Policy Coordinator

Marnie Criley

Program AssociateLeslie Hannay

NewsletterDan Funsch & Jim Coefield

Interns & VolunteersBenjamin Hart, Eric Harris

Board of DirectorsKatie Alvord, Karen Wood DiBari,

Sidney Maddock, Rod Mondt,Greg Munther, Cara Nelson, Mary

O'Brien, Ted Zukoski

Advisory CommitteeJasper Carlton, 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...

Abuse of Power, p. 1, 4-5Bethanie Walder

DePaving the Way, p. 3Bethanie Walder

Regional Reports, p. 6-7

Odes to Roads, p. 8-9Edward Abbey

Legal Notes, p. 10-11Ronni Flannery

Bibliography Notes, p. 12-13Leslie Hannay

New Resources forRoad Rippers, p. 14

In this Issue

After a somewhat freakish June snowstorm brought Missoula to a virtualstandstill, summer seems to have finally arrived. So after celebrating thesummer solstice, were preparing for various field adventures, the annual

congressional appropriations battle, another intense fire season and whatever elsemight come our way. In this issue of theRIPorter, however, we focus on the relation-

ship between energy exploration and increased road and motorized access. Granted,roads might be a minimal problem compared to all of the other impacts of energydevelopment, but the contribution of energy development to increased road densitiesis profound. Read on for more information.

WelcomeWildlands CPR welcomes summer interns Eric Harris and Benjamin Hart. Eric is

working with Ronni on an assessment of the Federal Highway AdministrationsRecreational Trails Program. Benjamin will be conducting field surveys of road andoff-road vehicle damage in the Custer National Forest. Eric is a second year lawstudent at the University of Montana,and Benjamin is just finishing hisundergraduate degree at University ofMontana. Were happy to have both of

them on board, and even happier tohave our first full time interns!

ThanksFor starters, we want to thank all

of the people who made contributionsto Wildlands CPR through the Com-bined Federal Campaign - werethrilled with the response wevereceived during our first year in theCampaign, and hope our new mem-bers are happy with our work. Wedalso like to thank the Weeden Founda-tion for our first-ever two-year grant!

We are also grateful to the Wilburforce,Brainerd, Lazar, and Town CreekFoundations for generous grants forour overall work. We greatly appreci-ate these foundations continuingsupport of our roads and off-roadvehicle work!

CorrectionThe Bibliography Notes column (about the ecological effects of firelines) in our

May/June newsletter (6:3) had a technical error. The article refers to mycorrhizae asa non-native fungus which invited other exotic species that depend on mycor-rhizae... Technically, however, mycorrhizae are not a fungus, but an associationbetween roots and many different species of fungus (literally: mykos = fungus and

rhiza = roots). Many thanks to Than Hitt for pointing out the mistake and weapologize for the error.

According to Danielle Gardner, who authored the column for us, the researchersactually conclude that the disruption caused by fire lines in the Florida marsh allowsthe establishment of atypical aerobic fungi because the marsh soil is exposed to air.In turn, the aerobic fungi create more complex glades ecosystems due to the newlycreated mycorrizal associations. The nonmycorrizal species [those that do notrequire association with fungi for nutrient absorption] that occur within a sawgrasscommunity are outcompeted by the mycorrizal species in competition for nutrients(Taylor, D.L. and R.R. Gibbons. 1985. Use of Fire Plows in a Marsh. FireManagement Notes. 46(3): 3-6.).


3/14

The Road-RIPorter July/August 2001 3

The Rules Are Changing Bethanie Walder

Years ago, the public realized the timber industry was leavingbeauty strips to hide their clearcuts from us as we drovethrough our national forests. Fortunately, we were able to look

beyond the beauty strips and fight the logging that was hidden fromview. Weve since learned that roads are enormous linear scars acrossthe landscape, and if we can stop a road we can stop most of theresource destruction that takes place off it. But the rules are changing,and stopping the roads no longer defends wild places. Its time to lookbeyond the roads.

Just five years ago roads werent considered an issue by the media,editorial boards, lawmakers, and the American public. In the last fewyears, however, they have nearly become public enemy number one.Roads have become a significant liability (media-wise, ecologically andeconomically) to the timber and mining industries, in addition to the

land management agencies themselves. But in reality, its not the roadsthemselves that are the only problem, its also the resource extraction,increased motorized access, and other environmental impacts that areassociated with them. This poses an interesting question: If we get rid ofwildland roads, but not the resource extraction that accompanies them,have we protected the land?

This is not just a rhetorical question. The Rough Terrain Technolo-gies Group, a company formed recently in Missoula, Montana, providesan excellent example. Their mission: to develop new technologies forlogging without roads. Even helicopter logging takes place within a mileor two of existing roads, so to get into larger roadless areas, new tech-nologies are needed.

In addition to logging companies like Rough Terrain, miningtechnology has changed dramatically in the past few years. Places like

the Cabinet Mountains Wilderness in Montana are now threatened withhardrock (copper and silver) mining through directional drilling. Theroads and mine-sites can be placed outside wilderness, while the drillsbore underneath to extract the resource. In the Cabinets, they proposeto hollow out a large tunnel, leaving 30-40 percent of the rock in placeas pillars to keep the overburden from collapsing. The mine openingwould be within a mile of the wilderness boundary, with the remaindertunneling 3 miles into the ore body, beneath the wilderness.

The technology for extracting resources, whether minerals, oil, gasor trees, has improved over time (grazing hasnt changed much, theresjust more of it), but even less harmful (and typically more expensive)technologies are not harmless. It certainly is not up to the federalgovernment to provide low-cost opportunities for destructive resourceextraction on public lands. If the industries dont want to log or mine in

a less-impacting manner, then they can go elsewhere. More importantly,there are certain places where resource extraction just doesnt belong -with, or without roads. But these changing technologies raise anotherimportant question: If resources are extracted from wildlands, withoutroads, are these lands still wild?

WildnessWe cannot begin to understand all of the interconnected ways

nature works. We can, however, understand that just because no road isused to cut trees, the land and water will still be impacted. We canunderstand that even if a temporary road is used to log or explore for oil,

and removed immediately thereafter, that the landand water will still be impacted. Fighting roads is notenough. As weve progressed in our battles againstroads, so too have the industries progressed in theirtechnologies to destroy nature without roads. Toprotect wild nature, then, we must make difficultdecisions about what activities are appropriate inwhat places. We must, actually, choose which placeswe want to remain wild. And we must protect naturefrom the activities that accompany roads, in additionto protecting her from the roads themselves.

Is a roadless area filled with stumps still a placethat can harbor wildlife, provide clean water andprovide opportunities for nonmotorized recreation?

Or more philosophically, is a wilderness area with ahuge hole underneath it still intact and pristine, or isits fundamental character changed? Wildness meansdifferent things to different people, with a motorizedtrail being wild in one persons eyes, and the peak ofan unnamed mountain being wild in anothers. Butfor those who believe that the earth is a living thing,for those who believe the earth has its own spirit;ripping the belly out of a mountainside and leavingthe surface untouched does not leave that place intactand wild, it leaves it scarred and violated, physicallyand emotionally. The spirit of the land may reside inits deepest parts. With the copper and silver ore, wealso extract its heart.

Wildlands CPR file photo.


4/14


Abuse of Power continued from page 1

Roads and linear barriers may seem like a pesky side issue inthe debate, but the cumulative impacts of the existing energyinfrastructure combined with its proposed increase are profound.And while this article focuses on specific road-type impacts, thatdoes not in any way diminish the other impacts of oil and gasexploration, hydro generation, nuclear power, etc.

Moving PowerRoads and other linear barriers are created through energy

exploration, production and distribution. Bushs proposed increasein natural gas exploration alone would result in thousands of milesof new roads, but other linear barriers are created through energydevelopment, including natural gas and oil pipelines, transmissionlines, seismic lines, and rail lines.

For example, the National Energy Policy (NEP) states that to matchsupply and demand of natural gas will require some 38,000 miles of newgas pipelines, along with 255,000 miles of distribution lines (NEPD, May2001). This is in addition to the 270,000 miles of gas transmission pipelines

and 952,000 miles of gas distribution lines that already exist (Morton 2001).But if these numbers sound staggering, they pale in comparison to oilpipelines... two million miles of which burrow into or sit atop US soil.

While most pipelines are buried, some are above ground, such asAlaskas North Slope pipeline, with a full-fledged 414-mile maintenanceroad alongside it. One of the most contentious roads in Alaska, the HaulRoad was originally closed to the public but is now promoted as an adven-ture driving destination. Whether above or below ground, pipelines requirea right-of-way and clearance for maintenance. Roads and rights-of-way canfunction as barriers to wildlife movement, and/or disturb hydrologicsystems. They also invite legal or illegal off-road vehicle use, increasingwildlife disturbance.

In addition to pipelines, the United States boasts 157,810 miles oftransmission lines, with another 47,000 in the rest of North America.According to the National Energy Policy, transmission grid expansions arelikely to total about 7,000 miles over the next ten years (NEPD 2001, p. 7:5).While the number of oil and gas pipelines dwarves the number of electrictransmission lines, most electric lines are above ground. Electric lines oftenfollow roads, but can be independent of them, creating additional linearbarriers to wildlife movement.

While energy is moved across the entire landscape, the Bureau of LandManagement (BLM) estimates that 90 percent of pipeline and transmissionrights-of-way in the western US are on federal lands (NEPD 2001). And

according to the NEP (p. 7-8), BLM administers23,000 rights-of-way for oil and gas pipelines and12,000 rights-of-way for electric transmissionlines. (Similar numbers were not cited for ForestService lands.) Despite these facts, Bushs energyplan (NEPD 2001, p. 7:8) claims that one cause ofelectric transmission constraints is limited accessto federal lands. Based on this faulty conclusion,the NEP recommends streamlining permits andeasing the siting process, for facilities and rights-of-way, on both public and private lands. Whilethe policy pays lip service to environmentalsensitivity, in actuality, it would undo the limitedsafeguards that now exist.

Energy ExtractionAccess to federal lands is an issue for energy

extraction as well as energy transmission. The

NEP states that nearly 30 percent of all domesticenergy production now comes from federal lands(except national parks) (NEPD 2001, p. 5:7). OnBLM lands, this equates to approximately 50,000active oil and gas wells (Albersworth 2001).

The majority of future oil and gas potentialon public lands occurs along the Rocky Mountainfront, though non-conventional energy extractionthreatens landscapes across the country. Accord-ing to the Oil and Gas Accountability Project(based on a report from the National PetroleumCouncil), 91% of natural gas under federal publicland in the Rocky Mountains is already accessible.Of that, 59% is open to production understandard lease terms and no additional restric-tions, and 32% is open with some restrictions,including minor delays or cost increases. Only9% of the resource bearing lands in the Rockiesare completely inaccessible due to no leasingand no surface occupancy restrictions (NPCReport Summary as cited in OGAP fact sheet.)And yet, the Bush Energy Policy decries excessiverestrictions on energy development from publiclands.

All photos with this article courtesy of the Oiland Gas Accountability Project (OGAP).


5/14


The NEPD [National Energy Policy Development] Group recommendsthat the President direct the Secretary of the Interior to examine landstatus and lease stipulation impediments to federal oil and gas leasing,and review and modify those where opportunities exist (consistent withthe law, good environmental practice, and balanced use of otherresources.) Expedite the ongoing Energy Policy and Conservation Act study ofimpediments to federal oil and gas exploration and development. Review public lands withdrawals and lease stipulations, with fullpublic consultation, especially with the people in the region, toconsider modifications where appropriate (NEPD 2001, p. 5:7).

Oil and gas exploration and production require different levels ofroading, but most regulations do not require that roads be removed afterextraction. Drill sites may be restored, but the roads often remain. InAlberta, for example, most exploration has been done with seismic lines: oiland gas companies set seismic charges along a grid, detonate them, and testfor reserves. Trucks carry the equipment, typical ly on low-grade, temporaryroads. If oil or gas is found, then permanent roads are built to each well.Unlike logging roads, which are used mostly during a logging operation, oiland gas roads are used daily over the life of the well, which can be decades.And if the wells are on public lands, the roads may be open to public use.

The Forest Service already has a network of at least 60,000 miles ofunclassified roads. Some of these roads are likely from oil and gas explora-

tion temporary roads that were never removed, despite the agencysrules. They foster increased off-road vehicle use, whether legal or illegal.

Take a PowderWyomings Powder River Basin provides a disturbing example of how

our insatiable desire for energy may play out. Most of the basins naturalgas is under BLM land the entire area (public and private) is slated for51,000 coalbed methane wells in the next 10 years. With each well,whether its coalbed methane extraction or conventional, will come roads,pipelines, well-pads and compressor stations (Darin and Beatie 2001).Roads are perhaps the least destructive part of coalbed methane production:of greater concern is that the wells will dump over 1 billion gallons of highlysalinized water onto the ground, dewatering and compromising the abilityof aquifers to recharge, affecting vegetation and soil structure, and impact-ing wildlife and aquatic habitat (Darin and Beatie 2001).

If the Powder River Basin project results in 51,000 wells, it will alsobring thousands of miles of new roads in this 20,000 square mile area. Thehigher the well density, the more roads and pipelines. The Basin holdsapproximately 25 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas thenumber of wells could go as high as 70,000. Remaining gas reserves in thelower 48 are estimated at 1,446 trillion cubic feet (57 times whats in thePowder River Basin) . To recover this gas, much of it through non-conven-tional means like coalbed methane, will require hundreds of thousands ofwells and all the roads and other disturbances that go with them. Thoughoften touted as clean, natural gas production is about as dirty as it gets.

ConclusionWhile George W. Bush and Dick Cheney

exploit the energy crisis for their own, andindustrial gain, the land lies naked, shrinking inthe arms of its abusers. It is inevitable that the USwill increase domestic energy production, but it isnot inevitable that we will do so at any cost.George W. is seizing on public fear to promotebad policy that will cause the rampant roading of

public lands in addition to abuses from theresource extraction itself. The Kyoto Protocoleven comes into play, as attempts to reducegreenhouse gasses can provide increased demandfor natural gas (though they could alternatelyjustify cleaner, renewable energy development).The Energy Policy states, significantly, thisprojected increase in natural gas generationassumes that coal electricity generation willcontinue to account for about 50 percent of USelectricity generation. If policies are adopted thatsharply lower coal electricity generation, then thelikely result is an even greater dependence onnatural gas generation. This creates concern

about the adequacy of natural gas supplies andpolicies NEPD 2001, p. 5:14.While we fight over thousands of miles of

logging roads and off-road vehicle routes, it isbecoming painfully clear that oil and gas develop-ment may rapidly outpace all other purposes forroad development. And when other impacts andlinear barriers, like pipeline and transmission linerights-of-way are considered, the cumulativeimpacts of energy exploration, development anddistribution become almost mind-boggling. Itgives new meaning and justification for theconcept of going off the grid.

For more information on energy issues,contact the Oil & Gas Accountability Project atwww.ogap.org.

ReferencesAlbersworth, D. 2001. Testimony to the House Resources

Committee, Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral

Resources, Regarding Domestic Natural Gas Supply

and Demand: The Contribution of Public Lands and

the OCS. The Wilderness Society. 3-15-01

Darin, T.F. and A.W. Beatie. 2001. Debunking the natural

gas clean energy myth: Coalbed methane in

Wyomings Powder River Basin. Environmental Law

Reporter (News and Analysis): 5-2001 (31 ELR 10566 -

10602).Morton, P. 2001. Testimony to the Committee on Energy

and Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Forests and

Public Land Management, US Senate. The Wilderness

Society. 4-26-01.

National Energy Policy Development Group. 2001. National

Energy Policy: Reliable, Affordable, and

Environmentally Sound Energy for Americas Future,

Report of the National Energy Policy Development

Group. The White House. Washington, DC. May, 2001.

Oil and Gas Accountability Project. 2001. Fact Sheet:

Industry Reports Vast Amount of Federal Public,

Private and Indian Lands Open to Natural Gas

Development.


6/14


Regional Reports & Updates

Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth issued an interim directiveeffective May 31, 2001 that extends the deadline for requiring roadsanalysis (for road management decisions and forest plan revisions oramendments) from July 12, 2001 to January 12, 2002. The specificlanguage in the Forest Service Manual is as follows:

1. Analysis Needed to inform Road Management Decisions. Section7712.13 identifies proposed road management decisions other thanforest plan revisions or amendments that require roads analysis andprovides guidance on the scope and scale of various levels of analysisthat might inform those decisions. The following deadlines govern theapplication of roads analysis to the proposed road management deci-sions identified in sections 7712.13 through 7712.13c:

a. Decisions made before January 12, 2002, do not require a roadsanalysis.

b. Decisions made after January 12, 2002, must be informed by aroads analysis.

2) Forest Scale Road Analyses. Every National Forest Systemadministrative unit must have a forest-scale roads analysis completed byJanuary 13, 2003, except as follows:

a. Those units that will complete a forest plan revision or amend-ment by January 12, 2002, do not need to complete a forest-scale roadsanalysis (FSM 7712.1) prior to adopting the plan revision or amend-ment. However, these units are still required to complete a forest-scaleroads analysis by January 13, 2003.

Six Florida panthers, between eight and twentypercent of the entire remaining population, havebeen killed on Florida highways in 2001. Therecently released data indicate that five of the sixdeaths occurred in southwestern Florida on StateRoad 846, dubbed Slaughter Alley by a localnewspaper. The deaths, all of which have occurred inthe past three months, have resulted in the worst

death rate in 18 years.

The Florida panther, which once roamed acrossthe southeastern United States, now teeters at thebrink of extinction, with an estimated total remainingpopulation of between 30 and 80. Habitat fragmenta-tion and degradation as well as human disturbance,including roadkill, have been the primary causes ofthe cats dramatic decline.

b. Those units that have begun revision oramendment of their forest plans but will not adopt afinal revision or final amendment by January 12,2002, must complete a roads analysis prior toadoption of the final plan revision or amendment.

c. Where additional time is needed for comple-tion of forest-scaleroads analysis, a Forest Supervisormay request approval from the Regional Forester foran extension. In making such a request, the ForestSupervisor must provide a statement of the reason(s)the extension is needed.

Further, Bosworth said in a May interview thatchanges also are expected for the portion of the roads

rule that gives interim guidelines for managingroadless areas prior to the implementation of theroadless rule. The agency will collect public com-ments on the changes that the interim rule madewhen a notice is published in the Federal Registerlater this month. Well keep you updated on opportu-nities for public comment. As with the Roadless rule,this is yet another attack from the current administra-tion on protecting our public lands from roadimpacts.

Road Management Strategy UpdateBosworth issues interim Directive Weakening Roads Rule

Florida Highway A Deathtrap For Endangered Panther

Photo by Brian F. Call. c 2001.


7/14


Forest Service Must Restore

Wilderness Study Areas

A federal judge has ordered the Forest Service to restore sevenWilderness Study Areas in Montana to the wild state in which theyexisted 24 years ago and then maintain them in that state as Congress

ordered.

The Montana Wilderness Study Act prohibited the Forest Servicefrom taking any action in any Montana Wilderness Study Area thatdiminishes the wilderness character of the area as it existed in 1977 orthat diminishes the areas potential for inclusion in the National Wilder-ness Preservation System. According to the lawsuit filed in 1996 by theMontana Wilderness Association, American Wildlands and Friends ofthe Bitterroot, that has not happened. These groups note that the ForestService has built trails for new types of all-terrain vehicles, expandedsnowmobile grooming and issued permits for mining exploration withinthese areas. According to U.S. District Court Judge Donald Molloysruling, there can be no degradation of the wilderness character of theBig Snowies, Bluejoint, Middle Fork Judith, Sapphires, Ten Lakes, West

Pioneers or the Hyalite-Porcupine-Buffalo Horn areas until Congressacts.

John Gatchell, conservation director with Montana WildernessAssociation (MWA), said environmentalists tried and tried to gain theForest Services cooperation voluntarily, but finally resorted to the courtfor help. Dozens and dozens of hiking trails were opened to ATV usewithout any public process, he said.

As part of a settlement of the big desert lawsuit (see RIPorter 6:3),the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has closed Surprise Canyon tomotorized vehicles. Adjacent to Californias Death Valley National Park,Surprise Canyon is an important habitat and water source for wildlife in

this ultra-arid part of California. The lawsuit was brought by the Centerfor Biological Diversity (CBD), Public Employees for EnvironmentalResponsibility, and Sierra Club. It bans motor vehicle use in the canyonimmediately, and at least until the BLM completes its National Environ-mental Policy Act and California Desert Conservation Area Plan amend-ment processes.

Surprise Canyon is known to harbor the rare endemic Panamintalligator lizard and is potential habitat for endangered riparian obligatebirds such as the Southwestern willow flycatcher and Least Bells vireo.For years, the BLM had allowed unregulated extreme off-road vehicleuse of Surprise Canyon. Off-road vehicles regularly winched-up uniquewaterfalls, cut native vegetation and spilled oil & gas into the water.

Protecting Surprise Canyon guards the essence of biologicaldiversity in the California Desert, said Daniel Patterson, CBDs DesertEcologist.

BLM Closes Surprise Canyon To Off-Road Vehicles

Photo by Daniel Patterson, Center for Biological Diversity.

Roadless Rule Reopened

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) hasdecided that the first roadless rulemaking process,which generated 1.6 million comments, over 90% ofwhich favored roadless protection, wasnt fair andopen enough. Therefore, on July 6 the USDA an-

nounced that it is moving forward once again toattempt to develop protections for roadless areas.Through an Advanced Notice of ProposedRulemaking (ANPR), the USDA will seek a sixty daypublic comment period to help determine the nextsteps in providing long term protection of roadlessareas.

The ANPR, which as of this writing should beavailable for inspection at the Federal Register, listsseveral questions for the public to consider regardingroadless area values and future protection andmanagement of inventoried roadless areas in nationalforests and grasslands. According to Mike Anderson of

The Wilderness Society, the ANPR displays a strongbias for abandoning the Roadless Rule in favor of theForest Services traditional forest-by-forest planningprocess. For more information contact Marnie Crileyat Wildlands CPR at 406-543-9551.


8/14


Collectively, counties, local governments,and in a few cases private parties haveasserted jurisdiction over tens of thou-

sands of R.S. 2477 rights-of-way. They would usethe 135-year-old mining law to gain motorizedaccess to and improve so-called highways (inmany cases, two-tracks, cow paths, and riverbottoms) across BLM lands, Forest Service lands,National Parks, and even designated Wildernessareas.

Enacted as part of the Mining Act of 1866,R.S. 2477 provides - in full - that: The right-of-

way for the construction of highways over publiclands, not reserved for public uses, is herebygranted. R.S. 2477 was later repealed by theFederal Lands Policy and Management Act of1976 (FLPMA), however, the repeal was notretroactive but was explicitly subject to validexisting rights. In other words, R.S. 2477 rights-of-way that were perfected prior to 1976 are validnotwithstanding FLPMA. Thus began the rush ofanti-Wilderness advocates claiming to haveperfected rights-of-way pre-dating 1976.

For decades, a debate has raged over whatexactly is required to perfect an R.S. 2477 right-

of-way. To have a valid R.S. 2477 right-of-way, ofcourse, one must have constructed a highwayover public lands that, at the time, were notreserved for public uses. Not surprisingly, theseterms and phrases have meant different things todifferent people. The handful of federal courtdecisions dealing with R.S. 2477 have notdefinitively settled the matter. Until now....

Federal Court Limits R.S. 2477 ApplicationJust before press time a federal district court in Utah decided a case filed

by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance and the Sierra Club (SUWA, et al v.BLM, et al), and sharply limited the ability of local governments to claimjurisdiction over trails across federal lands. The court upheld BLMs rejec-tion of several purported R.S. 2477 highways, and in the process construedkey R.S. 2477 terms and phrases. This decision has tremendousprecedential value for activists fighting these phantom roads. It will alsolikely be appealed to the 10th Circuit.

Construction: First, the court agreed with the BLM that construc-tion means mechanical construction and requires purposeful, physicalbuilding or improving. Neither the mere passage of vehicles across theland, nor haphazard, unintentional, or incomplete action could suffice. Thecourt based its ruling on a number of factors. First, the plain meaning of theword construction was entirely consistent with BLMs position. Second,BLMs interpretation comported with the federal land use policy objectivesin FLPMA. Finally, BLMs interpretation was strengthened by the fact thatthe Department of Interior - the agency charged with enforcing R.S. 2477 -had consistently (and for years) taken the position that constructionrequires actual building. According to the court, [i]t is unlikely thatCongress would have intended that the term construction in R.S. 2477 beread in a way that might have rendered later attempts to determine whatrights-of-way had been established nearly impossible.

Relying on Utah state law, the county claimants had argued thatcontinued use was sufficient to constitute construction. Finding no

contrary judicial precedent directly on point, and observing that state lawcannot be used to disregard or emasculate the meaning of R.S. 2477, thecourt declined to apply state law. Instead, the court applied establishedprinciples of statutory construction, and accordingly adopted the mostpersuasive interpretation - that of the BLM.

Highway: The court likewise agreed with the way the BLM interpretsthe term highway. According to the BLM, R.S. 2477 highways must bepublic in nature, and must have been so when the underlying lands wereavailable for R.S. 2477 purposes. This would disqualify routes used by asingle entity or those used only a few times. Moreover, R.S. 2477highways must connect the public with identifiable destinations orplaces and cannot exist independently of destinations used by and open tothe public.

Not Reserved for Public Uses: The courts ruling on this point is notnecessarily applicable to all R.S. 2477 claims, but it does have enormousimplications for lands that the federal government had set aside solely forcoal development. The court upheld BLMs conclusion that these lands werereserved for public uses for purposes of R.S. 2477. The upshot is that R.S.2477 rights-of-way on these lands are not valid unless perfected prior to thereservation.

Federal Court Closes the Gate on R.S. 2477 Claims Ronni Flannery

An R.S. 2477 claim through Utahs canyon country. Photo

courtesy of Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA).


9/14


R.S. 2477 Claims on Forest Service

vs. BLM LandsMost commonly, R.S. 2477 disputes involve alleged rights-of-way on

public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management. Less typical areR.S. 2477 claims associated with Forest Service lands. While admittedlyfewer in number, R.S. 2477 claims on Forest Service lands are no lesstroublesome, and they similarly have threatened - and will continue tothreaten - wild, forested areas throughout the West. For example, theexistence of an R.S. 2477 right-of-way is one of several arguments thatprivate litigants are advancing to support their desire to construct andimprove a 20-mile road through designated Wilderness in Montana.Elsewhere in Montana, motorized advocates appear to be trying to set up anR.S. 2477 claim to get an illegal snowmobile trail - previously closed andrevegetated - re-opened. The Rio Grande National Forest in Colorado andthe Jarbidge National Forest in Nevada are other national forests that haveserved as settings for R.S. 2477 disputes.

It is fairly well known that on BLM lands, only those rights-of-way thatwere perfected prior to FLPMAs effective date - October 21, 1976 - are valid.All others are subject to FLPMAs statutory scheme for issuing rights-of-wayover public lands.

Perhaps less well known is that Forest Service lands stand on a slightlydifferent footing vis a vis R.S. 2477 claims. The distinction - however subtle- can make all the difference to activists fighting R.S. 2477 highways onForest Service lands. Even though it was FLPMA - enacted in 1976 - thatrepealed R.S. 2477, R.S. 2477 itself, as discussed above, specifies that onlythose highways that were constructed prior to the public land inquestion being reserved for public purposes may be valid. Unlike BLMlands, most Forest Service lands were reserved in this sense decades ago.

With the passage in 1891 of theNational Forest System Enabling Act,national forests were closed - withlimited exceptions - to any furtherunilateral appropriations of publicland for roads and trails. So, unlike

BLM lands - on which R.S. 2477rights-of-way may be valid if per-fected prior to 1976 - R.S. 2477rights-of-way on Forest Service landsmust have been perfected before theforest at issue was reserved in thefirst place.

In Adams v. United States, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals explainedthat [t]o establish [a valid RS 2477 claim], [a claimant] must show that theroad in question was built before the surrounding land lost its publiccharacter .... See Adams, 3 F.3d 1254, 1258 (9th Cir. 1993). NationalForests either lost their public character in 1891 when, with the passage ofthe Enabling Act, they formally became a part of the National Forest System,

or at whatever later point such forests were officially added to the System.In the Adams case, the relevant date was November 5, 1906 - the date onwhich President Roosevelt reserved the lands now called the ToiyabeNational Forest. The R.S. 2477 claim thus failed because there was nocredible evidence showing that the road in question came into existenceprior to 1906.

Finally, remember that even valid R.S. 2477 highways are subject toregulation by the Forest Service. Clouser vs. Espy, 42 F.3d 1522, 1537-38(9th Cir. 1994)

ConclusionThe decision issued in the Southern Utah

Wilderness Alliance case holds considerablepromise for activists who are now or who may inthe future find themselves challenging the validityof R.S. 2477 rights-of-way on public lands. Thisdecision for the first time and in plain anddefinitive terms offers judicial interpretations ofseveral key terms in R.S. 2477. The case shouldmake a big difference in how public land manag-ers and other decision-makers evaluate R.S. 2477claims. Finally, for activists who focus on ForestService lands, it is important to keep in mind thatit is more difficult to establish R.S. 2477 claimsthere. Claimants have a higher burden of proof inthat they must prove that the right-of-way wasestablished prior to the time that the particularforest was reserved in the first place.

Ronni Flannery began working for the National

Trails & Waters Coalition in September 2000 and

provides legal and strategic assistance to grassroots

organizations and individual activists challenging

off-road vehicle use on public lands. Ronni has a

BS from the University of Wisconsin, and a JD from

University of Wisconsin Law School. She works outof the Wildlands CPR office in Missoula, MT.

An eroded gully mistaken for a highway in Garfield

County, Utah. Photo by Jim Thompson.

Photo courtesy of SUWA.


10/14


Bibliography Notes

Bibliography Notes summarizes 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 activists access important biological research relevant to roads. We keep copies of

most articles cited in Bibliography Notes in our office library.

Effect of Roads on Arthropods Leslie Hannay

Arthropods make up a significant part of thebiodiversity on this planet, and are important in manyways to the overall health of ecosystems and to our

understanding of natural biotic systems. At the base of manyfood chains, arthropods are important components of the dietsof invertebrates and birds, and are also an integral part of thenutrient- and energy-processing abilities of the soil (Coleman &Crossley 1996). Arthropods also tend to demonstrate oppor-tunism and rapid response to change. By studying arthropodresponses to ecological change, we can better understand theeffects of human disturbance and landscape modification onterrestrial systems (Morris 2000, Major et al 1999).

The impact of roads on arthropods is considerable. Roadsaffect terrestrial arthropods directly by destroying their habitat,and by increasing the risk of being crushed by vehicles ortrampled by pedestrian traffic. Roads also fragment arthropodhabitat, exacerbate the spread of exotic and invasive species,and create pollution in the air and on the ground.

Habitat DestructionRoads destroy arthropod habitat on the road bed itself and

on road verges by altering vegetation, changing soil dynamics,

and modifying microclimates. The most obvious effect is theconversion of habitat into road surfaces. Vegetation is replacedby less permeable surfaces, thereby eradicating food sources,nesting areas, and hiding places that are essential to arthropodsurvival (Mader 1984). Similarly, soil dynamics are modified

by road construction, whichflattens terrestrial niches and

causes substantial soilcompaction. This

contributes toincreased runoff

and decreasedsoil porosity,

which

impede arthropod survival in the immediate area of the road(Noss 1999). Microclimate also changes as a result of roadconstruction. Road surfaces tend to absorb solar radiation at ahigher rate than unmodified surfaces, increasing soil and airtemperatures. Increased wind due to the removal of vegetationaround the road, as well as the reduced capacity of the soil toretain moisture due to compaction, combine with these highertemperatures to create a more arid and hotter microclimateabove the road surface (Haskell 2000).

The conversion of habitat along roadsides is also signifi-cant. Often, the disturbed areas on either side of a roadsupport entirely different vegetation from that which waspresent before road construction; the effects upon forest faunamay persist up to 100 meters from the road itself (Haskell2000). This altered vegetation sustains different species withvarying success, due to changes in nesting habitat, food supply,and opportunities to hide from predators. Roadsides mayreceive a greater influx of nutrients from passing vehicles,increased water availability, and nearby agricultural land-scapes, resulting in a greater abundance of weeds on roadsides(Major et al 1999). The composition of plant and animalspecies on road verges will differ notably from non-roadsidehabitats, which intensifies competition and broadens thedisturbed area (Mader 1984). Even in cases where roadside

plants remain the same, the physiology and growth of theseplants, and the insects they sustain, often differs completelyfrom areas that are more distant from roads (Martell 1995,Lightfoot & Whitford 1991, Spencer et al 1988).

Frequent mowing along roads contributes to the environ-mental instability of roaded areas (Morris 2000). A commonresponse of arthropods to shortened vegetation is a reductionin the abundance and diversity of most groups and species.Such unstable conditions favor a few opportunistic and robustspecies, often nonnative, to the detriment of those that areslower to adapt (Morris 2000, Mader 1984, Hollifield &Dimmick 1995, Haskell 2000). The combined effects ofchanging roadside vegetation may lead to a more uniform setof species, an eventuality that increases the chance of local

extinction, especially of small populations of flightless ground-foraging insects (Vermeulen 1994). As previously mentioned,roadsides also change microclimates (Major et al 1999, Mader1984). In one study, increased aridity and temperature ontropical forest roadsides diminished insect diversity up to 40meters from the road, which acutely affected insectivorepopulations in the study area (Grindal and Brigham 1998).


11/14


Roadkill and TramplingAlthough there are no figures for arthropod roadkill, it is

known to have a major impact on roadside arthropod popula-tions (Oxley & Fenton 1974, Mader 1984). In one study of ORVimpacts on desert biota, it was observed that arthropod trackswere found 24 times as often on sites that were closed tomotorized traffic as on ORV-impacted sites (Luckenbach andBury 1983). Treading by humans has also been detrimental toarthropods. Even moderate trampling (5 treads per month)

reduced a wide range of invertebrate species by up to 82percent over a twelve-month period (Morris 2000). Roadconstruction also contributes to direct mortality of slower-moving, flightless arthropods, which cannot avoid beingcrushed by construction machinery.

Habitat FragmentationRoads constitute major barriers to arthropod dispersal

(Mader et al 1990, Haskell 2000, Vermeulen 1994). Linearbarriers affect the movement of ground-dwelling animals,stimulating lengthwise dispersal and inhibiting lateral move-ment (Mader et al 1990). This reluctance of arthropods to crossroads may be due to changes in microclimate at road edges,pollution and noise from traffic, environmental instability,changes in the composition of flora and fauna along roads,and the immediate danger to animals of being killed byoncoming traffic. Carabid beetles have been found to avoidcrossing road shoulders almost entirely, and were not observedever crossing the road itself (Mader 1984). Despite thetheoretical value of roads as connective corridors for recolo-nizing areas, studies on arthropods have shown that they tendto travel only short distances in a year. This suggests thatroads act as a mechanism for the infiltration of opportunisticspecies to the detriment of local populations (Vermeulen 1993,Lightfoot 1991). Fragmentation, reduction, and isolation ofcarabid habitat are most likely the main causes of the signifi-cant decrease in the species since the last century (Turin 1989in Vermeulen 1994).

Spread of Exotics, Invasives, and

OpportunistsRoads intensify invasion by exotic and invasive species.

Humans act as vehicles for the dispersal of exotics; roadsprovide movement corridors, create a disturbed environmentfor the establishment of opportunistic species, and altervegetation, which differentially favors some species (oftenpioneers or invasives) over others (Simberloff 1989, Lightfoot1991, Noss 1999). This has been demonstrated, to the greatdetriment of a number of agroecosystems and agriculturaleconomies, by crop infestation by nonlocal pests (Fye 1980,Kemp & Barrett 1989, Snodgrass & Stadelbacher 1989, Oi and

Barnes 1989). For example, the balsam wooly adelgid hasnearly destroyed two varieties of firs in the southern Appala-chians. It has been directly linked to roads as means ofdispersal (Campbell 1996).

Bibliography on page 14

PollutionPollution caused by roads includes lead and fuel additive

emissions from vehicles, salt from de-icing compounds, dust,ozone, exhaust fumes (cadmium, sulfur dioxide, nitrousoxides), and noise (Mader 1984, Hopkin and Howse 1998,Lightfoot & Whitford 1991, Oxley & Fenton 1974). Lead andother heavy metals from exhaust accumulate along roads andaffect wildlife. A study near Washington, D.C. found increasedlead, zinc, nickel, and cadmium in earthworms near roads(Oxley and Fenton 1974). Another study suggests the possiblelead contamination of honey bees along a roadway (Pratt &Sikorski 1982 in Lightfoot and Whitford 1991).

Salt from de-icing compounds is the most apparent sourceof stress on roadside systems, since salt accumulation oftenleaves bare patches in vegetation and visibly damages trees onroad verges (Spencer et al 1988). Salt has been shown todecrease predator efficiency, change the suitability of hostplants for arthropods, alter interactions between herbivoresand their natural enemies, and to drastically affect the healthof roadside vegetation upon which arthropods are dependent(Martel 1995, Spencer et a, Hopkin and Howse 1995). Saltaccumulation also degrades soil quality, reducing the suitabilityof roadside habitat for soil-dwelling arthropods.

Increased nitrogen levels on roadsides have been shown to

increase productivity of vegetation, resulting in higher insectinfestation. This increase in nitrogen may be due either tonitrous oxide emissions from vehicle exhaust, or to runofffrom the road surface (Lightfoot and Whitford 1991). Not allstudies have confirmed an increase in vegetal productivity,however. Overall, the roads tend to increase stress to roadsideecosystems, which makes for a less stable environment that ismore vulnerable to disease and pest infestation.

ConclusionExisting road networks affect arthropod populations by

destroying habitat, changing interspecies relationships,fragmenting dispersal corridors, facilitating the introduction

and establishment of exotics, and polluting biotic systems.While roads generally decrease species diversity, properrestoration techniques have increased species richness by asmuch as 300 percent (Hollifield and Dimmick 1995). In light ofthe reliance of higher-level taxa upon arthropods as a foodsource, as well as the importance of arthropods in processingsoil nutrients and energy, the impacts of roads on arthropodsare important for ecosystem conservation as a whole.

Leslie Hannay is the Program Associate for Wildlands CPR.


12/14


New Resources for Road-Rippers

continued from page 13

BibliographyCampbell, F.T. 1996. The invasion of exotics. Endangered Species

Bulletin. March/April 1996.

Coleman, D.C. and D.A. Crossley, Jr. 1996. Fundamentals of soil

ecology. Academic Press, San Diego.

Fye, R.E. 1980. Weed sources of Lygus Bugs in the Yakima Valley

and Columbia Basin in Washington. J.Economic Entomology

73(3):469-473.

Grindal, S.D. and R.M. Brigham. 1998. Short-term effects of small-

scale habitat disturbance on activity by insectivorous bats. J.

Wildlife Management62(3):996-1003.

Haskell, D.G. 2000. Effects of forest roads on macroinvertebrate

soil fauna of the southern Appalachian Mountains.Conservation Biology 14(1):57-63.

Hollifield, B.K. and R.W. Dimmick. 1995. Arthropod abundance

relative to forest management practices benefiting ruffed

grouse in the southern Appalachians. Wildlife Society Bulletin

23(4):756-764.

Hopkin, A.A.and G.M. Howse. 1998. A survey to evaluate crown

condition of forest, roadside, and urban maple trees in

Ontario, 1987-1995. Northern J. Applied Forestry 15(3):141-

145.

Kemp, J.C. and G.W. Barrett. 1989. Spatial patterning: impact of

uncultivated corridors on arthropod populations within

soybean agroecosystems. Ecology 70(1):114-128.

Lightfoot, D.C. and W.G. Whitford 1991. Productivity of

Creosotebush foliage and associated canopy arthropods alonga desert roadside. American Midland Naturalist125:310-322.

Luckenbach, R.A. and R.B. Bury. 1983. Effects of off-road vehicles

on the biota of the Algodones Dunes, Imperial County,

California. J. Applied Ecology 20:265-286.

Mader, H.-J. 1984. Animal habitat isolation by roads and

agricultural fields. Biological Conservation 29:81-96.

Mader, H.-J., C. Schell, P. Kornacker. 1990. Linear barriers to

arthropod movements in the landscape.Biological

Conservation 54:209-222.

Major, R.E., D. Smith, G. Cassis, M. Gray, and D.J. Colgan. 1999.

Are roadside strips important reservoirs of invertebrate

diversity? A comparison of the ant and beetle faunas of

roadside strips and large remnant woodlands.Australian J.

Zoology 47:611-624.

Martel, J. 1995. Performance of Eurosta solidaginis (diptera:

Tephritidae) and Epiblema scudderiana (Lepidoptera:

Tortricidae), Two gall-formers of Goldenrod, in roadside

environments. Environmental Entomology 24(3):697-706.

Morris, M.G. 2000. The effects of structure and its dynamics on the

ecology and conservation of arthropods in British grasslands.

Biological Conservation 95: 129-142.

Noss, R. 1995. The ecological effects of roads, or, the road todestruction. The Road Rippers Handbook, Wildlands Center

for Preventing Roads, Missoula, MT.

Oi, D.H. and M.M. Barnes. 1989. Predation by the western

predatory mite (Acari: Phytoseiidae) on the Pacific spider

mite (Acari: Tetranychidae) in the presence of road dust.

Environmental Entomology 18(5):892-896.

Oxley, D.J. and M.B. Fenton. 1974. The harm our roads do to

nature and wildlife.J. Applied Ecology 11:51-59

Simberloff, D. 1989. Which insect introductions succeed and which

fail? in Biological Invasions: A Global Perspective. Edited by

J.A. Drake, H.A. Mooney, F. diCastri, R.H. Groves, F.J. Kruger,

M. Rejmanek andM.Williamson, New York: Wiley.

Snodgrass, G.L. and E.A. Stadelbacher. 1989. Effect of different

grass and legume combinations on spider and ground beetlepopulations in roadside habitats in the Mississippi Delta.

Environmental Entomology 18(4):575-581.

Spencer, H.J. and G.R. Port. 1988. Effects of roadside conditions

on plants and insects. II. Soil conditions. J. Applied Ecology

25:709-715.

Spencer, H.J., N.E. Scott, G. R. Port, and A. W. Davison. 1988.

Effects of roadside conditions on plants and insects. I.

Atmospheric conditions. J. Applied Ecology 25:699-707.

Vermeulen, H.J.W. 1994. Corridor function of a road verge for

dispersal of stenotopic heathland ground beetles Carabidae.

Biological Conservation 69:339-349.

CARtoonsCARtoons is a 100 page book written and illustrated by Andy Singer and published by Car

Busters. It looks at the impact of automobiles on American Society and the world. It features over 85cartoons and illustrations as well as facts, figures, resources and a foreword by Jane Holtz Kay (authorof Asphalt Nation). The images may be freely reproduced for the non-profit use of individuals or

groups fighting cars. For this purpose, it comes with an optional CD-rom containing all of the imagesin the book (and more) in 600dpi, tif format.

The book costs $6.00 and the CD-rom is $4.00 (discounts are available for bulk orders). To order,send check or money order to Andy Singer at 1849 Portland Ave. #2, St. Paul, MN 55104. Or seewww.andysinger.com.

The Book can also be purchased directly on line (via credit-card) from Detour Publications at:http://www.detourpublications.com/catalogue/cars.html
http://www.detourpublications.com/catalogue/cars.htmlhttp://www.detourpublications.com/catalogue/cars.html


13/14


Printed MaterialsRoad-Ripper's Handbook ($20.00, $30 non-members)A com-

prehensive activist manual that includes the five Guides listed

below, plus The Ecological Effects of Roads, Gathering In-formation with the Freedom of Information Act, and more!

Road-Ripper's Guide to the National Forests ($5, $8 non-mem-bers) By Keith Hammer. How-to procedures for gettingroads closed and revegetated, descriptions of environmentallaws, road density standards & Forest Service road policies.

Road-Ripper's Guide to the National Parks ($5, $8 non-mem-bers) By David Bahr & Aron Yarmo. Provides backgroundon the National Park System and its use of roads, and outlineshow activists can get involved in NPS planning.

Road-Ripper's Guide to the BLM ($5, $8 non-members) ByDan Stotter. Provides an overview of road-related land andresource laws, and detailed discussions for participating inBLM decision-making processes.

Road-Ripper's Guide to Off-Road Vehicles ($5, $8 non-mem-bers) By Dan Wright. A comprehensive guide to reducingthe use and abuse of ORVs on public lands. Includes an ex-tensive bibliography.

Road-Rippers Guide to Wildland Road Removal ($5, $8 non-members)By Scott Bagley. Provides technical informationon road construction and removal, where and why roads fail,and how you can effectively assess road removal projects.

Trails of Destruction ($10) By Friends of the Earth and Wild-lands CPR, written by Erich Pica and Jacob Smith. This re-port explains the ecological impacts of ORVs, federal fundingfor motorized recreation on public lands, and the ORVindustrys role in pushing the ORV agenda.

On-Line ResourcesVisit our Web Site: www.wildrockies.org/WildCPR. Youll find

educational materials, back issues ofThe Road-RIPorter (in-

cluding all our bibliography, legal and field notes), and cur-rent action alerts.

Also at the site, weve got a link to an ORV Information Site withan interactive map-based database on each National ForestsORV Policy.

Now available on our site: Ecological Impacts of Roads: A Bib-liographic Database (Updated Jan. 2001) Contains approx.6,000 citations including scientific literature on erosion,fragmentation, sedimentation, pollution, effects on wildlife,aquatic and hydrological effects, and other information onthe impacts of roads.

Subscribe to our on-line list-serves. Check the boxes below onthe member form and receive Skid Marks and/or our ActivistAlert over E-Mail.

Membership and Order Information

Refer a friend to

Wildlands CPR!Send us the names and addresses of friendsyou think may be interested in receiving

membership information from Wildlands CPR.

WILDLANDS CPR MEMBERSHIP/ORDER FORM

Prices include shipping: for Priority Mail add $3.50 per item;

for Canadian orders, add $6.50 per item.

International Membership $30 Minimum . All prices in U.S. Dollars

Ask about reduced rates for items ordered in bulk.

I want to join (or renew my membership with)

Wildlands CPR:

Type of Membership: 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:

/

/

Phone/E-mail

Affiliation

Address

Name

Check here to receive our new ORV and road E-mail

newsletter, Skid Marks, every few weeks.

Check here for our E-mail Activist List.

Please remember to include your e-mail address!

Please send this form and your check to:Wildlands CPR PO Box 7516 Missoula, Montana 59807


14/14

Wildlands Center for Preventing Roads

P.O. Box 7516

Missoula, MT 59807

Visions...

Non-profit OrganizationUS POSTAGE

PAIDMISSOULA, MT 59801

PERMIT NO. 569

The Road-RIPorter is printed on 100% post-consumer recycled, process chlorine-free bleached paper.

To see ten thousand animals untamed and notbranded with the symbols of human commerce is

like scaling an unconquered mountain for thefirst time, or like finding a forest without roads

or footpaths, or the blemish of an axe.

Beryl MarkhamWest With the Night

Kenya, 1942

Photo by Daniel Patterson.

road riporter 6.4

Documents