road riporter 9.1

8/14/2019 Road RIPorter 9.1

1/24

Now or Never: Getting a Grip onOff-Road Vehicles

By Jason Kiely See article on page 3

The impacts of off road vehicles on water quality, soils, wildlife and quiet recreation are well-known, however, controlling these impacts on public lands presents a significant political challenge.

Background photo by Keith Hammer; inset photo credits (clockwise from bottom left): Wildlands CPRfile photo; Richard Compton; U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service; Howard Wilshire.

The Quarterly Newsletter of Wildlands CPRSpring Equinox 2004. Volume 9 # 1

Inside

Check out our website at:www.wildlandscpr.org

Getting a Grip on ORVs, by Jason Kiely.Pages 3-5

Odes to Roads: For our Brothers: Blue Jay,Gold Finch, Flicker, Squirrel, by SimonOrtiz. Pages 6-7

Legal Notes, ORVs in Hells Canyon, byBrett Brownscombe Pages 8-9

Depaving the Way, by Bethanie Walder.Pages 10-11

Wildlands CPRs 2003 Annual Report.Pages 12-13

Policy Primer: Roads Policy Review, byMarnie Criley. Pages 14-15

Activist Spotlight: Champions of theClearwater, by Kiffin Hope.Pages 16-17

Biblio Notes: The Price of Power, byKatherine Hyzy. Pages 18-20

Get with the Program: Restoration,Transportation & Science ProgramUpdates. Pages 20-21

Around the Office, Membership info.Pages 22-23


2/24

The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 20042

By Bethanie Walder

2004 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

[email protected]

DirectorBethanie Walder

Development DirectorTom Petersen

Restoration ProgramCoordinator

Marnie Criley

Science CoordinatorAdam Switalski

Transportation PolicyOrganizer

Jason Kiely

NTWC Grassroots

CoordinatorLisa Philipps

Program AssistantKiffin Hope

NewsletterDan Funsch & Jim Coefield

Interns & VolunteersCarla Abrams, Lauri Duensing, Hank Green,

Maureen Hartmann, Sara Krier, Adam Lieberg,Beth Peluso, Mark Ruby

Board of DirectorsKaren Wood DiBari, Greg Fishbein, Bill Geer,Dave Havlick, Sonya Newenhouse, Mary OBrien,

Matt Skroch, Ted Zukoski

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

WildlandsCPR

Ata forest activists meeting in Washington DC in January, one participantclaimed that the best way to protect national forests right now was togive up our current conservation work and instead focus on the upcom-

ing elections. While its hard sometimes to see the forest for the trees, the activistmay have been right. Nothing effects public lands policy more than the politicalwinds that blow inside the beltway in Washington DC.

Whether your support one party or another, participating in electoral politicsis essential to ensuring your place in the democratic process. This is true at everylevel, from town councils to the President of the United States.

The City Council in Missoula, Montana, for example, passed a road diet lastfall to reduce one of the main downtown roads from four to three lanes. The middle

lane would be used for left hand turns, leaving one lane each for east and westboundtraffic. This would leave more room for on-street parking, sidewalks, bike lanes, etc.According to many studies, traffic would move at the same speed or faster, since theexisting left lanes are constantly bottled up by cars waiting to turn.

But in November, a new city council was elected and one of the first things theydid (upon taking office in January) was overturn the road diet, which hadnt yet beenimplemented. This is similar to what happens on our public lands. President Clin-ton held a forestry roundtable and developed the Northwest Forest Plan; PresidentBush responded with the Healthy Forests Initiative. The Forest Service is often stuckon a seesaw of political mandates, making consistent management impossible andconstantly changing the expectations of resource-dependent communities. It alsomeans that our battles are constantly fought, won, lost, fought again, won again andlost again.

Until we make conservation a bipartisan issue again, management and policieswill continue to swing from one side of the pendulum to the other. The environmenthas the potential to play a bigger role in the upcoming elections than in many previ-ous elections. Lets make sure its an issue that no person running for political officecan ignore.

Happy springtime! Photo Mark Alan Wilson.


3/24

The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004 3


At one time,we didntmanagethe use of

off-highway vehicles . . . . But the number of people who ownOHVs has just exploded in recent years. In 2000, it reachedalmost 36 million. Even a tiny percentage of impact from allthose millions of users is still a lot of impact. Each year, weget hundreds of miles of what we euphemistically refer to asunplanned roads and trails. Thats how Forest Service ChiefDale Bosworth described unmanaged motorized recreationwhen he deemed the issue one of the four great threats facingnational forests during a speech on Earth Day in 2003.

In an effort to protect forests from the damage causedby off-road vehicles, late in 2003 Chief Bosworth chartered

an inter-disciplinary team of Forest Service managers tostrengthen regulations that govern motorized recreation byoverland vehicles. The team is lead by Jack Troyer, RegionalForester for the Intermountain Region (Region 4), based inOgden, Utah.

The Forest Service hopes to revise regulations governingthe use of dirt bikes, ATVs, SUVs, and other overland, off-roadvehicles on national forests and grasslands by late 2004. Inmeetings organized by the Natural Trails and Waters Coalitionand Wildlands CPR, Forest Service officials have said theywill propose new rules that prohibit cross-country motorizedtravel except under limited circumstances and that limit off-road vehicles to designated roads and routes. Chief Bosworthrecently said, I dont have that sense of urgency, myself,

regarding snowmobiles. The Forest Service says they willdeal with over-snow motorized recreation separately, whichmakes little sense in the big picture.

Dirt bikes, ATVs and other off-road vehicles have beena serious problem for a long time in virtually every nationalforest, said former Forest Service Deputy Chief Jim Furnish.Rarely have agency leaders had the guts to tackle the prob-lems head on, even though they have the tools. While theregulations can and should be strengthened, strong leader-ship is even more important.

By Jason Kiely

PhotobyHowardWilshire.

Top-level federal land managers (finally) seem to be coming to termswith the problems caused by unrestricted ORV use. Wildlands CPR file

photos.

continued on next page


4/24


continued from page 3


Unfortunately, Forest Service leadership on this issue has beenlacking for decades with serious consequences for the environment

and the majority of forest users. In his Earth Day speech, Chief Bos-worth recognized that the leadership vacuum has been filled by irre-sponsible motorists: The Lewis and Clark National Forest in Montanahas more than a thousand unplanned roads and trails reaching foralmost 650 miles. Thats pretty typical for a lot of national forests, andits only going to get worse.

The first off-road vehicle boom was in the 1970s, when three- andfour-wheelers became increasingly popular in deserts and forests. Hun-dreds of scientific studies were conducted on their ecological effects,and Presidents Nixon and Carter signed executive orders regulatingtheir use on public lands. As land management agencies implementednew travel plans in response to the executive orders, they largely de-pended on the terrain itself to limit where the vehicles could drive.

The 1980s were a bust for the industry: motorized recreation

waned as oil prices rose, the economy faltered, and the consumerproducts safety commission banned the sale of three-wheeled ATVs.But the boom reignited in the 1990s with the advent of faster, stronger,more powerful four-wheelers that can go nearly anywhere. Strangely,the Forest Service widened rather than narrowed the regulatory gap:the agency rescinded a little known regulation called the 40-inch rule.This rule stated that no vehicles wider than 40 inches could be used onnational forest trails. (At that time forty inches was the standard widthof the handlebars of a dirt bike.) With the rescission of that rule, weveseen a wholesale change in the attitude and aptitude of the agency tomanage off-road vehicles. Weve also seen the continued conversion offoot and horse trails to motorized use.

Unchecked by reasonable rules and regulations, off-road vehicleuse on national forests skyrocketed throughout the 1990s. Nonethe-less, off-road vehicle use still makes up only about 10% of overallrecreational use on the national forests.

In 1999, Wildlands CPR spearheaded the devel-opment of a rulemaking petition asking the Forest

Service to overhaul their off-road vehicle regula-tions. The petition documented the ecologicalimpacts of off-road vehicles and the Forest Servicescongressional mandate to protect the land, water,air, plant-life, and wildlife in national forests fromoff-road vehicle abuse. By the time we filed the peti-tion that December, more than 100 organizationshad signed on.

As documented in the petition, the failure to ef-fectively manage off-road vehicle use is causing seri-ous damage throughout national forests. In his 2003Earth Day speech, Chief Bosworth confirmed the en-vironmental destruction and antagonism caused byoff-road vehicle use: Were seeing more and more

erosion, water degradation, and habitat destruction.Were seeing more and more conflicts between us-ers. Were seeing more damage to cultural sites andmore violation of sites sacred to American Indians.And those are just some of the impacts.

Renegade routes unauthorized routes cutby irresponsible motorized riders infect mostforests like cancer. Travel on renegade routes ismore destructive than other motorized recreationbecause these routes usually cut through areaswhere roads just dont belong, such as riparianareas, steep slopes, and fragile ecosystems. As aresult, public lands fractured by renegade routes aremarked by eroded soils, polluted rivers, lakes and

streams, and decimated wildlife habitat.Destructive, unmanaged motorized recreationhas escalated to the point of assaulting the rightsof others, resulting in new non-traditional conser-vation alliances. The roar of motors and seizure oftraditional foot and horse trails displaces hikers,cross-country skiers and hunters; ranchers with for-

est grazing allotments and homeownersadjacent to forests suffer trespass andvandalism by brazen motorists. As moreriders take to the forests, opportunitiesfor others to enjoy unspoiled habitatand quiet of nature disappear.

Traditional hunters want a qual-ity experience, but they are facedwith ever-increasing negative impactsbrought about by unmanaged ATV useon our public lands, said Stan Rauch, alifelong hunter from Montana. As ATVuse grows unchecked, many hunters arebeing displaced from their most pristineand productive hunting areas on theirnational forests and critical wildlifehabitat is being sliced into smaller andsmaller pieces.

Rising oil prices slowed the growth of the ORV industry in the 80s, but the boom resumed withthe advent of newer, more powerful machines like the one touted in this advertisement (at left

Lack of oxygen only intensifies the rush). Conoco photo Mark Alan Wilson .


5/24


Wildlands CPR has been working closely with the Natural Trailsand Waters Coalition to articulate and promote policies for effectivereform. Essential reform would require forest-level land managers todesignate a system of motorized routes based on science and balancedpublic input within a defined time period. True reform will also protecthard-fought bans on motorized vehicles in places like the Hoosier andthe White Mountains National Forests. See sidebar.

Vera Smith, Conservation Director of the Colorado Mountain Club,insists that a sense of urgency is essential to making national policytranslate into effective management: If the Forest Service does not setclear deadlines for action, the problem will go from bad to worse, andcountless hikers and other quiet recreationists will continue to loseaccess to their national forests.

While the pending rule-change may fulfill the obligations com-pelled by the 1999 petition, the Forest Service insists that anotherimpetus for their work is the increasing challenge that their landmanagers face as they try to deal with off-road vehicle recreation. Thisdoes not appear to be just another agency rule change promoted andimposed from the top down. Instead, the process is more organic,coming from within the agency ranks that recognize the need to con-trol off-road vehicle abuse of the land.

For this reason alone, Wildlands CPR and many other conserva-tionists feel there is an opportunity for real, positive, lasting change

to come from this process. This isnt an era of positive change onenvironmental issues, however, and anyone working to protect publiclands must maneuver the potential political and regulatory pitfalls.Opportunities for real change, public and policymaker education, andcitizen involvement are too promising not to take the inherent risks. Ifwe want to get a handle on motorized recreation, its now or never.

Jason Kiely is Transportation Policy Organizer for Wildlands CPR.

Off-Road VehicleRecommendations

Co-chaired by Wildlands CPR, The NaturalTrails and Waters Coalition works to protectand restore all public lands and waters from

the damage caused by dirt bikes, jet skisand all other off-road vehicles. The Coalitionhas developed the following policy recom-

mendations that would enable Forest Servicesupervisors and district rangers to protect

land, water, wildlife, and air from motorizedrecreation:

Protecting traditional foot/horse trails from motorized use:motorized vehicles may only travel on roads and off-road vehicleroutes (ORV routes) designated in a public planning process andspecifically engineered and constructed for motorized travel.

Designating roads and routes for off-road vehicle travel through asite-specific and public process under the National EnvironmentalPolicy Act. Renegade roads/routes created by users withoutauthorization will be closed until full analysis is completed todetermine whether they can be designated without endangeringforest health, environmental values, public safety, and/or theexperience of other users. Renegade roads/routes that will bepermanently closed must be restored.

Permitting off-road vehicle use only in a manner that protectsnatural resources, environmental values (e.g. quiet, landscapecharacter), public safety and the experience of other forest users.

The agency has a positive obligation to analyze new recreationaltechnologies/activities before they are allowed to determine

whether or not they are compatible with this goal and, if they are,at what levels and where. The agency does not have an obligationto allow all forms of recreation to occur on Forest Service lands.

Prohibiting the use of off-road vehicles in wilderness quality landssuch as roadless/ unroaded areas and wilderness study areas.

Permitting off-road vehicle use only to the extent that effectivemonitoring and enforcement are annually funded, implementedand used to determine appropriate levels of continued off-roadvehicle use.

Establishing a two-year timeline for implementing this plan,after which any forest that has not completed designations andclosed renegade roads/routes will allow motorized recreationaluse only on roads/ORV routes that have been analyzed and thendesignated for such use.

Creating a consistent set of minimum off-road vehicle regulations,and enforcement and monitoring standards that all NationalForests must meet, while allowing individual forests to develop ormaintain more protective measures.

Developing specific regulations that address snowmobiles and

other motorized over-snow vehicles.

The time is now for citizens to speak out for quiet recreation.Wildlands CPR file photo.

ORV tracks crossthrough a sensitivearea in Big CypressNational Preserve.Photo Mark Alan

Wilson.


6/24


For Our Brothers:

Blue Jay, Gold Finch, Flicker, SquirrelBy Simon Ortiz, Acoma Pueblo

Who perished lately in this most unnecessary war, saw themlying off the side of a state road in southwest Colorado

They all loved life.And suddenly,it just stopped for them. Abruptly,the sudden sound of a speeding

machine,and that was it.

Blue Jay. Lying there,his dry eyelids are tiny scabs.Wartstones, looking ugly.

His legs are just old sticks,used to push ashes away.

O goddammit, I thought,just lying there.Thought of the way he looks,swooping in a mighty big hurry,

gliding off a fence poleinto a field of tall dry grass,the summer sunlight catchinga blade of wing, flashingthe bluegreen blackness,the sun actually black, turninginto the purest flash of light.

And so ugly now, dead.And nobody knows it exceptfor those black ants crawlinginto and out of decaying entrails.

Nobody but those ants,and I ask them to do a good job,return Blue Jay completelyback into the earth,back into the life.

Gold Finch, I took four tiny feathersfrom your broken body.

I hope you were looking at me then

Photo by Marcel Huijser.

out of that life, perhapsfrom the nearest hillsfrom that young cottonwood tree.

I hope you blessed me.Until I looked very closely,

I didnt see the fading blood stainon a wing tip, and I sorrowed for you.

I have always been one to admirethe yellow, the color of corn pollen,on your tiny feathers as Ive seen

you glittering from branch to branch,whirring and rushing from one treeto another. I have seen the yellowof your tiny body and the waythe shades of the cottonwoodand my grandfathers peach treescould hide you so wellbut in a moment your voice


7/24


would always speakand you could be found.Gold Finch. A pollen birdwith tips of black, flitshis head around and singsreasonably pretty and revealing.There you were, forgotten too,the hard knots of gravel aroundand under you, lying besidesthe poorly made, cracked asphaltroad upon which sped that hunkof steel, plastic and chrome.Well, Im sorry for the mess.

Ill try to do what I canto prevent this sort of thingbecause, Gold Finch, goddammit,the same thing is happening to us.

Flicker, my proud brother.Your ochre wings were meantfor the prayer sticks.

Askew.Head crushed.Misshapen.Mere chips of rotting woodfor your dead eyes.Crushed.

Askew.You always were one to flytoo close to flat, open ground.Crushed.

Squirrel, a gray thingwith bits of brown

where tiny ears join its head.Eats seeds, nuts, tender roots,tiny savory items.

Runs quickly, flashing grayand sudden.Throws its head with jerkynervous motion.

Flicks hardwood shrieks of sound.Lying by the side of Highway 17,staring with one dim eye acrossthe road at underbrush oak,

its body swollen with several daysof death in the hot sun,its tail a distorted limp twist.

I touch it gently and then try to lift it, to toss itinto some high grass,

but its fur comes loose.It is glued heavilyto the ground with its rotand I put my footagainst it and push itinto the grass, being carefulthat it remains uprightand is facing the rainwaterthat will wash it downstream.

I smell the wasteof its disintegrationand wipe its fur on my fingersoff with a stone

with a prayer for itand murmur a curse.

I dont have to ask who killed you.I know and I am angry and sorryand wonder what I shall do.

This, for now, is as much as I can do,knowing your names, telling about you.

Squirrel. Flicker. Gold Finch. Blue Jay.Our brothers.


Permission granted by author Simon J. Ortiz, originally published in Woven Stone, University ofArizona Press, 1992.

Simon Ortiz is a member of Acoma Pueblo in New Mexico. He has written 19 books of poetryand prose, and his most recent book of poems is From Sand Creek: Rising in This Heart Which isOur America (University of Arizona Press, 2000).


8/24


The cultural explosion and growing impacts of motorizedrecreation, namely all terrain vehicles (ATVs), has a wayof attracting strange bedfellows.

Last year I received a phone call from a rancher wonderingwhat could be done about ATV riders who persistently cut hislivestock fences, presenting him with free-roaming stock andassociated trespass and liability issues. Traditional huntersoften condemn and increasingly report motorized users whohunt in conflict with fair chase ethics and in violation of postednon-motorized rules. Horse and other pack animal riders, notto mention hikers, are yet another segment of the Americanpublic expressing growing frustration over those whose saddlesits atop a Kawasaki engine.

With much of Americas public land base already in needof restoration, and the growing loss of habitat to invasiveweeds, fragmentation, development, and other pressures,our countrys ongoing motorized recreation explosion rightlycauses one to wonder just how much the concept of multiple-use can and should be stretched to accommodate a land usethat presents such a high level of conflict and impact. In themajestically wild Hells Canyon country, which carves theborder between northeast Oregon and Idaho, the conflict overATVs has come to a head. For a host of reasons, the Hells

Canyon area will continue to drive rather than merely respondto changes in ATV management. A recent court decision shedslight.

Case BackgroundThe Kirkwood area of Hells Canyon sits within the Hells

Canyon National Recreation Area (HCNRA) and is home to anarray of historic and natural treasures. Archeological rem-nants of the Nez Perce Tribes ancestors persist above andbelow the ground. The former Kirkwood Ranch house andassociated outbuildings along the Snake River have been pre-served to mark the areas pioneer-era sheep ranching legacy.And despite invasive weeds also tied to this ranching legacy,the Kirkwood area is home to some of the best remaining, yethighly threatened native grassland habitat in the Columbia ba-sin. Idaho fescue and Blue-bunch wheatgrass wave to the windamidst a variety of rare forbs, several of which exist only in theHells Canyon area or are federally listed as endangered.

Before the Kirkwood Ranch entered federal ownership andForest Service management in the 1970s, its last owner bladeda road from the Snake River to the Hells Canyon rim hoveringsix miles above (the Kirkwood Road). Constructed in a gulchbottom on steep slopes and unstable soils prone to washout,the Road effectively replaced a stable, historic mid-slope pack

trail that had provided human access to the area for well overa half century. The Roads two wheel tracks are now a mainartery of recreational ATV use.

As ATV use grew in the Kirkwood area, groups like theHells Canyon Preservation Council (HCPC) and The Wilder-ness Society (TWS) grew more and more alarmed. Kirkwoodsinvasive noxious weed populations exploded along withincreasing ATV use. Especially problematic is the persistenceof ATV riders in illegally blazing tracks into the adjacent nativegrasslands, trampling rare plants along the way, disturbingsoils, and spreading weed seeds. Efforts to construct signs andfences preventing this renegade behavior have proven ineffec-tive, with fences being cut and signs torn down, driven over,or driven around. The areas rare and sensitive native habitatcontinues to be sacrificed to ATV abuse and an associatedweed invasion.

In 1998, a series of storms washed out significant portionsof the Kirkwood Road, making ATV access extremely difficult.Prior to this event, the Forest Service had not maintained theroad but allowed it to re-vegetate consistent with citizen input.After the 1998 washout, however, the agency reversed courseand reversed progress. In the name of constructing the nowsatirically dubbed Trojan Toilet at Kirkwood Ranch, but alsofor the stated benefit of assisting motorized use, the ForestService authorized the Kirkwood Roads reconstruction in2000. The end result was a smooth route that facilitated ATVtravel and the associated replacement of rare native grasslandhabitat with invasive noxious weeds.

Inroads into Off-Road Vehicle Management:

A Hells Canyon Case StudyBy Brett Brownscombe

User-created tracks off of the Kirkwood road. Photo by BrettBrownscombe.


9/24


The LawsuitHCPC and TWS subsequently filed

suit in federal court challenging the For-est Services year 2000 road work andthe agencys overall management of theKirkwood area under the Hells CanyonNational Recreation Area Act (HCNRAAct), the National Forest ManagementAct (NFMA), and the National Environ-

mental Policy Act (NEPA). [Hells CanyonPreservation Council v. U.S. ForestService, No. 02-291-HU (D. Or. Nov. 21,2003).]

The HCNRA Act requires humanuses, including motorized recreation, tobe compatible with resource protection,including the preservation of rare andendemic plants. The Act also requiresthe Forest Service to preserve andrestore the history of Hells Canyon andthe American West. The NFMA requirescompliance with applicable forest plans,which in this case requires the ForestService to enhance native vegetationin the Kirkwood area and emphasizeprevention in its approach to invasivenoxious weeds.

On November 21, 2003, the FederalDistrict Court of Oregon entered a finaldecision that the Forest Services year2000 reconstruction of the KirkwoodRoad violated the HCNRA Act, NFMA,and NEPA. The Court found the roadwork facilitated ATV travel and in turnthe spread of invasive weeds, perpetuat-ing the loss of rare native plant habitatcontrary to the HCNRA Act and theNFMA. It also determined the agencys

noxious weed spraying failed to demon-strate compliance with the Forest Plansprevention-first direction.

In addition, the Court recognizedthat while the areas history did not in-clude ATV recreation, the year 2000 roadwork facilitated ATV recreation. In turn,they determined that the Forest Servicefailed to demonstrate how its road workmet the HCNRA Acts historic preserva-tion and restoration requirement.

Lastly, the Court determined theForest Services reliance on a NEPAcategorical exclusion (C.E.) for the

road work was improper. The agencyhad expedited the roads reconstruc-tion and minimized public involvementby invoking a C.E. associated with therepair and maintenance of recreationsites (i.e., the toilet work at KirkwoodRanch). The Forest Services analysisof the projects impacts focused only onthe Trojan Toilets location at the Ranch

and completely ignored the six miles ofroad and adjacent grasslands actuallyaffected by the connected road recon-struction action. The Court found theC.E. relied upon is not broad enough toexcuse significant road work connectedto recreation site projects from deeperNEPA analysis.

As a last ditch argument raisedfor the first time in the governmentsbriefs, the Forest Service attempted tobackslide the road work into a differ-ent C.E., a category not mentioned inthe agencys decision memo. To this,the Court responded that if an agencywishes to invoke an appropriate C.E., itmust do so contemporaneous with theaction at issue, not after the fact.

In the end, the Court invalidated theagencys approach of trying to separateits Trojan Toilet project from associatedroad work as a flawed attempt to ignoreNEPAs requirement that connected ac-tions with potentially significant impacts

be disclosed and analyzed. Where sig-nificant effects may arise from an action,the invocation of a C.E. is legally flawed.

A decision on HCPC and TWSs re-maining claim as to the Forest Servicesoverall management of the Kirkwoodarea awaits the Supreme Courts resolu-tion of Norton v. Southern Utah Wilder-ness Alliance, relating to the publicsability to challenge an agencys failureto act.

The ImplicationsThe Courts determination that

a Forest Service decision facilitatingATV use violates the legal mandates ofenhancing native vegetation and historicpreservation/restoration are Hells Can-yon precedents and clearly significant tothis area. As to the decisions extendedapplicability, one needs to locate legalprovisions establishing native plantprotection and historic preservation/restoration duties, which could exist ina statute such as the HCNRA Act or anapplicable Forest Plan.

The Courts decision on NEPAgrounds has more immediate implica-

tions in the broader context. It clarifiesthe sideboards on the use of certainC.E.s and the Forest Services overallNEPA duties when road or ATV use-re-lated projects are at issue. Given theexpanded use of C.E.s on the publicland horizon, the case offers instructivediscussion of when the use of this expe-dited process is legally proper.

UpdateJust before going to press, we

learned that the Court has decided oneof the two outstanding claims in thiscase in our favor. The Federal Magis-trates findings will now be reviewed bya District Court/Article III judge beforebecoming final. Quoting from the opin-ion:

Plaintiffs have shown that the ForestServices refusal to close the Roadto motorized recreation constitutedan abdication of its responsibility to

manage the HCNRA in compliance withthe statutory mandate to preserve rare

and endemic plant species and rarecombinations of outstanding and diverseecosystems, as well as a failure to adhereto the CMPs requirement that the Roadbe closed when necessary to prevent

resource damage.

Brett Brownscombe is an environmentalattorney and the conservation director of HellsCanyon Preservation Council in La Grande,Oregon. For more information about thiscase, contact [email protected] or visitwww.hellscanyon.org

Vandalized road closed sign and obviousATV usage. Photo by Brett Brownscombe.


10/24


Back To Our (Grass) RootsBy Bethanie Walder

WhenI moved to Missoula in 1992, Ihad little money saved, I wasworking for peanuts, and I had

a lot of passion to get involved in local environmentalissues. As you can imagine, I did my share of enve-lope stuffing for local environmental organizations, buteventually I decided I wanted to get involved in a moremeaningful way. With only limited income, donating mytime was more feasible than donating $30, so I offered mytime in exchange for membership in a local chapter of anational environmental group. Their response surprised

me no cash, no membership. I turned my efforts to alocal organization, and started volunteering at least oneday a week. They set me up with a meaningful project,and I volunteered for nearly two years, until landing myjob with Wildlands CPR. At the time, almost everyonewho worked there was a volunteer.

Ive been thinking and reading a lot lately about the state of theenvironmental movement in the United States. Again and again, mythoughts return to the relationship between time and money. Manypeople herald Earth Day 1970 as the start of the modern environmentalmovement, when more than 20 million people nationwide stood up forprotecting the environment. One of the architects of Earth Day, Sena-tor Gaylord Nelson, wrote Earth Day worked because of the sponta-

neous response at the grassroots level. We had neither the time norresources to organize 20 million demonstrators and the thousands ofschools and local communities that participated. That was the remark-able thing about Earth Day. It organized itself.

Prior to this time, the conservation movement consisted ofrelatively homogenous habitat conservation organizations, madeup mostly of white, middle class men, funded by a small number ofwealthy donors. Earth Day democratized conservation issues andbrought environmental protection into the mainstream. In the decadethat followed, the bulk of Americas most important conservation lawswere passed, including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, EndangeredSpecies Act and National Forest Management Act. But as the con-servation movement matured, its energy (and some would argue itseffectiveness) waned. It begs the question: what is the relationshipbetween the increased professionalism of the conservation movement,the declining reliance on volunteers, the increased focus on direct mailfundraising, and the overall efficacy of the movement?

Mark Dowie addresses some of these issues in the opening of his1995 book, Losing Ground. It is worth noting that the decline in theorganizations potency and effectiveness coincided with their pro-fessionalization and a concurrent loss of passion within the ranks.While professionalism has certainly brought important successes tothe movement, it has been accompanied by a disturbing trend thedecline of volunteer activism.

Both increased professionalism and decreasedreliance on volunteers can be tied to increasingbudgets. As organizations focus on raising moneyto fund staff salaries, they change their relation-ships with their members, often expecting nomore than a larger donation every year. Increasingprofessionalization has also been associated with

changes in strategy for example, while litigationhas protected untold acres of wildlands, it is also in-herently disempowering to volunteers it relies onlawyers and money. In fact, litigation has resultedin backlashes against the laws themselves, like theEndangered Species Act. While litigation remains avital, necessary strategy, it may be more effectivewhen combined with building strong, local, vocalsupport for protection.

Unfortunately, the base of grassroots citizensupport, solidified by Earth Day in 1970, has signifi-cantly disintegrated over the past three decades.And with that disintegration (combined with aconcerted anti-environmental lobby effort by indus-try), has come a loss of general public involvementand support for conservation causes. (Of course,there are numerous exceptions, especially amongsmall local organizations that continue to dependextensively on volunteers, while some regional andnational organizations are beginning to re-embracevolunteer action.)

Is it possible that the economic troubles nowfaced by the conservation movement could lead usback to our populist roots? Can this reduction in


11/24


funding force conservation organizations to rethinktheir strategies, refocus on grassroots activism, andin the process, reinstill in the American public asense of democracy, empowerment and entitlementto a clean, healthy and functioning environment?Dowie describes the heart of the grassroots move-ment as the strong belief in the right of citizens toparticipate in environmental decision making.

A new report from Gideon Rosenblatt (Move-ment as Network: Connecting People and Organi-zations in the Environmental Movement, January2004) affirms Dowies contention that re-engaginglocal people in a meaningful way will be criticalto the success of the movement. In addition torecommending a new three-tiered structure for theenvironmental movement, Rosenblatt also focusesspecifically on the professionalization of conserva-tion work, Much of the movements over-invest-ment in institutional overhead at the local level is aresult of erecting permanent institutions around thiskind [volunteer-driven, looser-knit structures] ofgrassroots activity rather than keeping it informal.

Both Dowie and Rosenblatt focus on the impor-tance of involving local people and reinvigoratinggrassroots support for conservation, while main-taining an appropriate role for professional conser-vationists. Rosenblatt goes on to say that certainorganizations should focus on developing solu-tions, not on building memberships for fundraisingpurposes. At the same time he explains that otherorganizations should focus exclusively on buildingpublic support and large memberships. Accord-ing to Rosenblatt, the solution-based organizationsshould be funded almost entirely by foundations,while the people-based organizations will have morediverse financial and volunteer support. In some

organizations, therefore, we could have differentexpectations of members asking them first fortheir time and public support, and second for theirdonations. This necessarily implies that conserva-tion organizations must create more substantiveways for people to participate and do the hard workneeded to protect the environment. We do needprofessionalism, but not to the exclusion of grass-roots power-building.

The current budget shortfalls in conservationorganizations may provide just the catalyst we needto get the environmental movement back to its roots-- to focus on building local, vocal, active grassroots

support for conservation issues. If we can changethe way our members participate in our work, ask-ing for their time, not just their money, and offeringsubstantive, meaningful ways to get involved, I thinkwe will get what we ask for. And with their meaning-ful support will come the overall political and policychanges we seek.

With a lot of time and dedication, conserva-tionists can protect and restore not only their ownbackyards, but everyone elses, too. Consider the

Sky Islands Alliance. They have more than 500 volunteers, who have

logged 30,000 hours of donated time in the last 6 years, monitoringwildlife, roads and off-road vehicle routes, and removing and restoringunneeded roads. Their members ensure that their local national forestis well managed.

While money makes the world go round, good old-fashionedpeople power has brought down many a wealthy foe. In addition tothe example above, we can look to Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance,the Great Burn Study Group and numerous other examples of whatDowie calls the coming fourth wave of the environmental movement:Democratic in origin, populist in style, untrammeled by bureaucracy,and inspired by a host of new ideologies the fourth wave should crestsometime early in the twenty-first century.

Wildlands CPR is rethinking our own strategies, trying to developmore effective ways of combining litigation and science advocacy withmeaningful public involvement. Were assessing everything from ournewsletter and website to our main program strategies, and wed loveyour input and involvement in our work. At a recent forest activistmeeting I attended, I was amazed to hear so many people, from somany different organizations, talking about strategies to reinvigorateand rebuild the grassroots base of the conservation movement. Itseems the professionals are starting to talk about how to connect withthe volunteers again.

Citations:Dowie, Mark. 1995. Losing Ground: American Environmentalism at

the Close of the Twentieth Century. Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology, Cambridge, MA.

Nelson, Gaylord. How the First Earth Day Came About. TheWilderness Society. http://earthday.envirolink.org/history.html

Rosenblatt, Gideon. 2004. Movement as Network: Connecting Peopleand Organizations in the Environmental Movement. ONE/Northwest, Seattle, WA. http://www.movementasnetwork.org/MovementAsNetwork-final-1.0.pdf

Montana Conservation Corps volunteers sprig willowsand plant trees in a restoration project on the Clearwater

National Forest. Photo by Adam Switalski.


12/24


2003 Annual Report

StaffingOur staff changes a bit nearly every year and 2003 was no exception. First,

our long-time office assistant Jen Barry decided to head back to school to pursuea graduate degree. In her stead we hired Kiffin Hope, who jumped in with bothfeet and has done a splendid job at everything weve throw his way. Last winterwe hired Bridget Lyons as our transportation policy coordinator, but after a shortstint she decided it wasnt the right fit. Our search to replace her led us right backhome, where we hired one of our star interns, Jason Kiely, as our new transporta-tion policy organizer.

RestorationExciting! Thats how weve been thinking of our 2003 work on restoration.Early in the spring, Marnie Criley, our restoration program coordinator, finishedtwo years worth of collaborative work by publishing and releasing a set of restora-tion principles. Marnie also oversaw the development of a fantastic report aboutthe economics of road removal. This report finally puts conservationists in a posi-tion to debate restoration policies and projects on economic, as well as ecologicalterms, and it is the focus of our current outreach work.

This fall, Wildlands CPR took part in two on-the-ground road removal projects,working with the Sierra Club and the Montana Conservation Corps. In the first, wepartnered with the Sierra Club and hired a local contractor to remove several milesof road on land recently acquired by the Forest Service nearly adjacent to the Ana-conda-Pintler wilderness. Around the same time, Wildlands CPR secured funding tohire the Montana Conservation Corps to revegetate roads and logging landings that

had been removed in the Clearwater National Forest.In the workshop arena, we partnered with the National Forest Foundation and

the Redwood Community Action Agency to host a very successful road removalworkshop for agency staff and contractors in June. The conference attendeesincluded representatives from eight different national forests, as well as nearly ahalf-dozen contractors.

Science ProgramData, data, data Adam was busy

with presentations and research allyear, including presentations at theSociety for Ecological RestorationConference, Society for ConservationBiology Conference, the InternationalConference on Ecology and Transporta-tion, and the Y2Y Science Symposium.One of his papers was published in thejournal Frontiers in Ecology just after

the calendar year turned over into 2004.We updated our bibliographic

database this summer, combining ourdatabases on road effects and off-roadvehicle effects into one comprehensivebehemoth. The new combined data-base has nearly 10,000 citations andcontinues to be an invaluable resourcefor anyone working on road or off-roadvehicle issues.

Adam also oversaw intern RyanSchaffer as he gathered informationon Forest Service road removal. Ryanlooked at how many roads the agency

is actually removing, and he decipheredwhat the Forest Service means whenthey say theyre removing roads (whichis not as straightforward as one mightthink).

Transportation PolicyThe transportation policy program

had some fits and starts with staffchanges, but early on it included agreat workshop in Canada with the EastKootenay Environmental Society. In theworkshop, we helped coordinate a re-

gional response to increasing ORV prob-lems in Alberta and British Columbia.We also worked in two other key places Arizona and Utah where multipleforest planning/transportation planningefforts are underway.

Lisa Philipps, who works out of ouroffice for the Natural Trails and WatersCoalition (NTWC), has been busy ex-panding our relationships with hunters,anglers and private property owners.

In 2003, Wildlands CPR accentuated the positive by promotingnew alliances and exploring some unusual opportunities to

protect and restore wild nature.

Graphic Mark Alan Wilson.


13/24


She brought an exciting group of these folks back to DC inMarch to educate lawmakers about the problems with off-road vehicles. That group included Stan Rauch, a long-timebow-hunting advocate, who we hired on contract with theNTWC to do hunter outreach on the off-road vehicle issue.

Early in the fall, it became clear that the Forest Servicewas preparing to launch a new national rulemaking processto overhaul their off-road vehicle regulations. WildlandsCPR hired Jason Kiely to take on the role of TransportationPolicy Organizer. He went straight to work, partnering withthe NTWC, to develop a campaign plan to address this ForestService process. Jason brings extensive grassroots organiz-ing experience to Wildlands CPR and NTWC, and he will usethat experience to help invigorate the grassroots response tothe rulemaking process.

VictoriesWildlands CPR was graced with two important victories

in 2003 one in Oregon, the other in Florida. Nearly ten yearsof work in Hells Canyon National Recreation Area resultedin a surprisingly good comprehensive management plan.Similarly, nearly seven years of work in Big Cypress NationalPreserve were affirmed by a magistrates decision upholding

the new off-road vehicle plan there. The decision, which willlimit off-road vehicles to only 400 miles of designated routes,still has to be finalized by one more judge, which could hap-pen anytime within the next six months.

ConclusionWere spending our time promoting new models for good

management, and creating and highlighting excellent op-portunities to restore natural places basically finding whatworks, instead of focusing on whats broken. This type ofstrong offense has long been considered the foundation of

a good defense. We hope this report helps you understandwhy weve been able to be so successful this year. Thanks,as always, for your continued support and dont hesitate tostay in touch!

2003 Financial Report

Income: $348,898.21 Expenses: $363,068.64

Grants (88.3%)

Contributions (10%)

Membership (.8%) Other (.9%) Administration &Fundraising (11.1%)

Clearinghouse(6.1%)

Org.Devel.(12.4%)

Natural Trails& WatersCoalition &Minigrants(25.5%)

Restoration(20.6%)

Science(13.1%)

Transportation Policy(11.1%)

Photo Mark Alan Wilson.


14/24


Ithas been three years since Former ForestService Chief Mike Dombeck signed theRoad Management Strategy Rule and Policy

(Roads Policy) that revised regulations concerningthe management, use, and maintenance of theNational Forest Transportation System. The finalrule was intended to help ensure that additionsto the National Forest System road network are

essential for resource management and use; thatconstruction, reconstruction, and maintenance ofroads minimize adverse environmental impacts;and that unneeded roads are decommissioned andrestoration of ecological processes is initiated.In fact, the Roads Policy calls for the removal ofapproximately 186,000 miles of roads in the next 20years.

So, has the Roads Policy changed how the Forest Serviceaddresses its 446,000 miles of roads? Have forests completed theirroads analysis, as they were to have done by January 2003? Belowwell try and answer these questions, as well as present ways thatfolks can push their local forest on roads issues within the context ofroads analysis. For more information on Roads Analysis, see theRoad

RiporterVolume 7 #1 (Spring 2002).

Where is Roads Policy language located?The complete text of the final rule can be downloaded from the

Forest Service web site at www.fs.fed.us/news/roads. The rule changeshave been incorporated into the Forest Service regulations (36 CFRParts 212, 261 and 295), while the policy changes are reflected in theForest Service Manual, Titles 1900 (Planning) and 7700 (TransportationSystem); these are also available on the Forest Service website at www.fs.fed.us/im/directives.

Interim Directives and ImplicationsOver the past three years there have been several interim

directives. These were finally clarified on December 16, 2003, when theForest Service issued their final agency direction regarding the Roads

Policy. Basically, this final directive lays out what has been in practicefor two years.

The roads policy does not provide any special safeguards againstroad building in inventoried roadless areas. It puts the focus of forestscale analysis on maintenance level 3-5 roads (the higher qualitypassenger car roads that are rarely considered for decommissioning)and implies that high clearance vehicle roads and unclassified routes(often the most damaging roads on the forest) will be addressed inwatershed and project scale analyses. The final directive does add twonew terms, conversion to other uses and area scale. See below fordetails.

What has happened in these first three years?

The central measure for implementing the Roads Policy andinvolving the public is called the Roads Analysis Process (RAP),document FS-643. Wildlands CPR contacted the following forests toassess their implementation of RAP:

Apache (Arizona) Chatahoochee (Georgia)Cherokee (Tennessee) Clearwater (Idaho)Daniel Boone (Kentucky) Flathead (Montana)Gifford Pinchot (Washington) Gila (New Mexico)Gunnison (Colorado) Olympic (Washington)Shawnee (Illinois) Tongass (Alaska)Uinta (Utah) White River (Colorado)

Roads Policy Review of the first 3 YearsIts not too late to get involved

The 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!

Plugged and damaged culverts, common on high clearanceand unclassified roads, are a major threat to water quality.Wildlands CPR file photo.


15/24


Findings:1) While some forests have completed a

forest-wide RAP, others have yet to begin. There isstill plenty of opportunity to get involved.

2) The agency made a decision before theforests started their analyses that only maintenancelevel 3-5 roads (passenger vehicle roads) needed tobe considered in the forest scale analysis. Level 1and 2 roads, which often cause the most ecological

damage, will be analyzed under watershed analyses.These analyses are not mandated, nor is there atimeline to get them done.

3) Many forests are basing their roadsanalysis on outdated forest plans. Others arewaiting to conduct roads analysis as part of forestplan revision roads analysis is intended to informforest plan revision.

4) From the information we gathered, thereis not much implementation planning. After theanalysis is finished, it is unclear what the next stepwill be.

5) Many forests arent allowing for publicinput early in the process. Instead, they areholding public meetings after the RAP is complete.On the Medicine Bow NF, for example, the onlystakeholders were county road and bridgesuperintendents and county commissioners.

6) Conversion to other uses this new termcould well imply conversion to off-road vehicleroutes. Region 1 is proposing to allow off-roadvehicle use on some maintenance level 1 and 2roads.

How can citizens get involved?

The new Roads Policy and specifically the RAPpresent a profound opportunity to influence Forest

Service transportation issues; the Forest Serviceis only partially right when they say that the RAPis not a decision making process. Although thereare no concrete decisions made about whether aspecific road must be removed or modified, theinformation gathered in the analysis is a referencewhen the agency does make a decision, in an EIS,for example. Further, recommendations from RAPwill be utilized in the forest plan revision processwhere decisions do get made. Because of this, it isvery important for the public to get involved in theprocess. Heres how:

Every forest is required to determine theminimum road system needed by conducting aforest scale roads analysis (36 CFR 212.5). Find outwho deals with roads issues on your local forest. Setup a meeting and let them know you are interestedin the RAP and its implications.

Become a stakeholder (defined as havinga direct and meaningful interest in nationalforest road system management) in your forest.Most communication for the RAP was directed tostakeholders, not the general public.

Encourage your forest to include maintenance level 1-2 roadsin the forest scale analysis. The decision not to do so was not madeduring the Roads Policy EIS process, but was made later internally.

Make sure your forest is basing roads analysis on the newdirection stated in the Roads Policy and not on outdated forest plans.

Watchdog your forest. Make sure they adequately addressthe 71 questions posed in step 4 of RAP. For a critical assessmentof RAP and the 71 questions, go to http://www.wildlandscpr.org/resourcelibrary/reports/RoadsAnalysisReport.htm

Encourage your forest to consider road removal morethoroughly within the RAP. Because FS-643 was written prior to thenew Roads Policy, it has less of a focus on road decommissioningand more on road reconstruction. Make sure your forests RAP is

resulting in a minimum road system determination that includes roaddecommissioning.

Document any ecological impacts caused by roads in yourforest and tell the USFS about them. Be specific! It is especiallyimportant to raise concerns regarding Level 1 and 2 roads so theForest Service will conduct watershed analyses.

Many forests are using a risk/value matrix to determinepriorities for roads. High Risk/Low Value roads are obvious candidatesfor road decommissioning and we need to push the Forest Service onthis, especially if they are to meet their road decommissioning goals.

Make sure your forest is conducting a site-specific roadsanalysis for any road construction or reconstruction project. The oneHUGE loophole is that temporary roads are exempt from RAP.

ConclusionIn writing, the Roads Policy has changed how the Forest Service

views and will begin to address its road system. In practice, however,not much seems to have changed. In fact, Wildlands CPR found thatroad decommissioning miles per year dropped by 65% nationally from1999 to 2002. Clearly, with limited restoration budgets going almostexclusively to thinning and fire hazard reduction projects, it will takepressure from all of us if we hope to see more road removal and otherforms of true ecological restoration on national forests.

Ultimately, obliterating and revegetating forest roads may be the only way toprevent road failures. Wildlands CPR file photo.


16/24


The road along Doe Creek,Clearwater NF: before,during, and after road

removal and revegetation.Photos courtesy of U.S.Forest Service.

The Citizen Spotlight shares the stories of someof the awesome activists we work with, both asa tribute to them and as a way of highlighting

successful strategies and lessons learned. Pleaseemail your nomination for the Citizen Spotlight to

[email protected].

Champions of the Clearwater:Spotlight on Anne Connor, Rebecca Lloyd

& Heidi McRobertsBy Kiffin Hope

Consisting of 1.8 million acres within north-central Idaho,the Clearwater National Forest and surrounding areasdeserve the title Big Wild. From its 8,000+ foot peaks

east in the Bitterroot Mountains to the river canyons and roll-ing hills of the Palouse Prairie in the west, the Clearwater isalmost totally enclosed by other forests and wilderness areas,and is an integral part of the Selway-Bitterroot/Frank ChurchWilderness complex.

Part of the Clearwater National Forest also lies withintreaty territory of the Nez Perce Tribe. To this day, the NezPerce fish for salmon on the Clearwater River, which mean-ders through the reservation at its northern and eastern bor-ders, as well as on the Rapid, Selway, and Columbia Rivers.The welfare and management of this territory continues to bea principal interest to the Nez Perce, particularly for fisher-ies. Logging roads, including jammer roads and hastily built

culverts mostly constructed between 1950 and 1980 have,however, had a detrimental effect on the ancestral Nez Percefisheries. Anadromous fish are unable to navigate throughmany of the culverts, and most culverts are inadequate tohandle large storm and meltoff events. One other factorfurther complicates things for the fisheries and the landscapeas a whole. Because the Clearwater National Forest sits atopthe highly erodible soils of the Idaho Batholith, the area isprone to massive landslides every 10-20 years, most recentlyin 1996.

Heavy rains fell in November 1995, loosening the surfaceof the delicate, steep slopes of the Clearwater. The deepwinter months of 1995-96 then brought a snowpack twicethe average. In the spring of 1996, the melting snowpack andfrequent rainstorms created a virtual deluge that caused over900 landslides, 58% of which were associated with roads.Road failures even occurred on abandoned roads that wereovergrown with vegetation. In total, flooding and landslidesdumped an estimated 272,000 tons of sediment into streams.The Clearwaters fledgling road removal program quicklywent into high gear with the assistance of federal emergencyfunds. But these funds allowed only limited road repair andrestoration work to be completed. In 1997, however, theClearwater found a new and unexpected major funding part-ner.

While the Clearwater National Forest and Nez Perce Tribe

had worked on some projects together in the past, a $350,000grant to the tribe in late 1997 from the Bonneville PowerAdministration presented an opportunity for the Clearwaterand the tribe to establish a formal partnership. Initially, thenew partnership set up much needed restoration projects inthe Legendary Bear (formerly Papoose) and Fishing Creekdrainages following the landslides of 1996. Other projectsfollowed and the partnership continues to thrive to this day.Our cooperative partnership emphasizes fisheries enhance-ment and riparian restoration work using a holistic approach.We also focus on funding assessments and planning andcoordinating activities, says Heidi McRoberts, a Project Man-


17/24


Champions of the Clearwater:

Anne Connor

Rebecca Lloyd

Heidi McRoberts

have about 40 miles of road removal and two culvert replace-ments planned. We also have about 300 miles left to surveyfor our road and culvert risk assessment contract, Rebeccaexplained. Thats in addition to road decommissioning andculvert technique monitoring. Heidi added that the partner-ship has 10 miles of road decommissioning and two culvertreplacements planned for the Lolo Creek watershed in 2004.Sound ambitious? You bet. But thats not all. Outside of thisroad work, we have riparian condition surveys and invasiveweed treatments to complete, Rebecca said.

When asked what theRoad-RIPorterreaders can do to

support the efforts of the partnership, Anne, Rebecca, andHeidi had several things to offer. Spread the word, Heidisaid. Let other people know what we are doing, and aboutthe successes that weve had. We still have a long way to goto educate the public about the good of removing roads.Rebecca said, Send us leads for funding entities. I hate tosee a forest overlook great projects and miss partnershipopportunities. Anne encourages folks to get involved in thedecision making process by providing input to the Clearwaterduring commenting periods. All good advice.

With so much work to be done, Anne, Rebecca, and Heidienvision the Clearwater/Nez Perce partnership continuing formany years to come. Heidi says, As long as the funding stays

with us, well keep making progress.

Anne, Rebecca, and Heidi can be contacted via email.Anne: [email protected]; Rebecca: [email protected];Heidi: [email protected].

Kiffin Hope, MH, is Wildlands CPRs Program Associate

A big thank you to Beth Puluso, a contract researcher forWildlands CPR who has been examining the Clearwater NF/Nez

Perce Tribe partnership for an upcoming paper. Her researchprovided much of the background material for this article. K.H.

ager/Biologist for the Nez Perce. Heidis colleague, ProjectManager/Hydrologist Rebecca Lloyd, adds, The partnershipis a true partnership in every sense of the word.

Anne Connor is the Forest Service counterpart to Heidiand Rebecca. Anne is a civil engineer and heads the AquaticRestoration Program for the Clearwater National Forest. Thepartners work together very tightly, Anne remarks. Whilethe preservation, improvement, and restoration of historicNez Perce fisheries are the driving force behind the part-nership, technically, the Forest Service operates within theframework of maintaining access while treating watershedproblems. Anne says they work on every aspect of a proj-ect together, from the planning phase to the actual on-the-ground work.

The partnership has been very productive. Rebecca says,Just for road work on the upper Lochsa, we have removedover 300 miles of failing roads, replaced 11 culverts, andevaluated hundreds of miles of roads for restoration and cul-vert work. One result of this work has garnered a fair amountof attention. Anne reports that, In 2001, after an absence ofat least 50 years, fluvial bull and steelhead trout returned toBadger Creek within twelve months of a culvert upgrade on

Highway 12. Both species are listed as endangered.

National recognition has followed the partnership: in2000 they received the Rise to the Future Award for Collab-orative Aquatic Stewardship from the Chief of the Forest Ser-vice. Rebecca told me, Our on-the-ground activities earnedus the award, particularly our work on road obliteration andriparian protection through fencing and cattle exclusion.

What lies ahead? Given that the Clearwater NationalForest contains roughly 4,700 miles of Forest Service systemroads and another 1,300 of non-system roads, theres plentyof work to be done. In 2004, for the Upper Lochsa area, we

A rehabilitated road on the Clearwater. Photo byEdgar van der Grift.


18/24


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. Weoffer bibliographic searches to help activists access importantbiological research relevant to roads. We keep copies of most

articles cited in Bibliography Notes in our office library.

The Price of Power: Understanding theEffects of Power Lines on BirdsBy Katherine Hyzy

IntroductionLinear barriers such as power lines, right-of-way

clearings, pipelines, seismic lines and even fencesand ditches are ubiquitous features across our land-scape and can pose significant threats to ecosystemintegrity and at-risk species. Of these disturbances,power lines pose the greatest threat to avian popu-

lations. Mortalities from collisions with power linesand electrocutions on poles are well-documented(for review see Jalkotzy et al. 1997). Although thetotal number of these mortalities is relatively lowcompared to road kill (Janss and Ferrer 1998), evenlow mortality levels can have a significant effect onat-risk populations. Recent research has shown thatbird morphology and behavior can determine whichbirds are at greatest risk of being killed. Addition-ally, visibility and type of wires and poles are all fac-tors in bird mortality rates. This article summarizesrecent literature on the effects of power lines, poles,and electromagnetic fields, and concludes with a listof proposed mitigation measures.

Review of LiteraturePower Lines

Ornithologists studying bird/power line interac-tions have long hypothesized that bird morphologyplays an important role in the likelihood of collision(Jalkotzy et al. 1997). Building on this research,a recent study in west-central Spain attempted toestablish a model for determining species risk ofmortality from power lines. Over the course of twoyears, species abundance was measured in threehabitat types, and road surveys were conductedalong power lines to determine the relative abun-

dance of raptors, ravens and storks, the three birdspecies that other studies have identified as beingmost at risk of electrocution. In addition, severalmortality surveys were conducted beneath powerpoles in the region during roughly the same time pe-riod. The results from the two surveys were pooled,documenting a total of 41 species killed by powerlines. Overall, species with a greater wing loadingvalue (a greater weight-to-wing ratio; ducks vs. her-ons, for example) were more likely to die of powerline collisions than from electrocutions (Janss andFerrer 1998).

Several studies have attempted to determine the efficacy of power

line modifications designed to make wires more visible to avifauna orto otherwise protect them from power line collisions. During a three-year monitoring study Savereno et al. (1996) compared avian reactionto two transmission lines (with marked and unmarked static/ground-ing lines) running through saltmarsh along the South Carolina coast.Thirty-five to forty percent of the flocks exhibited behavior change inreaction to both line types. Of the flocks approaching at line height,98% changed behavior at the marked site, compare to 89% at the un-marked, indicating the markers did have an effect. Flocks also tendedto approach the marked line at lower elevations than at the unmarkedline. Observed collisions at both sites were primarily with the staticline. A similar study compared ptarmigan collisions between threesections of power line over a six-year period (Bevanger and Broseth2001). On one of the sections, the static line was removed, and a 51%

reduction in collisions resulted. In a third study, white wire spirals andblack bands crossed to form an x reduced overall collision mortalityby 75%, although the Great Bustard, an endangered species that sufferssignificant collision mortalities, did not respond to the markers (Janssand Ferrer 1998).

A study conducted in Spain compared avian mortalities on threedifferent types of power lines: one transmission wire with static wires,and two smaller distribution lines, each with three wires on virtuallythe same horizontal plane (Janss and Ferrer 1998). Each type of linewas at a significantly different height. The lowest of the distributionlines experienced much higher collision frequencies. Because nogeneral bird abundance surveys were conducted, clear conclusions



19/24


References follow on next page

cannot be drawn regarding type ofline and collision frequency, exceptto note that distribution lines, whichare less studied than transmissionlines, can certainly be as significant acause of mortalities.

Power PolesWhile power lines pose a

number of threats to a variety ofbirds, the poles that support themare most likely to affect raptors andcorvids. These birds are most at riskdue to their relatively wide wing-spans and tendency to use poles asnesting platforms and perches fromwhich they survey for prey (Lehm-ann 2001). Studies have shown thatgolden and bald eagles suffer someof the highest mortalities; one study based on ten years ofdata collected from 13 western states and Canada foundthat out of 1,450 confirmed raptor electrocutions, 272 weregolden eagles. Electrocution deaths occur when a birds body

bridges the gap between two energized components, mostlikely the wires (Harness and Wilson 2001). Studies gener-ally rely on ground surveys beneath poles and necropsies orvisual signs (scorch marks) to confirm electrocution deaths,but this technique may only provide a low estimate of elec-trocution mortalities (Deng and Frederick 2001). Reportingof raptor electrocutions is not required of utilities, and sinceraptor deaths are a violation of federal law, there may be aconsiderable disincentive to reporting.

In some areas raptor and corvid populations may benefitfrom the presence of power poles. In a study of a 596 kmsegment of transmission line through southern Idaho andOregon, researchers found that over the course of nine years,nesting pairs of raptors and corvids on the steel transmissiontowers increased from three to 133. In the same study, nest-ing success for golden eagles was ten percent higher for nestson the transmission line than in cliffside nests in the areapopulation (Steenhof et al. 1993).

Electromagnetic FieldsThere is growing concern that the strong electromagnetic

fields (EMFs) generated by wires may adversely affect thehealth of avian populations. One study (Fernie et al. 2000)observed two groups of mated American kestrels under con-trolled conditions, one exposed to EMF levels comparable toa transmission line. Pairs in the EMF-exposed group had sig-nificantly higher fertility rates, larger eggs and embryos, andhigher fledgling success. However, EMF-exposed eggs had

significantly thinner shells and a lower hatching success. Thereduced hatching success may be related to both the thinnershells (increased porosity) and the larger embryo size, whichmay reflect EMF effects on thyroid development. Dohertyand Grubb (1998) examined the nesting success of birds outin the field under several power lines and found species-specific effects. EMF exposure appeared to have little effecton house wrens nesting under transmission lines. However,comparing EMF-exposed tree swallows with control popula-tions revealed that EMF-exposed swallows had significantlywider eggs, with greater volume, and lower fledging success,leading to an overall lower rate of reproductive success.

RecommendationsWhile power lines and poles

pose a potential danger to birds,there are a number of ways in whichthis threat can be mitigated, if noteliminated. The following are recom-mendations inferred or taken directlyfrom the previous papers.

1. Remove static lines frompoles. While these do serve tostabilize high-voltage lines, officialsin Norway have admitted that at volt-ages below 132kv, their utility is lessthan certain (Bevanger and Broseth2001). If they are proven to be un-necessary, doing away with themcould prevent hundreds of collisiondeaths.

2. Use wire markers on static lines. Though effective-ness varies by species, wire markers should help reduce colli-sions.

3. Consider the presence of species of concern when

choosing power line locations. Some species, like the GreatBustard in Europe, cannot afford power line casualties.Avoiding the division of breeding and feeding grounds bylines could cut down on fatalities, as could burying the linesor locating them all on the same horizontal plane.

4. Minimize opportunities for birds to come in contactwith wires. Place perches above wires, ensure that wires arespaced to accommodate the wingspan of the largest birds,and provide nesting platforms in areas where raptors arelikely to nest on poles. Wooden poles also help reduce thenumber of electrocutions.

5. Create a centralized reporting system. Utilitiesshould be required to report avian mortalities in a standard-ized fashion. Doing so would provide a wealth of informationabout avian deaths, and would provide a means for trackingdown the worst offenders.

ConclusionWhile the era of decentralized electric generation may

be on the horizon, its unlikely that we will do away with theinfrastructure of the energy grid anytime soon. However,practicing responsible site placement and more avian-awaredesign with both newand existing power linesand poles will go a longway toward protectingand preserving avianpopulations and the

ecosystems of whichthey are a part.

Katharine Hyzy isa graduate student inthe Environmental

Studies program at theUniversity of Montana,and has workedon energy issues in

Montana and Oregon.

Photo courtesy of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Graphic courtesy of U.S. Fish andWildlife Service.


20/24


Regional Training AcademyWildlands CPR is contracting with former intern Maureen Hartmann to workwith Fred Bower (Forest Service Region 1 Transportation Planner) and Anne Con-nor (Clearwater National Forest in Idaho) to organize a full day road-decommis-sioning workshop during the Forest Services Region 1 Regional Training Academyin Missoula, Montana on April 1. The workshop will address program managementfor road decommissioning projects, with speakers and discussions on identifyingand prioritizing projects, outreach, partnerships, funding, and fire rehabilitation.Maureen has been utilizing Beth Pelusos model road removal paper to determinetopics and speakers, including Marnie Criley from Wildlands CPR. The audience isForest Service personnel from all of Region 1 so this will be an excellent opportu-nity to inform Forest Service staff on how to be proactive with their road removalprograms. For more information contact Marnie at the Wildlands CPR office.

Community Based ForestryMarnie has been working quite a bit this spring with community based forestryadvocates. She attended their annual Pacific Northwest Policy Forum in Portlandin January where the group decided on priority issues. Marnie will be working withthese folks to address road removal funding and community forestry restoration atthe federal level.

Economic Study OutreachWeve had a great response from the economic study and Marnie is following

up with those who received the report. Marnie is working with the National As-sociation of Counties to organize a two-hour presentation on the economic oppor-

tunities of road removal for the WesternInterstate Region annual conference.The three speakers shes working withare excellent new messengers for roadremoval: a county commissioner, aneconomist, and a restoration practi-tioner. We hope many counties beginseriously considering road removal as aviable economic development oppor-tunity.

The complete study by Center forEnvironmental Economic Developmentis now available on our website socheck it out!

Road closure opportunities

with Sky Island Alliance in Tucson,AZ (call 520.624.7080 or [email protected]):

April 23rd - 25th. Road Closureand Restoration Project on Las Ciene-gas National Conservation Area. Getyour hands dirty and play a direct rolein improving the ecological health ofyour public lands! 1 hour from Tucson.

Bevanger, K. and H. Broseth. 2001. Birdcollisions with power linesanexperiment with ptarmigan.

Biological Conservation 99: 341-346.

Deng, J. and P. Frederick. 2001.Nocturnal flight behavior of

waterbirds in close proximity toa transmission power line in theFlorida Everglades. Waterbirds24(3): 419-424.

Doherty, P. and T. Grubb. 1997.Reproductive success of cavity-nesting birds breeding under high-voltage power lines. American

Midland Naturalist140: 122-128.Fernie, K., D. Bird, R. Dawson and

P. Lague. 2000. Effects ofelectromagnetic fields on the

Restoration Program Update

reproductive success of Americankestrels. Physiological and

Biochemical Zoology73(1): 60-65.Harness, R.E. and K.R. Wilson. 2001.

Electric-utility structuresassociated with raptorelectrocutions in rural areas.

Wildlife Society Bulletin 29: 612-623.

Jalkotzy, M.G., P.I. Ross and M.D.Nasserden. 1997. The effectsof linear developments onwildlife: a review of selectedscientific literature. Preparedfor the Canadian Association ofPetroleum Producers. Arc WildlifeServices Ltd., Calgary.

Janss, G. and M. Ferrer. 1998. Rate ofbird collision with power lines:

effects of conductor-marking andstatic wire-marking.Journal of

Field Ornithology69(1): 8-17.Lehman, R.N. 2001. Raptor

electrocution on power lines:current issues and outlook.Wildlife Society Bulletin 29(3):

804-813.Savereno, A., L. Savereno, R. Boettcher

and S. Haig. 1996. Avian behaviorand mortality at power lines incoastal South Carolina. Wildlife

Society Bulletin 24(4): 636-648.Steenhof, K., M. Kochert and G. Roppe.

1993. Nesting by raptors andcommon ravens on electricaltransmission line towers. Journalof Wildlife Management57(2):271-281.

Bibliography

continued from last page


21/24


Several important new resources are available through ourscience program. Adam recently collaborated with several

researchers including John Bissonette (Utah State Univer-sity), Tom DeLuca (University of Montana), Charles Luce (For-est Service), and Mary Ann Madej (U.S. Geological Survey) topublish two papers on road removal.

New ResearchThe first is titled: Wildland road removal: research

needs and was published in the Proceedings of the Inter-national Conference on Ecology and Transportation. Thispaper describes research needed to determine whether roadremoval is effective at restoring ecosystem processes andwildlife habitat. The authors proposed several research

questions and the types of studies needed to further roadremoval efforts. The article proposes additional research soland managers can more effectively prioritize which roads toleave open and which roads to consider for future road re-moval projects. Check out the full article at: http://www.itre.ncsu.edu/cte/icoet/downloads/03SustainableSystems.pdf

The second paper is titled: Benefits and impacts fromroad removal and was published in the Ecological Societyof Americas new journal,Frontiers in Ecology and the Envi-ronment. It reviews different types of road removal and thestatus of road removal research. The authors assessed thepaucity of research available on road removal. They foundthat some research has been conducted on hydrologic andgeomorphic restoration following road removal; however, no

studies have directly addressed restoring wildlife habitat.See the full article online at: www.wildlandscpr.org. Thesetwo papers complement each other nicely and will hopefullyhelp encourage additional road removal research.

Science and WorkshopsAdam has also continued providing information requests

for scientists, agencypersonnel, and activistson the impacts of roadsand ORVs. Wildlands CPRvolunteer Hank Greenhas assisted in this effortand created an electronic

library that will help usmore efficiently promotethe most current sci-ence. Adam is workingwith Marnie to develop aroad removal workshop inVermont this spring. Formore information, contactour office.

The spread of knapweed and other noxious weeds is

facilitated by off road vehicles. Photo Mark Alan Wilson.

Forest Service Off-Road Vehicle RegulationsWildlands CPRs Transportation Policy Program is work-ing closely with the Natural Trails and Waters Coalition topromote strong off-road vehicle regulations as the ForestService gears-up to revise them (in response both to callsfor help from land managers ill-equipped to manage motor-ized recreation and the petition filed by Wildlands CPR andmore than 100 co-signers in December 1999). We helped drafta plan and secure funding for a campaign to engage forestactivists and non-traditional allies who also are bristling fromthe mismanagement of off-road vehicles. Weve piqued theinterest of national and state groups, including seven huntingand angling organizations, nine quiet recreation groups, andscores of traditional environmental organizations. Weve de-

veloped and articulated policy recommendations and we aretaking the lead in organizing grassroots conservation groups.For more information, see the cover story, and to get involvedcontact Jason Kiely in our office.

Travel Planning PrimerWildlands CPR will soon publish our long-awaited travel

planning primer - designed to guide organizations throughthe Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management travelplanning processes. The primer includes a description of theprocess, suggestions on formulating goals, details on gettinginvolved, and a thorough examination of political organizing.The appendices contain sample comments, monitoring formsand protocol, and other useful documents. Check our web-

site, www.wildlandscpr.org, or call Jason today for your copy!

Support for Travel PlanningJason conducted a workshop at the 13th annual Forest

Conference, hosted by Headwaters in Ashland, Oregon in Jan-uary. Attended by activists from the northwest, the workshopoutlined how to inject a conservation group into the travelplanning process; also discussed were opportunities to winpolicy changes and build non-traditional alliances by organiz-ing around the Forest Service off-road vehicle regulations re-vision. In February, Jason served on a panel to help Moscow,Idaho-based Friends of the Clearwater kick-off its organizingfor sensible transportation management, as the Clearwaterand Nez Perce National Forests begin a joint forest planning

process. Jason also gave a presentation on travel planningand the Forest Service rule-change at the Quiet CommotionConference sponsored by the Colorado Quiet Use Coalition inFebruary. We have also become involved in a collaborativeeffort in western Montana to ensure sensible planning as theBitterroot, Flathead, and Lolo National Forests ease into ajoint forest planning process.

TransportationProgram Update

Science ProgramUpdate


22/24


Wildlands CPRPublications

To order these publications, use theorder form on next page

Road-Rippers Handbook ($20.00, $30.00 non-members) A comprehensive activist

manual that includes the five Guideslisted below, plus The Ecological Effectsof Roads, Gathering Information with theFreedom of Information Act, and more!

Road-Rippers Guide to the National Forests($5, $8 non-members) By KeithHammer. How-to procedures forgetting roads closed and revegetated,descriptions of environmental laws, roaddensity standards & Forest Service roadpolicies.

Road-Rippers Guide to the National Parks($5, $8 non-members) By David Bahr& Aron Yarmo. Provides background on

the National Park System and its use ofroads, and outlines how activists can getinvolved in NPS planning.

Road-Rippers Guide to the BLM ($5, $8 non-members) By Dan Stotter. Providesan overview of road-related land andresource laws, and detailed discussionsfor participating in BLM decision-makingprocesses.

Road-Rippers Guide to Off-Road Vehicles ($5,$8 non-members) By Dan Wright. Acomprehensive guide to reducing theuse and abuse of ORVs on public lands.Includes an extensive bibliography.

Road-Rippers Guide to Wildland RoadRemoval ($5, $8 non-members) By Scott Bagely. Provides technicalinformation on road construction andremoval, where and why roads fail, andhow you can effectively assess roadremoval projects.

Trails of Destruction ($10) By Friends ofthe Earth and Wildlands CPR, written byErich Pica and Jacob Smith. This reportexplains the ecological impacts of ORVs,federal funding for motorized recreationon public lands, and the ORV industrysrole in pushing the ORV agenda.

Refer a friend to Wildlands CPR!Send us the names and addresses of friends you think may be

interested in receiving membership information from Wildlands CPR.

In

December, board members Cara Nelson and GregMunther finished their terms of service. Both have been

stellar board members, with Cara acting as vice presi-dent and president for the past two years, and Greg assisting witheverything from hosting fundraisers to writing comments on badForest Service transportation plans. Greg has even just now gotteninvolved in trying to stop a proposed road in Panama a projectthat long-time volunteer Carla Abrams has also been working on.Many thanks to Cara and Greg! While well miss them both ter-ribly, were excited to welcome new board member Bill Geer. Bythe time you receive this, Bill will have just finished a several-yearstint as the Executive Director of the Outdoor Writers Associationof America. He is a wildlife biologist who has worked for state agen-cies (UT Division of Wildlife Resources and MT Department of Fish& Game) and non-profits (National Fish and Wildlife Foundation,Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation

Alliance, and founder of the Utah Outdoor Resources Foundation).Weve been picking Bills brain about ideas and strategies for sev-eral months now, so were delighted to have his official support as amember of our board.

Wed also like to welcome two new interns to Wildlands CPRthis semester: Lauri Duensing will be working with Marnie Crileyto develop an on-the-ground monitoring follow-up of Ryan Shaffersroad removal project last summer, and Sara Krier is working withJason Kiely to document the best citizen monitoring programsaround the country. If youve got a place where youd like to set upa monitoring program, or youd like us to highlight your excellentmonitoring program, dont hesitate to let us know.

A final thank you to everyone who participated in our secondannual major donor campaign. We went from $14,000 in 2002 to$24,000 in 2003 about a 75% increase wow! Thanks so much forhelping make Wildlands CPR financially strong so we can continuefighting off-road vehicles and promoting wildland restoration for thelong haul. For more information about our finances, see our sum-mary annual report on pages 12-13.

Questions, comments about articles in the newsletter, our web-site, our work, etc. dont hesitate to drop us a line, anytime.

Photo by Bethanie Walder.


23/24


Membership and Order InformationMemberships

AddressCity, State,

Zip

Phone Email

NameOrganization

Name

Joining Wildlands CPR increases our member base which

increases public awareness, citizen activism, and political clout

and increases the dollars to get our work done.

All members receive an annual subscription to The Road-RIPorter.

Yes! I want to help revive and protect wild places by

becoming a Wildlands CPR member (or by renewing

my membership).

Type of Membership: OrganizationIndividual

Publications

Please send this form and your payment option to:

Wildlands CPR P.O. Box 7516 Missoula, Montana 59807

Send me these Wildlands CPR Publications:

Title/Price Each: Total:

Total of all items:

/

/

/

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. DollarsAsk about reduced rates for items ordered in bulk.

Check here to receive our ORV and road emailnewsletter, Skid Marks, every few weeks.

Check here for our Email Activist List.Please remember to include your email address.

Check here if you are interested in helpingto distribute The Road-RIPorterin your area.

Check here for our RIP-Web non-paperoption. Get the RIPorteronline before it getsprinted. Pl

road riporter 9.1

Documents