High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
Spring Equinox 2009. Volume 14 No. 1
Visit us online:
wildlandscpr.org
Inside…
A Look Down the Trail, by BethanieWalder. Page 2 The Plum Creek Chronicles, Pages 3-5Get with the Program: Restoration and Transportation Program Updates.Pages 6-7Odes to Roads: Undemocratic Din (parttwo), by Ted Williams. Pages 8-9DePaving the Way: by Bethanie Walder.Pages 10-11Wildlands CPR’s 2008 Annual Report.Pages 12-14Regional Reports & Updates. Page 15Biblio Notes: ORV impacts on SandDune and Beach Habitats, by BethGibson. Pages 16-18New Resources. Page 19Citizen Spotlight on Tim Clarke, byLaurel Hagen. Pages 20-21Around the Office, Membership Info.Pages 22-23
— story begins on page 3 —
The Plum Creek Chronicles
By Bethanie Walder and Dan Funsch
Photos (clockwise from top left): the scenic Swan Valley (Wildlands CPR); wildlife on the road (Marcel Huijser);a Swan subdivision (Wildlands CPR), and; one of Plum Creek’s square-mile clearcuts (Northwest Connections.)
The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2009
2
© 2009 Wildlands CPR
Wildlands CPR revives and protects wildland ecosystems by promoting watershed restoration through road removal, preventing new wildland road construction, and stopping off-road vehicle abuse.
P.O. Box 7516Missoula, MT 59807(406) 543-9551 www.wildlandscpr.org
Director
Bethanie Walder
Development Director
Tom Petersen
Science Coordinator
Adam Switalski
Legal and Agency Liaison
Sarah Peters
Montana State ORV Coordinator
Adam Rissien
Utah State ORV Coordinator
Laurel Hagen
Washington State Representative
Sue Gunn
Program Associate
Cathrine L. Walters
Restoration Research Associate
Josh Hurd
Journal Editor
Dan Funsch
Interns & Volunteers
Greg Peters, Geoff Fast, Beth Gibson, Owen Weber, Stuart Smith
Board of Directors
Amy Atwood, Greg Fishbein, Jim Furnish,William Geer, Chris Kassar, Rebecca Lloyd,Cara Nelson, Brett Paben
Restoring Watersheds Through Stimulus Funding
W
e’ve been working round-the-clock since mid-November to promote the Forest Ser-vice Legacy Roads program as a critical component of any final stimulus package.Some days we thought we had a great chance at success, and other days seemed rathergrim. In the end, we landed somewhere in the middle.
What we proposed
We developed a $500 million proposal to fund the Legacy Roads program for 2 years,at $250 million per year. More than 100 groups and retired agency staff, from all over thecountry, endorsed the proposal. We then submitted it to key Congressional offices in theHouse and Senate.The original House bill included some report language that mentioned the LegacyRoads program by name as an example of a good program for stimulus dollars. Unfor-tunately, that language didn’t make it into the final House bill or the final conference bill.However, after much education Congress did include the word “decommissioning” in theexplicit list of how Forest Service Capital Improvement and Maintenance (CIM) funds andBureau of Land Management (BLM) Construction funds could be spent. Congressionalstaff are starting to understand that road decommissioning is a smart way to bring greenjobs to rural communities.
What Congress adopted
The final American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, signed into law by PresidentObama on February 17, included $650 million to the Forest Service for CIM, and $180 mil-lion to the BLM for construction (in addition to other funds those agencies received). Theagencies were given 30 days to obligate the funds. The Park Service, Fish and WildlifeService and numerous other entities also received funds for restoration and maintenance/improvement.The Forest Service CIM money can be used for nearly any type of road maintenance,in addition to other facilities maintenance and improvement, like fixing visitor centers.The Senate initially requested that the FS spend $380 million of the CIM funds on roadsand trails; though that language didn’t make it into the final bill, it does provide an ideaof how they may allocate the funds. The bill’s purpose is to create jobs, but it also directsthat these funds be focused on improving natural resources. With no clear direction, theagency could invest a lot of money maintaining or even upgrading roads that really aren’tneeded anymore.
What’s next
Wildlands CPR put together an urgent letter to the acting Under Secretary of Agricul-ture and other Forest Service officials the day after the bill was signed, again endorsed bythe groups who supported the initial proposal, requesting critical sideboards for spend-ing the roads/trails money. We explicitly asked that they spend it on Legacy Roads typeprojects to provide green jobs in rural communities by decommissioning unneeded roadsand stormproofing needed roads. We also requested that they use a portion of the funds toidentify the minimum road system and prioritize roads for reclamation.We know they’ll spend some of the money on good projects, but they’ll also spendsome on projects we won’t like. While we should fight those bad projects aggressively,let’s work to highlight and promote the good ones, and give the agencies a pat on the backwhere they deserve one. This can be a good second step for Legacy Roads, and if we canhelp the agency create green jobs while restoring watersheds, we can continue to advanceour case for long-term, sustained funding for road decommissioning.
The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2009
3
The Plum Creek Chronicles
By Bethanie Walder and Dan Funsch
Editor’s Note:
some scenes have been slightly dramatized to fit your newsletter
Prologue: April 2008
The camera pans across a forest checkerboarded with clearcuts, focusing in on a realtor’s SUV as it winds along a dirt road between Plum Creek and Forest Service lands in western Montana…
The news broke in Missoula, MT that PlumCreek Timber Company had been engaged insecret negotiations with the Department of Ag-riculture regarding the terms of their many roadeasements with the Forest Service. The ease-ments were giving Plum Creek heartburn as theycontemplated subdividing and selling off up to2 million acres (of their 8 million acres nation-wide) for high value homesites in the expandingwildland-urban interface.The question on everyone’s mind: did theeasements allow access for residential develop-ment, or for resource management (ie. timberharvest) only? Some in the Forest Service andmany in local government supported the latterinterpretation - thus the secret negotiations. IfPlum Creek prevailed, significant ecological,economic and social impacts were certain in thecommunities where the company most wantedto divest.Over the next eight months a diversity ofpublic and private interests came together toprevent Plum Creek’s interpretation, in a perfectstorm of protest. In addition to Plum Creek andthe Forest Service, a full cast of characters hadroles to play:
• US Department of AgricultureUndersecretary Mark Rey• Montana Senators Jon Tester andMax Baucus• The Government Accountability Office(GAO)• Missoula County Commissioners andCounty Attorneys• Other County Commissioners in Montana• Social investment firms• Conservation organizations• Conservation lawyers
Act One
Featuring: Plum Creek, Mark Rey, and some top level ForestService officials
The camera pans across faces in a dimly lit, smoke-filled room. The drinksare flowing, there’s laughter in the air, and a pile of paperwork on the table…
The parties agree to language clarifying that the easements acrossnational forest land do, in fact, allow Plum Creek to sell off prime “real es-tate” for residential development. The Forest Service gets a guarantee thatthey won’t be responsible for fire-fighting costs to protect the new homes.Amidst backslapping and handshaking, the deal is agreed to, in theory.
Act Two
Featuring: the Missoula County Commissioners/attorneys,Senator Tester, and conservation organizations
The camera reveals a collective jaw-dropping expression from the MissoulaCounty Commissioners as they catch wind (and some rancid cigar smoke) of the negotiations…
The commissioners inform Senator Jon Tester, who orders Mark Reyto fly to Missoula and meet with the commissioners. Rey comes to themeeting but will not release any significant information about what he andPlum Creek have been cooking up. News accounts of the meeting and se-cret negotiations are negative, but the story gets little play outside of Mis-soula. The county files a Freedom of Information Request with the ForestService, seeking more detail. Rey chuckles all the way home, while SenatorTester makes a formal request for a GAO investigation.
— continued on page 3 —
Add a Comment