Road RIPorter 8.3

Fall Equinox 2003.
Volume 8 # 3 The Quarterly Newsletter of Wildlands Center for Preventing Roads
The Little Alliance

That Could
By Larry O’Hanlon
Inside…
The Little Alliance That Could, by Larry O’Hanlon.
Pages 3-5
Regional Reports & Updates. Page 6
New Resources. Page 7
Depaving the Way, by Bethanie Walder. Pages 8-9
Get with the Program: Restoration, Transportation
& Science Program Updates. Pages 10-11
Odes to Roads: A Southern Radical, by Tom
Petersen. Pages 12-13
More Regional Reports & Updates. Pages 14-15
Biblio Notes: Roads, Fragmentation & Neotropical
Migratory Songbirds, by Adam Switalski.
Pages 16-18
Activist Spotlight: Judith Spencer. Page 19
Policy Primer: Travel Planning, by Bridget Lyons.
Pages 20-21
Around the Office, Membership info. Pages 22-23
ORV tracks scar a desert hillside; a broken fence reveals a disregard for private property. Check out our website at:
Photos by Lisa Philipps.
— See article on page 3 — www.wildlandscpr.org
Wildlands
C
Center for
P
Preventing
R
Roads
By Bethanie Walder P.O. Box 7516

Missoula, MT 59807
(406) 543-9551
WildlandsCPR@wildlandscpr.org
Great Happenings! www.wildlandscpr.org
Wildlands Center for Preventing Roads works to

protect and restore wildland ecosystems by
H
ere at Wildlands CPR we’ve had a pretty exciting and surprising couple of
months, with several important legal and agency victories coming through. preventing and removing roads and limiting
There’ve been tough spots, too, but it’s nice to have something to crow motorized recreation. We are a national
about for a change, so here we go… clearinghouse and network, providing citizens
with tools and strategies to fight road
First, an enormous thank you to Wildlands CPR board member Mary O’Brien for construction, deter motorized recreation, and
her tenacious efforts to protect Hells Canyon National Recreation Area (on the promote road removal and revegetation.
Idaho/Oregon border). In 1994, Mary put together a coalition of folks to develop a
citizen’s alternative to the Comprehensive Management Planning process. For the
next nine years, Mary dogged the Forest Service, the Council of Environmental Director
Quality, and even the members of the coalition (including me), to ensure that our Bethanie Walder
alternative was fully considered in the planning process. On July 23, we found out
that more than 50% of what we asked for was included in the final decision for the Development Director
management plan. Now let’s be clear, the plan’s not perfect, but Hells Canyon is Tom Petersen
going to close 33% of its road system (with possible decommissioning, too), restrict
off-road vehicle use to designated open routes only, and limit grazing. See page 14 Restoration Program
for details. Coordinator
Marnie Criley
Second, a huge thank you to Brian Scherf and Amy Atwood. Brian has been
working with the Florida Biodiversity Project to protect Big Cypress National Science Coordinator
Preserve from ORVs for at least as long as Mary’s been working to protect Hells Adam Switalski
Canyon. Amy is a lawyer with Meyer and Glitzenstein law firm in DC, working with
Brian and others to protect the preserve. On August 1, the district magistrate in NTWC Grassroots
Florida upheld the Park Service’s off-road vehicle plan limiting off-road vehicle use Coordinator
to 400 miles of designated routes. (One more judge still has to approve the Lisa Philipps
magistrate’s report.) We also intervened with Brian and several other groups on
Program Assistant
behalf of the Park Service plan. See page 6 for details.
Kiffin Hope
And the third thanks goes to Paul Spitler and others who’ve been working on
Newsletter
ORV issues in California. While Wildlands CPR hasn’t been at all involved in their
Dan Funsch & Jim Coefield
project, the work they have done is commendable. The state of California recently
entered into a Memorandum of Intent with the Forest Service to inventory and
Interns & Volunteers
analyze all ORV routes on the California National Forests, and then determine which
Maureen Hartmann, Jason Kiely,
ones to designate as open, and which ones to close, by December 2007. This is a Beth Peluso, Ryan Shaffer
first-of-its kind model for changing USFS ORV management and could provide a
model for other states. (The state of California is funding the work, not the Forest Board of Directors
Service). We’ll have many more details about the pros and cons of the agreement in Karen Wood DiBari, Greg Fishbein, Dave Havlick,
the next RIPorter. Greg Munther, Cara Nelson, Sonia Newenhouse,
Mary O'Brien, Matt Skroch, Ted Zukoski
In this era of negative environmental policy-making we’re all routinely bom-
barded with bad news — from the rescission of the roadless policy by a Wyoming Advisory Committee
judge with a conflict of interest, to the exponential growth in RS 2477 claims and Jasper Carlton, Dave Foreman,
settlements by itinerant counties and states. We hope you’ll take as much pleasure Keith Hammer, Timothy Hermach,
as we have in these three stories of good news. And of course, don’t forget the Marion Hourdequin, Kraig Klungness, Lorin
Lindner, Andy Mahler, Robert McConnell,
cover story — a stunning success by a small group of private property owners in Stephanie Mills, Reed Noss,
Nevada. If we work together, it’s amazing how much of a difference we can make! Michael Soulé, Steve Trombulak, Louisa Willcox,
Bill Willers, Howie Wolke
© 2003 Wildlands CPR
2 The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003

The Little Alliance That Could
By Larry O’Hanlon
F Wilson Canyon Locator Map

olks who drive through Wilson Canyon don’t
soon forget it. It’s a mile of unexpected rock
and river drama along the otherwise sedately
scenic desert Highway 208 between the towns of
Yerington and Smith, southeast of Carson City,
Nevada. Nature made the canyon, it could be said,
by slowly and steadily pitting a mountain against a
river.
The mountain is the modest Singatze range,

which separates Yerington’s Mason Valley from
Smith Valley. The river is the west branch of the
Walker River, which flows east out of the northern
Sierra Nevada. Instead of changing course to go
around the nascent Singatzes, or backing up and
making a lake of Smith Valley, the Walker River
stuck to its course and carved the canyon as the
mountains grew around it. The result is a rare and
beautiful stretch of lush river cut through a desert
mountain. Native Americans cherished the area,
miners valued it as a railroad route for hauling
copper ore, and today it is still a major thorough-
fare for travelers and vacationers in northern
Nevada, a popular place to fish, camp, fossil hunt,
hike and picnic. It’s also in the process of being
rapidly torn apart by off-road vehicles.
The persistence of that little West Walker River

serves as a model for the Wilson Canyon Alliance,
which has recently managed to pressure the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to order the
closure of the some of the heavily damaged
riparian zone at Wilson Canyon to camping and
motor vehicles. Despite continuing roadblocks and
back room deals being put together by a local
good-old-boy (and girl) political system, and an
ongoing misinformation campaign by ORVers in the
local paper, the Wilson Canyon Alliance has
managed to raise the issue of ORV abuse at Wilson
Canyon.
Allied & Angry

The Wilson Canyon Alliance is a truly
grassroots group that represents a wide range of protected and managed with a visionary and inclusive plan that
concerned citizens, nearby private property doesn’t just sweep the problem under the rug.
owners (like myself), and even some dirt bike
riders who think things have gone too far at Wilson When people refer to Wilson Canyon today they are usually
Canyon. Unlike the “Friends of Wilson Canyon,” talking about a wider area, including a couple of miles of river west of
which is merely the local front for the Blue Ribbon the canyon that is the only area open to the public, on what is a
Coalition, we are a loose-knit group of people with mostly privately-owned river. This narrow public stretch of river and
no budget and meager resources. Our members the federal lands on either side of it have been the object of contro-
include people from widely divergent points on the versy and contention in recent months, culminating in a new BLM
political and social spectrum, but we all agree on decision to close the heavily abused riparian zone to camping and
one thing: Wilson Canyon desperately needs to be vehicles.
— continued on next page —

The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003 3
The Little Alliance That Could
— continued from page 3 —
The Wilson Canyon Alliance’s existence and the current public In the months that followed, local resident
controversy started earlier this year when a locally-raised nature Lauri Christine and I (both property owners near
photographer decided he could no longer stomach the hideous scars Wilson Canyon) learned of the meeting and started
that were multiplying on either side of the highway west of the mouth asking Worley questions about his group’s goals,
of Wilson Canyon. Large, frequent encampments of off-road vehicle plans and affiliations. What skimpy responses we
(ORV) users along the river caused the scars. To the south of the got did not answer our questions and made it clear
highway and the river, the US Forest Service (USFS) was seeing rapid that we were not invited to participate in their
deterioration of hillsides that had virtually no tracks or trails ten process, other than in a minimally responsive
years ago. To the north of the highway and river, the BLM had “suggestion box” sort of way. We tried to get
informally allowed ORV use for years, but had failed to pay attention around this by contacting Worley’s political
as damages increased at a cancerous rate, spreading to every hill and advocate, Lyon County Commissioner Phyllis
ridge in the otherwise scenic area, spilling onto private property and Hunewill, but she stuck to Worley as the only voice
fouling the lush, rare desert riverside “riparian” zone. on the matter and was openly hostile to what she
called “outsiders” (translation: anyone not born in
the area or a residing there continuously for more
than 30 years).
. . . we were not content to stand by
We were not satisfied with trusting the ORVers,
while the BLM and county officials nor were we content to stand by while the BLM and
made deals without public input or county officials made deals without public input or
notice to local property owners. So, we started
notice to local property owners. making noise, broadcasting e-mails to all sort of
folks we didn’t know. We hit paydirt when a
sympathetic “insider” (by Hunewill’s definition)
contacted us: Ron Walter. After talking it over with
In late 2002 that photographer, Ron Walter of Gardnerville, NV, Ron, we realized that for our vision of a restored,
complained enough that a meeting was arranged between Walter, his planned, intelligently managed, multiple-use Wilson
father, representatives from USFS, BLM, a local county commissioner, Canyon to become a reality, we could not leave it in
the Nevada Department of Transportation, and a group that called the hands of the ORV folks — whose sole motiva-
themselves “Friends of Wilson Canyon” (FWC). At that meeting the tion appears to be fear of losing ORV access.
“Friends” leader Chuck Worley explained that his group was working
on the matter with the USFS, and were hoping to post signs and erect Hollering the Truth
barricades to block some trails to ORVs. The upshot was the formation of the Wilson
Canyon Alliance. We created a petition for emer-
gency closure of the BLM lands near Wilson
Canyon to ORVs and other vehicles (but not to non-
motorized use). We then developed the website
http://www.wilsoncanyon.org to broadcast the
issues at Wilson Canyon and address the ORV
misinformation people were reading in the Mason
Valley News, the weekly family-run newspaper in
Yerington, NV. Every time someone approached us
with a claim like “dirtbikers are good for business,”
we mulled the matter over and did some research.
Those claims and our responses now fill the
website’s “Truth about ORVs” section so people
can find their way through the Blue Ribbon
Coalition’s smokescreen. On that particular issue
we concluded it was unfounded, and that dirtbike
destruction is bad for business in the long-run
since it drives away visitors looking for natural
beauty and river access. What we were beginning
to build was a watertight case for protecting Wilson
A canyon once quiet . . . Wilson Mountain (top) and a beaver dam Canyon.
on the West Walker River (lower left). Photos courtesy of the
Wilson Canyon Alliance.

At the same time, we started documenting the Instead of resting on the laurels
damage. In other words: pictures, pictures, pic- of our small victory, the Wilson
tures. Images are far more powerful than words, Canyon Alliance has taken the
especially on an emotional matter like protecting matter an unusual step further. We
the land. So we started gathering a baseline image recognize that no good is going to
bank to show the state of things. That image bank come of shoving court decisions or
also will document future improvement or degrada- bureaucratic edicts down the
tion, by simple comparison. The pictures cover the throats of either side. We also
gamut: multiplying trails and scarring hillside recognize that there is no chance
tracks; illegal fires; unlicensed vehicles on public that we will change the minds of
roads; unburied human waste and toilet paper ORVers or that they will make us see
along the riverbank; piles of garbage; toxic waste; the wisdom of their destructive
illegal wood cutting and fires; ORV tracks in the pastime. So we have proposed a
riverbed; and trespassing and vandalism by ORVers series of meetings to identify the
on private lands. things the Friends of Wilson Canyon
and the Wilson Canyon Alliance can
While we were documenting the problems, we agree on (e.g. a managed, user fee As the song goes, “take me to the
began searching for others locally and nationally campground along the river) and the river,” but NOT in an off-road
vehicle, please. Photo courtesy of
who might be facing similar issues. We found things we agree to disagree on (e.g.
the Wilson Canyon Alliance.
friends in the Lahontan Audubon Society in Reno, open range for ORVs). Our hope is
Nevada. They had already published a position
statement on protecting the watershed of the
Walker River and its terminus, Walker Lake. We also
were contacted by Bonnie Rannald of the brand- We recognize that no good is going to
new Walker Lake Interpretive Association, who
shares our dream of creating a Walker River come of shoving court decisions or
Interpretive Center at Wilson Canyon. We also bureaucratic edicts down the
discovered Wildlands CPR and the National Trails
and Waters Coalition (NTWC). Lisa Philipps and throats of either side.
other NTWC folks have provided us with invaluable
knowledge on how to file a Freedom of Information
Act request, what the applicable laws are, and who
else is out there fighting similar ORV abuses on that by focusing our collective efforts on things we agree on, more
public lands. local citizens will get involved and more can be accomplished. As for
our differences, we have to learn to respect these and find solutions
In June we published a 27-page report entitled — much like the one we already proposed in our report (i.e., includ-
“Crisis at Wilson Canyon.” In it we documented the ing an ORV area in the regional park plan).
state of affairs with minimal text and maximum
color photography. The report also includes maps So far the ORVers have not shown much willingness to cooperate.
and a sketch of a visionary regional park plan that Eventually they will have to, however. The law and common sense is
we believe is the wisest and most beneficial use of on our side, as well as that great silent majority of folks who we are
the Wilson Canyon area. We even included a closed, trying to wake up to this issue.
user-fee ORV course. We sent the report to every-
one we thought had a stake or a part in the man-
agement of Wilson Canyon — from Carson City to — Larry O’Hanlon is an independent science journalist as well as a
Washington, D.C. We also posted it online and private property owner in Wilson Canyon.
alerted everyone to the ongoing destruction. The
response has been phenomenal.
In July the NTWC’s Lisa Philipps petitioned the

BLM for the immediate emergency closure of the
Wilson Canyon area to ORVs. That, plus our
Alliance’s report, made the truth unavoidable:
Wilson Canyon was in trouble and BLM’s manage-
ment of the area was shameful. A few weeks later
BLM announced the decision to begin the long
process of closing the riparian zone to camping and
vehicles. The ORVers immediately protested —
despite the fact that protecting the riparian zone is
the very least the BLM could propose.
This BLM sign (on left) “recommends” using firepans and porta-potties.
Unfortunately, ORV users have ignored both these recommendations, leaving fire
scars, trash and refuse alongside the river. Photos courtesy of Wilson Canyon
Alliance.

Big Cypress ORV Limits Upheld
In a Report and Recommendation issued on August 1, Florida
Magistrate Judge Douglas N. Frazier upheld restrictions in a National
Park Service (NPS) management plan on the use of off-road vehicles
(ORVs) in Big Cypress National Preserve. According to Judge Frazier,
Big Cypress’s off-road vehicle plan “implements the management
philosophy for ORVs that was identified by Congress when it created A thousand points of light? Or, runaway ORV traffic
the Big Cypress NP.” Big Cypress is home to the Florida panther and bisecting the fragile wetlands of Big Cypress. Photo by Karl
Cape Sable Seaside sparrow, two critically endangered species. Forsgaard.
The NPS plan will designate a 400-mile trail system for off-road
vehicles, along with access points and nighttime and seasonal
closures. Prior to the plan, the Preserve had wracked up more than
23,000 miles of user-created routes, as swamp buggies were allowed
to drive anywhere. This resulted in extreme damage to the preserve’s
fragile biodiversity and wetlands ecosystem. While we are extremely pleased with the
Judge’s report, the NPS must still assure that the
ORV groups challenged the management plan, and the Park management plan is fully implemented. This will
Service was engaged in intense backdoor negotiations with these require adequate funding from the Department of
groups for a long time. Fortunately, however, these negotiations Interior and congress. Along with implementing
failed. Meanwhile, a coalition of environmental and animal welfare the plan’s trail system and protections, the NPS
organizations intervened in the lawsuit to defend the management must fund research, monitor impacts, educate the
plan on behalf of the federal government. public and enforce the terms of the plan.
Wildlands CPR has been working with Brian Scherf and the Judge Frazier’s Report and Recommendation
Florida Biodiversity Project for years to protect the Preserve, and also must be approved by Justice John Steele, Chief
was joined in the litigation by the National Parks Conservation Judge of the Ft. Myers Division. The coalition of
Association, The Fund for Animals, The Wilderness Society, American intervenors were represented by Amy Atwood and
Lands, Biodiversity Legal Foundation, Bluewater Network, Defenders Eric Glitzenstein of the Washington, D.C. public
of Wildlife, Humane Society of the United States and the Sierra Club. interest law firm of Meyer & Glitzenstein.
Jarbidge Dispute Revisited

After several years of relative quiet in Elko City, Nevada, the That appears to have triggered a return to the
dispute over the South Canyon Road on the Jarbidge river has July 4th tradition. Though this reconstruction
resurfaced. In mid-August the Forest Service reported that it appears effort wasn’t as organized or as large, a visit to the
unauthorized work is being done on the road to reopen it. It is now road in mid-July found boulders moved, young
passable by ATVs and small SUVs, which have been driving across the cottonwoods run-over, and clear evidence of
river in at least three places. attempts to open the entire 1.5 mile stretch of road.
According to the USFWS the new re-opened road
The dispute dates back to 1995 when the road was washed out crosses the river several times. Vehicles have been
during a flood. Then, in 1998, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service driving directly through the riverbed, trashing this
(USFWS) issued an emergency listing under the Endangered Species southernmost habitat for bulltrout.
Act to protect a distinct population of bull trout. Two years later, a
“shovel brigade” was organized for the July 4th weekend to rebuild We’ll keep you posted on further developments
the road, despite a judge’s ruling that the road was to remain closed. regarding Jarbidge and the South Canyon Road.
Then in 2001, the Forest Service and the county came to a settlement For more information, see RIPorter 4:6.
regarding ownership of the right-of-way to the road. But conserva-
tionists intervened and a judge set aside that settlement agreement
this June.

New Resources
C heck out the Sierra Club’s website for a little Hummer
humor: www.hummerdinger.com or http://
sierraclubmedia.net/ Here you’ll find out whether you’re
New Coalition Report on ATV
Safety Crisis
compatible with your hummer, whether you’re a hummer
hunk, or how you, too, can live the hummer lifestyle! On August 20, the Natural Trails and Waters Coalition
On a more serious note, a new children’s book was joined together once again with the Consumer Federation of
recently published looking at the impacts of cars on our America, Bluewater Network, and doctors to release a new
lifestyles... report documenting the ongoing ATV safety crisis. This
report expands on one issued last year. The Coalition took
The Little Driver the lead in researching and drafting this report, which
documents the failure of the ATV industry’s voluntary
approach to safety using previously unpublished data which
By Martin Wagner, 2003, 56 pages. the Coalition and Consumer Federation obtained through a
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. This report also
Joe always dreamt of driving his own car. When his wish describes and challenges industry’s proposal (floated in
comes true and he takes his brand-new sports car for a spin June) to abolish voluntary recommendations against the use
through town and country, his adventures soon take a turn of adult-size ATVs by children under 16 and put some
for the unexpected. A children’s book for young and old, The children on the bigger, faster machines made for adults. The
Little Driver takes a fresh look at our obsession with cars full report and a press release are available at
through the eyes of a boy still young enough to take nothing www.naturaltrails.org.
for granted. Available from http://www.thelittledriver.com
New Studies On Roads and Motorized Use

Effects of Roads on Wildlife
The Wilderness Society has recently issued a compre-
hensive report entitled Ecological Effects of a Transporta-
tion Network on Wildlife. It utilizes spatial analysis to assess
the potential impacts of transportation networks on wildlife
within the Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument.
Access the full report at: http://www.wilderness.org/Library/
Documents/MissouriBreaksTransportationEffects.
Impacts of Motorized Uses on Wildlife in

Montana’s Rocky Mountain Front
The Coalition for the Protection of the Rocky Mountain
Front has recently issued a new analysis of scientific
literature assessing the impacts of motorized vehicles on
wildlife common to this area. This new report also offers a
series of recommendations about specific measures that
should be included in travel management plans in order to
avoid such impacts. In addition to general recommenda-
tions, more specific recommendations are offered for lynx,
wolves, grizzly bears, wolverines, cougar, elk, bighorn sheep
and mountain goats. Access the full report at:
http://www.wilderness.org/Library/Documents Wildlands CPR file photo.

Bosworth — Diverting Our Attention
By Bethanie Walder
I
n this era of great political diversions, it was
with some humor that I read the title of the
Earth Day speech given by Forest Service Chief
Dale Bosworth: “Great Issues and Great Diver-
sions.” Bosworth used this speech and continues
to use this language to argue that conservationists
are focusing on issues that aren’t a problem, while
missing what’s really important in this changing
environment.
For starters, Bosworth claims that the “timber

wars” are over and that roads are no longer a
relevant issue; in his opinion, we should move on
to more important matters. In reality, however, Mass failures like this one on the Gifford Pinchot National Forest are a reminder
congress is about to pass legislation that will re- that the problems caused by roads won’t simply go away with the passage of
ignite the conflict over logging. Bosworth’s speech time. Wildlands CPR file photo.
is itself a great diversion from the issues that lay in
front of us.
own opposition to protecting roadless areas ensures that new road
While he does not paint the picture as black construction is indeed a major issue.
and white, Bosworth defines the four great issues
and four great diversions as follows: Bosworth’s dismissal of the problems caused by roads is prob-
lematic to his entire thesis: roads are critical to each and every one of
1. Fire and fuel is a great issue, while “the the great issues he outlines. The majority of wildfires start in close
bogus debate over logging” is a great diversion. proximity to roads. Roads are a primary cause of the spread of
2. The spread of invasive species is a great invasive species, both plant and animal. Roads are a major cause of
issue, while “the publicity surrounding individual habitat fragmentation on public and private lands. Bosworth’s final
endangered species and the efficacy of the regula- distinction between roads and unmanaged recreation takes the cake,
tory system” is a great diversion. however. Though it’s a long excerpt, it’s worth reprinting in its
3. Habitat fragmentation through land conver- entirety. Bosworth stated in his speech:
sion (rural development) is a great issue, while
“grazing on public lands” is a great diversion. “At one time, we didn’t manage the use of off-highway
4. Unmanaged outdoor recreation is a great vehicles, either. OHVs [off-highway vehicles] are a great way
issue, while “all the roads the Forest Service is to experience the outdoors, and only a tiny fraction of the
supposedly building to get out the cut” is a great users leave lasting traces by going cross-country. But the
diversion. number of people who own OHVs has just exploded in recent
years. In 2000, it reached almost 36 million. Even a tiny
Interestingly, 50% of Wildlands CPR’s work percentage of impact from all those millions of users is still a
(roads) made it into the great diversion category, lot of impact. Each year, we get hundreds of miles of what we
while the other 50% (off-road vehicles) made it into euphemistically refer to as ‘unplanned roads and trails.’
the great issue category. From our perspective,
however, roads and off-road vehicle issues can’t be “For example, the Lewis and Clark National Forest in
neatly separated out — we wouldn’t have off-road Montana has more than a thousand unplanned roads and trails
vehicle problems if we didn’t have roads. reaching for almost 650 miles. That’s pretty typical for a lot of
Bosworth doesn’t say categorically that roads

aren’t a problem. Instead, he says new road
construction is no longer an issue and backs it up
by stating that the Forest Service is removing
Ironically, Bosworth’s own opposition
fourteen miles of road for every one mile they build to protecting roadless areas ensures
(I’ll explain the problem with this statistic later).
Ironically, new road construction had become less that new road construction is
of a problem until the Bush Administration over- indeed a major issue.
turned the roadless protection rule. Bosworth’s

national forests, and it’s only going to get worse. We’re seeing
more and more erosion, water degradation, and habitat
destruction. We’re seeing more and more conflicts between
users. We’re seeing more damage to cultural sites and more
violation of sites sacred to American Indians. And those are
just some of the impacts. We’re going to have to manage that
by restricting OHV use to designated roads, trails, and areas.
“So the great issue is unmanaged recreation — and the

great diversion is all the roads the Forest Service is supposedly
building to get out the cut.”
While Bosworth clearly understands some of the issues sur-

rounding motorized recreation, his arguments regarding roads and
off-road vehicles don’t hold water for a host of reasons. First, let’s be
clear: most of the 380,000 miles of planned roads on the national
forests were built for resource extraction (to get cut out), and most
new road construction continues to serve resource extraction
(though the agency does build some roads for recreation). Second,
the Forest Service itself adds many miles of unplanned roads, obscur-
ing their construction under the moniker of “temporary” roads.
Temporary roads are not tracked by the agency, so there is no way to
determine how many miles are built each year — nor are there
adequate standards for their construction. The Forest Service also
hides new road building behind reconstruction projects, many of
which could easily be considered new construction based on the A slurry bomber drops a load of retardant on a
status of the existing road bed. Third, off-road vehicle users clearly fire outside of Missoula, Montana. The majority of
recognize the connection between roads and motorized recreation — this summer’s fires in the northern Rockies started
they are one of the most vocal and inflexible constituencies fighting in roaded landscapes. Photo by Bethanie Walder.
against road removal. Fourth, concerned citizens, conservationists,
and land managers have been pushing the Forest Service to address
the problems caused by unlimited off-road vehicle use for years and
the agency has basically refused. Is Bosworth ready to back up his
words and develop effective, enforceable and meaningful regulations
for off-road vehicles? So we come full circle, back to the connection
between off-road vehicles and roads. While
Bosworth downplays road issues by explaining that the Forest Bosworth claims that road construction is no
Service is decommissioning fourteen miles of road for every one mile longer a problem, the Forest Service is dedicating
they build. But recent research by Wildlands CPR intern Ryan Shaffer nearly half of their road decommissioning money to
found that the Forest Service does not track their road decommis- dealing with unauthorized roads constructed by
off-road vehicle users. In the
meantime, the official road
system continues to erode along
with falling budgets.
Is Bosworth ready to back up his words and
develop effective, enforceable and meaningful Any way you slice it, roads
remain one of the biggest threats
regulations for off-road vehicles? to the integrity of the national
forests, by increasing the impacts
of every one of the great issues
Bosworth highlighted. If
sioning program (report will be available on the web shortly). Only Bosworth really wants the great issues of the past
the Siuslaw National Forest has a database showing what kind of work to remain in the past, then he should follow in the
is being done where — from gating to culvert removal to full footsteps of his predecessor and guarantee the
recontouring. Because of the paucity of data, Wildlands CPR intends protection of roadless areas from roads and
to conduct some ground-truthing and determine whether roads are resource extraction, while moving away from the
being “decommissioned” by throwing up gates or blockades, or by uneconomical logging and resource extraction of
actually moving some dirt and removing some culverts on the the past. His immediate predecessor also promoted
ground. With costs ranging from less than $1,000 per mile to more road removal as a means to restore the health of
than $10,000 per mile, it seems clear that many different levels of national forests. Instead, roadless protection is
work are going on. Equally important in understanding Chief being eroded, new logging proposals are being
Bosworth’s statement is recognizing that in the past few years nearly promoted, and Bosworth may shortly find himself
40% of road decommissioning has focused on user-created/non- back at the center of the timber wars that had all
system roads. but ended a few short years ago.

Restoration Program Update
By Marnie Criley
W ith the economic study complete (check out our website for
the Summary Report and full study) and two interns hard at
work, the restoration program has been quite busy this summer. Beth
Peluso, our contract researcher assessing the Clearwater National
Forest’s road removal program, will return from fieldwork in Septem-
ber to finish her project. Her goal is to develop a template for a
model road removal program. Maureen Hartmann, one of our summer
interns, is already using Beth’s work to strategize a road removal
workshop/training curricula geared toward Forest Service personnel
and Tribal members. Maureen has already collected training materi-
als, researched training opportunities within the Forest Service and
Tribes, and researched potential workshop presenters and sponsors.
Many agency personnel in this region have expressed interest in such
a workshop, which would focus on the steps needed to create a
successful road removal program.
Our other intern, Jason Kiely, is doing outreach and organizing

around the economic study. Jason is working with three key groups:
the Mineral County Community Foundation (MCCF) in western
Montana; the Gifford Pinchot Collaborative Working Group (GPWG) in Reseeding helps establish new vegetative cover
quickly. Wildlands CPR file photo.
Washington state; and folks in Wallowa county in eastern Oregon
(where a new Management Plan for the Hells Canyon National
Recreation Area was just released — see updates). Mineral County’s
landbase is 84% public lands — Pat Hayes, a former union organizer,
heads up MCCF and is organizing local residents and environmental- has already come up with a couple of projects to
ists to propose restoration projects to bring high quality jobs to propose to the local Resource Advisory Council.
Mineral County. Jason and Marnie have started working with Pat to Again, Jason and Marnie are hoping to use the
see how road removal projects might fit into the mix. economic study to start a road removal discussion.
To date, it isn’t something the communities have
Jason is also reaching out to the Gifford Pinchot Collaborative been ready to work on. Perhaps the economics
Working Group. This group of local residents, community leaders and data will open some doors.
environmentalists in communities surrounding the Gifford Pinchot NF,
In other news, Wildlands CPR joined with Swan
View Coalition, Friends of the Wild Swan, and
Alliance for the Wild Rockies in filing a lawsuit in
U.S. District Court in Missoula against the Forest
Service and Fish and Wildlife Service over parts of
the Moose Post-Fire Project (Flathead NF, Mon-
tana). It is our contention that the project flies in
the face of existing standards for watershed
restoration through road removal. See page 16 of
the summer solstice issue (Volume 8 #2) of The
RIPorter for more information.
Upcoming Events: Marnie will attend the

National Network of Forest Practitioners’ annual
meeting in South Carolina in October. Following the
meeting, the Restoration Steering Committee hopes
to have a regional restoration meeting to discuss
Wildlands CPR’s road removal workshops have educated restoration on southern public lands. If you’re
and inspired huundreds of activists and concerned citizens interested in attending a southeast regional
nationwide. Wildlands CPR file photo. restoration meeting, contact our office.
Transportation Program Science Program Update
Update
By Bridget Lyons By Adam Switalski
T he big news from the Transportation Policy

program at Wildlands CPR is the unveiling of
several new tools for conservation-minded public
A dam continues to promote road removal
research; he recently presented a paper at the
Society for Conservation Biology’s annual meeting
lands advocates. In the last RIPorter, we mentioned in Duluth, MN and at the International Conference
that Bridget was working on a Travel Planning on Ecology and Transportation in New York.
Primer; this resource is now available electroni- Between the two conferences he addressed several
cally and should be available in print within the hundred researchers — summarizing what we
next month. In addition to examining the purposes know about road removal and identifying what
and procedures behind Forest Service and BLM further research is needed. Adam is also coordinat-
travel planning, this booklet shows how you can ing a project on the impacts of road removal on
get involved in the political and on-the-ground grizzly bears in the northern Rockies. He met with
processes to support wildland integrity and quiet a group of interested university, federal, and
use. Appendices include legal resources, scoping private researchers and will continue to explore
and comment letter templates, sample fact sheets research and funding opportunities with this group.
and press releases, and a host of other tools. We
hope this resource will be useful to those just Ryan Schafer has completed an internship with
getting involved in travel planning, as well as Wildlands CPR examining where road removal
seasoned activists seeking new tips. Please get in (decommissioning) is occurring on Forest Service
touch with us to receive a copy! lands. Ryan called Forest Service offices across the
U.S., conducted interviews with their road special-
In addition to the Travel Planning Primer we ists, and attained data on costs and miles of roads
also have an updated off-road vehicle presentation, removed. He found that some form of road
available as both a slide show and a Power Point decommissioning is occurring in most of the 155
presentation. This resource introduces the public national forests across the country, however, he
to the myriad ecological and social effects of also found great variety in costs and treatments
motorized recreation. We hope that the collection between forests. There was no universal treatment
of disturbing impact photographs coupled with an being employed; road decommissioning activities
explanatory text and up-to-date statistics will ranged from blocking road entrances to full road
inspire more people to get involved with motorized obliteration. We hope to have another intern this
recreation issues. To this end, a “What You Can fall who can follow this project up with ground-
Do” section concludes the presentation. If you are truthing.
interested in having a Wildlands CPR staff member
present this show, or if you would like to present it Perhaps Ryan’s most important finding is that
on your own, please give us a call. more than 50% of Forest Service road removal/
decommissioning work occurs on user-created
Unfortunately for us, Wildlands CPR also has to routes.
bid Bridget farewell — she’s decided to return to
teaching. We’ll miss her terrific work, but we thank
her for her extremely productive stay with us.
Good luck Bridget!
ORV tracks cross an alpine meadow

in the Flathead National Forest,
Montana. Wildlands CPR’s
transportation program is giving
citizens the tools needed to confront
the damage to public lands caused by
unrestricted ORV use. Photo by Keith
Hammer.

A Southern Radical Restore:
To recover — to bring
back to its original
By Tom Petersen
state by repairing or
D rebuilding; to bring
ave Petrig is a seventy-one year old retired lawyer from
Atlanta who bought 460 acres in western Montana with his
daughter. After a few minutes walking with him on an old back to good health or
logging road, Petrig paused, leaned on his walking stick, and care- vigor; to put back in its
fully surveyed their purchase. His grey beret sat cocked at an angle former position; to
on his head, and his red and black checked flannel shirt was
crisscrossed with camera and binocular straps. He looked part reinstate or stabilize.
pioneer, part pirate. We were in Montana, Big Sky Country, the land
of open spaces, but also the land of Gold and Silver (the state motto (Webster’s Dictionary)
is “oro y plata”), the land of mining and logging and roads, and now,
in some desired places like the mountains of western Montana, the
land of second-homes. But Petrig didn’t buy the land to develop it.
He bought his Montana dreamland to restore it.
“Nope, not going to build on it,” he firmly stated, shaking his
head as we continued walking his land. “Just going to take these old
roads out, get a check on the knapweed, and bring back some of the
streams. I just want to make it a better place.”
I turned my ear towards him to make sure I heard him right. Buy
land in Montana and not develop it, not subdivide for a good profit,
or put in a house and a road and a three-car garage?
“More of your kind need to move to Montana,” I told Petrig, and he

broke into an easy Southern smile and motioned me to follow him up the
hill.
We walked up and over the peak of the hill and down into the drainage.
“Take a look at these old roads and small streams,” he said. “This stream is
full of silt from the road erosion, so I hired these guys to get rid of this road
and clean up the stream. I can’t wait to see it when they’re done.” He smiled
again, obviously pleased at the thought, and pushed up his beret with the
tip of his finger.
“These guys” were Watershed Consulting, Inc., a restoration company
based out of Whitefish, Montana. Petrig had hired them to take out some of
the roads, bring back the stream, and revegetate the land with native plants.
The land had been premier elk habitat, but the roads Petrig inherited had
fractured it, as if the land had once been like a single plate of glass — a
smooth, clean surface — and then as road after road was built, the glass
shattered, with jagged lines breaking in every direction.
Later that same week I saw Watershed Consulting and their backhoe
operators at work on one of Petrig’s old roads. But after watching them one
afternoon it seemed the more traditional names for them like “Heavy
Equipment Operator “ just didn’t fit. “Road Removal Artist” came to mind.
But I didn’t realize their work was artful until I saw an operator carefully
transplanting vegetation onto a road he had just removed. The dirt road
surface had been ripped with long, three-foot claws set on the rear of his
backhoe, the culverts removed, and the slopes put back to their original
contour.
David Petrig. Photo by Tom Petersen. He gingerly lifted a snowberry bush from a nearby hillside and placed it
gently on the former roadbed. Its creamy white berries clung to the dark
green stems. With his small front-end scoop like a thumbed-hand extension
of his own, he dug a two-foot deep hole for the snowberry bush, carefully

picked up the bush with his scoop and lowered it into its new home
on the former road. The hand-like scoop filled the hole, nudged soil
under and around the newly transplanted bush, and tamped it down
almost reverently with the back of the bucket, as if tucking it into bed.
The operator moved to a red willow and duplicated the trans-
planting from hillside to former roadbed, and then again with a small
Ponderosa Pine, and then again with a second snowberry. After about
an hour’s work, the former road looked like a natural hillside again.
On another section of the road, streamside, Mark VanderMeer,
another of the Watershed crew, was also transplanting willows and
snowberry bushes, but Mark was placing them by hand in the stream
bank to hold the soil. After he finished planting the willows, he
walked downstream about twenty yards from me and started placing
small logs and branches in the stream to build small fish pools-but
then he stopped suddenly and stared at the ground, eyes wide-open.
I wondered if someone had been hurt, or if he’d seen bear sign.
Mark turned towards me and I saw him beaming, like one of those old
Montana miners must have when they discovered gold. Obviously
there was no danger, but the bear part I still wasn’t sure about; I had
heard about Mark’s fascination with animals. Mark turned and I saw
that he had his hands together and extended, palms up in an almost
supplicant manner, and full of a dark material.
“It’s bear alright,” Mark exclaimed, seeing the concerned look on Mark VanderMeer, of Watershed Consulting, inspects a
my face. “Look at this old bear scat, and really look at what’s in it! You clump of old bear scat, rich in seeds and berries.
couldn’t ask for better reseeding than this!” Healthy wildlife populations not only benefit from
As I walked closer to Mark’s outstretched hands, I saw china-red restoring wildlands, they help facilitate the process.
berries and cream-colored seeds mixed in what looked like a rich Photo by Tom Petersen.
garden humus, but was really decomposed bear droppings.
“Seeds and fertilizer all together,” Mark said. “I can’t believe my
luck. It just can’t happen any better than this, bears spreading their
chewed up seeds on the ground along with their rich fertilizer to get
the seeds going. I love it.”
This discovery made Mark’s day. He had discovered gold. Simple

pleasures for a restorationist, but thinking more about it, I realized
Mark’s enthusiasm was for a natural process that strongly affirms his
own work as an artist, as one who restores the land.
A few months later I went again to Petrig’s land. I walked back
about a mile, uphill from where Mark discovered the bear scat. The
backhoe operator had worked his way down most of the road, ripping
and transplanting as he went. Some of the native grass seeds had
sprouted a luminescent light green. With the slopes recontoured and
dozens of snowberries and willows transplanted to look so natural on
the former road, I had to look carefully to see where the road had
been. He had done his job well, and the definition of restoration was
being fulfilled: Watershed and Petrig were bringing the land back to
good health, to vigor.
I laugh to myself realizing that most of these backhoe operators,
many of whom were former road builders using similar equipment,
would not define themselves as artists, or, as radicals. But they are.
Road removal is a radical act. “Radical” is sometimes defined as
shifting from accepted or traditional forms, and removing roads is
surely a shift from tradition. And what could be more radical in an
economy based on growth, development, and quick profit than to buy
land solely to restore it, as witnessed by the southern gentleman
Dave Petrig?
— Tom Petersen is Wildlands CPR’s Development Director. He lives in

Missoula, Montana and his essay about the spirit of that town, “The
Mountains Rise, The Rivers Sing, The People Dance,” will be published
in the August 2003 issue of ISLE, the journal of the Association for the
Paying attention to details makes all the difference in Study of Literature and the Environment.
road restoration. Photo by Tom Petersen.

New Hells Canyon Plan Viewed
With Cautious Optimism
A fter almost 10 years, the Hells Canyon National Recreation Area (HCNRA) in
northeastern Oregon finally released a new Comprehensive Management
Plan (CMP) that offers encouraging new direction. The Record of Decision (July
22, 2003) for the CMP directs the HCNRA to be sensitively managed “as a healthy
ecosystem that is an integral component of a larger biological region.” Hells
Canyon Preservation Council (HCPC) and partners organized under the CMP
Tracking Group (including representatives of tribal, hunting, and scientific
communities and Wildlands CPR) presented the case for the Canyon through
hundreds of letters, documents, and meetings; thousands of public comments A tributary of the Snake River in the
from caring supporters; and the development of an alternative for the Forest Hells Canyon National Recreation Area.
Service’s consideration during its planning process: The Native Ecosystem Photo by Bethanie Walder.
Alternative. It appears the HCNRA listened.
A few exciting components of the new plan:

Existing Roads: Road density will be limited to 1.35 miles per square mile,
which is more protective than the existing 1.5 mile standard, though still above
• Lord Flat Trail will remain
the 1 mile threshold supported by science. It will result in the closure of approxi- open to motorized vehicles from June 1
mately one third of the existing roads in HCNRA, or about 200 miles, with decom- through August 31, despite its intru-
missioning a possibility. sion into the Hells Canyon Wilderness
New Road Construction: Road building will generally occur only in conjunc- — where motorized use is supposed to
tion with access to already developed recreation sites and private lands. Roads be prohibited — and chronic distur-
will not be constructed to provide further motorized access to views of the bance of an area critical to elk and
Canyon. Instead, the CMP favors opportunities for enhanced horse and hiker other wildlife. (ROD p.13.)
travel, including several miles of new trail. The Forest Service has long relied on • The CMP establishes snowmo-
achieving this access by motorizing the Canyon instead of serving less impacting, bile routes on 132 miles of existing
non-motorized recreation. roads and creates over 40,000 acres of
All-Terrain Vehicles: The CMP “Limits use of motorized and mechanical snowmobile “play areas.” (ROD p.14.)
equipment [including ATV’s] to designated open roads and trails.” This elimi- This will occur adjacent to roadless
nates the current allowance of off-road/trail motorized use within 300 feet of and wilderness areas, which are
either side of existing routes. Vehicles will still be allowed to access designated critical for wildlife.
recreation sites, but such use will be limited to specifically designated routes.
Grazing Allotments: The Forest Service closed 245,782 acres of grasslands to HCPC is in the process of review-
livestock. Period. All but two of the vacant grazing allotments are closed. It’s ing the entire CMP Decision and has
possible that the remaining two could go through a NEPA process to be used as not committed to a definite course of
grass banks for permittees in the future if they’ve lost use of an existing open action at this time. While not every
allotment. aspect is favorable, the CMP decision
Miscellaneous: No regularly scheduled commercial flights will be allowed and does represent a positive step for
no additional airstrips will be opened within the NRA. which the Forest Service deserves
credit. The new programmatic direc-
A few negative aspects tion contained in the CMP, however,
still needs to be implemented on the
• New road construction is allowed in order to achieve selective logging ground. Wildlands CPR is working with
objectives. (ROD p.13.) HCPC and others to initiate a road
• The Kirkwood Trail will remain open to ATV’s and other motorized decommissioning program on the
vehicles (except a three month annual closure of a 1000 foot section where the HCNRA. For more information contact
Trail crosses Kirkwood Creek) despite persistent illegal ATV use that is spreading Brett Brownscomb at HCPC at
weeds into and trampling upon the area’s rare native grasslands. (ROD p.13.) brett@hellscanyon.org.
Department of Interior and Utah
“Resolve” R.S. 2477 Claims
By Bridget Lyons
In an earlier issue of The RIPorter (8.1), we reported on the Bureau of Land

Management’s (BLM) amended regulations for issuing “recordable dis-
claimers of interest.” Their amendment, also called the “disclaimer rule,”
made it easier for states and counties to apply for disclaimers — docu-
ments in which the federal government formally renounces its interest in a
parcel of land. Along with their amendment, BLM announced that “An
existing owner of an R.S. 2477 right-of-way may apply for a recordable
disclaimer under existing regulations or as amended in this final rule.”
At the time the disclaimer rule was released, conservationists were
wondering how it would affect the processing of numerous contentious
R.S. 2477 claims throughout the country. A Memorandum of Understand-
ing (MOU) between the state of Utah and the Department of the Interior
released in April has begun to answer this question — in a way that may
threaten public lands nationwide.
For years, state and county agencies have asserted their rights to
roads and trails on federal land by using an outdated statute called R.S.
2477 (see The RIPorter 6.4). R.S. 2477 is a section of the 1866 Mining Act
allowing for rights-of-way to be granted to individuals or agencies without
applying to the government and without any environmental assessment.
R.S. 2477 was repealed in 1976 by the Federal Land Policy Management Act
(FLPMA), however, claims predating 1976 continued to be honored. In the
past ten years, many rural states and counties have used R.S. 2477 as a
license to bulldoze, widen, and pave their asserted “rights-of-way” and Future resolution of R.S. 2477 claims is sure to muddy
thereby remove areas from consideration for Wilderness designation. up the water. Photo by Dan Funsch.
Environmentalists responded with litigation, but as progress was being
made, Congress placed a moratorium on any further R.S. 2477 rulemaking by ment, called the Taylor amendment,
federal agencies. which then passed on a 226-194 vote.
The Memorandum of Understanding signed by Governor Mike Leavitt of Utah The Taylor amendment prohibits the
and Secretary of the Interior Gail Norton is an attempt to “bring resolution” to this processing of disclaimers on National
issue. It purports to “implement an acknowledgment process to acknowledge Park, National Monument, Wilderness
certain R.S. 2477 rights-of-way on BLM land within the state of Utah.” The MOU Area, Wilderness Study Area, and
will use the disclaimer rule to acknowledge R.S. 2477 claims that: National Wildlife Refuge lands. In
• Were in existence prior to the 1976 passage of FLPMA; doing so, it protects an additional 200
• Are currently in use, as proven by photos, affidavits, surveys, etc, for million acres of land from potential
four wheeled automobiles and trucks; damage. The Taylor Amendment does
not protect as much land as the
• Have had some periodic maintenance; and original Udall Amendment would have
• Are not in Wilderness Areas, WSA’s, National Parks, or National Wildlife protected, however, and a variety of
Refuges. lands — including Wild and Scenic
River corridors, National Conservation
The MOU states that the BLM will only acknowledge R.S. 2477 rights-of-way Areas, and broad tracts of wilderness-
that “are unquestionably part of the state’s transportation infrastructure.” The quality BLM and Forest Service land —
state of Utah has submitted a list of roads to the Department of Interior for may still be vulnerable to road expan-
consideration under this MOU. sion and improvement through the
Conservationists are very concerned about this MOU both because of the processing of right-of-way claims.
effects it may have on wild places in Utah and because of the precedent it may set As we await decisions on indi-
for other states. The negotiations leading up to the MOU were not disclosed to vidual roads and trails in Utah and in
the public, nor was there any opportunity for public involvement. The disclaimer other states, it is important that
process itself does not allow for any public input. No environmental analysis will concerned citizens continue to monitor
accompany the issuance of disclaimers of interest, and it is possible for states and their local agencies for R.S. 2477 claims
counties to upgrade their rights-of-way once a disclaimer has been issued. and keep in touch with organizations
In response to these concerns, Representative Mark Udall (D-CO) proposed working on this issue. For more
an amendment to the Department of Interior’s Appropriations bill that would have information about the MOU and R.S.
prohibited agencies from spending tax dollars on processing disclaimers. During 2477, please see the R.S. 2477
discussion on the House floor, the amendment was altered by another amend- coalition’s website at www.rs2477.org.

Bibliography Notes summarizes and highlights
some of the scientific literature in our 6,000 citation
bibliography on the ecological effects of roads.
We offer bibliographic searches to help activists
access important biological research relevant to
roads. We keep copies of most articles cited in
Bibliography Notes in our office library.
Where Have All the Songbirds Gone? Roads, Fragmentation,

and the Decline of Neotropical Migratory Songbirds
By Adam Switalski
Introduction
There are approximately 250 species of neotropical Although much of the birds’ tropical habitat has been
migratory birds, most of which are songbirds. They breed in degraded, studies suggest that conversion of large tracts of
North American forests during our summer and spend North American forest is the leading cause of their decline
winters in Central and South America in search of insects, (Terborgh 1989; Böhning-Gaese 1993). Much of North
nectar, and fruits. These songbirds play a major role in America’s forested area has been logged, converted to
maintaining the health and stability of forested ecosystems agriculture or suburban landscapes, and left inhospitable for
by dispersing seeds, pollinating flowers, and consuming songbirds.
massive amounts of insects that if unchecked could lead to
defoliating outbreaks. They are also enjoyed by millions of More subtle causes of habitat loss include the construc-
people. tion of roads and power lines. These linear barriers also
have been correlated with a decline in neotropical migrant
Although songbirds are arguably the most watched and songbirds (Berkey 1993; Boren et al. 1999; Ortega and Capen
beloved of wildlife, they have experienced a significant 2002). Whether by forest conversion or the construction of
decline in recent years (Terborgh 1989, 1992; Finch 1991; roads and power lines, fragmentation subdivides habitat
Hagan and Johnson 1992). This decline is concerning into smaller and smaller parcels. The result is an increase of
because bird populations are indicators of ecological edge habitat, or the boundary between intact forest and
integrity and are highly sensitive to adverse environmental surrounding impacted areas. Small forests with large
change (Maurer 1993). This article reviews two important amounts of edge habitat are a hostile landscape for nesting
factors — roads and habitat fragmentation — in the decline neotropical migratory songbirds. In these areas, songbirds
of neotropical migratory songbirds. face two great threats: 1) the loss of eggs and nestlings to
predators and, 2) parasitism by cowbirds.
Why are neotropical migratory songbirds
declining? Nest Predation
Songbirds require large amounts of continuous forested Nest predation is thought to be a leading cause of
habitat for survival and successful reproduction in both declines in neotropical migratory songbirds (Wilcove 1985;
their wintering grounds in Central and South America Andrén and Angelstam 1988; Yahner and Scott 1988). Forest
and their summer breeding grounds in edges comprise ideal habitat for many predators that would
North America (Robbins not typically invade a forest ecosystem, and many opportu-
1979; Whitcomb et al. nistic predators concentrate their feeding efforts along
1981; Robbins et al. these edges. When roads, power lines, or pipelines are
1989). constructed through forests, small mammalian preda-
tors such as raccoons, opossums, skunks, and feral cats
use these linear avenues to access songbird breeding
grounds and prey upon their eggs and young. Addition-
ally, egg-eating birds such as American crows or blue
jays also focus their hunting along forest edges.
Brood Parasitism
The Brown-headed Cowbird (Molothrus ater) also
thrives along forest edges and may pose an even
greater hazard to songbirds than that posed by preda-
tion (Brittingham and Temple 1983; Temple and Cary
Sedge Warbler. 1988). Cowbirds are an obligate brood parasite, which
means they lay their eggs in the nests of other birds and
rely on the host parents to rear their young. This can

greatly reduce the reproductive success of parasitized
songbirds because the host parents dedicate much of their
time feeding the fast-growing cowbird nestling while neglect-
ing their own young.
Cowbirds are native to the northern Great Plains and

evolved in close association with bison; they expanded their
range as European settlement brought domestic cows and
grain throughout North America. Songbirds did not evolve
with cowbirds and have only recently been exposed to nest Forest edge habitat compromises security and gives nest predators an
parasitism. With hundreds of millions of cowbirds now advantage. Photo by Messick.
living throughout the summer breeding range of songbirds,
they will continue to be a great threat.
Other Factors
In addition to fragmentation and edge effects, roads and
References
other linear barriers contribute to the decline of songbirds
in others ways. Songbirds are very sensitive to noise and Andrén, H., and P. Angelstam. 1988. Elevated predation rates
will avoid roads with a large volume of traffic (Reijnen et al. as an edge effect in habitat islands: experimental
1995, 1996). With millions of miles of roads in North evidence. Ecology 69: 544-547.
America, this renders ineffective a huge amount of potential Askins, R.A. 1995. Hostile landscapes and the decline of
summer breeding habitat. Songbirds also can be attracted migratory songbirds. Science 267: 1956-1957.
to less-traveled roads for gravel to aide in digestion, for Berkey, T.U. 1993. Edge effects in seed and egg predation at
insects and worms on roadsides, and to take dust baths two neotropical rainforest sites. Biological Conservation
(Noss 1995). This can lead to collisions between birds and 66(2): 139-143.
vehicles (e.g. Novelli et al. 1988). It is estimated that a Böhning-Gaese, K., M.L. Taper, and J.H. Brown. 1993. Are
million vertebrates are victims of road kill every day in the declines in North America insectivorous songbirds due to
United States; many of these are songbirds. Additionally, misuse of breeding range? Conservation Biology 7(1): 76-
worms contaminated by road pollution can be fatal to the 86.
birds that feed upon them (Noss 1995). Boren, J.C., D.M. Engle, M.W. Palmer, R.E. Masters, and T. Criner.
1999. Land use change effects on breeding bird
Conclusions and Solutions community composition. Journal of Range Management
Neotropical migratory songbirds are beloved and 52: 420-430.
provide priceless ecosystem services, however, a severe Brittingham, M.C., and S.A. Temple. 1983. Have cowbirds
decline of songbirds has been documented. Many causes for caused forest songbirds to decline? Bioscience 33: 31-35.
this decline have been identified. Edges created from roads, Finch, D.M. 1991. Population Ecology, Habitat Requirements,
forestry, agriculture, and suburbanization have resulted in a and Conservation of Neotropical Migratory Birds. USDA
number of ecological changes for songbirds, including Forest Service, General Technical Report RM-205, Fort
greater susceptibility to nest predation and brood parasit- Collins, Colorado.
ism. Habitat fragmentation has created a population sink in Hagan, J.M., and D.W. Johnson (eds.). 1992. Ecology and
many of the areas where songbirds once thrived. Conservation of Neotropical Migrant Landbirds.
Smithsonian Instution Press, Washington, D.C.
To reverse songbirds’ decline, it will be necessary to Hennings, L.A., and W.D. Edge. 2003. Riparian bird community
preserve critical summer breeding habitats and, where structure in Portland, Oregon: habitat, urbanization, and
possible, protect and restore large tracts of intact forest. spatial scale patterns. The Condor 105: 288-302.
Conservation efforts should be focused on a regional scale Maurer, B.A. 1993. Biological diversity, ecological integrity, and
because small nature preserves alone will not be sufficient neotropical migrants: new perspectives for wildlife
to preserve songbirds (Askins 1995). Maurer and Heywood management. Pages 24-31 in D.M. Finch and P.W. Stangel,
(1993) recommend decreasing timber harvest on remaining editors. Status and Management of Neotropical Migratory
tracts of extensive forest on public lands. In urban areas, Birds. USDA General Technical Report RM-229.
Hennings and Edge (2003) suggest increasing forest canopy Maurer, B.A., and S.G. Heywood. 1993. Geographic range
and reducing street density within a 100-meter radius of fragmentation and abundance in neotropical migratory
streams. Successfully protecting and restoring large birds. Conservation Biology 7(3): 501-509.
continuous forest tracts, reducing forest edges, and improv- Noss, R. 1995. The ecological effects of roads. Road Rippers
ing urban/suburban habitats should help slow songbirds’ Handbook, Wildlands CPR, Missoula, Montana. Available
decline. online at: http://www.wildlandscpr.org/resourcelibrary/
reports/ecoleffectsroads.html
— Adam Switalski is the Science Program Coordinator for
Wildlands CPR.
— continued on next page —

Neotropical migratory songbirds require intact forests in north America.
Photo by S. Lennard.
References,
continued from previous page
Novelli, R., E. Takase, and V. Castro. 1988. Study of birds killed Robbins, C.S., J.R. Sauerr, R.S. Greenberg, and S. Droege. 1989.
by collision with vehicles in a stretch of Highway BR-471, Population declines in North America birds that migrate
between Quinta and Taim, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. to the neotropics. Proceedings of the National Academy
Revista Brasileira De Zoologia 5: 51-59. of Sciences of the United States of America. 86: 7658-7662.
Ortega, Y.K., and D. Capen. 2002. Roads as edges: effects on Temple, S.A., and J.R. Cary. 1988. Modeling dynamics of
birds in forested landscapes. Forest Science 48(2): 381- habitat-interior bird populations in fragmented
396. landscapes. Conservation Biology 2:340-347.
Reijnen, R., R. Foppen, C. ter Braak, and J. Thissen. 1995. The Terborgh, J. 1989. Where Have All the Birds Gone? Princeton
effects of car traffic on breeding bird populations in University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
woodland. III. Reduction of density in relation to Terborgh, J. 1992. Why American songbirds are vanishing.
proximity of main roads. Journal of Applied Ecology 32: Scientific American 26:56-62.
187-202. Whitcomb, R.F., C.S. Robbins, J.F. Lynch, B.L. Whitcomb, M.K.
Reijnen, R., R. Foppen, and H. Meeuwsen. 1996. The effects of Klimkiewicz, and D. Bystrak. 1981. Effects of forest
traffic on density of breeding birds in Dutch agricultural fragmentation on avifauna of the Eastern deciduous
grasslands. Biological Conservation 75: 255-260. forest. Pages 125-205 in R.L. Burgess and D.M. Sharpe,
Robbins, C.S. 1979. Effect of forest fragmentation on bird editors. Forest Island Dynamics in Man Dominated
populations. Pages 198-212 in R.M. DeGraaf and K.E. Landscapes. Springer-Verlag, New York, New York.
Evans, editors. Management of North-Central and Wilcove, D.S. 1985. Nest predation in forest tracts and the
Northeastern Forests for Nongame Birds. General decline of migratory songbirds. Ecology 66(4): 1211-1214.
Technical Report NC-51. USDA Forest Service, North Yahner, R.H., and D.P. Scott. 1988. Effects of forest
Central Forest Experimental Station, St. Paul, Minnesota. fragmentation on depredation of artificial nests. Journal
of Wildlife Management 52:158-161.
Drawing by Elizabeth O’Leary.

The Activist Spotlight shares the stories of some of
the awesome activists we work with, both as a
tribute to them and as a way of highlighting
successful strategies and lessons learned. Please
email your nomination for the Activist Spotlight to
jenbarry@wildlandscpr.org.
Spotlight on Judith Spencer

By Jen Barry
J
udith Spencer and her husband had a vision of a peaceful life,
where she could continue her writing and he could enjoy his
retirement. Their vision never included an intrusive off-road
vehicle (ORV) playground, but after they relocated to their dream
home in the small town of Arnold, California, noise and trespass from
ORVs at the nearby “Interface” zone became unbearable. The
Spencers had to keep their windows closed and seldom used their
deck because the air was so filled with dust.
The Interface is an 8,600-acre parcel of the Stanislaus National
Forest that is surrounded by private land. Thousands of homes are
directly impacted by ORV use, as is wildlife and four major streams, Judith and her dogs on Cougar Rock in the
all headwaters to the Calaveras River. Despite a forest-wide policy Interface. Photo by Bob Spencer.
allowing ORV use on “designated trails only” (i.e. the eighteen miles
of designated Interface trails), ORVs have extended their reach to
more than 100 miles of additional, unauthorized routes (of these, the
Forest Service has acknowledged only fifty-five miles). Despite this, Judith has persisted. CORE
On a Sierra Club-sponsored day hike in the summer of 1998, remains a community-based group whose member-
Judith met other area residents disturbed by ORVs. Forest Service ship has grown to 102. They use an ad hoc
personnel were on the hike and informed them of an upcoming public approach by meeting only as necessary, and stay in
comment opportunity. communication through e-mail and telephone. In
Ten of the hikers decided to organize. They formed Commitment February 2003 CORE joined the Natural Trails and
to Our Recreational Environment (CORE) and began generating public Waters Coalition (NTWC). According to Judith,
awareness through outreach to residents in the four surrounding “Our association with NTWC couldn’t have come at
towns. Though lacking activist experience, Judith agreed to head the a better time. They provided the opportunity for
group, believing the process would be completed and a decision my meeting with the DC offices of our Senators and
rendered in four months. Congressman just as the Interface Trails DEIS was
CORE conducted a survey to determine how the Interface was issued. NTWC provided a grant for our outreach
being used — they found that 90% was non-motorized use — and then campaign, which enabled us to mail or hand
encouraged residents to submit comments. The bulk of the com- distribute nearly 4,000 flyers to the community.
ments called either for restricting ORV use to the northern third of And they helped us plan for broad media involve-
the Interface, or completely removing ORVs. Judith remembers ment — then secured an interview with The L.A.
thinking the Forest Service would appreciate learning what the Times.”
communities wanted: “We had a lot to learn,” she now says. On the The latest public comment period ended May
last day of the comment period the District Ranger was transferred, 19th. This time the DEIS includes an alternative for
and soon thereafter, the EA was withdrawn with no decision ren- totally removing ORVs from the Interface, and the
dered. vast majority of the more than 1800 comments
When the next EA was issued the vast majority of comments support this alternative. A decision should be
again called for restricting ORVs to the northern third, or excluding imminent.
them entirely, although the EA still offered no alternative for removing Though she’s contemplated moving away from
ORVs. This EA was withdrawn without a decision just as a third the Interface — thinking it would be easier to fight
District Ranger began his tenure. if she wasn’t living on the battlefield — Judith’s
Judith and other CORE members hoped to reach a compromise belief that communities, non-motorized recreation,
with the ORV recreationists, and initiated a “stakeholders” meeting. and the environment deserve protection from ORV
Four local homeowners met with representatives of the Blue Ribbon impacts on public land has given her the strength
Coalition, the American Motorcyclists Association, Enduro Riders to continue the campaign. She finds among the
Association, and one local rider. These folks turned out to be well- group the needed skills, energy and dedication to
paid lobbyists — backed by ORV manufacturers. The ORV lobbyists keep the process moving in a positive direction.
offered to give up the lower two-thirds of the Interface as soon as the Besides, she says, “We had to wait for 15 years to
Forest Service provided an equivalent area for them — meaning a be here full time — and we don’t want to be forced
mile of new designated trail for every mile of illegal trail ORVs had to leave.” Thanks, Judith for turning over every
created. When this “compromise” was rejected, the ORV lobbyists stone and never giving up — we hope you’ll soon
refused to continue the talks. be able to enjoy your deck in peace and quiet!

The Policy Primer is a column
designed to highlight the ins &
outs of a specific road or Off
Road Vehicle policy. If you have
a policy you’d like us to
investigate, let us know!
Travel Planning
By Bridget Lyons
What Is Travel Planning?

The law requires forest plans and RMP’s to be
“Travel planning” is the process through which a land manage-
updated regularly in order to accommodate policy
ment agency creates or designates a transportation network and
changes, issues raised by the public or by land
determines how it will be managed. The end product is a travel
managers, and the results of ongoing monitoring
system — represented by a travel map — that illustrates and de-
and evaluation (USFS: 36 CFR 219.9; BLM: 43 CFR
scribes the designated roads and trails in a National Forest or BLM
1610.5-6). When forest plans or RMPs are revised,
Resource Area. Usually roads and trails are coded to indicate the
travel plans can be created or revised as well.
type of use for which they are open: for example, a red dashed lined
Sometimes travel planning is assessed at the same
may represent “open to motorized use” while a dotted black line often
time as the myriad other management issues; other
represents “open to foot travel only.”
times, the agency determines that creating a travel
map is too time consuming, complicated, or
Travel planning is a step in the development of forest plans and
politically charged to include amidst all the other
BLM resource management plans (RMP’s), which are written by each
issues they need to assess. In these cases, the
forest and BLM resource area to broadly guide the planning and use
agency conducts travel planning as a separate
of lands under their jurisdiction (43 USC 1712). They are long-term
process, and then releases a “notice of intent (NOI)
guidelines, revised every 10-15 years, that generally designate the
to develop a travel management plan.” The NOI is
uses appropriate for each section of the forest or resource area. For
published in the Federal Register and mailed to all
example, a forest plan may indicate (through the designation of
individuals and groups on the agency’s interested
management areas) that off-road vehicle use is appropriate in a
party list. If travel planning has not already come
certain area and that timber harvest is not appropriate in another.
to a forest or resource area near you, it will soon.
Forest plans and RMP’s generally do not determine whether or not
Contact your local land management agency to
dirt bikes can be used on a specific trail, for example — that is the job
ascertain their plan revision schedule, and ask
of the travel plan.
them whether or not they are likely to make travel
planning a separate process. You can expect the
entire travel planning process to take about two
years.
Whether travel planning is conducted as part

of a larger plan revision or as an individual process,
its goals are the same. For each designated road
and trail, the travel planning process determines
the types of uses (e.g. motorized/non-motorized
recreation) that will and will not be allowed. As
part of this process, travel plans usually address
other recreational issues as well, such as whether
or not cross-country (off-trail) travel by wheeled
and oversnow vehicles will be permitted. Seasonal
and permanent closures for wildlife and vegetation
protection are often addressed. Plans for stream-
lining the road system and decommissioning and
removing roads also may be included in travel
planning. Signing conventions (e.g. “closed unless
signed open”) for the resource are created and
Decisions on which roads to close and revegetate are made through agency realignments of trails may be decided.
travel planning processes. Wildlands CPR file photo.

Why Do Travel Planning? the original forest plans and RMPs were written. Because the explo-
Over time, some roads and trails fall into sive growth in the numbers and power of these machines was not
disuse or disrepair. Others are created — legally or anticipated, motorized use has been allowed to grow without limits in
illegally — by the agency or users. These roads many areas. Current travel planning processes should — and
and trails need to be surveyed and evaluated to generally do — address the need for regulating motorized recreation
determine whether or not they should be included and new forms of recreation.
in the transportation system or obliterated and
restored. Each year, agencies pass new manage- Travel Planning Goals
ment directives on subjects as diverse as lynx Before travel planning begins, it is important to determine what
habitat and disabled access. Travel plans need to you want the final travel plan to look like. This process begins with
be updated to incorporate the latest science and setting goals. General goals that public lands advocates should
comply with new management decisions. Some- pursue include:
times agencies cite a need for better public
education as a reason for travel planning as well. • Establish resource protection as the overarching travel
In a number of cases, conservation organizations management priority;
with off-road vehicle monitoring programs or road
and trail surveying programs have triggered travel
• Use science-based decision-making;
planning by submitting their data to the agency • Maintain the wild character of the land;
and bringing to light discrepancies between • Streamline the travel system;
management plan regulations and on-the-ground
reality.
• Account for potential growth in recreational use; and
• Maintain or re-establish quality non-motorized recreational
The most common reason cited by agencies for experiences.
doing travel planning, however, is the increase in
recreational use of the land. In proposal after Motorized recreation planning is often at the heart of travel
proposal, agencies describe exponential increases planning, and you should consider establishing goals for this aspect
in visitation of all types, along with associated of the process. Because of the years of hard work invested by
increases in user conflicts and resource damage. conservationists and non-motorized recreationists, it can finally be
Land managers consistently mention that the off- said that most land managers are aware of the impacts of motorized
road vehicles of today were never anticipated when recreation. While agency officials may or may not act upon this
knowledge, most acknowledge that motorized recreation requires
careful oversight and active management. These are basic principles
to follow:
• Prohibit cross-country travel by motorized vehicles;

• Restrict off-road vehicle use to designated routes only;
• Designate routes through a public process which includes
full National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis;
• Create a “closed unless signed open” signing convention;
• Permit ORV use only when funding allows for adequate
monitoring and enforcement;
• Limit multiple-use trails; and
• Prohibit motorized use in all Wilderness Areas, proposed
Wilderness areas, wilderness-quality areas, and roadless areas.
How can individuals and organizations supporting ecosystem

health and quiet use advocate for the goals listed above? Participat-
ing in the agencies’ processes, political organizing, and “on-the-
ground” data collection are essential to creating and implementing a
model travel plan. These steps are the subject of Wildlands CPR’s
newest resource, the “Travel Planning Primer.” This booklet with lead
you through the travel planning process step-by-step and provide you
with the tools you need to create goals and objectives, write com-
ment letters, organize diverse constituencies and more. Please
contact our office to receive a copy of the full document.
— Bridget Lyons was Wildlands CPR’s Transportation Policy

Road maintenance, public lands access and
Coordinator.
travel restrictions are some of the issues
addressed in travel planning. Photo by Mark
Alan Wilson.

Wildlands CPR
Publications
A
fter more than a month of dire predictions from land manag- Road-Ripper’s Handbook ($20.00, $30.00 non-
ers, fire season in the northern Rockies finally exploded members) — A comprehensive activist
during the second weekend in August. Over fifty fires blew manual that includes the five Guides listed
up in two days, ringing the Missoula valley with fire and smoke. below, plus The Ecological Effects of
Those of us who live in Missoula were lucky or unlucky enough to Roads, Gathering Information with the
watch one fire torching on a ridge just outside of town: beauty and Freedom of Information Act, and more!
terror in one breath. The fires led agencies to shut down most Road-Ripper’s Guide to the National Forests ($5,
activities on public lands, though some lands remain open for limited $8 non-members) — By Keith Hammer.
use. Many area road removal programs, however, have been discon- How-to procedures for getting roads
tinued until the fire danger dissipates. closed and revegetated, descriptions of
Here in our office, things are smokin’! We have three terrific environmental laws, road density
interns this summer, and they’ve been working on some fantastic standards & Forest Service road policies.
projects. From June through early August, Ryan Shaffer collected Road-Ripper’s Guide to the National Parks ($5,
data from national forests throughout the country to determine how $8 non-members) — By David Bahr & Aron
much road removal is actually happening on the ground. While he Yarmo. Provides background on the
wasn’t able to answer our questions conclusively, he revealed the National Park System and its use of roads,
shortcomings in Forest Service tracking capacity for restoration and outlines how activists can get involved
projects and provided some insight into which regions and forests are in NPS planning.
restoring the most roads. We’re hoping to have another intern this Road-Ripper’s Guide to the BLM ($5, $8 non-
fall to set up a ground-truthing program to field check Ryan’s findings. members) — By Dan Stotter. Provides an
See page 11 for a short summary of Ryan’s work. THANKS RYAN, we’ll overview of road-related land and resource
miss having you around. laws, and detailed discussions for
Just after Ryan began, one of our former interns returned for a participating in BLM decision-making
second round. Mo Hartmann has been working with Marnie and processes.
contract staffer Beth Peluso to develop a workshop to help agencies Road-Ripper’s Guide to Off-Road Vehicles ($5, $8
develop strong road removal programs. Mo formerly worked with us non-members) — By Dan Wright. A
assessing wildlife mitigation structures and we’re thrilled to have her comprehensive guide to reducing the use
back — especially since she’s double-timing as a road obliteration and abuse of ORVs on public lands.
inspector for the Nez Perce Tribe. Includes an extensive bibliography.
We’re also very excited to have Jason Kiely join us to develop a Road-Ripper’s Guide to Wildland Road Removal
more significant organizing component to our road removal work. ($5, $8 non-members) — By Scott Bagely.
Jason worked as an urban organizer in Chicago for five years before Provides technical information on road
moving out to Missoula; he stepped into our office just as the Center construction and removal, where and why
for Environmental Economic Development was finishing their road roads fail, and how you can effectively
removal economics report. Jason’s been working with Marnie and assess road removal projects.
with groups in Montana, Washington, and Oregon to promote the Trails of Destruction ($10) — By Friends of the
economic benefits of road removal in rural communities. Earth and Wildlands CPR, written by Erich
We’ll keep you posted on the results of their work — and thanks, Pica and Jacob Smith. This report explains
to all of them, for bringing so much skill into our summer internship the ecological impacts of ORVs, federal
program. funding for motorized recreation on public
On the down side, two of our staffers have decided to move on. lands, and the ORV industry’s role in
Jen Barry, our tireless program assistant for the past two years, is pushing the ORV agenda.
returning to school full-time in fine arts, while Bridget Lyons, who
recently joined us to work on transportation issues, has decided to
move on. By the next RIPorter, we should be able to introduce their
replacements. We thank both of them for their fantastic contribu- — To order these publications, use the
tions to Wildlands CPR — they will be missed. order form on next page —
Finally, we’d like to extend a big thanks to the Flintridge, Lazar,
Maki, Wilburforce and Weeden Foundations for generous grants
supporting our work.
Refer a friend to Wildlands CPR!

Send us the names and addresses of friends you think may be inter-
ested in receiving membership information from Wildlands CPR.

Membership and Order Information
Memberships
Joining Wildlands CPR increases our member base — which Yes! I want to help revive and protect wild places by
increases public awareness, citizen activism, and political clout — becoming a Wildlands CPR member
and increases the dollars to get our work done. (or by renewing my membership)
All members receive an annual subscription to The Road-RIPorter.
Organization
Name
Name
City, State,
Address
Zip
Phone Email
Type of Membership: Individual Organization
Payment Option #1: Payment Option #2:

Monthly Giving Annual Membership Dues
Instead of annual member dues, a monthly donation can be automati- I have enclosed my tax-deductible Wildlands CPR
cally withdrawn from your checking account. A monthly donation will membership contribution of:
do two things: it adds up quickly to a major contribution, and it allows
Wildlands CPR to make long-term plans.
$1,000 $250 $50 family $15 living lightly
$5/Month $10/Month $20/Month other $500 $100 $30 standard other
I/we authorize Wildlands CPR to deduct the amount indicated above

from my checking account once per month. Please include a voided
check. All information will be kept confidential. I prefer to give online via my credit card.
[Go to www.wildlandscpr.org/join_us/index.html]
Signature
Thank you for your support!
Publications
Send me these Wildlands CPR Publications: Prices include shipping: for Priority Mail add $3.50 per item;
for Canadian orders, add $6.50 per item.
International Membership — $30 Minimum. All prices in U.S. Dollars
Ask about reduced rates for items ordered in bulk.
Qty: Title/Price Each: Total:
Check here if you are interested in helping
/ to distribute The Road-RIPorter in your area.
Check here to receive our ORV and road email
/ newsletter, “Skid Marks,” every few weeks.
Check here for our Email Activist List.
/ Please remember to include your email address.
Total of all items: Check here for our RIP-Web non-paper

option. Get the RIPorter online before it gets
printed. Please include your email address.
In order to increase our membership,Wildlands CPR

occasionally exchanges member’s names with like- Please send this form and your payment option to:
minded conservation organizations. If you do not want Wildlands CPR • PO Box 7516 • Missoula, Montana 59807
your name traded, please check here.

Photo by Glenn Marangelo.
Non-profit Organization
US POSTAGE
PAID
MISSOULA MT, 59801
PERMIT NO. 569
Wildlands Center for Preventing Roads

P.O. Box 7516
Missoula, MT 59807
If its purity and quiet are destroyed and

broken by the noise and smoke . . . then it
will cease to belong to the whole people
and will be unworthy of the care and
protection of the national government.
— 1st Lt. Dan C. Kingman

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Yellowstone National Park 1883
The Road-RIPorter is printed on 100% post-consumer recycled, process chlorine-free bleached paper with soy-based ink.

Road RIPorter 8.3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Road RIPorter 8.3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Road RIPorter 8.3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fall Equinox 2003.

Volume 8 # 3 The Quarterly Newsletter of Wildlands Center for Preventing Roads

The Little Alliance

By Bethanie Walder P.O. Box 7516

Wildlands Center for Preventing Roads works to

© 2003 Wildlands CPR

2 The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003

F Wilson Canyon Locator Map

The mountain is the modest Singatze range,

The persistence of that little West Walker River

Allied & Angry

— continued on next page —

4 The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003

In July the NTWC’s Lisa Philipps petitioned the

The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003 5

Jarbidge Dispute Revisited

6 The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003

New Studies On Roads and Motorized Use

Impacts of Motorized Uses on Wildlife in

The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003 7

For starters, Bosworth claims that the “timber

Bosworth doesn’t say categorically that roads

8 The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003

“So the great issue is unmanaged recreation — and the

While Bosworth clearly understands some of the issues sur-

The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003 9

Our other intern, Jason Kiely, is doing outreach and organizing

Upcoming Events: Marnie will attend the

T he big news from the Transportation Policy

ORV tracks cross an alpine meadow

The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003 11

“More of your kind need to move to Montana,” I told Petrig, and he

12 The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003

This discovery made Mark’s day. He had discovered gold. Simple

— Tom Petersen is Wildlands CPR’s Development Director. He lives in

The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003 13

A few exciting components of the new plan:

In an earlier issue of The RIPorter (8.1), we reported on the Bureau of Land

The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003 15

Where Have All the Songbirds Gone? Roads, Fragmentation,

16 The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003

Cowbirds are native to the northern Great Plains and

The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003 17

18 The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003

Spotlight on Judith Spencer

The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003 19

What Is Travel Planning?

Whether travel planning is conducted as part

20 The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003

• Prohibit cross-country travel by motorized vehicles;

How can individuals and organizations supporting ecosystem

— Bridget Lyons was Wildlands CPR’s Transportation Policy

The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003 21

Refer a friend to Wildlands CPR!

22 The Road-RIPorter, Fall Equinox 2003

Type of Membership: Individual Organization

Payment Option #1: Payment Option #2:

I/we authorize Wildlands CPR to deduct the amount indicated above

Thank you for your support!

Total of all items: Check here for our RIP-Web non-paper