Autumn Equinox 2010. Volume 15 No.

Washington’s Skokomish Watershed:

Exemplar of the Legacy Roads and Trails Initiative
By Mike Anderson, The Wilderness Society

Inside…
A Look Down the Trail, by Bethanie Walder.
Page 2
Washington’s Skokomish Watershed:
Exemplar of the Legacy Roads and
Trails Initiative, by Mike Anderson.
Pages 3-5
Legal Notes: Logging Roads, Stormwater
and the Clean Water Act, by
­Christopher Winter. Pages 6-10
Get with the Program: Restoration and
Transportation Program Updates.
Pages 11-12
Biblio Notes: Impacts of Off-Road Vehicles
on Quiet Users, by Allison Jones and
Adam Switalski. Pages 13-15
New Resources. Page 16
Odes to Roads: Doublespeak, by Thomas R.
Petersen. Pages 17-18
DePaving the Way: Climate Change,
Watershed Restoration and Forest
Planning, by Bethanie Walder. Page
19-20
Around the Office. Page 21
Photo by Mike Anderson.

Membership Info. Page 22

Visit us online:
wildlandscpr.org
— story begins on page 3 —
 P.O. Box 7516
Missoula, MT 59807
(406) 543-9551
www.wildlandscpr.org

Like Father, Like Son Wildlands CPR revives and protects wild places by
promoting watershed restoration that improves
fish and wildlife habitat, provides clean water, and

W
enhances community economies. We focus on
e were standing next to his excavator, on a road reclamation field tour on
reclaiming ecologically damaging, unneeded roads
the Helena NF (MT), when I asked Karry Cross if he had completed any
and stopping off-road vehicle abuse on public lands.
road reclamation projects before this one. He replied that he’d been run-
ning an excavator since he was eight years old. He quickly realized his mistake and
said he meant 18, but then just as quickly returned to the topic of his experience with
excavators as a kid. Turns out his dad built national forest roads, and Karry was riding Director
on his dad’s lap in the excavator cab from when he was even younger than eight years Bethanie Walder
old. It’s in his blood.

Perhaps what’s most interesting about this is that Karry isn’t the only excavator Development Director
operator removing roads that were built by his dad. A day earlier Sue Gunn from Wild-
Thomas R. Petersen
lands CPR staff was out on a field tour on the Olympic National Forest in Washington,
where excavator operator Dusty Watz told a similar story, according to the Tacoma
News Tribune: Science Coordinator
Adam Switalski
“I’m up here decommissioning and maintaining roads my dad built,” noted Dusty
Watz, owner of JZ Construction in Union. Watz said the legacy roads program has al-
lowed him to keep eight employees busy who might otherwise be out of work.
Legal Liaison
Their dads built the roads, and now they’re getting paid to reclaim them. The Sarah Peters
Legacy Roads and Trails Remediation Initiative has received $180 million in funding
during the past three years. The jobs created through Legacy Roads are high-quality
Montana State ORV
jobs in the woods, employing many of the same people who used to work on resource
extraction. Watz has been able to keep eight people on staff, while Cross’s project will Coordinator
remove more than 20 miles of roads in this project area, while also working in other Adam Rissien
spots. Cross estimates he can remove up to 2000 feet of road a day, depending on how
steep the slope is and how many, if any, culverts need to be removed. This particular
site will take about 60 days to complete, and then it’s on to the next site within the Restoration Campaign
project area. He’ll be busy until the snow flies. Director
Sue Gunn
Earlier this year the Forest Service began analyzing the jobs impact of the stimulus
funds, and determined that for every $1 million spent on road maintenance/upgrades/
decommissioning that approximately 12 direct jobs and 12 indirect and induced jobs Program Associate
are created or maintained. That adds up to more than 2100 direct jobs, plus another Cathrine L. Walters
2100 jobs sustained throughout the economy supporting or benefitting from this work.

Because road maintenance and reclamation requires heavy equipment like Journal Editor
bulldozers and excavators, and because it’s expensive to move such large equipment Dan Funsch
over long distances, these also tend to be local jobs, going to people who live in rural,
resource-dependent communities. Perhaps it’s not surprising, then, to meet quite a
few people who are literally following in their dads’ excavator tracks. In this modern Board of Directors
era, it’s nice to know that perhaps some kids are still learning trades and skills from Susan Jane Brown, Jim Furnish,
their parents. But it’s way more than just a skill to be able to reclaim a road. Don’t Marion Hourdequin, Chris Kassar, Rebecca Lloyd,
take my word for it, here’s what Karry had to say to the ABC news reporter: Crystal Mario, Cara Nelson, Brett Paben

“It’s nice to be home, reclaiming roads is making it look as natural as you can make
it look. You got to have a vision of what it might have looked like 100 years ago and
what it’s going to look like 100 years from now, you got to have an eye for beauty.”
© 2010 Wildlands CPR

2 The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010

Washington’s Skokomish Watershed:
Exemplar of the Legacy Roads and Trails Initiative
By Mike Anderson, The Wilderness Society

N
estled into the southeast corner of the Olympic Pen-
insula in western Washington, the Skokomish River
is at the forefront of the U.S. Forest Service’s growing
efforts to restore damaged watersheds and reduce the envi-
ronmental impacts of its road system. The Skokomish is both
a fascinating case study of successful collaborative watershed
restoration project and a politically crucial testing ground for
large-scale road decommissioning in the national forests.

From a political standpoint, the Skokomish watershed is

highly significant because of its keen interest to Congressman
Norm Dicks, whose district encompasses the Skokomish and
the rest of the Olympic Peninsula. As chairman of the appro-
priations subcommittee that controls the Forest Service bud-
get, Congressman Dicks has spoken out for restoring national
forest watersheds like the Skokomish. Most importantly,
with the Washington Watershed Restoration Initiative (WWRI)
support, Dicks has created and championed the Legacy Roads
and Trails Remediation Initiative, which has brought $180 mil-
lion to national forests across the country since its inception,
including $90 million in fiscal year 2010.

The Skokomish River is ecologically and economically

important since it is the major source of fresh water for Hood
Canal – an arm of Puget Sound that is rich in seafood and
aquatic diversity but frequently troubled by low dissolved
oxygen levels. It is also the home of several threatened spe-
cies of Pacific salmon – Chinook, coho, and summer chum –
as well as the threatened bull trout.
Reviewing the project design in the field. Photo by Mike Anderson.
The Skokomish is also notorious in Washington state
because it is the most frequently flooded river in the state,
due in part to the watershed’s unique history of logging,
road building, and hydropower development during the 20th
century.
The overcutting ceased in the 1980s, but not before
sixty percent of the South Fork Skokomish watershed had
A Troubled History of been clear-cut and hundreds of miles of logging roads had
been built within the watershed, often on steep and unstable
Excessive Logging and Flooding slopes. The watershed quickly began to unravel, as a mul-
titude of road failures and landslides sent vast amounts of
Beginning in the 1950s, the Forest Service deliberately gravel and sediment into the river’s tributaries. Much of this
overcut the national forest lands in the South Fork Skokomish, material was swept downriver and deposited in the lower
consistent with the management plan for the congressionally river valley, where (because of hydropower development by
authorized Shelton Cooperative Sustained Yield Unit. The the City of Tacoma that diverted most of the water out of the
purpose of the Shelton Unit was to maintain a steady supply river’s North Fork) water flows were insufficient to flush the
of timber to local mills by accelerating the harvest of national gravel out of the river and into Hood Canal.
forest lands while the timber regrew on the cut-over private
lands owned by Simpson Timber Company (now called Green
Diamond Resources).
— continued on next page —

3 The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010

 — Cover Story, cont’d ­—
As the lower river filled with excess gravel from the
upper watershed, the river inevitably began to overflow
its banks more often and more severely. The flooding has
ravaged the homes and livelihoods of the valley residents, in-
cluding farmers and the Skokomish Tribe, whose reservation
lies at the mouth of the river along Hood Canal. The flooding
has also damaged community relations, as accusations and
denials of responsibility have created serious conflicts among
angry local residents and Tribal members, the Forest Service,
Green Diamond Resources, and the City of Tacoma.
...sixty percent of the watershed had been
clear-cut and hundreds of miles of logging
roads had been built, often on steep and
unstable slopes.
In the 1990s the Forest Service began to address the
problems caused by the mismanagement of the South Fork
Skokomish watershed. With the adoption of the Northwest
Forest Plan in 1994, the Olympic National Forest shifted
quickly from producing timber to restoring damaged forests
and watersheds.
The Forest Service decommissioned more than 100 miles
of high-risk roads in the South Fork watershed during the
1990s. The Olympic National Forest adopted an Access and
Travel Management Plan that called for reducing the size of
its forest-wide road system by one-third. However, funding
for watershed restoration and road decommissioning dried
up early in the next decade, stalling most of the restoration
efforts and leaving many high-risk roads in place.
Crews work to remove one of the Skokomish’s roads. Photo by Mike
Anderson.
4 The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010
Collaborative Restoration: the Skokomish
Watershed Action Team and Congressman
Dicks
In 2005, a new chapter of the Skokomish River story
opened modestly with an effort by the Forest Service and
a conservation group, Conservation Northwest, to reach
consensus on a proposed “stewardship” thinning project in
the South Fork Skokomish watershed called the “Flat Timber
Sale.” Participants included representatives of conserva-
tion groups such as the Olympic Forest Coalition and The
Wilderness Society, along with representatives of the timber
industry, the Skokomish Tribe, the office of Congressman
Norm Dicks, and others. After a few field trips and meetings,
the group agreed to support a modified thinning project, from
which timber sale receipts would be used to fund high-prior-
ity road decommissioning and other restoration work in the
watershed.
Encouraged by the successful agreement and construc-
tive dialogue about Flat Stewardship, The Wilderness Society
and others began to discuss the possibility of continuing
and expanding the collaboration to address restoration of
the entire Skokomish watershed. After an all-day facilitated
discussion, the group agreed in early 2006 to form an informal
collaborative group – the Skokomish Watershed Action Team
(SWAT).
Congressman Dicks met with representatives of the SWAT
later that year to discuss the group’s goals and strategy to
restore the watershed. At the end of that meeting, Congress-
man Dicks asked the group to “give me a three-year plan.”
The SWAT responded to his request a few months later by
producing a three-year action plan that focused on two objec-
tives – implementation of high-priority Forest Service road
decommissioning in the upper watershed and completion of
a comprehensive study of flooding in the lower watershed by
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
In April 2007, shortly after Congressman Dicks became
chairman of the House Interior Appropriations Subcommit-
tee, the Washington Watershed Restoration Initiative formally
requested an appropriation for the Forest Service to address
the problems caused by roads in national forests in Wash-
ington state including places like the Skokomish watershed. 
The next month -- much to our surprise and great delight
-- the subcommittee bill, or “Chairman’s Mark,” for fiscal year
2008 included $65 million for the Forest Service to establish
and fund a new Legacy Roads and Trails Remediation Initia-
tive (LRT). 
— continued on next page —
 — Cover Story, cont’d ­—
Rather than earmarking funds for Washington, the
Skokomish or other specific areas, the bill specified that the
money was to be used anywhere in the National Forest Sys-
tem for “urgently needed road decommissioning…especially
in areas where Forest Service roads may be contributing to
water quality problems in streams and water bodies which
support threatened, endangered or sensitive species....”  Con-
gress ended up appropriating $40 million for LRT in 2008 and,
with leadership by Congressman Dicks, has increased that
amount to $50 million in FY 2009 and $90 million in FY 2010.    In addition, the Tribe is restoring 200 acres of estuary
Watershed Restoration in Action
The SWAT has worked closely with the Forest Service
to identify and request LRT funding for road projects in the
Skokomish watershed that closely fit the statutory criteria.
The SWAT’s 3-Year Action Plan has provided a solid basis for
LRT proposals that are consistent with Forest Service priori-
ties and widely-supported in the local community.
Earlier this year, two dozen organizations and local
residents involved in the SWAT sent a letter to the Regional
Forester endorsing the Olympic National Forest’s LRT propos-
als in the Skokomish. The Region subsequently allocated $2.6
million for LRT work in the Skokomish, including $2.0 million
for road decommissioning and another $600,000 for storm
damage prevention. This may be the largest amount of LRT
funding in the nation for a single watershed.
While focusing mostly on cutting off sediment coming
from roads in the upper watershed, the SWAT has also col-
Cong. Dicks posing with
the Skokomish Watershed
Action Team during Legacy
and Trails field tour,
summer of 2008.
Photo by Mike Anderson.
5 The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010
laborated on several other watershed restoration projects.
Green Diamond Resources last year restored access to a
mile of salmon spawning habitat by replacing an impassable
culvert with a bridge. This year the Forest Service and the
Skokomish Tribe are restoring large woody structures to a
barren stretch of the South Fork Skokomish River, using a
helicopter to air-lift 2,000 trees – root wads and all – from the
upland forest to the river channel.
habitat at the mouth of the river by removing two miles of old
dikes. All told, $6 million is being invested in restoration of
the Skokomish watershed this year, creating dozens of jobs
and boosting the economy as well as improving environmen-
tal quality.
The collaborative efforts and successes of the SWAT have
not gone unnoticed. The Skokomish watershed was one of
three restoration case studies featured in the U.S. exhibit at
the World Forestry Congress in Buenos Aires last fall. The
Olympic National Forest’s hard-working hydrologist, Robin
Stoddard, received an Environmental Hero award from the
Hood Canal Coordinating Council. And the Skokomish Grange
– representing the long-suffering but determined farmers who
live in the valley – gave the SWAT a certificate of appreciation
for community service.
Restoration of the Skokomish is far from complete, but
the Forest Service -- with help from the SWAT, Congressman
Dicks, and the Legacy Roads and Trails Remediation Initiative
-- is making great headway in healing the headwaters of this
important watershed.
 Legal Notes
Logging Roads, Stormwater and the
Clean Water Act
­— By Christopher Winter

I
n a long anticipated decision, the
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
recently held that stormwater from
logging roads requires National Pol-
lution Discharge Elimination System
Permits (NPDES) permits under the
Clean Water Act. Northwest Environ-
mental Defense Center v. Brown, __ F.3d
__ (9th Cir. 2010), 2010 WL 322105. The
decision could set important precedent
for management of logging roads while
providing citizen activists with new
tools in their work to protect aquatic
habitat, however, it is only a first step
in bringing logging roads within the
NPDES program and many unanswered
questions remain.

Logging Roads and

Sediment
Sediment associated with logging is
a well-documented threat to water qual-
ity throughout the West. In 2000, the
Environmental Protection Agency found
that sediment associated with logging
activities was the fifth leading source of
water quality impairment to rivers and
streams nationwide. Across the West,
roads are the leading source of sedi-
ment from logging activities.
Logging roads are often designed to
collect stormwater in ditches, channels
and culverts that discharge directly into
surface water near or adjacent to the
road system. In other words, the road
system is hydrologically connected
to the stream network. In conjunc-
tion with timber sales, contractors
usually apply gravel to reinforce the
road surface for the heavy truck traffic
associated with timber hauling. In the
process of hauling, the gravel becomes
ground into fine sediment.
Culverts routinely become clogged by debris and require ongoing maintenance. Under
the court’s ruling, they are considered point sources of pollution and will require
permits. Photo courtesy of Bureau of Land Management.
In short, sediment is one of the worst
and most pervasive forms of pollution
across the West.
When it rains, stormwater carries the fine sediment from the road surface
directly into the stream network via the ditches and culverts. The resulting
sedimentation has a number of well-studied impacts on water quality and stream
geomorphology, which cause harm to aquatic species like salmon and steelhead.
Excess sediment contributes to channel simplification, including loss in the depth,
frequency, and quality of pools and off-channel habitat critical for rearing salmon.
Sediment also fills in spawning grounds, reducing egg survival rates. Increased
turbidity can impair feeding activities, clog gills and damage habitat for macroin-
vertebrates that provide prey for salmonids. In short, sediment is one of the worst
and most pervasive forms of pollution across the West.
— continued on next page­—

6 The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010

 — Legal Notes, cont’d ­—

The Clean Water Act and the Silvicultural Rule Despite the holding in Costle, EPA
has repeatedly tried to exempt logging
activities from the NPDES program.
In 1972, Congress passed the Clean Water Act and required a permit for the Over many years, EPA issued and
discharge of pollution from a “point source,” which means a discrete conveyance revised what has come to be known as
like a pipe, ditch or channel. The permit program, known as the NPDES program, the “Silvicultural Rule,” which is now
has been a very effective way of regulating water pollution since that time. NPDES embodied at 40 C.F.R. § 122.27. The cur-
permits must ensure that the discharge complies with water quality standards, and rent version of the regulation defines
the permit holder must monitor and report the level of pollution as compared to only certain types of discharges associ-
the permit limits. The permittee submits regular monitoring reports (i.e. discharge ated with logging activities as point
monitoring reports) to EPA or state agencies, and those reports often document sources, including those associated
violations of the permit and therefore the Clean Water Act. Citizens can bring en- with rock crushing, gravel washing,
forcement actions in federal court to enforce the terms of a NPDES permit if EPA or log sorting and log storage facilities.
the state agencies allow a polluter to continue their polluting activities. EPA, in passing the rule, attempted to
categorically exclude all other types
The pipes, ditches and channels that carry polluted stormwater from logging of discharge from the definition of
roads into the stream system meet the plain language definition of point sources point source and therefore the NPDES
in the Clean Water Act. Nevertheless, early in the history of the Clean Water Act, program.
EPA attempted to exempt point source discharges associated with logging activi-
ties from the NPDES program. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit struck Over the last ten years, the “Silvi-
down that exemption in 1973, holding that EPA did not have the discretion to cultural Rule” has come under increas-
exempt categories of point sources from the NPDES program. Nat. Res. Defence ing scrutiny by federal courts. In 2002,
Council v. Costle, 568 F.2d 1369 (D.C. Cir. 1977). Congress defined point sources in the Ninth Circuit held that a point
the statute and clearly required permits for all point source discharges. The court source discharge of pesticides must be
held that EPA could not contravene the will of Congress and waive the permit re- covered by a permit even though these
quirement for a whole category of point source discharges associated with logging. activities are not listed in the Silvicul-
tural Rule as a point source discharge.
Importantly, the D.C. Circuit Court also rejected EPA’s argument that it would League of Wilderness Defenders/Blue
be “infeasible” to administer such a program. EPA argued that the sheer number Mountains Biodiversity Project v. Fors-
of point sources made it impossible for the agency to effectively regulate them. In gren, 309 F.3d 1181 (9th Cir. 2002). In
the opinion authored by Judge Leventhal, the D.C. Circuit rejected this argument, that case, the Ninth Circuit echoed the
stating that EPA could issue general permits that cover categories of point source 1973 decision in Costle, holding that EPA
discharges such as logging roads. cannot ignore Congress’ direction and
redefine pipes as a non-point source of
pollution.

In 2003, the Northern District of

California, relying on the Forsgren case,
held that stormwater from logging
roads that was collected in ditches and
discharged to surface water is subject
to the NPDES program. Environmental
Protection Information Ctr. v. Pacific Lum-
ber Co., 2003 WL 25506817 (N.D. Cal.).
Because Pacific Lumber Co. eventually
filed for bankruptcy, that case never
made it to the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals.

Gravel is easily crushed by the weight of logging trucks and can find its way into lakes, rivers and
streams. Photo courtesy of Bureau of Land Management.
— continued on next page­—

7 The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010

 — Legal Notes, cont’d ­—

Section 402(p) of the Clean Water Act

and Stormwater
While EPA was struggling to figure out whether and how
to regulate discharges associated with logging activities,
Congress was taking action on the nationwide stormwater
problem. In 1987, Congress amended the Clean Water Act
specifically to address stormwater pollution and establish
an orderly process for bringing these discharges within the
scope of the NPDES program. Section 402(p), 33 U.S.C. §
1342(p), established a tiered approach to permitting storm-
water discharges from point sources. As part of the first
phase or Phase I, Congress designated five specific sources
of stormwater, which were required to apply for permits by
1990. The Phase I sources included discharges “associated
with industrial activity.”

In 1990, EPA implemented the Phase I stormwater regula-

tions, which identified industrial activities subject to permit-
ting requirements according to Standard Industrial Classifica-
tion (“SIC”) codes. The regulations unambiguously include
facilities classified as SIC 24, which includes logging under
SIC 2411, as those engaged in industrial activity. 40 C.F.R. §
122.26(b)(14)(ii). The regulation provides:

Storm water discharge associated with industrial activ-

ity means the discharge from any conveyance that is used
for collecting and conveying storm water and that is directly
related to manufacturing, processing or raw materials storage
areas at an industrial plant. The term does not include dis-
charges from facilities or activities excluded from the NPDES
program under this part 122. Erosion control practices include measures to intercept
sediment. Photo courtesy of Bureau of Land Management.
40 C.F.R. § 122.26(b)(14).

The last sentence of the regulation – the reference to part

122 – includes the Silvicultural Rule at 40 C.F.R. § 122.27. In
this way, EPA attempted to exempt stormwater from logging
roads by incorporating the Silvicultural Rule by reference.
The Court’s Decision
pursuant to the statutory definition and that EPA lacked
authority to exempt these sources from the NPDES program
by regulation. According to the opinion, the Silvicultural
Rule cannot be read to redefine a point source as a non-point
source, and therefore point sources associated with logging
roads must have NPDES permits.

In a unanimous opinion authored by Judge William A.
Fletcher, the Ninth Circuit held that discharges of stormwater
from ditches, channels and culverts require NPDES permits.
The District Court in Portland, Oregon granted a motion to
dismiss the case after the Northwest Environmental Defense
Center (NEDC) had filed its complaint, and held that these
types of discharges do not require permits. The Ninth Circuit
reversed the District Court and remanded the case for further
proceedings.
The Ninth Circuit first held that the pipes, ditches and
culverts associated with logging roads are point sources
The court also addressed the Phase I regulations and
held that the discharges at issue are “associated with in-
dustrial activity” and therefore require a permit pursuant to
Section 402(p) of the Clean Water Act. The court rejected
arguments made by the timber industry that timber hauling
activities are not “associated with industrial activity.”
In concluding its opinion, the Ninth Circuit responded to
the arguments of EPA and the timber industry regarding the
potential administrative burden related to permitting storm-
water from logging roads. Noting that “Congress intentionally
passed a ‘tough law,’” the court encouraged EPA to move for-

— continued on next page­—

8 The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010

 — Legal Notes, cont’d ­—

from the court. Because the District

Court dismissed the case as a matter of
law, the court never ruled on the factual
evidence of the violations that NEDC
had collected. On remand, NEDC will car-
ry the burden of proving the violations.

Second, the timber industry is

likely to ask Congress for an exemp-
tion from the Clean Water Act permit
program. Although the political process
is unpredictable, the science on this is-
sue is clear. Logging roads are a serious
source of pollution, and they have long-
term negative impacts on salmon and
other aquatic species. One would hope,
given the clear science on this issue,
that Congress would not grant a Clean
Water Act exemption for one of the lead-
ing sources of pollution nationwide.

Finally, state agencies and EPA

The decision clarifies that logging activities do indeed create point sources of sediment will have to focus on writing general
pollution that require EPA permits. Photo courtesy of Bureau of Land Management. stormwater permits for logging roads.
To achieve improved watershed condi-
tions, those permits must include clear
The Ninth Circuit first held that the and enforceable protections for water
quality, regular monitoring through-
pipes, ditches and culverts associated out the road network, and a system of
with logging roads are point sources... reporting and citizen oversight and en-
forcement. It will be critical for citizens
and... must have NPDES permits. and public interest organizations to
participate on a state-by-state basis to
ensure that agencies implement lawful
permits.
ward with a permitting regime. Just as
the Costle court did more than 30 years What’s It All Mean?
earlier, Judge Fletcher called out the
general permit program as a possible This opinion is only the first step in What You Can Do
solution and stated that “the permitting bringing logging roads within the permit
program of the Clean Water Act, and 1) Be on the lookout for legislation
process is not necessarily onerous.”
this issue will continue to be in flux for that would grant a Clean Water Act
EPA has successfully implemented
the foreseeable future. First, defendants exemption to the timber industry;
storm water permit programs for large
in the case have the opportunity for 2) Encourage your state agencies
and small municipalities (which include
further appeal and can seek rehearing to develop general stormwater permits
extensive road networks), many cat-
en banc from the Ninth Circuit or pos- for logging roads and then participate in
egories of industrial facilities (including
sibly review by the Supreme Court. The that process;
their roads) and construction sites as
decision is not final until those appeal 3) Follow the development of the
small as 1 acre in size (including associ-
options have been exhausted, although case at www.crag.org;
ated roads). The Court made a point
it is unusual for unanimous appellate 4) Begin to collect data on the
of stating that “we are confident, given
opinions to be reversed. worst logging roads in your local forests
the closely analogous NPDES permit- (see sidebar)
ting process for stormwater runoff from
other kinds of roads, that EPA will be If the opinion is not reversed, then
the case goes back to the District Court — Christopher Winter is Co-Executive
able to do so effectively and relatively
where NEDC will have to prove the vio- Director and Staff Attorney with the Crag
expeditiously.”
lations and then seek appropriate relief Law Center (www.crag.org) and is based
in Portland, Oregon. CRAG represented
NEDC in the lawsuit.

9 The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010

 — Legal Notes, cont’d ­—

Anatomy of a Citizen Suit

­— By Christopher Winter

C
lean Water Act citizen suits are unique
types of cases in which members of the
public document violations of federal
environmental law and present that evidence
to a judge. The burden in these cases is on the
citizen to prove that a discharge of a pollut-
ant to surface water is taking place, where it is
taking place and how it is in violation of the
Clean Water Act. These types of cases require
citizens to present a well-developed factual
case to the judge.

The case brought by the Portland, Oregon

non-profit NEDC involved the discharge of
polluted stormwater from two logging roads
in the Tillamook State Forest in Northwest
Oregon. NEDC filed the case against Marvin
Brown, the Director of the Oregon Depart-
ment of Forestry (ODF) and ODF as the own-
ers of the roads at issue. NEDC also sued the
private logging companies that maintain the
roads pursuant to timber sale contracts with
ODF. Neither ODF nor the timber companies
had permits for the discharges.

Extensive research and preparatory work

went into documenting the violations of the
Clean Water Act. NEDC used the state public
records act to obtain and review information
related to timber sale activities on the Til-
lamook State Forest. Through that process, Citizens hoping to file a citizen suit under the Clean Water Act need to collect data to
NEDC identified key stream parallel roads that support their case. Photo courtesy of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
were being used as main timber haul routes by
ODF and its contractors.

Once the haul routes were identified, NEDC
then surveyed the roads and identified the
location of ditches and culverts that routed
stormwater directly into the stream system.
NEDC then spent extensive time in the field
during rain events, collecting samples from
eleven different discharge points over several
days, as well as background samples imme-
diately upstream of the discharge locations.
A commercial laboratory analyzed those samples for total suspended
solids and turbidity. That data was then used to draft the required 60-
day notice letter, setting forth the location of the discharge and alleged
violations of the Clean Water Act.
Data collection such as this is critical before considering a citizen suit
under the Clean Water Act.

10 The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010

Program Updates, Autumn 2010
Restoration Program

W
ildlands CPR continues to lead the national Legacy Roads and
Trails campaign and we were particularly busy this summer,
hosting field tours in Washington and Montana and monitor-
ing restored roads in Montana and Idaho. In addition, our Restoration
Campaign Director, Sue Gunn, coordinated a September award ceremony
for the Washington Watershed Restoration Initiative (WWRI) to honor our
congressional and state/federal agency champions.
Congressman Norm Dicks (WA) and former Director of the Washing-
ton Department of Ecology, Jay Manning, received awards for their work
to promote and fund Legacy Roads and Trails. Dicks started this Forest
Service program when he was chair of the House Interior and Environment
Appropriations Subcommittee (he now chairs the Defense Appropriations
Subcommittee, but still sits on the Interior and Environment Subcommit-
tee). Sue, in handing Mr. Dicks the “Clean Water Hero Award” said that Mr.
Dicks’ support of Legacy Roads is already considered a great environmen-
tal contribution to our nation. Manning was responsible for moving the
WA Dept of Ecology to engage the Forest Service over road management,
and he is responsible for the Department’s participation in the WWRI. He
received the Environmental Champion Award. And finally, Tom Erkert, Re-
gional Engineer for the Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region, received
the “Data Daylight Honorable Mention” for the 2005 cost estimate report
he wrote on the funds needed to stabilize the national forest road system
in Washington State.
Field tour of Legacy Roads project on the
Helena National Forest, Montana. Wildlands
CPR photo.
In addition to organizing the Montana field
tour, Sue has been building an informal coali-
tion here in MT similar to the WWRI. This
new Legacy Roads, Trails and Jobs Coalition is
working to increase public support for Legacy
Roads in Montana. It already has 27 members,
including the Confederated Salish Kootenai
Tribes, Ironworkers, Laborers, and five other
local unions, plus the Missoula area AFL-CIO,
Montana Association of Conservation Districts,
and numerous other state/local environmental
organizations.

Upon receiving his award, Congressman Dicks stated that one of his
priorities is to make the Legacy Roads and Trails program permanent,
which would provide the agency with longer-term consistency and stabil-
ity for rightsizing their road system. We’ll keep you posted if and when
that happens!

In August, Congressman Dicks joined Wildlands CPR and other WWRI

members on a field tour of a Legacy Roads project on the Olympic National
Forest (WA). Several reporters attended, resulting in a number of articles
about the importance of the Legacy Roads and Trails program for both
economic and ecological reasons. We hosted a similar field tour on the
Helena National Forest in Montana, to look at Legacy Roads projects in
the Northern Region. This tour resulted in stories on all three television
stations in Helena, in addition to a great article and editorial in the Helena
Independent-Republic newspaper.
Congressman Norm Dicks (D-WA) receives
There was one common theme from the Washington and Montana field his Claen Water Hero award from Sue Gunn.
tours: excavator operators on both projects talked enthusiastically about Wildlands CPR photo.
reclamation work and noted that their fathers had built roads in the very
same forests. — Cont’d o
­ n next page —
11 The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010
 Restoration Program, cont’d
While Sue’s been leading the policy and advocacy components of our
campaign, Staff Scientist Adam Switalski has been busy all summer with
both Legacy Roads monitoring on MT and ID national forests, and Lolo
National Forest (MT) road inventory work. To monitor Legacy Roads,
Wildlands CPR partnered with the Forest Service and collected pre-project
data to compare with post-project monitoring data in the future. With
assistance from botanists and other scientists, Adam drafted an extensive
monitoring protocol and field-tested it in the Kootenai NF (MT), one of our
monitoring forests. The bulk of the field work was done by Greg Peters
(who also coordinated the Helena Field Tour). Adam also hired several
graduate students from the University of Montana to assist with the bo-
tanical monitoring in the fall. The field season will end shortly after this is-
sue of The RIPorter is completed (end of September), but ideally Wildlands
CPR will receive funding to continue this work for several more years.
Adam S. is also coordinating our Lolo
National Forest road survey project, overseeing
our 2-person field crew as they look for erosion
problems, weeds, and wildlife on Forest Service
roads, in addition to documenting the location
and condition of non-system roads. Collecting
this data will enable the agency to set priorities
for restoration, maintenance and road reclama-
tion - and identify potential Legacy Roads and
Trails projects. The field season ends at the
end of September, after which Adam S. will pull
together a final report for the Lolo.

Transportation Program

O
ur Restoration Program is not the only
one “gettin’ er done,” as our MT Trans-
portation Coordinator Adam Rissien and
our Legal Liaison and Staff Attorney Sarah Pe-
ters have been working hard as travel planning
enters the home-stretch in MT and nationally.
For example, Sarah assisted activists and
lawyers with travel planning processes on the
Six Rivers (CA), Sierra (CA), Kaibab-Williams
(AZ), Gunnison (CO), Humboldt-Toiyabe (NV),
Klamath (CA) and Fremont-Winema (OR) Na-
tional Forests.
Wildlands CPR also joined Klamath Siskiyou Wild to intervene on
behalf of the Forest Service in litigation that off-road vehicle riders filed to
challenge Smith River National Recreation Area (SRNRA) road decommis-
sioning.
In addition to all of this travel planning work, Wildlands CPR filed a
lawsuit against the Beaverhead-Deerlodge (B-D) National Forest (MT) to
challenge their revised Forest Plan. Friends of the Bitterroot and Mon-
tanans for Quiet Recreation joined us on the suit, which claims that the
agency failed to carefully plan for snowmobile use when they designated
winter motorized recreation across 60 percent of the forest without un-
dertaking a winter travel planning process. For example, the Centennial
and Beaverhead Mountains of the B-D serve as a vital travel route connect-
ing wolverines between Idaho and Greater Yellowstone, while providing
crucial wolverine denning habitat. Mt. Jefferson, however, has become a
destination for extreme snowmobilers coming over the border from Island
Park, ID. Allowing heavy snowmobile use may cause wolverines to aban-
don dens and preclude their ability to travel safely through these impor-
tant areas. Missoula attorney Jack Tuholske is representing us in the case.

But winter planning isn’t the only challenge on the Beaverhead-

Deerlodge. Adam R. has been overseeing two field staff collecting data
on off-road vehicle damage on both system and unauthorized motorized
routes. Some of that data collection has already resulted in the closure of
unauthorized routes! We’ve also been able to document certain situations
where no motorized use is occurring but the Forest Service thinks other-
wise. Adam is using the data collected to create google earth maps that
include damage photos – he’s been focusing on roadless areas within the
B-D. Keep an eye on our website for these maps, available soon.

... A reminder of the need to effectively manage motorized
vehicles. Photo courtesy of Bureau of Land Management.
Adam R. has also been continuing our work on the Bitterroot National
Forest (MT) as they finalize their travel plan. He has partnered with
diverse allies like mountain bikers, hunters and equestrians to keep them
engaged in the travel planning process. We expect that the Bitterroot will
release their new travel plan sometime around the new year. Keep an eye
on our website to stay informed about that final decision.

12 The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010

 Bibliography Notes summarizes and highlights some of the
scientific literature in our 20,000 citation bibliography on the
physical and ecological effects of roads and off-road vehicles. We
offer bibliographic searches to help activists access important
biological research relevant to roads.

A Review of the Impacts of Off-Road Vehicles

on Quiet Users
By Allison Jones and Adam Switalski Editor’s Note: This BiblioNote is an excerpt from
Wildlands CPR and Wild Utah’s ORV BMPs published in
2008. To see a list of Best Management Practices for plan-
ning and management of ORV routes or to view the full
report visit: http://www.wildlandscpr.org/ORV-BMPs

Q
uiet recreational users include hik-
ers, hunters, anglers, bird watchers,
horseback riders and others for which
“natural quiet” is an important element of the
recreational experience. Despite significant
growth during the 1990s, ORV use comprises
only 3 percent of recreational visits to all U.S.
national forests when such use is the primary
activity, and 6.6 percent of all visits where ORVs
are used in concert with other activities such as
hunting and fishing (USDA 2003). With few ex-
ceptions, quiet users comprise the vast majority
of recreational visitation on public lands.

Conflict can be defined as an emotional

state of annoyance with another group or per-
son that can result in dissatisfaction with a spe-
cific experience (Yankoviak 2005). For example,
a hiker seeking quiet in nature could experience
conflict after encountering an ORV user on
the same trail because the ORV use could be
perceived as preventing the hiker from attaining Quiet users account for over 90% of recreational visits to public lands. Photo courtesy of
his or her goal of a quiet, natural experience. Bureau of Land Management.
Feelings of conflict often occur among quiet us-
ers when they hear motor vehicle noise, witness
acts of great speed and/or reckless behavior,
smell exhaust, and see visible environmental
damage. This all can lead to the displacement of Non-motorized users often are
non-motorized recreationists from places they
would normally frequent (Moore 1994, Gambill
disproportionately affected by the
1996, Stokowski and LaPointe 2000). presence of motor vehicles

— Continued on next page ­—

13 The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010

 — Biblio Notes, cont’d ­—
Use conflict often can be “asymmetrical” in that one user
group is generally more impacted by conflict than another.
For instance, cross-country skiers may be bothered by snow-
mobile riders but snowmobile riders are not generally both-
ered by cross-country skiers. This “asymmetrical conflict” is
most likely to occur between motorized and non-motorized
recreation activities, where ORV riding in particular is consid-
ered incompatible with every other land-based activity but
snowmobiling (WDNR 2006). Consequently, non-motorized
users often are disproportionately affected by the presence of
motor vehicles (especially loud ones), which can cover a lot
of ground quickly (Badarraco 1976, Webber 1995).
The Skyline trail on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest (Utah) is
shared by hikers, horses, mountain bikes, and motorcycles. Photo
by Dan Funsch.
14
Both motorized and quiet recreationists prefer that
trails be managed for multiple uses but with motorized and
non-motorized activities separated (Andereck et al. 2001).
Where trails are designated as multiple-use, heavy motorized
use tends to cause other trail users to pursue opportunities
at other locations in order to realize the desired experiences
(USDI 2004). There are numerous citations in the literature of
non-motorized recreationists being displaced or leaving an
area altogether where motorized use is frequent (Adelman et
al. 1982, Moore 1994, Webber 1995, Stokowski and LaPointe
2000, Manning and Valliere 2002).
Both motorized and quiet
recreationists prefer that trails
be managed for multiple uses but
with motorized and non-motorized
activities separated
A non-invasive and cost-effective method for measuring
and evaluating the level and extent of ORV-related conflict
is required to adequately assess conditions on public lands,
rather than reliance on the occasional reporting of conflict
to Law Enforcement Officers or agency personnel. Before
deciding which trails to designate for motorized recreation,
managers must be able to ascertain whether any conflict ex-
ists or might exist, what groups are experiencing conflict and
the degree or severity of the conflict. Thus, it is essential to
undertake proactive and systematic outreach to both motor-
ized and non-motorized visitors in order to facilitate mutual
understanding of the preferences and desired experiences of
public land visitors in conjunction with (as compatible with)
the resource protection obligations of the agencies. Only
through proactive outreach can the agency identify emerging
conflicts before a critical flash point is reached that requires
immediate management action.
­ Allison is Conservation Biologist for the Wild Utah Project
—
and Adam is Science Coordinator for Wildlands CPR.
— references on next page —
The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010
 — Biblio Notes, cont’d —
Literature Cited
Adelman, B., T. Heberlein, and T. Bonnicksen. 1982. Social
psychological explanations for the persistence of a
conflict between paddling canoeists and motorcraft
users in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area. Leisure
Sciences 5: 45-61.
Andereck, K.L., C.A. Vogt, K. Larkin, and K. Freye. 2001.
Differences between motorized and nonmotorized trail
users. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration
10(3): 62-77.
Badaracco, R.J. 1976. ORVs rough on visitors. Parks and
Recreation 11(9): 32-35, 68-75.
Gambill, P. 1996. Multi-Use Trail Management Policy: User-
Group Conflict and Resource Impact Issues. Wheaton, IL:
The Wheaton Center.
Manning, R., and W. Valliere. 2002. Coping in outdoor
recreation: causes and consequences of crowding and
conflict among community residents. Journal of Leisure
Research 33(4): 410-426.
Moore, R.L. 1994. Conflicts on multiple-use trails: Synthesis
of the literature and state of the practice, Report No.
FHWA-PD-94-031. Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway
Administration.
Stokowski, P.A. and C.B. LaPointe. 2000.
Environmental and social effects
of ATVs and ORVs: An annotated
bibliography and research assessment.
School of Natural Resources,
University of Vermont. 31p. http://
www.anr.state.vt.us/anr/atv_nov20_
final.pdf
A motorized user getting an early start. Photo courtesy of Bureau of Land Management.
15
USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service).
2003. National Forest Visitor Use Monitoring Program,
National Project Results, January 2000 through
September 2003.
USDI (U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land
Management). 2004. Bureau of Land Management,
Proposed Colorado Canyons National Conservation
Area Resource Management Plan/Environmental Impact
Statement, July 2004, page 4-38.
Webber, P.C. 1995. Report to the Board of Environmental
Management on the Policy for Off-road Vehicle Use
in Massachusetts Forests and Parks. Commonwealth
of Massachusetts: Department of Environmental
Management. Boston, MA.
WDNR (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources).
2006. Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation
Plan (SCORP), Chapter 4, Compatibility & Conflict in
Wisconsin Outdoor Recreation.
Yankoviak, B.M. 2005. Off-road vehicle policy on USDA
National Forests: evaluating user conflicts and travel
management. M.S. Thesis. Missoula, MT: University of
Montana.
The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010
 FY10 Legacy Roads Projects
Finally Announced
In August the Forest Service belatedly released their FY10
final list of Legacy Roads and Trails projects. Though the
funding increased significantly from 2009 ($50 million) to 2010
($90 million), when comparing the total projected accom-
plishments between the two years you might notice that the
anticipated outcomes are not necessarily doubled. We are
pleased to see that numerous regions and forests have dedi-
cated at least a portion of FY10 funding to project planning,
survey and design. This is an important step, as they were run-
ning out of projects with completed environmental analyses.
The agency projects the following work will be completed
with the FY10 funds:
• 835 stream crossings fixed (culvert replacements and
upgrades), restoring almost 1000 miles of stream.
• 1960 miles of road improved
• 1731 miles of road maintained
• 1253 miles of system roads decommissioned
• 908 miles of unauthorized roads decommissioned
• 87 bridges reconstructed
• 1223 miles of trails maintained
• 309 miles of trails improved
• 533,598 acres of watershed improved
Legacy Roads and Trails funds continue to have real
impacts on the ground. For a full report about the first two
years of Legacy Roads and Trails (including a comparison to
initial projected accomplishments with actual work contract-
ed out), visit www.scribd.com/doc/34342186/Legacy-Roads-
Trails-A-2-Year-Evaluation.
New Book Focuses On
Mitigating Roads’ Impacts
— Excerpted from an article by Ben Pierce
A new book published by Montana State University West-
ern Transportation Institute researchers Anthony Clevenger
and Marcel Huijser, and co-edited by Jon Beckmann and Jodi
Hilty of The Wildlife Conservation Society, makes the case
for safer, smarter roads. Entitled “Safe Passages: Highways,
Wildlife, and Habitat Connectivity,” the books details case
studies aimed at mitigating risk to wildlife, humans and the
environment on the increasingly fast-paced lanes of the na-
tion’s highways.
To read more, visit http://chronicleoutdoors.
com/2010/08/19/safe-passages-new-book-focuses-on-mitigat-
ing-risk-of-wildlife-on-roadways/#more-1336 and see Ben’s full
article in Chronicle Outdoors.
16
FS Report on Watersheds & Climate
Editor’s note: This is the actual Abstract from the FS report
Abstract
Water from forested watersheds provides irreplaceable
habitat for aquatic and riparian species and supports our
homes, farms, industries, and energy production. Secure,
high-quality water from forests is fundamental to our prosper-
ity and our stewardship responsibility.
Yet population pressures, land uses, and rapid climate
change combine to seriously threaten these waters and the
resilience of watersheds in most places. Forest land managers
are expected to anticipate and respond to these threats and
steward forested watersheds to ensure the sustained protec-
tion and provision of water and the services it provides.
Effective, constructive watershed stewardship requires
that we think, collaborate, and act. We think to understand
the values at risk and how watersheds can remain resilient,
and we support our thinking with knowledge sharing and
planning. We collaborate to develop common understandings
and goals for watersheds and a robust, durable capacity for
response that includes all stakeholders and is guided by sci-
ence. We act to secure and steward resilient watersheds that
will continue to provide crucial habitats and water supplies in
the coming century by implementing practices that protect,
maintain, and restore watershed processes and services.
Citation:
Furniss, MJ; Staab, BP; Hazelhurst, S; Clifton, CF; Roby, KB;
Ilhadrt, BL.; Larry, EB; Todd, AH; Reid, LM; Hines, SJ; B,
KA; Luce, CH; Edwards, PJ. 2010. Water, climate change,
and forests: watershed stewardship for a changing
climate. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-812. Portland, OR:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific
Northwest Research Station. 75 p.
High elevation headwaters in the Absaroka Beartooth Wilderness.
Photo by Dan Funsch.
The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010
Doublespeak
By Thomas R. Petersen
It was a clear case of attempted spin.
With damage control his obvious charge, Wayne Nosala,
Legislative Director for the California Off-Road Vehicle Asso-
ciation, tried to paint what was a horrific, tragic ORV accident
in the Mojave Desert as something that had simply been “a
family affair.” The NPR interviewer wouldn’t bite.
Two days earlier eight people were killed and ten injured,
including children when a tricked-out off-road truck in a
Mojave desert race called the “California 200” sailed over a
jump and hurtled into a crowd of spectators that were packed
within 10 feet of the track, held back from the dangerous
rocky course by… nothing. The truck came to a rest upside
down with its oversized wheels spinning towards the sky.
The driver was unhurt, but had to escape, literally run-
ning for his life as the angry mob pelted him with rocks.
Tens of thousands of people attend the California 200, in
which a variety of off-road vehicles negotiate jumps and other
obstacles at speeds up to 60 mph on the 50-mile off-road
course that is essentially just raw desert terrain. The race
had been scheduled to last through the night. It was immedi-
ately cancelled with the accident.
That souped-up jeeps and trucks, four-wheelers and dirt
bikes would be allowed to tear across the desert in the first
place, across fragile cryptobiotic soil, through rare desert
tortoise habitat—or, unfortunately at times, through desert
tortoises themselves— is another story. (See, for example,
The Road-RIPorter, Vol. 14, #3, and The Road-RIPorter, Vol. 15,
#1.)
But to label an all-night drinking party by thousands of
boisterous ORV enthusiasts a “family affair” is messaging
gone bad. Swizzling beers and getting run-over by an ORV
gone amok is a family affair? According to Nosala, the ORV
legislative director, yes.
But let’s hear it straight from him, via the NPR interview
(below, Transcript from NPR’s All Things Considered from
Aug. 16th, 2010.)
17
Photo courtesy of Bureau of Land Management.
Robert SIEGEL (NPR): Now, I gather the California 200 is four
laps around a 50-mile course. How much of the attraction
is being able to be very close to those trucks, as they
speed by?
Mr. NOSALA: Well, let me tell you this. The lands that they
race on are public lands. They’re overseen by the Bureau
of Land Management, the BLM. And there’s only four of
these areas they’re allowed to race in California. And
so the attraction is there’s a lot of people that come out
from the city, a lot of family type people and they come
out, and there’s no charge to come and spectate these
events. And it’s a great atmosphere, there’s a lot of family
type atmosphere.
SIEGEL: Mr. Nosala, can you just give us a sense, given where
this accident took place and where it was in the course,
were the people who were struck by the truck, were they
in fact too close to the action? Or was it simply an unpre-
dictable accident?
Mr. NOSALA: Over 40 years, we’ve never had an incident like
this. So it’s hard to predict something like this. There’s
a lot of stuff that you cannot predict. There’s been other
motorsports accidents that have been similar or even
more dramatic...
SIEGEL: No, but my question is this: From what I’ve read, this
took place on the course right at a point called the rock
pile, where the truck in question made a jump. Were the
people standing there who were the victims of this unfor-
— Continued on next page —
The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010
 — Odes to Roads, cont’d —
tunate accident, were they in a place that was clearly too close to the
track or are there always people there and is that where you would
expect people to be?
Mr. NOSALA: There is not always people there. There’s a 50-mile long
course and most of the course, there won’t be anybody lined on
the course at all. Sometimes these areas do get a bit congested and
maybe, yes, some of those issues should be mitigated. And surely they
will be mitigated as a result of this accident.
SIEGEL: But was this a common place where people would stand to see the
race, near the rock pile?
Mr. NOSALA: Yeah, in that particular racing area there is a gathering - that
is a gathering spot where there is historic spectator viewing. (author’s
comment: Note direct contradiction of his previous statement; I could
sense as I listened that Nosala was beginning his fall.)
SIEGEL: But could they actually walk right out on to the track, if they
wanted to, for example?
Mr. NOSALA: If you wanted to, if you really wanted to walk right out on the
track in front of the truck, you could. But I mean, it’s - historically, over
40 years, that’s not happened.
SIEGEL: Are you concerned about what consequences this accident might
have for the sport?
Mr. NOSALA: In a way, yes. I’m just hoping that we can get through this.
I think, you know, there’s been a lot of negative press and I’m trying
to dispel some of the negative aspects of the sport. There’s a lot of
positives to the sport. You know, it’s a family atmosphere. Usually a lot
of these guys go for out for an entire week and they’ll camp out there,
hang out with their family. And a lot of people come out from the big
cities and sit out in the open desert and blow off a little bit of steam,
have some fun around the campfire. And that’s kind of what it’s about
and getting to the outdoors, getting into the dirt and getting out of the
- beat of the hustle and bustle of the big city.
SIEGEL: Well, Mr. Nosala, thank you very much for talking with us about it.
Mr. NOSALA: Okay.
I heard this interview live, and Nosala’s ending “Okay” was clearly
prefaced by a gulp and a hesitant, embarrassing pause that indicated he
felt the interview had not gone so well.
Nosala spun and failed, but the AP story described it straight: “Aug. 14
tragedy occurred amid fans partying close to the race course,” and the LA
Times ran a story on Aug. 15th: “On Saturday, hundreds of spectators had
crowded around the site where the vehicle landed, some just a few feet
from the main dirt track. Empty beer bottles and water bottles littered the
area where the deadly incident occurred.”
Just to be clear on what was really going on, here’s a comment on the
LA Times story, from their on-line comment section, from a person only
identified as “brolicious:”
18
Photo courtesy of Bureau of Land Management.
“Sucks bros. Youre (sic) out in the desert just
chilling, drinking natty light and icing your bros,
when all of a sudden a huge bitchin offroad truck
decides to appear out of nowhere and be a total
buzzkill by flattening you out.”
Now, you may or may not know what “natty
lights” are (Natural Light beer), but I had to
look up “icing your bros,” which is apparently a
drinking game with Smirnoff Ice, described this
way:
“You have to drop to one knee, and then
chug the Ice in front of everyone. This is meant to
embarrass you because Smirnoff Ice is, like GAY.
And drinking it makes you gay in public. You will
be shunned and excommunicated by your bros if
you don’t, unless you perform a proper Ice Block,
in which you are allowed to retrieve your bro
shield.”
Like Nosala said, the California 200 desert
race was a “family affair.”
Really? And next time I’ll take my partner
and her 6 year-old daughter to witness what a
real ORV family affair is all about.
But wait, maybe this is the true message
that those of us who disagree with ORV desert/
forest/stream abusers want communicated: that
ORV “family affairs” can equal drunken desert
parties. For this is what it is really all about,
they say, “blowing off a little steam, having some
fun around the campfire.” But for some reason I
don’t picture s’mores being eaten or hear “Kum
Ba Yah” being sung. Maybe Nosala really did get
the right message across.
Drink. Ride. Kill. Oh yeah, and bring the
kids.
— Thomas R. Petersen is Development Director
for Wildlands CPR.
The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010
 DePaving the Way
Climate Change, Watershed Restoration
and Forest Planning
By Bethanie Walder
T
he Forest Service has spent
nearly a decade trying to come
up with a new rule for develop-
ing land management plans for the
national forests. The process has been
messy and fraught with litigation. But
after the courts struck down the agen-
cy’s most recent attempt, the Obama
Administration began a new approach
that seems quite robust and might just
result in a viable planning rule. This
new rule presents an opportunity to set
the foundation of forest planning upon
the bedrock of watershed health. Doing
so would not only set the stage for a
concerted effort to restore the damage
of an ailing, oversized road network
and otherwise degraded forest/aquatic
habitats, but also help to protect
watersheds from the effects of climate
change. Whether the new rule does
this, however, or is simply a re-write of
an old paradigm, is still anyone’s guess.
Throughout the process, the agen-
cy has repeatedly referred to climate
change and restoration as key com-
ponents of the new rule, but will they
be integrated at a fundamental level?
Since Dept of Agriculture Secretary Tom
Vilsack’s stated vision for the national
forests is protecting and restoring clean
water, one would think so. But the
restoration discussion so far continues
the agency’s focus on silviculture. The
language is framed in terms of land-
scape management, which clearly can
and does include watersheds, but the
emphasis seems to remain on vegeta-
tion treatment. This is troubling.
On the other hand, the Forest
Service’s new Climate Change Roadmap
does give direct attention to water-
sheds, including a specific section on
forests and watershed stewardship. It
also refers directly back to Secretary
Vilsack’s vision:
19
“Through an all-lands approach,
America will sustain and restore
flourishing forest and grassland
ecosystems capable of delivering
clean and abundant water, carbon
sequestration and storage, sources
of renewable energy, habitat for
fish and wildlife, opportunities
for outdoor recreation, and all the
other benefits that Americans want
and need.”  
At the fourth national roundtable,
issues related to watershed protection
and restoration came up repeatedly in
both the large group sessions and the
break-out groups. While participants,
including Wildlands CPR staff, voiced
these concerns in session after ses-
sion, Earthjustice and Pacific Rivers
Council also submitted a white paper
Falls of the North Fork Blackfoot River,
about opportunities to protect water
Montana. Photo by Dan Funsch.
and watershed resources through the
planning process (http://www.earthjus-
tice.org/sites/default/files/files/NFMA-
H2Osheds-Rule-Framework-0729.pdf). Rupe goes on to talk about a
myriad of opportunities to address wa-
This chorus of voices was noticed tershed issues, and in the end actually
by Forest Service planner John Rupe, identifies watershed restoration as the
who subsequently wrote on the “New potential cornerstone for the new rule!
Century of Forest Planning” blog:
“In a search for a streamlined, easy-
“The management of water resourc- to-implement planning rule, the
es in National Forests and Grass- specifics of watershed management
lands continues to be an important may be left out of the proposed text. 
topic in the development of the new However, there is strong support for
planning rule, and was discussed water planning as a central feature
at last week’s National Roundtable.  of the rule.  … Watershed restoration
While the meeting presentations has a much longer history in the
were intended to focus on the more agency and the scientific commu-
general topics of forest restoration nity, and is one of the foundations
and resilience, some participants for why the Forest Service came
at the meeting wanted to speak into existence.  Watershed mainte-
specifically about water.” (http:// nance and restoration could be the
ncfp.wordpress.com/2010/08/06/ cornerstone of the philosophical
addressing-watershed-health-in- underpinning of the rule.”
the-forest-service-planning-rule/)
The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010

S o it appears that our voices are being
heard by some of the folks who are
working on forest planning. Perhaps the
most significant new report bridging the
gap between watersheds and climate
comes from the Pacific Northwest Re-
search Station, “Water, Climate Change
and Forests: Watershed Stewardship
for a Changing Climate” (PNW-GTR-812,
June 2010).
Martin Lake, Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness.
Photo by Dan Funsch.
This report includes disturbing but
useful information about the connec-
tion between water and climate change,
and the importance of protecting and
restoring watershed health specifi-
cally to protect aquatic resources. For
example, the report notes that increas-
ingly severe storms and precipitation
events will lead to more road damage
and associated sedimentation problems.
I was impressed to see the following
comment:
20
— DePaving the Way, cont’d —
“Although fuels treatments may
reduce the watershed effects of fire
in some circumstances (Ritchie et al.
2007), they can also cause adverse
effects on aquatic ecosystems,
particularly when new roads are
built or old, unmaintained roads
are kept open to support these
activities. Thus forest managers
will be increasingly faced with the
challenging question of which is
worse for aquatic habitats, wildfire
or the active measures intended to
suppress it (Bisson et al. 2003).”
The report discusses roads, road
impacts, and increasing road impacts
as the climate changes. It specifi-
cally addresses some of the projected
impacts of climate change to ecosystem
services, especially “watershed servic-
es.” These impacts include decreased
water quality and increased water treat-
ment costs, as well as decreased soil
productivity and altered recreational
and cultural experiences. It’s a fairly
comprehensive look at some of the
cascading impacts of climate change on
watershed health and quality. And the
authors are not afraid to acknowledge
past management impacts (p. 26):
“The effects of climate change will
not play out on pristine landforms.
They will interact with existing
conditions and generally increase
the severity and extent of existing
problems such as species extirpa-
tion, water pollution, and water
scarcity. As described in the first
section, many watersheds have
already been altered by large-scale
water diversions, impaired water
quality, and degraded habitat con-
ditions. On national forests, past
grazing, timber harvesting, mining,
and road development have left a
legacy of altered watershed condi-
tions that persist over wide areas.”
The report repeatedly discusses the
importance of road decommissioning
and improved maintenance – especially
in the recommendations sections. It
also includes a one-page highlighted
section on decommissioning and/or
improving roads. That section includes
the following summary:
The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010
“Strategically applied road de-
commissioning or road improve-
ments can help restore natural
flow patterns, increase flood
plain and habitat connectivity,
decrease peak flows, and reduce
erosion and temperature impacts.
Such changes can help amelio-
rate climate change impacts and
contribute to improved watershed
resilience.”
It’s clear that an increasing number
of people within the Forest Service are
starting to pay attention to the pro-
found impacts roads have on aquatic
systems and hydrology, in addition to
their wildlife impacts. Complementing
this concern for watershed health are
citizens and lawmakers of all politi-
cal persuasions who have realized the
urgency of addressing climate change.
I’d like to think that the agency could
combine its growing interest in a water-
shed perspective with its initiatives for
rightsizing the road system and fighting
climate change into an effective, afford-
able management scenario embodied in
a new forest planning rule. One thing’s
for sure: we’ll be watching.
Citations
Furniss, MJ; Staab, BP; Hazelhurst,
S; Clifton, CF; Roby, KB; Ilhadrt,
BL.; Larry, EB; Todd, AH; Reid,
LM; Hines, SJ; B, KA; Luce,
CH; Edwards, PJ. 2010. Water,
climate change, and forests:
watershed stewardship for a
changing climate. Gen. Tech.
Rep. PNW-GTR-812. Portland, OR:
U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Pacific Northwest
Research Station. 75 p.
USDA Forest Service. July 2010.
National Roadmap for Responding
to Climate Change. Washington,
DC. http://www.fs.fed.us/
climatechange/pdf/roadmap.pdf
W Annual Gifts Campaign
e know that the summer heat has
been relatively unbearable in some
parts of the country, especially in
the eastern U.S., but it’s been positively glorious
here in Missoula. A few years ago, the average
daily temperature in the month of July was 97
degrees, but this year, we haven’t even hit 97
once (yet). Very few fires, very little smoke, it’s
like a little slice of heaven. So we’ve been enjoy-
ing it, but that hasn’t stopped us from having an
extremely productive summer as well.
Welcome
We added two more people to our field
staff for the last month or so of the field season.
Graham Byrd had to leave early, so Mo Essen will
be stepping in to fill his rather large shoes on
our Lolo Inventory project. In addition, we hired
Adam West to assist with our Legacy Roads and
Trails monitoring project. Adam will be in the
field this September collecting pre-road removal
data about vegetation conditions. We’ll be fol-
lowing up next year to see what types of vegeta-
tion are returning to these areas after the roads
are decommissioned.
Yellowstone River. Photo by Dan Funsch.
21
Success Is Yours: Wildlands CPR is kicking off our 9th Annual Gift Cam-
paign on October 25th to celebrate the success You have given us. Your
annual support gives Wildlands CPR the ability to advocate for increased
Legacy Roads funding, put the brakes on renegade ORV abuse, and restore
our nation’s watersheds.  A six-week affair, our goal is $40,000, and many of
you will be receiving a letter and phone call this fall to consider getting us
to that goal. Every $100, $50 and $25 counts—it’s surprising how fast these
amounts (with some contributors able to give more) add up!
Thank You for the success you are giving us.
Thanks
A huge thank you to the B-Bar Ranch for hosting our annual board
and staff retreat in June. We had an extremely productive long weekend
and finished the meeting with excellent plans for new projects as well as
continuing efforts. We’d also like to thank the Patagonia Foundation for
two beautiful jackets for the successful Montana Shares raffle. And finally,
thanks to all of you who have made individual contributions to Wildlands
CPR this summer, and to those of you who will make donations this fall,
including through the annual gifts campaign.
Festival of the Book
Wildlands CPR, Humanities Montana, and the Missoula Art Museum
are teaming up around the 2010 Montana Festival of the Book at the end
of October to highlight the Limited Edition Set of Wildlands CPR’s conser-
vation anthology, A Road Runs Through It: Reviving Wild Places. The
anthology features some of our top writers including Annie Proulx, Peter
Matthiessen, Barry Lopez, William Kittredge, Phil Condon, and more.
The Limited Edition Set—which includes the leather-bound book
signed by all 26 living contributors and 6 original wood engravings—is
currently featured at the Missoula Art Museum in a special exhibit in their
lobby gallery (the Set is now part of their permanent collection).
There will be a closing event for the Limited Edition exhibit at the Mis-
soula Art Museum at 1 pm on Saturday October 30th, coinciding with the
Festival of the Book. Claire Emery, the wood engraving artist, will speak
as will Bethanie Walder, Wildlands CPR’s Executive Director. There will be
refreshments, and time to see the exhibit.
We will also have two readings from the book, a small “Selected Shorts
from A Road Runs Through It,” and, like NPR’s show, have known Missou-
lians read short selections from the book. Former MT Congressman Pat
Williams will be one of the readers, and Cherie Newman, of MT NPR’s “The
Write Question,” will be the other.
If you’re in the Missoula area, please join us for this special event!
The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010
 Support Wildlands CPR Today!
We’ve made supporting Wildlands CPR easier — and more effective — than ever before.
Please consider making a monthly pledge!

Consider the advantages of our Monthly Giving Program

• Reducing Overhead
Monthly giving puts your contribution
directly into action and reduces our
administrative costs. The savings go to
restoring wildlands and building a more
effective network.
• Making Your Gift Easier
Say goodbye to renewal letters! Your
credit card or bank statement will con-
tain a record of each gift; we will also
send a year-end tax receipt for your
records.
• Our Promise To You
You maintain complete control over
your donation. To change or cancel
your gift at any time, just write or give
us a call.

Name
Phone
Street
Email
City, State,
Zip

Type of Membership: Individual/Family Organization Business

Organization/Business Name (if applicable)

Payment Option #1: Payment Option #2:

Electronic Funds Transfer Credit Card Pledge
from Checking Account

$5/Month $10/Month $20/Month other $10/Month (minimum) $20/Month other

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

from my checking account once per month. Charge my: ___ Visa ___ MasterCard ___ American Express

Credit Card Number: _______________________________

Signature
CSC Number: ________________ *(see below)
Please include a voided check. All information will be kept confiden-
tial. Transfers will be processed on the first Friday of each month, or Expiration date: _____________________________
the following business day should that Friday be a bank holiday.

Signature: ________________________________________
NOTE: If you would prefer to make an annual donation, * The Card Security Code (CSC) is usually a 3 - or 4 - digit number, which is not
please visit our website (www.wildlandscpr.org) or send your part of the credit card number. The CSC is typically printed on the back of a credit
check to the address below. card (usually in the signature field).

Please send this form and your payment option to:

Wildlands CPR • P.O. Box 7516 • Missoula, Montana 59807 Thank you for your support!

22 The Road-RIPorter, Autumn Equinox 2010

 Absaroka Beartooth Wilderness. Photo by Dan Funsch.

These [primitive areas in national parks]

should be guarded as the nation’s greatest
treasure; and no roads should be permitted to
deface their beauty.

— Rosalie Edge