BRC's "NO SPIN" on the Roadless Initiative
-by
Adena Cook
On May 5, the
Final Rule on management of our
National Forest System "Roadless Areas" was released.
Subsequent news stories totally misrepresented the intent of
the Rule or what it could accomplish. The stories
postulated that the Rule would stimulate road-building and
timber harvest in these relatively undeveloped areas. In
describing these areas, they chose to ignore that
our Roadless Areas are where a significant amount of
recreation occurs in our National Forests,
the
importance of that recreation, and how it is crucial that
these areas be actively managed to provide for forest
health, access and diverse recreation opportunities.
The Rule establishes guidelines and an ambitious time
frame under which the governor of each state with
Roadless Areas can submit a petition to the Forest Service
proposing to change how each of these areas is now managed. The stakes for the recreation community are high. For
example in Idaho, 45% of national forest lands are in
inventoried roadless areas, and these areas provide
significant opportunities for motorized recreation. The OHV
community isn't the only group with a dog in this fight.
Indeed, the majority of trail
based recreation enjoyed by the American public is in "roadless"
areas.
In the next 18 months, a governor must decide whether or
not to submit a petition for change. For those choosing to
submit a petition, they must conduct some rational process
leading to final submittal to the Secretary of Agriculture
on the ambitious time frame required. Any such decisions
are likely to be highly controversial, and subject to the
disinformation that has characterized the public discussion
so far. Both could be costly, both in dollars and political
capital that a governor could spend to get the job done.
The rule leaves to each affected State's
discretion the process by which a petition is crafted.
It does specify that a petition must contain:
1. Location and description of the lands and how they are
managed now.
2. Purpose and need for change.
3. Relation of the area's current management to local and
state land conservation policies now in place.
4. How fish and wildlife would be affected.
5. A description of how the public was involved in
developing the petition.
6. A commitment that the state will participate in
subsequent rulemaking as a cooperating agency.
After the petition is submitted, the Secretary has 180
days to accept or decline the petition. The rule provides
for the creation of a national advisory committee to assist
in evaluating the petitions. The committee will also
provide advice and recommendations to the Secretary on any
state specific rulemaking.
The committee will consist of 12 members appointed by the
Secretary of Agriculture, "..composed of a balanced group of
representatives of diverse national organizations who can
provide insights into the major contemporary issues
associated with the conservation and management of
inventoried roadless areas...Collectively, the members
should represent a diversity of organizations and
perspectives."
After a petition is accepted, the Forest Service will
begin rulemaking to address the petition. This rulemaking
process will consider the environmental effects of the
proposed rule in compliance with NEPA. Put in the context
of other Forest Service planning efforts, the petition may
be analogous to a proposed action and the subsequent process
will presumably have a full range of alternatives with
national public involvement at the appropriate levels. The
subsequent decision by the Secretary will reflect this
decisionmaking process, and could be different from the
petition. However, despite many inquiries from states and
affected interest groups, the Forest Service and Department
of Agriculture have been conspicuously vague in describing
the process that will be used in evaluating and finalizing
any petitions submitted under the Rule.
This is a powerful opportunity for the recreation
community to join together and tell our story:
The
importance of recreation in our Roadless Areas, access to
our national forests, and active management of those lands.
The story thus far has spun way off this track. The
recreation community has a significant challenge ahead.
Following are some thoughts on how recreation groups at
the state level could proceed:
* Networking with all the recreation groups that
use these roadless areas will be more important than ever.
* Become informed on all the Roadless Areas in the state,
their recreation resources, and assemble a package of the
highlights in each. A good place to start is the Forest
Service's Roadless web site:
http://www.fs.fed.us
* Establish a close relationship with officials engaged in
the petition decisionmaking and process.
* Submit applications to any state committees or task forces
that are established. Now is the time for our best people
to become involved.
* Work with recreation leadership to encourage appropriate
applicants for positions on the national committee. The
deadline for applications is 45 days from May 5.
Finally, organized recreation advocates have long been,
and will continue to be, fully engaged in this process and
the fight for our ongoing access to Roadless Areas.
Be aware of their requests for financial or other
assistance, and provide them this assistance according to
your means and qualifications.
This will be a lot of work for everyone in the recreation
community who has Roadless Areas in their state. It is a
tremendous opportunity to tell our story, and we cannot
afford to leave that story untold.
Adena Cook is Public Lands Advisor for the
BlueRibbon Coalition, a national recreation group that
champions responsible use of public and private lands,
and encourages individual environmental stewardship. It
represents over 10,000 individual members and 1,100
organization and business members, for a combined total
of over 600,000 recreationists nationwide.
1-800-258-3742.
http://www.sharetrails.org
Still confused or want more
info
Sequoia National Forest Roadless Report
facts that have rarely seen the light of
day & why designating more Wilderness is not appropriate
Colorado
Poll Supports Motorized Access
Roadless Rule is Illegal
Forest Service
Background Paper on Roadless
Sequoia Roadless & Wilderness Maps
Roadless maps of each state & entire US
Roadless Rule A Win For Westerners
Roadless Review is needed letter
