Spring Equinox 2004.

Volume 9 # 1 The Quarterly Newsletter of Wildlands CPR

Now or Never: Getting a Grip on

Off-Road Vehicles — See article on page 3 —
By Jason Kiely

Inside…
Getting a Grip on ORVs, by Jason Kiely.
Pages 3-5
Odes to Roads: For our Brothers: Blue Jay,
Gold Finch, Flicker, Squirrel, by Simon
Ortiz. Pages 6-7
Legal Notes, ORVs in Hells Canyon, by
Brett Brownscombe Pages 8-9
Depaving the Way, by Bethanie Walder.
Pages 10-11
Wildlands CPR’s 2003 Annual Report.
Pages 12-13
Policy Primer: Roads Policy Review, by
Marnie Criley. Pages 14-15
Activist Spotlight: Champions of the
Clearwater, by Kiffin Hope.
Pages 16-17
Biblio Notes: The Price of Power, by
Katherine Hyzy. Pages 18-20
Get with the Program: Restoration,
Transportation & Science Program
Updates. Pages 20-21 The impacts of off road vehicles on water quality, soils, wildlife and quiet recreation are well-
known, however, controlling these impacts on public lands presents a significant political challenge.
Around the Office, Membership info. Background photo by Keith Hammer; inset photo credits (clockwise from bottom left): Wildlands CPR
Pages 22-23 file photo; Richard Compton; U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service; Howard Wilshire.

Check out our website at:

www.wildlandscpr.org
 Wildlands
CPR

P.O. Box 7516

By Bethanie Walder Missoula, MT 59807
(406) 543-9551
WildlandsCPR@wildlandscpr.org

At
www.wildlandscpr.org
a forest activists’ meeting in Washington DC in January, one participant
claimed that the best way to protect national forests right now was to Wildlands CPR works to protect and restore
give up our current conservation work and instead focus on the upcom- wildland ecosystems by preventing and
ing elections. While it’s hard sometimes to see the forest for the trees, the activist removing roads and limiting motorized
may have been right. Nothing effects public lands policy more than the political recreation. We are a national clearinghouse
winds that blow inside the beltway in Washington DC. and network, providing citizens with tools
and strategies to fight road construction,
Whether your support one party or another, participating in electoral politics deter motorized recreation, and promote road
is essential to ensuring your place in the democratic process. This is true at every removal and revegetation.
level, from town councils to the President of the United States.
Director
The City Council in Missoula, Montana, for example, passed a “road diet” last Bethanie Walder
fall to reduce one of the main downtown roads from four to three lanes. The middle
lane would be used for left hand turns, leaving one lane each for east and westbound Development Director
traffic. This would leave more room for on-street parking, sidewalks, bike lanes, etc. Tom Petersen
According to many studies, traffic would move at the same speed or faster, since the
existing left lanes are constantly bottled up by cars waiting to turn. Restoration Program
Coordinator
But in November, a new city council was elected and one of the first things they Marnie Criley
did (upon taking office in January) was overturn the road diet, which hadn’t yet been
implemented. This is similar to what happens on our public lands. President Clin- Science Coordinator
ton held a forestry roundtable and developed the Northwest Forest Plan; President Adam Switalski
Bush responded with the Healthy Forests Initiative. The Forest Service is often stuck
on a seesaw of political mandates, making consistent management impossible and Transportation Policy
constantly changing the expectations of resource-dependent communities. It also Organizer
means that our battles are constantly fought, won, lost, fought again, won again and Jason Kiely
lost again. NTWC Grassroots
Coordinator
Until we make conservation a bipartisan issue again, management and policies
Lisa Philipps
will continue to swing from one side of the pendulum to the other. The environment
has the potential to play a bigger role in the upcoming elections than in many previ- Program Assistant
ous elections. Let’s make sure it’s an issue that no person running for political office Kiffin Hope
can ignore.
Newsletter
Dan Funsch & Jim Coefield

Interns & Volunteers

Carla Abrams, Lauri Duensing, Hank Green,
Maureen Hartmann, Sara Krier, Adam Lieberg,
Beth Peluso, Mark Ruby

Board of Directors
Karen Wood DiBari, Greg Fishbein, Bill Geer,
Dave Havlick, Sonya Newenhouse, Mary O’Brien,
Matt Skroch, Ted Zukoski

Advisory Committee
Jasper Carlton, Dave Foreman,
Keith Hammer, Timothy Hermach,
Marion Hourdequin, Kraig Klungness, Lorin Lind-
ner, Andy Mahler, Robert McConnell, Stephanie
Mills, Reed Noss, Michael Soulé, Steve Trombulak,
Louisa Willcox, Bill Willers, Howie Wolke
Happy springtime! Photo © Mark Alan Wilson.
© 2004 Wildlands CPR

2 The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004

 Now or Never: Getting a Grip on
Off-Road Vehicles

Photo by Howard Wilshire.

By Jason Kiely

“At one time,

we didn’t
manage
the use of
off-highway vehicles . . . . But the number of people who own
OHVs has just exploded in recent years. In 2000, it reached
almost 36 million. Even a tiny percentage of impact from all
those millions of users is still a lot of impact. Each year, we
get hundreds of miles of what we euphemistically refer to as
‘unplanned roads and trails.’” That’s how Forest Service Chief
Dale Bosworth described unmanaged motorized recreation
when he deemed the issue one of the four great threats facing
national forests during a speech on Earth Day in 2003.
In an effort to protect forests from the damage caused
by off-road vehicles, late in 2003 Chief Bosworth chartered
an inter-disciplinary team of Forest Service managers to
strengthen regulations that govern motorized recreation by
overland vehicles. The team is lead by Jack Troyer, Regional
Forester for the Intermountain Region (Region 4), based in
Ogden, Utah.
The Forest Service hopes to revise regulations governing
the use of dirt bikes, ATVs, SUVs, and other overland, off-road
vehicles on national forests and grasslands by late 2004. In
meetings organized by the Natural Trails and Waters Coalition
and Wildlands CPR, Forest Service officials have said they
will propose new rules that prohibit cross-country motorized
travel except under limited circumstances and that limit off-
road vehicles to designated roads and routes. Chief Bosworth
recently said, “I don’t have that sense of urgency, myself,
regarding snowmobiles.” The Forest Service says they will
deal with over-snow motorized recreation separately, which
makes little sense in the big picture.
“Dirt bikes, ATVs and other off-road vehicles have been
a serious problem for a long time in virtually every national Top-level federal land managers (finally) seem to be coming to terms
with the problems caused by unrestricted ORV use. Wildlands CPR file
forest,” said former Forest Service Deputy Chief Jim Furnish.
photos.
“Rarely have agency leaders had the guts to tackle the prob-
lems head on, even though they have the tools. While the
regulations can and should be strengthened, strong leader-
ship is even more important.”
— continued on next page —

The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004 3

Now or Never: Getting a Grip on
Off-Road Vehicles
— continued from page 3 —
Unfortunately, Forest Service leadership on this issue has been
lacking for decades with serious consequences for the environment
and the majority of forest users. In his Earth Day speech, Chief Bos-
worth recognized that the leadership vacuum has been filled by irre-
sponsible motorists: “The Lewis and Clark National Forest in Montana
has more than a thousand unplanned roads and trails reaching for
almost 650 miles. That’s pretty typical for a lot of national forests, and
it’s only going to get worse.”
The first off-road vehicle boom was in the 1970s, when three- and
four-wheelers became increasingly popular in deserts and forests. Hun-
dreds of scientific studies were conducted on their ecological effects,
and Presidents Nixon and Carter signed executive orders regulating
their use on public lands. As land management agencies implemented
new travel plans in response to the executive orders, they largely de-
pended on the terrain itself to limit where the vehicles could drive.
The 1980s were a bust for the industry: motorized recreation
waned as oil prices rose, the economy faltered, and the consumer
products safety commission banned the sale of three-wheeled ATVs.
But the boom reignited in the 1990s with the advent of faster, stronger,
more powerful four-wheelers that can go nearly anywhere. Strangely,
the Forest Service widened rather than narrowed the regulatory gap:
the agency rescinded a little known regulation called the “40-inch rule.”
This rule stated that no vehicles wider than 40 inches could be used on
national forest trails. (At that time forty inches was the standard width
of the handlebars of a dirt bike.) With the rescission of that rule, we’ve
seen a wholesale change in the attitude and aptitude of the agency to
manage off-road vehicles. We’ve also seen the continued conversion of
foot and horse trails to motorized use.
Unchecked by reasonable rules and regulations, off-road vehicle
use on national forests skyrocketed throughout the 1990s. Nonethe-
less, off-road vehicle use still makes up only about 10% of overall
recreational use on the national forests.
Rising oil prices slowed the growth of the ORV industry in the 80s, but the boom resumed with
the advent of newer, more powerful machines like the one touted in this advertisement (at left
— “Lack of oxygen only intensifies the rush”). Conoco photo © Mark Alan Wilson .
4 The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004
In 1999, Wildlands CPR spearheaded the devel-
opment of a rulemaking petition asking the Forest
Service to overhaul their off-road vehicle regula-
tions. The petition documented the ecological
impacts of off-road vehicles and the Forest Service’s
congressional mandate to protect the land, water,
air, plant-life, and wildlife in national forests from
off-road vehicle abuse. By the time we filed the peti-
tion that December, more than 100 organizations
had signed on.
As documented in the petition, the failure to ef-
fectively manage off-road vehicle use is causing seri-
ous damage throughout national forests. In his 2003
Earth Day speech, Chief Bosworth confirmed the en-
vironmental destruction and antagonism caused by
off-road vehicle use: “We’re seeing more and more
erosion, water degradation, and habitat destruction.
We’re seeing more and more conflicts between us-
ers. 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.”
“Renegade routes” — unauthorized routes cut
by irresponsible motorized riders — infect most
forests like cancer. Travel on renegade routes is
more destructive than other motorized recreation
because these routes usually cut through areas
where roads just don’t belong, such as riparian
areas, steep slopes, and fragile ecosystems. As a
result, public lands fractured by renegade routes are
marked by eroded soils, polluted rivers, lakes and
streams, and decimated wildlife habitat.
Destructive, unmanaged motorized recreation
has escalated to the point of assaulting the rights
of others, resulting in new non-traditional conser-
vation alliances. The roar of motors and seizure of
traditional foot and horse trails displaces hikers,
cross-country skiers and hunters; ranchers with for-
est grazing allotments and homeowners
adjacent to forests suffer trespass and
vandalism by brazen motorists. As more
riders take to the forests, opportunities
for others to enjoy unspoiled habitat
and quiet of nature disappear.
“Traditional hunters want a qual-
ity experience, but they are faced
with ever-increasing negative impacts
brought about by unmanaged ATV use
on our public lands,” said Stan Rauch, a
lifelong hunter from Montana. “As ATV
use grows unchecked, many hunters are
being displaced from their most pristine
and productive hunting areas on their
national forests and critical wildlife
habitat is being sliced into smaller and
smaller pieces.”

ORV tracks cross
through a sensitive
area in Big Cypress
National Preserve.
Photo © Mark Alan
Wilson.
Wildlands CPR has been working closely with the Natural Trails
and Waters Coalition to articulate and promote policies for effective
reform. Essential reform would require forest-level land managers to
designate a system of motorized routes based on science and balanced
public input within a defined time period. True reform will also protect
hard-fought bans on motorized vehicles in places like the Hoosier and
the White Mountains National Forests. See sidebar.
Vera Smith, Conservation Director of the Colorado Mountain Club,
insists that a sense of urgency is essential to making national policy
translate into effective management: “If the Forest Service does not set
clear deadlines for action, the problem will go from bad to worse, and
countless hikers and other quiet recreationists will continue to lose
access to their national forests.”
While the pending rule-change may fulfill the obligations com-
pelled by the 1999 petition, the Forest Service insists that another
impetus for their work is the increasing challenge that their land
managers face as they try to deal with off-road vehicle recreation. This
does not appear to be just another agency rule change promoted and
imposed from the top down. Instead, the process is more organic,
coming from within the agency ranks that recognize the need to con-
trol off-road vehicle abuse of the land.
For this reason alone, Wildlands CPR and many other conserva-
tionists feel there is an opportunity for real, positive, lasting change
to come from this process. This isn’t an era of positive change on
environmental issues, however, and anyone working to protect public
lands must maneuver the potential political and regulatory pitfalls.
Opportunities for real change, public and policymaker education, and
citizen involvement are too promising not to take the inherent risks. If
we want to get a handle on motorized recreation, it’s now or never.
— Jason Kiely is Transportation Policy Organizer for Wildlands CPR.
The time is now for citizens to speak out for quiet recreation.
Wildlands CPR file photo.
The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004
Off-Road Vehicle
Recommendations
Co-chaired by Wildlands CPR, The Natural
Trails and Waters Coalition works to protect
and restore all public lands and waters from
the damage caused by dirt bikes, jet skis
and all other off-road vehicles. The Coalition
has developed the following policy recom-
mendations that would enable Forest Service
supervisors and district rangers to protect
land, water, wildlife, and air from motorized
recreation:
• Protecting traditional foot/horse trails from motorized use:
motorized vehicles may only travel on roads and off-road vehicle
routes (ORV routes) designated in a public planning process and
specifically engineered and constructed for motorized travel.
• Designating roads and routes for off-road vehicle travel through a
site-specific and public process under the National Environmental
Policy Act. Renegade roads/routes created by users without
authorization will be closed until full analysis is completed to
determine whether they can be designated without endangering
forest health, environmental values, public safety, and/or the
experience of other users. Renegade roads/routes that will be
permanently closed must be restored.
• Permitting off-road vehicle use only in a manner that protects
natural resources, environmental values (e.g. quiet, landscape
character), public safety and the experience of other forest users.
The agency has a positive obligation to analyze new recreational
technologies/activities before they are allowed to determine
whether or not they are compatible with this goal and, if they are,
at what levels and where. The agency does not have an obligation
to allow all forms of recreation to occur on Forest Service lands.
• Prohibiting the use of off-road vehicles in wilderness quality lands
such as roadless/ unroaded areas and wilderness study areas.
• Permitting off-road vehicle use only to the extent that effective
monitoring and enforcement are annually funded, implemented
and used to determine appropriate levels of continued off-road
vehicle use.
• Establishing a two-year timeline for implementing this plan,
after which any forest that has not completed designations and
closed renegade roads/routes will allow motorized recreational
use only on roads/ORV routes that have been analyzed and then
designated for such use.
• Creating a consistent set of minimum off-road vehicle regulations,
and enforcement and monitoring standards that all National
Forests must meet, while allowing individual forests to develop or
maintain more protective measures.
• Developing specific regulations that address snowmobiles and
other motorized over-snow vehicles.
5
For Our Brothers:
Blue Jay, Gold Finch, Flicker, Squirrel
By Simon Ortiz, Acoma Pueblo

Who perished lately in this most unnecessary war, saw them

lying off the side of a state road in southwest Colorado

They all loved life.

And suddenly,
it just stopped for them. Abruptly,
the sudden sound of a speeding
machine,
and that was it.

Blue Jay. Lying there,

his dry eyelids are tiny scabs.
Wartstones, looking ugly.
His legs are just old sticks,
used to push ashes away.

O goddammit, I thought, Photo by Marcel Huijser.

just lying there.
Thought of the way he looks,
swooping in a mighty big hurry,
gliding off a fence pole
into a field of tall dry grass,
the summer sunlight catching out of that life, perhaps
a blade of wing, flashing from the nearest hills
the bluegreen blackness, from that young cottonwood tree.
the sun actually black, turning I hope you blessed me.
into the purest flash of light. Until I looked very closely,
And so ugly now, dead. I didn’t see the fading blood stain
And nobody knows it except on a wing tip, and I sorrowed for you.
for those black ants crawling I have always been one to admire
into and out of decaying entrails. the yellow, the color of corn pollen,
Nobody but those ants, on your tiny feathers as I’ve seen
and I ask them to do a good job, you glittering from branch to branch,
return Blue Jay completely whirring and rushing from one tree
back into the earth, to another. I have seen the yellow
back into the life. of your tiny body and the way
the shades of the cottonwood
Gold Finch, I took four tiny feathers and my grandfather’s peach trees
from your broken body. could hide you so well
I hope you were looking at me then but in a moment your voice

6 The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004

 would always speak
and you could be found.
Gold Finch. A pollen bird
with tips of black, flits
his head around and sings
reasonably pretty and revealing.
There you were, forgotten too,
the hard knots of gravel around
and under you, lying besides
the poorly made, cracked asphalt
road upon which sped that hunk
of steel, plastic and chrome.
Photo by Marcel Huijser.
Well, I’m sorry for the mess.
I’ll try to do what I can
to prevent this sort of thing
because, Gold Finch, goddammit,
the same thing is happening to us. its body swollen with several days
of death in the hot sun,
Flicker, my proud brother. its tail a distorted limp twist.
Your ochre wings were meant I touch it gently and then try to lift it, to toss it
for the prayer sticks. into some high grass,
Askew. but its fur comes loose.
Head crushed. It is glued heavily
Misshapen. to the ground with its rot
Mere chips of rotting wood and I put my foot
for your dead eyes. against it and push it
Crushed. into the grass, being careful
Askew. that it remains upright
You always were one to fly and is facing the rainwater
too close to flat, open ground. that will wash it downstream.
Crushed. I smell the waste
of its disintegration
Squirrel, a gray thing and wipe its fur on my fingers
with bits of brown off with a stone
where tiny ears join its head. with a prayer for it
Eats seeds, nuts, tender roots, and murmur a curse.
tiny savory items.
Runs quickly, flashing gray I don’t have to ask who killed you.
and sudden. I know and I am angry and sorry
Throws its head with jerky and wonder what I shall do.
nervous motion.
Flicks hardwood shrieks of sound. This, for now, is as much as I can do,
Lying by the side of Highway 17, knowing your names, telling about you.
staring with one dim eye across Squirrel. Flicker. Gold Finch. Blue Jay.
the road at underbrush oak, Our brothers.

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

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

The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004 7

Inroads into Off-Road Vehicle Management:
A Hells Canyon Case Study
By Brett Brownscombe

T
he cultural explosion and growing impacts of motorized
recreation, namely all terrain vehicles (ATVs), has a way
of attracting strange bedfellows.

Last year I received a phone call from a rancher wondering

what could be done about ATV riders who persistently cut his
livestock fences, presenting him with free-roaming stock and
associated trespass and liability issues. Traditional hunters
often condemn and increasingly report motorized users who
hunt in conflict with fair chase ethics and in violation of posted
non-motorized rules. Horse and other pack animal riders, not
to mention hikers, are yet another segment of the American
public expressing growing frustration over those whose saddle
sits atop a Kawasaki engine.
With much of America’s public land base already in need
of restoration, and the growing loss of habitat to invasive
weeds, fragmentation, development, and other pressures,
our country’s ongoing motorized recreation explosion rightly
causes one to wonder just how much the concept of multiple-
use can and should be stretched to accommodate a land use
that presents such a high level of conflict and impact. In the
majestically wild Hells Canyon country, which carves the
border between northeast Oregon and Idaho, the conflict over
ATVs has come to a head. For a host of reasons, the Hells
Canyon area will continue to drive rather than merely respond
to changes in ATV management. A recent court decision sheds
light.
Case Background
The Kirkwood area of Hells Canyon sits within the Hells
Canyon National Recreation Area (HCNRA) and is home to an
array of historic and natural treasures. Archeological rem-
nants of the Nez Perce Tribe’s ancestors persist above and
below the ground. The former Kirkwood Ranch house and
associated outbuildings along the Snake River have been pre-
served to mark the area’s pioneer-era sheep ranching legacy.
And despite invasive weeds also tied to this ranching legacy,
the Kirkwood area is home to some of the best remaining, yet
highly threatened native grassland habitat in the Columbia ba-
sin. Idaho fescue and Blue-bunch wheatgrass wave to the wind
amidst a variety of rare forbs, several of which exist only in the
Hells Canyon area or are federally listed as endangered.
Before the Kirkwood Ranch entered federal ownership and
Forest Service management in the 1970’s, its last owner bladed
a road from the Snake River to the Hells Canyon rim hovering
six miles above (“the Kirkwood Road”). Constructed in a gulch
bottom on steep slopes and unstable soils prone to washout,
the Road effectively replaced a stable, historic mid-slope pack
User-created tracks off of the Kirkwood “road.” Photo by Brett
Brownscombe.
trail that had provided human access to the area for well over
a half century. The Road’s two wheel tracks are now a main
artery of recreational ATV use.
As ATV use grew in the Kirkwood area, groups like the
Hells Canyon Preservation Council (HCPC) and The Wilder-
ness Society (TWS) grew more and more alarmed. Kirkwood’s
invasive noxious weed populations exploded along with
increasing ATV use. Especially problematic is the persistence
of ATV riders in illegally blazing tracks into the adjacent native
grasslands, trampling rare plants along the way, disturbing
soils, and spreading weed seeds. Efforts to construct signs and
fences preventing this renegade behavior have proven ineffec-
tive, with fences being cut and signs torn down, driven over,
or driven around. The area’s rare and sensitive native habitat
continues to be sacrificed to ATV abuse and an associated
weed invasion.
In 1998, a series of storms washed out significant portions
of the Kirkwood Road, making ATV access extremely difficult.
Prior to this event, the Forest Service had not maintained the
road but allowed it to re-vegetate consistent with citizen input.
After the 1998 washout, however, the agency reversed course
and reversed progress. In the name of constructing the now
satirically dubbed “Trojan Toilet” at Kirkwood Ranch, but also
for the stated benefit of assisting motorized use, the Forest
Service authorized the Kirkwood Road’s reconstruction in
2000. The end result was a smooth route that facilitated ATV
travel and the associated replacement of rare native grassland
habitat with invasive noxious weeds.

8 The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004

The Lawsuit
HCPC and TWS subsequently filed
suit in federal court challenging the For-
est Service’s year 2000 road work and
the agency’s overall management of the
Kirkwood area under the Hells Canyon
National Recreation Area Act (HCNRA
Act), the National Forest Management
Act (NFMA), and the National Environ-
mental Policy Act (NEPA). [Hells Canyon
Preservation Council v. U.S. Forest
Service, No. 02-291-HU (D. Or. Nov. 21,
2003).]
The HCNRA Act requires human
uses, including motorized recreation, to
be compatible with resource protection,
including the preservation of rare and
endemic plants. The Act also requires
the Forest Service to preserve and
restore the history of Hells Canyon and
the American West. The NFMA requires
compliance with applicable forest plans,
which in this case requires the Forest
Service to enhance native vegetation
in the Kirkwood area and emphasize
prevention in its approach to invasive
noxious weeds.
On November 21, 2003, the Federal
District Court of Oregon entered a final
decision that the Forest Service’s year
2000 reconstruction of the Kirkwood
Road violated the HCNRA Act, NFMA,
and NEPA. The Court found the road
work facilitated ATV travel and in turn
the spread of invasive weeds, perpetuat-
ing the loss of rare native plant habitat
contrary to the HCNRA Act and the
NFMA. It also determined the agency’s
noxious weed spraying failed to demon-
strate compliance with the Forest Plan’s
prevention-first direction.
In addition, the Court recognized
that while the area’s history did not in-
clude ATV recreation, the year 2000 road
work facilitated ATV recreation. In turn,
they determined that the Forest Service
failed to demonstrate how its road work
met the HCNRA Act’s historic preserva-
tion and restoration requirement.
Lastly, the Court determined the
Forest Service’s reliance on a NEPA
categorical exclusion (C.E.) for the
road work was improper. The agency
had expedited the road’s reconstruc-
tion and minimized public involvement
by invoking a C.E. associated with the
repair and maintenance of recreation
sites (i.e., the toilet work at Kirkwood
Ranch). The Forest Service’s analysis
of the project’s impacts focused only on
the Trojan Toilet’s location at the Ranch
The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004
and completely ignored the six miles of
road and adjacent grasslands actually
affected by the connected road recon-
struction action. The Court found the
C.E. relied upon is not broad enough to
excuse significant road work connected
to recreation site projects from deeper
NEPA analysis.
As a last ditch argument raised
for the first time in the government’s
briefs, the Forest Service attempted to
backslide the road work into a differ-
ent C.E., a category not mentioned in
the agency’s decision memo. To this,
the Court responded that if an agency
wishes to invoke an appropriate C.E., it
must do so contemporaneous with the
action at issue, not after the fact.
In the end, the Court invalidated the
agency’s approach of trying to separate
its Trojan Toilet project from associated
road work as a flawed attempt to ignore
NEPA’s requirement that connected ac-
tions with potentially significant impacts
be disclosed and analyzed. Where sig-
nificant effects may arise from an action, Vandalized “road closed” sign and obvious
the invocation of a C.E. is legally flawed. ATV usage. Photo by Brett Brownscombe.
A decision on HCPC and TWS’s re-
maining claim as to the Forest Service’s
overall management of the Kirkwood
area awaits the Supreme Court’s resolu-
tion of Norton v. Southern Utah Wilder- Update
ness Alliance, relating to the public’s Just before going to press, we
ability to challenge an agency’s failure learned that the Court has decided one
to act. of the two outstanding claims in this
case in our favor. The Federal Magis-
The Implications trate’s findings will now be reviewed by
The Court’s determination that a District Court/Article III judge before
a Forest Service decision facilitating becoming final. Quoting from the opin-
ATV use violates the legal mandates of ion:
enhancing native vegetation and historic
preservation/restoration are Hells Can- “Plaintiffs have shown that the Forest
yon precedents and clearly significant to Service’s refusal to close the Road
this area. As to the decision’s extended to motorized recreation constituted
applicability, one needs to locate legal an abdication of its responsibility to
provisions establishing native plant manage the HCNRA in compliance with
protection and historic preservation/ the statutory mandate to preserve rare
restoration duties, which could exist in and endemic plant species and rare
a statute such as the HCNRA Act or an combinations of outstanding and diverse
applicable Forest Plan. ecosystems, as well as a failure to adhere
The Court’s decision on NEPA to the CMP’s requirement that the Road
grounds has more immediate implica- be closed when necessary to prevent
tions in the broader context. It clarifies resource damage.”
the sideboards on the use of certain
C.E.’s and the Forest Service’s overall
NEPA duties when road or ATV use-re-
— Brett Brownscombe is an environmental
lated projects are at issue. Given the
attorney and the conservation director of Hells
expanded use of C.E.’s on the public Canyon Preservation Council in La Grande,
land horizon, the case offers instructive Oregon. For more information about this
discussion of when the use of this expe- case, contact brett@hellscanyon.org or visit
dited process is legally proper. www.hellscanyon.org
9
Back To Our (Grass) Roots
By Bethanie Walder

When
I moved to Missoula in 1992, I
had little money saved, I was
working for peanuts, and I had
a lot of passion to get involved in local environmental
issues. As you can imagine, I did my share of enve-
lope stuffing for local environmental organizations, but
eventually I decided I wanted to get involved in a more
meaningful way. With only limited income, donating my
time was more feasible than donating $30, so I offered my
time in exchange for membership in a local chapter of a
national environmental group. Their response surprised
me – no cash, no membership. I turned my efforts to a
local organization, and started volunteering at least one
day a week. They set me up with a meaningful project,
and I volunteered for nearly two years, until landing my
job with Wildlands CPR. At the time, almost everyone
who “worked” there was a volunteer.

I’ve been thinking and reading a lot lately about the state of the
environmental movement in the United States. Again and again, my
thoughts return to the relationship between time and money. Many
people herald Earth Day 1970 as the start of the modern environmental
movement, when more than 20 million people nationwide stood up for
protecting the environment. One of the architects of Earth Day, Sena-
tor Gaylord Nelson, wrote “Earth Day worked because of the sponta-
neous response at the grassroots level. We had neither the time nor
resources to organize 20 million demonstrators and the thousands of
schools and local communities that participated. That was the remark-
able thing about Earth Day. It organized itself.”
Prior to this time, the conservation movement consisted of
relatively homogenous habitat conservation organizations, made
up mostly of white, middle class men, funded by a small number of
wealthy donors. Earth Day democratized conservation issues and
brought environmental protection into the mainstream. In the decade
that followed, the bulk of America’s most important conservation laws
were passed, including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Endangered
Species Act and National Forest Management Act. But as the con-
servation movement matured, its energy (and some would argue its
effectiveness) waned. It begs the question: what is the relationship
between the increased professionalism of the conservation movement,
the declining reliance on volunteers, the increased focus on direct mail
fundraising, and the overall efficacy of the movement?
Mark Dowie addresses some of these issues in the opening of his
1995 book, Losing Ground. “It is worth noting that the decline in the
organizations’ potency and effectiveness coincided with their pro-
fessionalization and a concurrent loss of passion within the ranks.”
While professionalism has certainly brought important successes to
the movement, it has been accompanied by a disturbing trend – the
decline of volunteer activism.
Both increased professionalism and decreased
reliance on volunteers can be tied to increasing
budgets. As organizations focus on raising money
to fund staff salaries, they change their relation-
ships with their members, often expecting no
more than a larger donation every year. Increasing
professionalization has also been associated with
changes in strategy – for example, while litigation
has protected untold acres of wildlands, it is also in-
herently disempowering to volunteers – it relies on
lawyers and money. In fact, litigation has resulted
in backlashes against the laws themselves, like the
Endangered Species Act. While litigation remains a
vital, necessary strategy, it may be more effective
when combined with building strong, local, vocal
support for protection.
Unfortunately, the base of grassroots citizen
support, solidified by Earth Day in 1970, has signifi-
cantly disintegrated over the past three decades.
And with that disintegration (combined with a
concerted anti-environmental lobby effort by indus-
try), has come a loss of general public involvement
and support for conservation causes. (Of course,
there are numerous exceptions, especially among
small local organizations that continue to depend
extensively on volunteers, while some regional and
national organizations are beginning to re-embrace
volunteer action.)
Is it possible that the economic troubles now
faced by the conservation movement could lead us
back to our populist roots? Can this reduction in

10 The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004

funding force conservation organizations to rethink
their strategies, refocus on grassroots activism, and
in the process, reinstill in the American public a
sense of democracy, empowerment and entitlement
to a clean, healthy and functioning environment?
Dowie describes the heart of the grassroots move-
ment as “the strong belief in the right of citizens to
participate in environmental decision making.”

A new report from Gideon Rosenblatt (Move-

ment as Network: Connecting People and Organi-
zations in the Environmental Movement, January
2004) affirms Dowie’s contention that re-engaging
local people in a meaningful way will be critical
to the success of the movement. In addition to
recommending a new three-tiered structure for the
environmental movement, Rosenblatt also focuses
specifically on the professionalization of conserva-
tion work, “Much of the movement’s over-invest-
ment in institutional overhead at the local level is a
result of erecting permanent institutions around this
kind [volunteer-driven, looser-knit structures] of
grassroots activity rather than keeping it informal.”
Both Dowie and Rosenblatt focus on the impor-
tance of involving local people and reinvigorating
grassroots support for conservation, while main-
taining an appropriate role for professional conser-
vationists. Rosenblatt goes on to say that certain
organizations should focus on developing solu-
tions, not on building memberships for fundraising
purposes. At the same time he explains that other
organizations should focus exclusively on building
public support and large memberships. Accord-
ing to Rosenblatt, the solution-based organizations
should be funded almost entirely by foundations,
while the people-based organizations will have more
diverse financial and volunteer support. In some
organizations, therefore, we could have different
expectations of members – asking them first for
their time and public support, and second for their
donations. This necessarily implies that conserva-
tion organizations must create more substantive
ways for people to participate and do the hard work
needed to protect the environment. We do need
professionalism, but not to the exclusion of grass-
roots power-building.
The current budget shortfalls in conservation
organizations may provide just the catalyst we need
to get the environmental movement back to its roots
-- to focus on building local, vocal, active grassroots
support for conservation issues. If we can change
the way our members participate in our work, ask-
ing for their time, not just their money, and offering
substantive, meaningful ways to get involved, I think
we will get what we ask for. And with their meaning-
ful support will come the overall political and policy
changes we seek.
With a lot of time and dedication, conserva-
tionists can protect and restore not only their own
backyards, but everyone else’s, too. Consider the
Montana Conservation Corps volunteers sprig willows
and plant trees in a restoration project on the Clearwater
National Forest. Photo by Adam Switalski.
Sky Islands Alliance. They have more than 500 volunteers, who have
logged 30,000 hours of donated time in the last 6 years, monitoring
wildlife, roads and off-road vehicle routes, and removing and restoring
unneeded roads. Their members ensure that their local national forest
is well managed.
While money makes the world go round, good old-fashioned
people power has brought down many a wealthy foe. In addition to
the example above, we can look to Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance,
the Great Burn Study Group and numerous other examples of what
Dowie calls the coming “fourth wave” of the environmental movement:
“Democratic in origin, populist in style, untrammeled by bureaucracy,
and inspired by a host of new ideologies – the fourth wave should crest
sometime early in the twenty-first century.”
Wildlands CPR is rethinking our own strategies, trying to develop
more effective ways of combining litigation and science advocacy with
meaningful public involvement. We’re assessing everything from our
newsletter and website to our main program strategies, and we’d love
your input and involvement in our work. At a recent forest activist
meeting I attended, I was amazed to hear so many people, from so
many different organizations, talking about strategies to reinvigorate
and rebuild the grassroots base of the conservation movement. It
seems the professionals are starting to talk about how to connect with
the volunteers again.
Citations:
Dowie, Mark. 1995. Losing Ground: American Environmentalism at
the Close of the Twentieth Century. Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Nelson, Gaylord. How the First Earth Day Came About. The
Wilderness Society. http://earthday.envirolink.org/history.html
Rosenblatt, Gideon. 2004. Movement as Network: Connecting People
and Organizations in the Environmental Movement. ONE/
Northwest, Seattle, WA. http://www.movementasnetwork.org/
MovementAsNetwork-final-1.0.pdf

The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004 11

2003 Annual Report
In 2003, Wildlands CPR accentuated the positive by promoting
new alliances and exploring some unusual opportunities to
protect and restore wild nature.

Staffing Science Program

Our staff changes a bit nearly every year – and 2003 was no exception. First, Data, data, data… Adam was busy
our long-time office assistant Jen Barry decided to head back to school to pursue with presentations and research all
a graduate degree. In her stead we hired Kiffin Hope, who jumped in with both year, including presentations at the
feet and has done a splendid job at everything we’ve throw his way. Last winter Society for Ecological Restoration
we hired Bridget Lyons as our transportation policy coordinator, but after a short Conference, Society for Conservation
stint she decided it wasn’t the right fit. Our search to replace her led us right back Biology Conference, the International
home, where we hired one of our star interns, Jason Kiely, as our new transporta- Conference on Ecology and Transporta-
tion policy organizer. tion, and the Y2Y Science Symposium.
One of his papers was published in the
journal Frontiers in Ecology just after
Restoration the calendar year turned over into 2004.
Exciting! That’s how we’ve been thinking of our 2003 work on restoration. We updated our bibliographic
Early in the spring, Marnie Criley, our restoration program coordinator, finished database this summer, combining our
two years’ worth of collaborative work by publishing and releasing a set of restora- databases on road effects and off-road
tion principles. Marnie also oversaw the development of a fantastic report about vehicle effects into one comprehensive
the economics of road removal. This report finally puts conservationists in a posi- behemoth. The new combined data-
tion to debate restoration policies and projects on economic, as well as ecological base has nearly 10,000 citations and
terms, and it is the focus of our current outreach work. continues to be an invaluable resource
This fall, Wildlands CPR took part in two on-the-ground road removal projects, for anyone working on road or off-road
working with the Sierra Club and the Montana Conservation Corps. In the first, we vehicle issues.
partnered with the Sierra Club and hired a local contractor to remove several miles Adam also oversaw intern Ryan
of road on land recently acquired by the Forest Service nearly adjacent to the Ana- Schaffer as he gathered information
conda-Pintler wilderness. Around the same time, Wildlands CPR secured funding to on Forest Service road removal. Ryan
hire the Montana Conservation Corps to revegetate roads and logging landings that looked at how many roads the agency
had been removed in the Clearwater National Forest. is actually removing, and he deciphered
In the workshop arena, we partnered with the National Forest Foundation and what the Forest Service means when
the Redwood Community Action Agency to host a very successful road removal they say they’re removing roads (which
workshop for agency staff and contractors in June. The conference attendees is not as straightforward as one might
included representatives from eight different national forests, as well as nearly a think).
half-dozen contractors.

Transportation Policy
The transportation policy program
had some fits and starts with staff
changes, but early on it included a
great workshop in Canada with the East
Kootenay Environmental Society. In the
workshop, we helped coordinate a re-
gional response to increasing ORV prob-
lems in Alberta and British Columbia.
We also worked in two other key places
— Arizona and Utah — where multiple
forest planning/transportation planning
efforts are underway.
Lisa Philipps, who works out of our
office for the Natural Trails and Waters
Coalition (NTWC), has been busy ex-
panding our relationships with hunters,
Graphic © Mark Alan Wilson. anglers and private property owners.

12 The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004

She brought an exciting group of these folks back to DC in
March to educate lawmakers about the problems with off-
road vehicles. That group included Stan Rauch, a long-time
bow-hunting advocate, who we hired on contract with the
NTWC to do hunter outreach on the off-road vehicle issue.
Early in the fall, it became clear that the Forest Service
was preparing to launch a new national rulemaking process
to overhaul their off-road vehicle regulations. Wildlands
CPR hired Jason Kiely to take on the role of Transportation
Policy Organizer. He went straight to work, partnering with
the NTWC, to develop a campaign plan to address this Forest
Service process. Jason brings extensive grassroots organiz-
ing experience to Wildlands CPR and NTWC, and he will use
that experience to help invigorate the grassroots response to
the rulemaking process.

Photo © Mark Alan Wilson.

Victories
Wildlands CPR was graced with two important victories
in 2003 – one in Oregon, the other in Florida. Nearly ten years
of work in Hells Canyon National Recreation Area resulted
in a surprisingly good comprehensive management plan.
Similarly, nearly seven years of work in Big Cypress National
Preserve were affirmed by a magistrate’s decision upholding
the new off-road vehicle plan there. The decision, which will
limit off-road vehicles to only 400 miles of designated routes,
still has to be finalized by one more judge, which could hap-
pen anytime within the next six months.
Conclusion
We’re spending our time promoting new models for good
management, and creating and highlighting excellent op-
portunities to restore natural places – basically finding what
works, instead of focusing on what’s broken. This type of
strong offense has long been considered the foundation of
a good defense. We hope this report helps you understand
why we’ve been able to be so successful this year. Thanks,
as always, for your continued support – and don’t hesitate to
stay in touch!

2003 Financial Report

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

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

Transportation Policy Fundraising (11.1%)
Contributions (10%) (11.1%)
Clearinghouse
Science (6.1%)
(13.1%)

Org.
Devel.
(12.4%)

Grants (88.3%) Natural Trails

Restoration
& Waters
(20.6%)
Coalition &
Minigrants
(25.5%)

The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004 13


Roads Policy Review of the first 3 Years
It’s not too late to get involved
It
has been three years since Former Forest
Service Chief Mike Dombeck signed the
Road Management Strategy Rule and Policy
(Roads Policy) that revised regulations concerning
the management, use, and maintenance of the
National Forest Transportation System. The final
rule was intended to help ensure that additions
to the National Forest System road network are
essential for resource management and use; that
construction, reconstruction, and maintenance of
roads minimize adverse environmental impacts;
and that unneeded roads are decommissioned and
restoration of ecological processes is initiated.
In fact, the Roads Policy calls for the removal of
approximately 186,000 miles of roads in the next 20
years.
Plugged and damaged culverts, common on high clearance
and unclassified roads, are a major threat to water quality.
Wildlands CPR file photo.
14
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!
So, has the Roads Policy changed how the Forest Service
addresses its 446,000 miles of roads? Have forests completed their
roads analysis, as they were to have done by January 2003? Below
we’ll try and answer these questions, as well as present ways that
folks can push their local forest on roads issues within the context of
roads analysis. For more information on Roads Analysis, see the Road
Riporter Volume 7 #1 (Spring 2002).
Where is Roads Policy language located?
The complete text of the final rule can be downloaded from the
Forest Service web site at www.fs.fed.us/news/roads. The rule changes
have been incorporated into the Forest Service regulations (36 CFR
Parts 212, 261 and 295), while the policy changes are reflected in the
Forest Service Manual, Titles 1900 (Planning) and 7700 (Transportation
System); these are also available on the Forest Service website at www.
fs.fed.us/im/directives.
Interim Directives and Implications
Over the past three years there have been several interim
directives. These were finally clarified on December 16, 2003, when the
Forest Service issued their final agency direction regarding the Roads
Policy. Basically, this final directive lays out what has been in practice
for two years.
The roads policy does not provide any special safeguards against
road building in inventoried roadless areas. It puts the focus of forest
scale analysis on maintenance level 3-5 roads (the higher quality
passenger car roads that are rarely considered for decommissioning)
and implies that high clearance vehicle roads and unclassified routes
(often the most damaging roads on the forest) will be addressed in
watershed and project scale analyses. The final directive does add two
new terms, “conversion to other uses” and “area scale.” See below for
details.
What has happened in these first three years?
The central measure for implementing the Roads Policy and
involving the public is called the “Roads Analysis Process” (RAP),
document FS-643. Wildlands CPR contacted the following forests to
assess their implementation of RAP:
Apache (Arizona) Chatahoochee (Georgia)
Cherokee (Tennessee) Clearwater (Idaho)
Daniel Boone (Kentucky) Flathead (Montana)
Gifford Pinchot (Washington) Gila (New Mexico)
Gunnison (Colorado) Olympic (Washington)
Shawnee (Illinois) Tongass (Alaska)
Uinta (Utah) White River (Colorado)
The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004
Findings:
1) While some forests have completed a
forest-wide RAP, others have yet to begin. There is
still plenty of opportunity to get involved.
2) The agency made a decision before the
forests started their analyses that only maintenance
level 3-5 roads (passenger vehicle roads) needed to
be considered in the forest scale analysis. Level 1
and 2 roads, which often cause the most ecological
damage, will be analyzed under watershed analyses.
These analyses are not mandated, nor is there a
timeline to get them done.
3) Many forests are basing their roads
analysis on outdated forest plans. Others are
waiting to conduct roads analysis as part of forest
plan revision – roads analysis is intended to inform
forest plan revision.
4) From the information we gathered, there
is not much implementation planning. After the Ultimately, obliterating and revegetating forest roads may be the only way to
prevent road failures. Wildlands CPR file photo.
analysis is finished, it is unclear what the next step
will be.
5) Many forests aren’t allowing for public
input early in the process. Instead, they are
holding public meetings after the RAP is complete.
On the Medicine Bow NF, for example, the only
stakeholders were county road and bridge • Encourage your forest to include maintenance level 1-2 roads
superintendents and county commissioners. in the forest scale analysis. The decision not to do so was not made
6) “Conversion to other uses” – this new term during the Roads Policy EIS process, but was made later internally.
could well imply conversion to off-road vehicle • Make sure your forest is basing roads analysis on the new
routes. Region 1 is proposing to allow off-road direction stated in the Roads Policy and not on outdated forest plans.
vehicle use on some maintenance level 1 and 2 • Watchdog your forest. Make sure they adequately address
roads. the 71 questions posed in step 4 of RAP. For a critical assessment
of RAP and the 71 questions, go to http://www.wildlandscpr.org/
How can citizens get involved? resourcelibrary/reports/RoadsAnalysisReport.htm
• Encourage your forest to consider road removal more
The new Roads Policy and specifically the RAP thoroughly within the RAP. Because FS-643 was written prior to the
present a profound opportunity to influence Forest new Roads Policy, it has less of a focus on road decommissioning
Service transportation issues; the Forest Service and more on road reconstruction. Make sure your forest’s RAP is
is only partially right when they say that the RAP resulting in a minimum road system determination that includes road
is not a decision making process. Although there decommissioning.
are no concrete decisions made about whether a • Document any ecological impacts caused by roads in your
specific road must be removed or modified, the forest and tell the USFS about them. Be specific! It is especially
information gathered in the analysis is a reference important to raise concerns regarding Level 1 and 2 roads so the
when the agency does make a decision, in an EIS, Forest Service will conduct watershed analyses.
for example. Further, recommendations from RAP • Many forests are using a risk/value matrix to determine
will be utilized in the forest plan revision process priorities for roads. High Risk/Low Value roads are obvious candidates
where decisions do get made. Because of this, it is for road decommissioning and we need to push the Forest Service on
very important for the public to get involved in the this, especially if they are to meet their road decommissioning goals.
process. Here’s how: • Make sure your forest is conducting a site-specific roads
analysis for any road construction or reconstruction project. The one
• Every forest is required to determine the HUGE loophole is that temporary roads are exempt from RAP.
minimum road system needed by conducting a
forest scale roads analysis (36 CFR 212.5). Find out Conclusion
who deals with roads issues on your local forest. Set In writing, the Roads Policy has changed how the Forest Service
up a meeting and let them know you are interested views and will begin to address its road system. In practice, however,
in the RAP and its implications. not much seems to have changed. In fact, Wildlands CPR found that
• Become a stakeholder (defined as having road decommissioning miles per year dropped by 65% nationally from
a “direct and meaningful interest in national 1999 to 2002. Clearly, with limited restoration budgets going almost
forest road system management”) in your forest. exclusively to thinning and fire hazard reduction projects, it will take
Most communication for the RAP was directed to pressure from all of us if we hope to see more road removal and other
stakeholders, not the general public. forms of true ecological restoration on national forests.

The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004 15

 The Citizen 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 Citizen Spotlight to
kiffin@wildlandscpr.org.

Champions of the Clearwater:

Spotlight on Anne Connor, Rebecca Lloyd
By Kiffin Hope
& Heidi McRoberts

C
onsisting of 1.8 million acres within north-central Idaho, The road along Doe Creek,
the Clearwater National Forest and surrounding areas Clearwater NF: before,
deserve the title “Big Wild.” From its 8,000+ foot peaks during, and after road
east in the Bitterroot Mountains to the river canyons and roll-
removal and revegetation.
ing hills of the Palouse Prairie in the west, the Clearwater is
almost totally enclosed by other forests and wilderness areas,
Photos courtesy of U.S.
and is an integral part of the Selway-Bitterroot/Frank Church Forest Service.
Wilderness complex.

Part of the Clearwater National Forest also lies within

treaty territory of the Nez Perce Tribe. To this day, the Nez
Perce fish for salmon on the Clearwater River, which mean-
ders through the reservation at its northern and eastern bor-
ders, as well as on the Rapid, Selway, and Columbia Rivers.
The welfare and management of this territory continues to be
a principal interest to the Nez Perce, particularly for fisher-
ies. Logging roads, including “jammer” roads and hastily built
culverts – mostly constructed between 1950 and 1980 – have,
however, had a detrimental effect on the ancestral Nez Perce
fisheries. Anadromous fish are unable to navigate through
many of the culverts, and most culverts are inadequate to
handle large storm and meltoff events. One other factor
further complicates things for the fisheries and the landscape
as a whole. Because the Clearwater National Forest sits atop
the highly erodible soils of the Idaho Batholith, the area is
prone to massive landslides every 10-20 years, most recently
in 1996.

Heavy rains fell in November 1995, loosening the surface

of the delicate, steep slopes of the Clearwater. The deep
winter months of 1995-96 then brought a snowpack twice
the average. In the spring of 1996, the melting snowpack and
frequent rainstorms created a virtual deluge that caused over
900 landslides, 58% of which were associated with roads.
Road failures even occurred on abandoned roads that were
overgrown with vegetation. In total, flooding and landslides
dumped an estimated 272,000 tons of sediment into streams.
The Clearwater’s fledgling road removal program quickly
went into high gear with the assistance of federal emergency
funds. But these funds allowed only limited road repair and
restoration work to be completed. In 1997, however, the
Clearwater found a new and unexpected major funding part-
ner.
While the Clearwater National Forest and Nez Perce Tribe
had worked on some projects together in the past, a $350,000
grant to the tribe in late 1997 from the Bonneville Power
Administration presented an opportunity for the Clearwater
and the tribe to establish a formal partnership. Initially, the
new partnership set up much needed restoration projects in
the Legendary Bear (formerly Papoose) and Fishing Creek
drainages following the landslides of 1996. Other projects
followed and the partnership continues to thrive to this day.
“Our cooperative partnership emphasizes fisheries enhance-
ment and riparian restoration work using a holistic approach.
We also focus on funding assessments and planning and
coordinating activities,” says Heidi McRoberts, a Project Man-

16 The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004

ager/Biologist for the Nez Perce. Heidi’s colleague, Project
Manager/Hydrologist Rebecca Lloyd, adds, “The partnership
is a true partnership in every sense of the word.”
Anne Connor is the Forest Service counterpart to Heidi
and Rebecca. Anne is a civil engineer and heads the Aquatic
Restoration Program for the Clearwater National Forest. The
partners work together “very tightly,” Anne remarks. “While
the preservation, improvement, and restoration of historic
Nez Perce fisheries are the driving force behind the part-
nership, technically, the Forest Service operates within the
framework of maintaining access while treating watershed
problems.” Anne says they work on every aspect of a proj-
ect together, “from the planning phase to the actual on-the-
ground work.”
The partnership has been very productive. Rebecca says,
“Just for road work on the upper Lochsa, we have removed
over 300 miles of failing roads, replaced 11 culverts, and
evaluated hundreds of miles of roads for restoration and cul-
vert work.” One result of this work has garnered a fair amount
of attention. Anne reports that, “In 2001, after an absence of
at least 50 years, fluvial bull and steelhead trout returned to
Badger Creek within twelve months of a culvert upgrade on
Highway 12.” Both species are listed as endangered.
National recognition has followed the partnership: in
2000 they received the Rise to the Future Award for Collab-
orative Aquatic Stewardship from the Chief of the Forest Ser-
vice. Rebecca told me, “Our on-the-ground activities earned
us the award, particularly our work on road obliteration and
riparian protection through fencing and cattle exclusion.”
What lies ahead? Given that the Clearwater National
Forest contains roughly 4,700 miles of Forest Service system
roads and another 1,300 of non-system roads, there’s plenty
of work to be done. “In 2004, for the Upper Lochsa area, we
A rehabilitated road on the Clearwater. Photo by
Edgar van der Grift.
The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004
Champions of the Clearwater:
Anne Connor
Heidi McRoberts
Rebecca Lloyd
have about 40 miles of road removal and two culvert replace-
ments planned. We also have about 300 miles left to survey
for our road and culvert risk assessment contract,” Rebecca
explained. “That’s in addition to road decommissioning and
culvert technique monitoring.” Heidi added that the partner-
ship has 10 miles of road decommissioning and two culvert
replacements planned for the Lolo Creek watershed in 2004.
Sound ambitious? You bet. But that’s not all. “Outside of this
road work, we have riparian condition surveys and invasive
weed treatments to complete,” Rebecca said.
When asked what the Road-RIPorter readers can do to
support the efforts of the partnership, Anne, Rebecca, and
Heidi had several things to offer. “Spread the word,” Heidi
said. “Let other people know what we are doing, and about
the successes that we’ve had. We still have a long way to go
to educate the public about the ‘good’ of removing roads.”
Rebecca said, “Send us leads for funding entities. I hate to
see a forest overlook great projects and miss partnership
opportunities.” Anne encourages folks “to get involved in the
decision making process by providing input to the Clearwater
during commenting periods.” All good advice.
With so much work to be done, Anne, Rebecca, and Heidi
envision the Clearwater/Nez Perce partnership continuing for
many years to come. Heidi says, “As long as the funding stays
with us, we’ll keep making progress.”
Anne, Rebecca, and Heidi can be contacted via email.
Anne: aconnor@fs.fed.us; Rebecca: rebeccal@nezperce.org;
Heidi: heidim@nezperce.org.
— Kiffin Hope, MH, is Wildlands CPR’s Program Associate
A big thank you to Beth Puluso, a contract researcher for
Wildlands CPR who has been examining the Clearwater NF/Nez
Perce Tribe partnership for an upcoming paper. Her research
provided much of the background material for this article. K.H.
17
 Bibliography Notes summarizes and highlights some of the
scientific literature in our 10,000 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. We keep copies of most
articles cited in Bibliography Notes in our office library.

The Price of Power: Understanding the

Effects of Power Lines on Birds
By Katherine Hyzy

Introduction
Linear barriers such as power lines, right-of-way
clearings, pipelines, seismic lines and even fences
and ditches are ubiquitous features across our land-
scape and can pose significant threats to ecosystem
integrity and at-risk species. Of these disturbances,
power lines pose the greatest threat to avian popu-
lations. Mortalities from collisions with power lines
and electrocutions on poles are well-documented
(for review see Jalkotzy et al. 1997). Although the
total number of these mortalities is relatively low
compared to road kill (Janss and Ferrer 1998), even
low mortality levels can have a significant effect on
at-risk populations. Recent research has shown that
bird morphology and behavior can determine which
birds are at greatest risk of being killed. Addition-
ally, visibility and type of wires and poles are all fac-
tors in bird mortality rates. This article summarizes Photo by Marcel Huijser.
recent literature on the effects of power lines, poles,
and electromagnetic fields, and concludes with a list
of proposed mitigation measures. Several studies have attempted to determine the efficacy of power
line modifications designed to make wires more visible to avifauna or
to otherwise protect them from power line collisions. During a three-
Review of Literature year monitoring study Savereno et al. (1996) compared avian reaction
Power Lines to two transmission lines (with marked and unmarked static/ground-
Ornithologists studying bird/power line interac- ing lines) running through saltmarsh along the South Carolina coast.
tions have long hypothesized that bird morphology Thirty-five to forty percent of the flocks exhibited behavior change in
plays an important role in the likelihood of collision reaction to both line types. Of the flocks approaching at line height,
(Jalkotzy et al. 1997). Building on this research, 98% changed behavior at the marked site, compare to 89% at the un-
a recent study in west-central Spain attempted to marked, indicating the markers did have an effect. Flocks also tended
establish a model for determining species’ risk of to approach the marked line at lower elevations than at the unmarked
mortality from power lines. Over the course of two line. Observed collisions at both sites were primarily with the static
years, species abundance was measured in three line. A similar study compared ptarmigan collisions between three
habitat types, and road surveys were conducted sections of power line over a six-year period (Bevanger and Broseth
along power lines to determine the relative abun- 2001). On one of the sections, the static line was removed, and a 51%
dance of raptors, ravens and storks, the three bird reduction in collisions resulted. In a third study, white wire spirals and
species that other studies have identified as being black bands crossed to form an “x” reduced overall collision mortality
most at risk of electrocution. In addition, several by 75%, although the Great Bustard, an endangered species that suffers
mortality surveys were conducted beneath power significant collision mortalities, did not respond to the markers (Janss
poles in the region during roughly the same time pe- and Ferrer 1998).
riod. The results from the two surveys were pooled, A study conducted in Spain compared avian mortalities on three
documenting a total of 41 species killed by power different types of power lines: one transmission wire with static wires,
lines. Overall, species with a greater wing loading and two smaller distribution lines, each with three wires on virtually
value (a greater weight-to-wing ratio; ducks vs. her- the same horizontal plane (Janss and Ferrer 1998). Each type of line
ons, for example) were more likely to die of power was at a significantly different height. The lowest of the distribution
line collisions than from electrocutions (Janss and lines experienced much higher collision frequencies. Because no
Ferrer 1998). general bird abundance surveys were conducted, clear conclusions

18 The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004

cannot be drawn regarding type of
line and collision frequency, except Recommendations
to note that distribution lines, which While power lines and poles
are less studied than transmission pose a potential danger to birds,
lines, can certainly be as significant a there are a number of ways in which
cause of mortalities. this threat can be mitigated, if not
eliminated. The following are recom-
Power Poles mendations inferred or taken directly
While power lines pose a from the previous papers.
number of threats to a variety of 1. Remove static lines from
birds, the poles that support them poles. While these do serve to
are most likely to affect raptors and stabilize high-voltage lines, officials
corvids. These birds are most at risk in Norway have admitted that at volt-
due to their relatively wide wing- ages below 132kv, their utility is less
spans and tendency to use poles as than certain (Bevanger and Broseth
nesting platforms and perches from Photo courtesy of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001). If they are proven to be un-
which they survey for prey (Lehm- necessary, doing away with them
ann 2001). Studies have shown that could prevent hundreds of collision
golden and bald eagles suffer some deaths.
of the highest mortalities; one study based on ten years of 2. Use wire markers on static lines. Though effective-
data collected from 13 western states and Canada found ness varies by species, wire markers should help reduce colli-
that out of 1,450 confirmed raptor electrocutions, 272 were sions.
golden eagles. Electrocution deaths occur when a bird’s body 3. Consider the presence of species of concern when
bridges the gap between two energized components, most choosing power line locations. Some species, like the Great
likely the wires (Harness and Wilson 2001). Studies gener- Bustard in Europe, cannot afford power line casualties.
ally rely on ground surveys beneath poles and necropsies or Avoiding the division of breeding and feeding grounds by
visual signs (scorch marks) to confirm electrocution deaths, lines could cut down on fatalities, as could burying the lines
but this technique may only provide a low estimate of elec- or locating them all on the same horizontal plane.
trocution mortalities (Deng and Frederick 2001). Reporting 4. Minimize opportunities for birds to come in contact
of raptor electrocutions is not required of utilities, and since with wires. Place perches above wires, ensure that wires are
raptor deaths are a violation of federal law, there may be a spaced to accommodate the wingspan of the largest birds,
considerable disincentive to reporting. and provide nesting platforms in areas where raptors are
In some areas raptor and corvid populations may benefit likely to nest on poles. Wooden poles also help reduce the
from the presence of power poles. In a study of a 596 km number of electrocutions.
segment of transmission line through southern Idaho and 5. Create a centralized reporting system. Utilities
Oregon, researchers found that over the course of nine years, should be required to report avian mortalities in a standard-
nesting pairs of raptors and corvids on the steel transmission ized fashion. Doing so would provide a wealth of information
towers increased from three to 133. In the same study, nest- about avian deaths, and would provide a means for tracking
ing success for golden eagles was ten percent higher for nests down the worst offenders.
on the transmission line than in cliffside nests in the area
population (Steenhof et al. 1993). Conclusion
While the era of decentralized electric generation may
Electromagnetic Fields be on the horizon, it’s unlikely that we will do away with the
There is growing concern that the strong electromagnetic infrastructure of the energy grid anytime soon. However,
fields (EMFs) generated by wires may adversely affect the practicing responsible site placement and more avian-aware
health of avian populations. One study (Fernie et al. 2000) design with both new
observed two groups of mated American kestrels under con- and existing power lines
trolled conditions, one exposed to EMF levels comparable to and poles will go a long
a transmission line. Pairs in the EMF-exposed group had sig- way toward protecting
nificantly higher fertility rates, larger eggs and embryos, and and preserving avian
higher fledgling success. However, EMF-exposed eggs had populations and the
significantly thinner shells and a lower hatching success. The ecosystems of which
reduced hatching success may be related to both the thinner they are a part.
shells (increased porosity) and the larger embryo size, which
may reflect EMF effects on thyroid development. Doherty — Katharine Hyzy is
and Grubb (1998) examined the nesting success of birds out a graduate student in
in the field under several power lines and found species- the Environmental
specific effects. EMF exposure appeared to have little effect Studies program at the
on house wrens nesting under transmission lines. However, University of Montana, Graphic courtesy of U.S. Fish and
comparing EMF-exposed tree swallows with control popula- and has worked Wildlife Service.
tions revealed that EMF-exposed swallows had significantly on energy issues in
wider eggs, with greater volume, and lower fledging success, Montana and Oregon.
leading to an overall lower rate of reproductive success.
— References follow on next page —

The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004 19

Restoration Program Update

Regional Training Academy tunities of road removal for the Western

Wildlands CPR is contracting with former intern Maureen Hartmann to work Interstate Region annual conference.
with Fred Bower (Forest Service Region 1 Transportation Planner) and Anne Con- The three speakers she’s working with
nor (Clearwater National Forest in Idaho) to organize a full day road-decommis- are excellent new messengers for road
sioning workshop during the Forest Service’s Region 1 Regional Training Academy removal: a county commissioner, an
in Missoula, Montana on April 1. The workshop will address program management economist, and a restoration practi-
for road decommissioning projects, with speakers and discussions on identifying tioner. We hope many counties begin
and prioritizing projects, outreach, partnerships, funding, and fire rehabilitation. seriously considering road removal as a
Maureen has been utilizing Beth Peluso’s model road removal paper to determine viable economic development “oppor-
topics and speakers, including Marnie Criley from Wildlands CPR. The audience is tunity.”
Forest Service personnel from all of Region 1 so this will be an excellent opportu-
nity to inform Forest Service staff on how to be proactive with their road removal The complete study by Center for
programs. For more information contact Marnie at the Wildlands CPR office. Environmental Economic Development
is now available on our website so
check it out!
Community Based Forestry
Marnie has been working quite a bit this spring with community based forestry
Road closure opportunities
advocates. She attended their annual Pacific Northwest Policy Forum in Portland
with Sky Island Alliance in Tucson,
in January where the group decided on priority issues. Marnie will be working with
AZ (call 520.624.7080 or contact
these folks to address road removal funding and community forestry restoration at
trevor@skyislandalliance.org):
the federal level.
April 23rd - 25th. Road Closure
and Restoration Project on Las Ciene-
Economic Study Outreach gas National Conservation Area. Get
We’ve had a great response from the economic study and Marnie is following your hands dirty and play a direct role
up with those who received the report. Marnie is working with the National As- in improving the ecological health of
sociation of Counties to organize a two-hour presentation on the economic oppor- your public lands! 1 hour from Tucson.

Bibliography
— continued from last page —
Bevanger, K. and H. Broseth. 2001. Bird
collisions with power lines—an
experiment with ptarmigan.
Biological Conservation 99: 341-
346.
Deng, J. and P. Frederick. 2001.
Nocturnal flight behavior of
waterbirds in close proximity to
a transmission power line in the
Florida Everglades. Waterbirds
24(3): 419-424.
Doherty, P. and T. Grubb. 1997.
Reproductive success of cavity-
nesting birds breeding under high-
voltage power lines. American
Midland Naturalist 140: 122-128.
Fernie, K., D. Bird, R. Dawson and
P. Lague. 2000. Effects of
electromagnetic fields on the
reproductive success of American
kestrels. Physiological and
Biochemical Zoology 73(1): 60-65.
Harness, R.E. and K.R. Wilson. 2001.
Electric-utility structures
associated with raptor
electrocutions in rural areas.
Wildlife Society Bulletin 29: 612-
623.
Jalkotzy, M.G., P.I. Ross and M.D.
Nasserden. 1997. The effects
of linear developments on
wildlife: a review of selected
scientific literature. Prepared
for the Canadian Association of
Petroleum Producers. Arc Wildlife
Services Ltd., Calgary.
Janss, G. and M. Ferrer. 1998. Rate of
bird collision with power lines:
effects of conductor-marking and
static wire-marking. Journal of
Field Ornithology 69(1): 8-17.
Lehman, R.N. 2001. Raptor
electrocution on power lines:
current issues and outlook.
Wildlife Society Bulletin 29(3):
804-813.
Savereno, A., L. Savereno, R. Boettcher
and S. Haig. 1996. Avian behavior
and mortality at power lines in
coastal South Carolina. Wildlife
Society Bulletin 24(4): 636-648.
Steenhof, K., M. Kochert and G. Roppe.
1993. Nesting by raptors and
common ravens on electrical
transmission line towers. Journal
of Wildlife Management 57(2):
271-281.

20 The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004

Transportation
Program Update
Forest Service Off-Road Vehicle Regulations
Wildlands CPR’s Transportation Policy Program is work-
ing closely with the Natural Trails and Waters Coalition to
promote strong off-road vehicle regulations as the Forest
Service gears-up to revise them (in response both to calls
for help from land managers ill-equipped to manage motor-
ized recreation and the petition filed by Wildlands CPR and
more than 100 co-signers in December 1999). We helped draft
a plan and secure funding for a campaign to engage forest
activists and non-traditional allies who also are bristling from
the mismanagement of off-road vehicles. We’ve piqued the
interest of national and state groups, including seven hunting
and angling organizations, nine quiet recreation groups, and
scores of traditional environmental organizations. We’ve de-
veloped and articulated policy recommendations and we are
taking the lead in organizing grassroots conservation groups.
For more information, see the cover story, and to get involved
contact Jason Kiely in our office.
Travel Planning Primer
Wildlands CPR will soon publish our long-awaited travel
planning primer - designed to guide organizations through
the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management travel
planning processes. The primer includes a description of the
process, suggestions on formulating goals, details on getting
involved, and a thorough examination of political organizing.
The appendices contain sample comments, monitoring forms
and protocol, and other useful documents. Check our web-
site, www.wildlandscpr.org, or call Jason today for your copy!
Support for Travel Planning
Jason conducted a workshop at the 13th annual Forest
Conference, hosted by Headwaters in Ashland, Oregon in Jan-
uary. Attended by activists from the northwest, the workshop
outlined how to inject a conservation group into the travel
planning process; also discussed were opportunities to win
policy changes and build non-traditional alliances by organiz-
ing around the Forest Service off-road vehicle regulations re-
vision. In February, Jason served on a panel to help Moscow,
Idaho-based Friends of the Clearwater kick-off its organizing
for sensible transportation management, as the Clearwater
and Nez Perce National Forests begin a joint forest planning
process. Jason also gave a presentation on travel planning
and the Forest Service rule-change at the Quiet Commotion
Conference sponsored by the Colorado Quiet Use Coalition in
February. We have also become involved in a collaborative
effort in western Montana to ensure sensible planning as the
Bitterroot, Flathead, and Lolo National Forests ease into a
joint forest planning process.
The spread of knapweed and other noxious weeds is
facilitated by off road vehicles. Photo © Mark Alan Wilson.
The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004
Science Program
Update
S everal important new resources are available through our
science program. Adam recently collaborated with several
researchers including John Bissonette (Utah State Univer-
sity), Tom DeLuca (University of Montana), Charles Luce (For-
est Service), and Mary Ann Madej (U.S. Geological Survey) to
publish two papers on road removal.
New Research
The first is titled: “Wildland road removal: research
needs” and was published in the Proceedings of the Inter-
national Conference on Ecology and Transportation. This
paper describes research needed to determine whether road
removal is effective at restoring ecosystem processes and
wildlife habitat. The authors proposed several research
questions and the types of studies needed to further road
removal efforts. The article proposes additional research so
land managers can more effectively prioritize which roads to
leave open and which roads to consider for future road re-
moval projects. Check out the full article at: http://www.itre.
ncsu.edu/cte/icoet/downloads/03SustainableSystems.pdf
The second paper is titled: “Benefits and impacts from
road removal” and was published in the Ecological Society
of America’s new journal, Frontiers in Ecology and the Envi-
ronment. It reviews different types of road removal and the
status of road removal research. The authors assessed the
paucity of research available on road removal. They found
that “some research has been conducted on hydrologic and
geomorphic restoration following road removal; however, no
studies have directly addressed restoring wildlife habitat.”
See the full article online at: www.wildlandscpr.org. These
two papers complement each other nicely and will hopefully
help encourage additional road removal research.
Science and Workshops
Adam has also continued providing information requests
for scientists, agency
personnel, and activists
on the impacts of roads
and ORVs. Wildlands CPR
volunteer Hank Green
has assisted in this effort
and created an electronic
library that will help us
more efficiently promote
the most current sci-
ence. Adam is working
with Marnie to develop a
road removal workshop in
Vermont this spring. For
more information, contact
our office.
21

In
December, board members Cara Nelson and Greg
Munther finished their terms of service. Both have been
stellar board members, with Cara acting as vice presi-
dent and president for the past two years, and Greg assisting with
everything from hosting fundraisers to writing comments on bad
Forest Service transportation plans. Greg has even just now gotten
involved in trying to stop a proposed road in Panama – a project
that long-time volunteer Carla Abrams has also been working on.
Many thanks to Cara and Greg! While we’ll miss them both ter-
ribly, we’re excited to welcome new board member Bill Geer. By
the time you receive this, Bill will have just finished a several-year
stint as the Executive Director of the Outdoor Writers Association
of America. He is a wildlife biologist who has worked for state agen-
cies (UT Division of Wildlife Resources and MT Department of Fish
& Game) and non-profits (National Fish and Wildlife Foundation,
Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation
Alliance, and founder of the Utah Outdoor Resources Foundation).
We’ve been picking Bill’s brain about ideas and strategies for sev-
eral months now, so we’re delighted to have his official support as a
member of our board.
We’d also like to welcome two new interns to Wildlands CPR
this semester: Lauri Duensing will be working with Marnie Criley
to develop an on-the-ground monitoring follow-up of Ryan Shaffer’s
road removal project last summer, and Sara Krier is working with
Jason Kiely to document the best citizen monitoring programs
around the country. If you’ve got a place where you’d like to set up
a monitoring program, or you’d like us to highlight your excellent
monitoring program, don’t hesitate to let us know.
A final thank you to everyone who participated in our second
annual major donor campaign. We went from $14,000 in 2002 to
$24,000 in 2003 – about a 75% increase – wow! Thanks so much for
helping make Wildlands CPR financially strong so we can continue
fighting off-road vehicles and promoting wildland restoration for the
long haul. For more information about our finances, see our sum-
mary annual report on pages 12-13.
Questions, comments about articles in the newsletter, our web-
site, our work, etc. – don’t hesitate to drop us a line, anytime.
Photo by Bethanie Walder.
Refer a friend to Wildlands CPR!
Send us the names and addresses of friends you think may be
interested in receiving membership information from Wildlands CPR.
22
Wildlands CPR
Publications
Road-Ripper’s Handbook ($20.00, $30.00 non-
members) — A comprehensive activist
manual that includes the five Guides
listed below, plus The Ecological Effects
of Roads, Gathering Information with the
Freedom of Information Act, and more!
Road-Ripper’s Guide to the National Forests
($5, $8 non-members) — By Keith
Hammer. How-to procedures for
getting roads closed and revegetated,
descriptions of environmental laws, road
density standards & Forest Service road
policies.
Road-Ripper’s Guide to the National Parks
($5, $8 non-members) — By David Bahr
& Aron Yarmo. Provides background on
the National Park System and its use of
roads, and outlines how activists can get
involved in NPS planning.
Road-Ripper’s Guide to the BLM ($5, $8 non-
members) — By Dan Stotter. Provides
an overview of road-related land and
resource laws, and detailed discussions
for participating in BLM decision-making
processes.
Road-Ripper’s Guide to Off-Road Vehicles ($5,
$8 non-members) — By Dan Wright. A
comprehensive guide to reducing the
use and abuse of ORVs on public lands.
Includes an extensive bibliography.
Road-Ripper’s Guide to Wildland Road
Removal ($5, $8 non-members)
— By Scott Bagely. Provides technical
information on road construction and
removal, where and why roads fail, and
how you can effectively assess road
removal projects.
Trails of Destruction ($10) — By Friends of
the Earth and Wildlands CPR, written by
Erich Pica and Jacob Smith. This report
explains the ecological impacts of ORVs,
federal funding for motorized recreation
on public lands, and the ORV industry’s
role in pushing the ORV agenda.
— To order these publications, use the
order form on next page —
The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004
 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 (or by renewing
— and increases the dollars to get our work done. 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 automat- I have enclosed my tax-deductible Wildlands CPR
ically withdrawn from your checking account. A monthly donation membership contribution of:
will 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.
Signature [Go to www.wildlandscpr.org/join_us/index.html]

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-minded Please send this form and your payment option to:
conservation organizations. If you do not want your name Wildlands CPR • P.O. Box 7516 • Missoula, Montana 59807
traded, please check here.

The Road-RIPorter, Spring Equinox 2004 23

 Soda Mountain Wilderness. Photo by Dave Willis.

Non-profit Organization
US POSTAGE
PAID
MISSOULA MT, 59801
PERMIT NO. 569

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

Considering the many benefits and

uses of a transportation network
across the National Forests, it is
difficult to understand why roads
have been under siege in recent years.

— U.S. Representative Larry Combest

(R-TX), May 1997

The Road-RIPorter is printed on 100% post-consumer recycled, process chlorine-free bleached paper with soy-based ink.