More FYI:
BLUERIBBON ON ROADLESS
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:
Location and description of the lands and how they are managed now.
Purpose and need for change.
Relation of the area’s current management to local and state land conservation policies now in place.
How fish and wildlife would be affected.
A description of how the public was involved in developing the petition.
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.
