The Road-RIPorter

Bimonthly Newsletter of the Wildlands Center for Preventing Roads. January/February 1998. Volume 3 # 1

Roadless Area Protection:

At What Price?
by Bethanie Walder

O
n our National Forests, roadless areas are Finally, protection should be extended
to all roadless areas, regardless of whether
often considered the key to wildland they are under the jurisdiction of the Forest
Service, the Bureau of Land Management,
protection and recovery. Across the the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or any
country, environmental activists consistently decry other agency. Offering exemptions for
certain areas destroys the purpose of
timber sales in roadless areas, and rightly so. protecting them. If roadless area protection
The Salvage Logging Rider wreaked havoc on roadless areas throughout the is granted to the entire National Forest
National Forest System, as these areas were systematically roaded and logged system, and areas like the Tongass National
regardless of environmental laws and regulations. But roadless areas are only one Forest or the lands under the President’s
piece in an increasingly complex puzzle of wildland protection and recovery. Northwest Forest Plan are excluded, then
While efforts to protect roadless areas should be supported, they should be we are left with little real protection.
recognized as only the first step in a broader strategy to protect & restore wildland Wildlife need functioning, intact, low-
ecosystems. The next step: restoring ecological function and integrity to areas elevation habitat to survive. For long-term
already degraded. and lasting protection for the ecological
Since November, the Clinton Administration has been working with the resources that our National Forests contain,
Department of Agriculture to develop an interim protection plan for roadless areas it is time to rethink how the whole forest is
in the National Forests. In conjunction with this proposal, they are expected to managed. Are the National Forests for
announce a policy regarding road construction on National Forest land. Why this resource extraction or resource protection?
new focus on roadless areas and roads? It is related, in part, to the past year’s
Congressional debates over road construction, and a hope to avoid similar debates
in 1998. But can an administrative policy be effective? — continued on page 3 —

Roadless Areas
In order to evaluate a proposed policy, forget politics and
focus on the impact the policy will have on the ground. Any
policy to protect roadless areas must protect them from road
construction and resource extraction. For example, prohibit-
ing permanent, but not temporary, road construction might
allow roadless areas to remain roadless figuratively, but still
degrades the land. Likewise, allowing helicopter logging
without new roads won’t protect the ecological integrity of
roadless areas.
In addition to protecting roadless areas from resource
extraction and road construction, roadless area policies
should not be based on size — they should be based on
biological value. Any area should be protected from resource
extraction, regardless of whether it is 5,000 acres, 1,000 acres
or ten acres. Nor should an official Forest Service inventory
be a prerequisite for protection. Many “uninventoried” Low and mid-elevation roadless areas like the Scotchman’s Peaks in
roadless areas are as worthy of protection as inventoried western Montana await a new national policy. Photo by George
roadless areas. Wuerthner.
 From the Wildlands CPR Office...
Changes, changes, changes
It seems as if every issue we tell you about staff changes here at Wildlands CPR,
but I suppose that’s part of being a growing organization. We sadly said good-bye to
Dave Havlick as our RIPorter editor/producer with the November/December 1997
Wildlands
issue. Fortunately, we still see him almost every day since he works on the other side C
Center for
of our wall with the Wild Rockies Field Institute and Predator Project’s Roads Scholar P
Preventing
Project. Conservation activist and former editor of The Networker (Alliance for the R
Roads
Wild Rockies’ newsletter) Dan Funsch will be taking over Dave’s position, and Jim
Coefield will continue to work on the newsletter as well. Though we’ll miss Dave’s P.O. Box 7516
touch, we are looking forward to a great year with Dan and Jim. Missoula, MT 59807
We are thrilled to welcome our new half-time motorized recreation coordinator (406) 543-9551
Jacob Smith. Jacob has been working with the Biodiversity Legal Foundation for wildlandsCPR@wildrockies.org
www.wildrockies.org/WildCPR
several years, focusing on transportation planning and motorized recreation issues
like snowmobiles. He’ll be staying in Boulder, working half time for BLF and half
time for us. Jacob will consolidate the scientific and legal data we’ve been collecting
Wildlands Center for Preventing
on motorized recreation, and compile a “tool-box” of resources for activists to use to Roads is a national coalition of
challenge this insidious and destructive use of public lands. He is here to answer grassroots groups and individuals
your questions, to help you develop effective strategies, and within the next six working to reverse the severe
months or so, to set up a workshop on ecological impacts of wildland roads.
how to challenge motorized recreation We seek to protect native ecosystems
and ORV use. Thanks to the Harder In this Issue and biodiversity by recreating an
interconnected network of roadless
Foundation for providing the start-up public wildlands.
money for this program/position.
Roadless Area Protection: Director
What Price? p. 1 Bethanie Walder
Ask Dr. Roads Bethanie Walder
We have also added a new section to Development Director
The RIPorter: Ask Dr. Roads. Finally, an Odes to Roads, p. 4-5 Tom Youngblood-Petersen
authority you can turn to with your most Tom Youngblood-Petersen
Office Assistant
burning road and motorized recreation Dana Jensen
questions. Ever wonder, for example, Field Notes, p. 6-7
what type of road Jack Kerouac was on? (anti) Motorized Recreation
Find out the answer to this, and other, Regional Reports, p. 8-10 Program
profound questions in this issue. And Dana Jensen and staff Jacob Smith
don’t forget to send your questions for Newsletter
Dr. Roads to ponder on postcards, over Glossary of Terms, p. 11 Dan Funsch
the phone or e-mail, or preferably,
written on the back of road signs. We Bibliography Notes, p. 12-13 Interns & Volunteers
hope you appreciate our attempt to bring Erin Ebersberger Barb Cestero
Scott Bagely
some levity to The RIPorter. Brian Koltes
Ask Dr. Roads, p. 14
Thanks... Dr. Roads, Master of what? Board of Directors
Katie Alvord
We were thrilled to receive grants Mary Byrd Davis
from the Wilburforce and New-Land Kraig Klungness
Foundations and the Foundation for Deep Ecology in late 1997. Many thanks to all Sidney Maddock
three foundations for their support. These grants will expand our network, get our Rod Mondt
Cara Nelson
information out to more people, and continue to provide the best road and motorized Mary O'Brien
recreation-fighting resources we can develop. Thanks too, to all those of you who Tom Skeele
sent in end-of-the-year contributions and made our membership drive a success. Scott Stouder
Big thanks to Portland, OR cartoonist Matt Wuerker for donating the back cover
‘toon for this issue and several others that may appear in future RIPorters. We’ve got Advisory Committee
Jasper Carlton, Libby Ellis,
a lot of work to do to keep his vision (nightmare) from becoming reality. Dave Foreman, Keith
Hammer, Timothy Hermach,
Please read on, enjoy The RIPorter, and keep in touch with us about what we can Marion Hourdequin, Lorin
do to make your work easier. Lindner, Andy Mahler, Robert
McConnell, Stephanie Mills,
Reed Noss, Michael Soulé,
Dan Stotter, Steve
Trombulak, Louisa Willcox,
Bill Willers, Howie Wolke

2 The Road-RIPorter January/February 1998

Roadless Area Protection: What Price?
— continued from page 1 —

To summarize, roadless area protection policies must:

¤ exclude all types of road construction (including temporary roads, roads for
ORVs/motorized recreation and user created roads);
¤ exclude resource extraction;
¤ be based on biological criteria rather than acreage (e.g. areas greater than 1,000
or 5,000 acres);
¤ include uninventoried as well as inventoried roadless lands; Developers can wreak havoc on an ecosystem
¤ not exclude roadless areas in certain regions or forests. without ever building a road. Photo by Bill
Cunningham.
Any policy that says, “no new roads in roadless areas” without saying “no
industrial resource extraction” is an empty policy with little or no impact. If we stop
the roads, but not the resource extraction, then we have not succeeded in our temporary, system or non-system roads)
ultimate goal: to protect and restore wildland ecosystems. A policy such as this is until the ground-based surveys and
simply a paper victory. prioritization are complete.

Road Construction As an organization dedicated to

The administration is expected to integrate its proposed roadless area policy fighting roads and motorized recreation,
with a roads policy. In the past two years, congressional debate has focused on road Wildlands CPR recognizes that the
construction funding in the National Forests. Whether or not the federal government problems caused by roads are integrally
pays for the roads isn’t the real issue. The real issue is where (if anywhere) we want linked to industrial resource extraction
to allow roads, where we want them prohibited, and why. and industrial recreation. Though any
road construction has an impact on the
To improve ecological conditions, a road policy must be based on and incorpo- land, road construction combined with
rate the following objectives: resource extraction has a greater
1. Complete a comprehensive, ground-based inventory of all roads that exist. impact. To protect wildland ecosystems,
This inventory should include all temporary roads, user-created roads, highways it is critical to prevent the roads and
and other paved roads that go through FS land — any routes on the land that allow extractive activities associated with
for the passage of motor vehicles. The inventory should act as the basis for road and them. To restore ecosystems, it is
access management and road restoration. critical to remove roads — we have an
2. Create comprehensive road density standards for wildlife habitat, with specific opportunity to recreate roadless areas
standards for road-sensitive species. and the biological diversity they
Such road density standards should take into account habitat quality as well as support. We encourage the Clinton
quantity (for example, low road densities along a ridge might be equivalent to higher Administration to adopt a policy that
road densities in flat areas), as well as aquatic versus terrestrial species’ needs. embodies these principles as the first
3. Prioritize the most ecologically significant roaded lands for protection and step towards protecting National Forest
restoration. lands, not the final answer.
While many roadless areas offer significant resources in terms of biological
diversity, some roaded areas do, too. Some lightly or moderately roaded areas might
offer more important biological diversity/ecological values (or potential) than some
roadless areas. National Forest manage-
ment should be based on ecological
rather than economic considerations.
(This would avoid direct conflicts Protecting
between ecologically important habitat
roadless areas
and commercial resource extraction.)
4. Prioritize ecosystem restoration is necessary but
through road removal and revegetation. not sufficient
Road removal and revegetation as a means
should be prioritized based on the to restore
inventories and values explained above. ecosystem health.
5. Implement a moratorium on new Active
road construction and reconstruction on
restoration of
National Forest lands.
Because the impacts of roads are so degraded
severe, and because they lead to the landscapes also
continued extraction of resources from will be essential.
public lands, the Forest Service should
place a moratorium on all forms of road Photo by Mark
construction and reconstruction Alan Wilson.
(including all forms of roads, e.g.

The Road-RIPorter January/February 1998 3

 Odes to Roads

The Road to Wilderness Recovery...

...is No Road at All
by Tom Youngblood-Petersen

W
e breathed a sigh of relief to assess their plans and work. The USFS
as our headlights flashed is fairly new to road removal, and a poor
restoration job can cause more harm
on the mud brown U.S. than good. Because Wildlands CPR has
Forest Service (USFS) sign, “Road had its ear to the ground on restoration
efforts, we thought we might have a few
Closed Ahead.” After driving five hours things to say.
from home and then ten jarring miles We knew the road switchbacked
into excellent wildlife habitat, and that
up a rutted dirt road in the Gallatin snowmelt waters pour each spring from
the 11,000 foot Taylor Peaks into the
National Forest of south-central drainage to Cache Creek. We knew
Montana, we were ready to camp for wildland road building fragmented the
The FS habitat, disrupting the movement of
the night, and start work the next sensitive species such as elk and griz,
wanted
morning. And we were relieved the and we knew roads devastate wild
feedback
USFS was beginning to
on their
close a few of their
restoration
440,000 miles of roads.
efforts,
and were Six of us — two from Wildlands
CPR — had volunteered to help the USFS
anxious for revegetate this closed road on a water-
us to shed restoration project in the upper
Cache Creek drainage, almost 8,500 feet
assess in elevation and a half-mile from the
259,000 acre Lee Metcalf Wilderness
their plans Area. It is home to grizzly bear, elk,
and work. moose and wolves.
The USFS acquired the old road
system — and its problems — in a
Wildlands CPR Director Bethanie Walder (left) gets her hands dirty restoring
recent land exchange. Many of the
this section of Forest Service road. Also pictured are Keith Stockmann
culverts had failed, causing the water to (middle) and a Forest Service worker. Photo by Tom Youngblood-Petersen.
divert and cut new channels, and the
road prism (road bed) was restricting cross slope flow, concen- fisheries, choking streams with sedi-
trating water into a few streams, and washing deep ruts in the ments that strangle fish by decreasing
highly erodible soil. Both the failed culverts and the eroding available oxygen and burying eggs.
road prism were causing increased sediment load in Cache But we didn’t know the other
Creek, where westslope cutthroat trout, a rare and native problems associated with this particular
Montana fish, zip through its waters. road until we saw the gate closure —
The USFS had removed 20 culverts and re-graded the and deep tire tracks — the next morn-
slopes to a stable angle. They wanted Wildlands CPR volun- ing. The wide berth around the gate
teers to re-establish vegetation on the disturbed soil, helping allowed a truck to drive easily around it,
reduce the erosion problem in Cache Creek. They also wanted splash through a water ditch on the
feedback on their restoration efforts, and were anxious for us uphill side, and thrash its way up the

4 The Road-RIPorter January/February 1998

road. “I knew we had an erosion problem
up here, but I didn’t know we had an
access problem,” said Susan Lamont, the
USFS restoration project leader. “We
might be able to reduce the sediment
load in Cache Creek and help those
cutthroats,” she continued, “but we’re
going to have a hard time keeping out
the ORV’s” (Off-Road Vehicles).
As we walked up the road, the tire
tracks appeared again and again at the
humped dirt water bars built to drain
water off the road. We arrived at the
primary work site, a particularly steep
switchback with a stream running
through its high and low ends. The
culvert had been removed and the road
pulled back to resemble the original
stream crossing, leaving bare earth
exposed on the still steep banks down to
the stream. The tire tracks showed the
truck had U-turned here and headed
back. It was an unfortunate example of
how roads make interior forests vehicle-
accessible (although these forests had
previously been clear-cut), and cause
stream disruption and erosion.
“Let’s hope they don’t return,”
Lamont said, looking at the tracks, not
sounding too convinced of the possibil-
ity.
“In the meantime, here’s the plan,”
she continued. “Let’s spread grass seed
over this disturbed area, rake it in, and
then lay straw erosion mats on the
steeper slopes near the stream to help
hold the soil.”
The six of us worked with Lamont
and two other USFS workers all day,
scattering a native seed variety of
Chinook Barley, Sherman Big Blue,
Pryor Slender, Native Western, and
Bromar Mountain Brome. (Even so,
these seeds weren’t necessarily endemic
to this area, an important detail in seed
selection we discussed.) We showed the
USFS how to transplant sedges, willows,
and wild purple coneflowers from
established, undisturbed areas around
the site to the bare soils near the
streams and seeps where the culverts
had been pulled. We showed them how
to re-seed with the grasses already
growing nearby. We sweated — a lot —
on that hot August day.
After working most of the day at the
switchback, we walked back, re-seeding
and transplanting along the water bars.
Back at the gate, we knew our day’s
work would be futile if the closure
wasn’t blocked more effectively. The
The Road-RIPorter January/February 1998
weak gate closure also begged the
question: Why was the Forest Service
just partially closing the road (removing
the culverts) and not ripping it out
entirely? You can’t drive on a road if
there’s no road to drive on.
“I’ll get a fire crew up here tomor-
row morning,” Lamont offered, “and
have them down a couple of the trees in
these thick stands on either side of the
closure to shut-off access.” She took a
deep breath. “No guarantees, though.
Some of these ORV’ers carry chain
saws.” It seemed more was needed to
keep this road closed than a physical
blockade.
Some of what is needed, says David
Brower, a long-time environmental
activist and former president of the
Sierra Club, is “... to stir up good
turmoil... and add enough to our
humility to concede rights to other
species....”
Road-rippers can engage in this
creative commotion — this “good
turmoil” — by following the legislative
Blessing the newly installed erosion control
blanket. Photo by Tom Youngblood-Petersen.
and political road battles and writing
strong letters to legislators in support of
road prevention and restoration. We
can write newspaper editorials, letters-
to-the-editor, op-eds, or news stories on
roadless areas, the importance of wild
places, and the need to limit motorized
recreation. We can photograph roadless
areas at risk and send copies to our
legislators (and Wildlands CPR!). And
we can follow Daniel Patterson’s advice
(in the July/August Road-RIPorter) and
“I knew we had an implement spontaneous road-closures
during our wildland excursions, using a
erosion problem up here, shovel to block a user created road with
soil, boulders, logs, and other dead and
but I didn’t know we downed plant materials.
Tens of thousands of road miles
had an access problem... now scar the Northern Rockies, and
hundreds of thousands slice across the
we’re going to have U.S. and Canada, cutting through the
homes of critters from invertebrates to
a hard time keeping out the big bears. But early that evening,
camped near trout-filled Cache Creek,
the ORV’s.” we heard coyotes yapping, elk bugling,
and we scoped the high avalanche
chutes and forest edges where griz like
— Susan Lamont, USFS to roam. Removing roads will keep them
there.
—Tom Youngblood-Petersen is
Development Director for Wildlands CPR.
His writing has appeared in Camas: An
Environmental Journal, Northern Lights,
and other magazines.
5
 Field Notes
Dr. Splatt
“Count two roadkills
and call me in the morning”
This version of Field Notes focuses on an innovative
program centered in Derry, New Hampshire, where one insightful
and creative teacher has students throughout the country
counting roadkills and learning all about habitat and wildlife in
the process. We encourage you to photocopy this article and
pass it along to school teachers in your community who might
be interested in a new project for their students, one that’s
connected to similar projects throughout the country.
D
erry, New Hampshire is home of
Pinkerton Academy and the
illustrious Dr. Splatt (real name— other teachers help
Brewster Bartlett). Back in 1992, Bartlett
participated in a National Science
Foundation project to integrate the
internet into science programs and get
local school teachers working together
through the web. Prior to coming up with
his roadkill project, Mr. Bartlett developed year (though some
an acid rain monitoring project and
needed an additional hook to get students
interested in using the internet. While driving to school one day,
he passed some roadkill, and Dr. Splatt was born. Bartlett
contacted the NH Department of Fish and Game (NHDFG) and
learned that the only roadkill they actually counted were moose,
bear and deer. They just didn’t have the people power to count
anything else.
What Dr. Splatt had that the NHDFG didn’t was student
power, and that student power has multiplied from Pinkerton
Academy to over 100 schools throughout the country (mostly in
the East). The roadkill program is an interdisciplinary project that represent. This led one student to question whether the change
incorporates science, math, geography, art and statistics. But more
than providing a fun way for students to learn the basics, it
interests them in the natural world and the cycles of life, seasons, the difference that might make for animals that were crossing the
weather and habitat adjacent to roads. All these factors and more
may lead to increases or decreases in roadkill. As Splatt says, the
program is about
increasing
awareness, not
about being 100%
scientifically
accurate. A case in
point might be the
number of urps
(“unidentified road
pizzas’) that have
been tallied. But at
least this allows all
roadkill to be
counted, regard-
less of whether
you can tell if it’s a
toad or a frog.
Photos by Mark Alan Wilson — see roadkill poem on p. 15
6 The Road-RIPorter January/February 1998
The project has the following goals for students:
¤ to use roadkill data to compare and contrast dead “roadents”
between the participating schools.
¤ to understand the migratory patterns of different animals.
¤ to understand the reciprocal relationship effects between hu-
mans and wildlife.
¤ to recognize the animals in their particular area of study.
¤ to predict which type of animal will be most and least killed
by motor vehicles.
¤ to understand the habitats and ecological impacts of small
and large mammals.
¤ to understand the geographical differences between states
as evidenced by roadkill.
Dr. Splatt and
their students
collect and analyze
roadkill data. The
field season lasts
from early March
to early May each
students do more
extensive studies).
Each student is
given a road to
watch on their way to and from school for this 8 week period.
Every day they record the number and type of roadkill they see.
Once a week, participating schools send the information to
Splatt’s website database. Prior to the field season, the students
record data about their road, such as how many lanes it has, the
speed of traffic, what types of habitat are adjacent to it, etc. They
are able to compare to previous years’ numbers and species
killed, looking for trends and determining what those might
to/from daylight savings may have significant impacts on roadkill
because of the dramatic change in traffic during rush hour, and
road during previously low-flow periods.
Students also communicate with other schools involved in
the project. As the data is entered, they
can look at the type of roadkill counted
and determine what type of habitat exists
near certain schools. An abundance of
rats, for example, might reflect surveys
completed in an urban setting. Dr. Splatt
works with a database coordinator to keep
the data consistent and make sure it can
be used effectively. If you are interested in
setting up a roadkill survey at your school,
contact Dr. Splatt by e-mail at
Bartlett@whale.simmons.edu. On the
adjacent page, we have included a sample
data sheet. For more information, check
out the very informative and interactive
website at http://earth.simmons.edu/
roadkill/roadkill.html
 RoadKill ‘97 Data Sheet
Date: ___________ ID#: __________
Lat: ______ ______ Temperature: _________
Long: ______ ______ Precipitation: _________
Lunar Phase: _________________________________

R OA
Remember . . . .
RESE DKILL
ARC
H
accuracy is very
important!

Copyright © 1997 Simmons College and others.

Paul D. Columbo, EnviroNet Network Director

The Road-RIPorter January/February 1998 7


Regional Reports & Alerts
The logging trucks won’t be rolling in Vermont’s Lamb Brook roadless
area anytime soon. Photo by Dan Funsch
VERMONT, LAMB BROOK ROADLESS AREA
Decision to Build Roads and Clearcut Struck Down
by Second Circuit
In a decision issued January 5th, the
US Second Circuit Court of Appeals
ruled that a US Forest Service proposal
to build roads and log in the 5,500 acre
Lamb Brook Roadless Area, located in
Vermont’s Green Mountain National
Forest, violated the National Environ-
mental Policy Act (NEPA).
The project had previously been
declared illegal by the Federal District
Court in Vermont two years ago (see The
RIPorter v1 #3, p. 7). That decision was
appealed by the Forest Service, and was
heard by the Appeals Court last Febru-
ary. In its decision, the Appeals Court
stated: “In sum, we agree that the Forest
Service violated NEPA by failing to
adequately consider all relevant environ-
mental factors prior to making its
finding of no significant impact....” This
led to a finding that the Forest Service’s
decision was “arbitrary and capricious.”
The sale has been remanded back to the
agency for further analysis.
The lawsuit contested the agency’s
decision to construct and reconstruct
three miles of roads and log one of
southern Vermont’s most remote wild
forests, Lamb Brook. The area is located
on the Green Mountain National Forest,
southwest of Wilmington, VT. As one of
southern Vermont’s most remote areas,
8 The Road-RIPorter January/February 1998
12
T-
Lamb Brook is an ecological jewel,
critical to the survival of black bear,
interior dependent songbirds, and many
other species.
The project has been criticized by
Vermont’s entire Congressional delega-
tion and the State’s wildlife biologist.
Plaintiffs in the lawsuit included Green
Mountain Forest Watch, Conservation
Law Foundation, National Audubon
Society, Sierra Club, The Wilderness
Society, and the Vermont Audubon
Council. The lawsuit was the first of its
kind against the US Forest Service in
New England’s history.
The ruling stopped short of being
precedent-setting for the entire 340,000
acre forest, and also held that District
Court Judge Murtha overstepped his
bounds when he ruled on the impacts of
the logging two years ago. Murtha had
ruled that the impact of the project
would be “arguably significant.”
Congratulations and thanks to Mathew
Jacobson and all the members of Green
Mountain Forest Watch, which led the
coalition of environmentalists who
brought the suit.
COLORADO,
UPPER PIEDRA ROAD
San Juan National Forest
The Forest Service recently began
the analysis for the San Juan Forest Plan
revision, which will ultimately deter-
mine the fate of the Upper Piedra Road.
Colorado activists have attended
community meetings and raised public
interest in closing the road.
The conservation community has
drafted a “Citizen’s Alternative to the
Forest Plan” which would close an
additional 30 roads and provide a
broader vision of sustainable manage-
ment of the San Juan Ecosystem. The
road closures proposed by this plan
have been embraced by many, including
hunters and outfitters determined to
keep ATVs and ORVs out of the Forest.
WHAT YOU CAN DO
The Forest Service needs your
encouragement to close these roads. To
submit your comments or obtain a copy
of the Forest Plan amendment, write to:
San Juan National Forest
-
701 Camino del Rio
Durango, CO 81301
For more information contact:
San Juan Citizen’s Alliance
560 Clearview Road
Durango, CO 81301
(970)259-6181
Upper Piedra road in the San Juan Mountains.
Photo by Mark Alan Wilson.
S.W. OREGON, SCHOHEIM JEEP TRAIL
Cascade/Siskiyou Ecological Emphasis Area
The State of Oregon and Bureau of Land Management
(BLM) have formalized their plans for extending the Schoheim
Jeep Trail through the Cascade/Siskiyou Ecological Emphasis
Area and the citizen-backed Soda Mountain Wilderness
proposal.
Planning for the “Oregon Backcountry Discovery Route”
was farmed out to a private ORV contractor by the Oregon
Parks and Recreation Department. And despite Parks and Rec.
Coordinator Pete Bond’s assertion that: “From the beginning,
our intent has been not to conflict with existing or proposed
Wilderness areas,” all three options for the route would in fact
have direct and indirect impacts on proposed Wilderness.
The Northwest Forest Plan recognizes the importance of
this area for biological connectivity, which would be jeopar-
dized further by extending the trail. Furthermore, state ORV
tax dollars, the proposed source of funding for the project,
would be better spent decommissioning existing ORV trails
and mitigating damage already caused by excessive ORV
activity.
YOUR LETTERS ARE NEEDED
Please write to Oregon Governor Kitzhaber and tell him
that the Soda Mountain Proposed Wilderness and Cascade-
Siskiyou Ecological Emphasis Area are NO place for a state-
sponsored ORV route.
W. VIRGINIA, CORRIDOR H
Proposed 4 lane highway
Corridor H, the $1 billion “road to nowhere” across the
Potomac Highlands of West Virginia, is still largely unfunded,
as Congress did not pass a five-year transportation bill in
1997. The battle resumes in March, when Senator Robert C.
Byrd (D-WV) will try to corral $2 billion in Appalachian
Corridor funds.
Road backers say Corridor H is needed to promote
economic development, while opponents say it is destructive
and unnecessary. The road would cross two national forests,
We Hope! Photo by Bethanie Walder.
The Road-RIPorter January/February 1998
Proposed Soda Mountain Wilderness, threatened by the Schoheim Jeep
Trail. Photo by Dave Willis.
Write to:
Governor John Kitzhaber
-
RE: PARKS/REC DEPT ORV DISCOVERY ROUTE
254 State Capitol
Salem, OR 97310
For more information contact:
Soda Mountain Wilderness Council
12
PO Box 512
Ashland, OR 97520
T-
(541)482-9191
41 streams, and two Civil War battlefields. Projected traffic
levels are far short of the 10,000 vehicles per day engineers
say would justify a new four-lane. Meanwhile, existing roads
are deteriorating. A Federal Highway study found that 45% of
West Virginia’s bridges are deficient.
The State of Virginia, citing the cost and local community
opposition, has refused to build its portion of Corridor H,
which was to connect to I-81. ABC TV’s “It’s Your Money,” the
Boston Globe and other national media have dubbed Corridor
H a “road to nowhere.” The road has been panned as “pork
barrel” by Citizens Against Government Waste and Taxpayers
for Common Sense. Corporate welfare would benefit road
contractors, ski resorts, timber haulers, and the poultry
industry.
Corridor H opponents will appeal a lower court decision
which let highway agencies off the hook for failing to do
historical studies or consider alternatives to the major four-
lane. In the appeal, Corridor H Alternatives (CHA) will be
joined by over a dozen environmental and community groups
and several national groups (Scenic America, Friends of the
Earth, Save America’s Forests, the American Civil War Associa-
tion, and Taxpayers for Common Sense). CHA favors passing
lanes, slightly wider pavement, and straightening dangerous
curves to improve traffic flow and safety on existing roads.
The appeal hearing is expected this spring in federal appeals
court in Washington, D.C.
For more information contact:
Corridor H Alternatives
12
T-
PO Box 11
Kerens, WV 26276
(304)636-4522
9
 Regional Reports, cont’d
IDAHO, NORTH FORK BOISE RIVER
Roads Smothering Bull Trout?
The North Fork of the Boise River, in central Idaho, is
well-known to locals as a place to connect with nature and
escape the hubbub of downtown Boise. Historically, the waters
have provided habitat for bull trout. Scenic canyons give
boaters a range of options from flat to whitewater, and
ponderosa pine forests filter the abundant sunlight into warm
hues of vanilla-scented green.
A pair of field researchers from the Bozeman, MT-based
Predator Project devoted two weeks in 1997 to roam the North
Fork Boise River basin for a different reason: to document the
total road density in the lower basin by systematically driving,
bicycling, or hiking every road that could be found.
The point? Bull trout are gone from all the lower tributar-
ies of the North Fork of the Boise, and the North Fork itself no
longer has resident populations. With salvage logging continu-
ing in the heavily roaded basin, numerous landslides and road
failures, and a river channel that is visibly plagued with
sandbars, sediment-filled pools and cloudy water, the North
Fork of the Boise is a victim of excessive road densities and
aquatic damage caused by roads.
Predator Project’s “Roads Scholars” inventoried 119
square miles of the watershed. The analysis area, just over half
of the entire watershed, had a total road density of an alarm-
ing 3.9 miles/square mile (elk habitat effectiveness falls to
50% with road densities of 2 miles/square mile). Not only are
there a lot of roads, but the region’s granitic soils do not lend
themselves to staying in place. The researchers also docu-
mented twenty-five significant erosion events, such as road
failures, blown culverts, and road surface sloughing.
The North Fork and the rest of the Boise River watershed
currently is the subject of some attention. Idaho released a
draft of its “Boise River Key Watersheds Bull Trout Problem
Assessment” in October, 1997. The State intends to use this
document as part of its conservation plan to recover bull trout.
(The US Fish and Wildlife Service has been court-ordered to
consider the bull trout for listing under the Endangered
Species Act; and the State of Idaho would like to avoid a
federally-mandated recovery.)
FLORIDA, I-75 AND US 41
Everglades National Park and Big Cypress National Preserve
Road-watchers are pushing for measures to lessen the
impact of US 41 on wildlife habitat and security in the south-
ern portion of the Everglades and Big Cypress Preserve. One
measure would raise the highway to facilitate natural hydro-
logic processes and animal movements, and another would
place extra culverts under the highway. Unfortunately, the
high cost of these measures makes their adoption unlikely.
The Florida Biodiversity Project is negotiating a legal
settlement over two recreational access points that proliferate
ORV usage off of I-75. The Army Corps of Engineers has
drafted an EIS on the ORV management plan, and is soliciting
further public comment on these controversial access points.
10
Landslides and road washouts like this one are, unfortunately, a common
sight in the North Fork of the Boise River drainage. Photo by Dave Havlick.
While the Key Watersheds report acknowledges that roads
can lead to increased sedimentation and loss of aquatic
habitat, the document fails to call for any road-related restora-
tion actions beyond fixing a handful of culverts to permit fish
passage. The report concludes that “the Boise River key
watersheds are in good shape and have considerable potential
for recovery of complex interacting groups of bull trout.”
WHAT YOU CAN DO
The State of Idaho failed to invite public comment on the
draft Key Watersheds report, so we’ll extend the offer that they
neglected. Write to:
Division of Environmental Quality
Attn: Southwest Fish W.A.G.
1445 North Orchard
-
Boise, ID 83706-2239
Request a copy of the draft Key Watersheds report, and be
sure to let them know that high road densities damage fish
habitat. For more information or results from Predator
Project’s watershed inventory, email predproj@avicom.net or
call (406)543-8424.
ED NOTE: The two field researchers were none other than
Road-RIPorter editors past and present, Dave Havlick and Dan
Funsch.
There is some good news for south Florida and the
critically endangered Florida panther. Big Cypress Preserve has
taken steps to minimize the impact of roads on panther
movement. The Preserve constructed 36 panther underpasses
(costing nearly $1 million apiece) under I-75. The success of
this program (not a panther mortality on I-75 since), has led to
additional underpasses being considered for State Road 29.
For more information contact:
Florida Biodiversity Project
12
1060 Tyler Street
Hollywood, FL 33019
T-
The Road-RIPorter January/February 1998
 Glossary of National Forest Road Definitions

M
any Road-RIPorter readers have written or called seeking information about the different types of
road designations used by the Forest Service. What does the Agency mean when it talks about
system vs. non-system roads? What is the difference between temporary and long-term roads?
This glossary will give you answers to some of your questions. (In the next issue of The RIPorter we will
discuss temporary roads specifically.) Definitions in quotations are from the USDA Forest Service Handbook
7709.54 Forest Transportation Terminology Handbook which expired in 1992. However, FSM 7700 currently is
being revised. The revisions will include definitions from the old handbook plus new definitions, such as road
decommissioning or obliteration. The revision isn’t final, but is expected in 1998. Definitions with (R1) in
parentheses are specific to Region One of the Forest Service. These same concepts might be addressed by
different terms in other regions— please check with your own regional office.

Road — “a general term denoting a way for purposes
of travel by vehicles greater than 50" in width.” It does
not include trails which are operated and maintained
under the trail classification. NOTE: This definition is
used to identify roads (e.g. user-created, temporary) on
the ground.
Ownership/Jurisdiction
Forest development roads are not public roads (FSM
7705) in the same sense as roads that are under the
jurisdiction of public road agencies, such as states or
counties. ...(T)hey are authorized only for the administra-
tion and utilization of National Forest System lands.
Forest road — “A road wholly or partly within, or
adjacent to, and serving the National Forest System and
necessary for the protection, administration, and use of
the National Forest System and the use and development
of its resources.”
Forest development road — “A ‘forest road’ under
the jurisdiction of the Forest Service.”
System road — Same definition as forest develop-
ment road.
Non-system road — Forest roads not under the
jurisdiction of the Forest Service. (This term is used in
Region One and also may be used in other regions.)
Historical road — A former forest road that is no
longer used. (R1)
Service Life
Constant service (long-term road) — “A long-term
facility developed and operated for continuous or annual
recurrent service.”
Intermittent road — “A road developed and operated
for periodic service and closed for more than one year
between periods of use.” The road can be stored for
future use by removing culverts and improving drainage
so the road causes minimal damage to watershed/
ecosystem health until it is reconstructed.
Short-term road — “A facility developed and oper-
ated for a limited period of time which will cease to exist
as a transportation facility after the purpose for which it
was constructed is completed, and the occupied land is
reclaimed and managed for natural resource purposes.”
Activities
New road construction — “The investment in
construction of a road to provide access that adds new
miles of road to the transportation system.”
Road maintenance — “Expenditures in the minor
restoration and upkeep of a road necessary to retain the
road’s approved traffic service level.” (Replacements of
existing structures, such as culverts or bridges is consid-
ered maintenance, while increasing culvert size or
improving a bridge would be considered “betterment.”)
Road reconstruction — “The investment in con-
struction activity that results in betterment, restoration
or in the realignment of a road as defined below:
1. Realignment: Investment in construction activity
that results in the new location of an existing road or
portions thereof;
2. Betterment: Investment in construction activity
that raises the traffic service level of a road or improves
its safety or operating efficiency;
3. Restoration: Investment in construction activity
required to rebuild a road to its approved traffic service
level.”
Contracts
Specified road — Roads authorized for a specific
resource need (e.g. logging, mining, grazing). This term
can be applied to constant, intermittent or short-term
roads.
Temporary road — Roads constructed for specific
resource needs, but not intended to be part of the
permanent transportation system. Temporary roads are
most often constructed by timber contractors for remov-
ing timber. Temporary roads are required to be reveg-
etated within 10 years of completion of their use. Tem-
porary roads can remain active for upwards of 5 years as
part of timber sales. Temporary roads are not invento-
ried or considered a part of the transportation system.
There are no design standards for temporary roads other
than location and clearing width and State best manage-
ment practices (where they exist), unless the road is
classified as a specified short-term road.

The Road-RIPorter January/February 1998 11

 Bibliography Notes
Bibliography Notes summarizes and highlights some of the
scientific literature in our 6,000 citation bibliography on the ecological
effects of roads. We offer bibliography 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.
Roads and Exotic Plants,
Pests and Pathogens
by Erin Ebersberger
A
n exotic “invader” is defined as
any organism that is able to
colonize and persist in an area
where it has never existed before
(Mooney and Drake 1986). Exotic
species of plants, pests and pathogens
are a serious threat to native ecosystems
(Liebhold et al. 1995, Vitousek et al.
1996). Invasions by exotic species can
reduce biodiversity, spread disease and
alter ecosystem processes. They also can
destroy wildlife habitat and damage
agricultural crops, rangelands, forests
and wildlands (Vitousek et al. 1996).
The continuing establishment and
spread of exotic species has severe
ecological and economic impacts.
Roads provide access for the dispersal
and introduction of exotics. Ecosystem
disturbance caused by road building
provides a perfect ecological climate for
the establishment of invasive species.
Once an exotic organism takes hold in
an area, the options for control are often
costly, dangerous and ineffective. To
stop the arrival, establishment and
spread of exotics, preventing invasions is
important. Limiting the construction of
roads into undisturbed ecosystems is
effective in preventing further invasion.
Damaging Effects of
Invaders
In the realm of exotic plants,
St. Johnswort,
Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea maculosa)
Hypericum
has a severe effect on the grasslands of
perferatum L.
the intermountain west. Knapweed
This invasive
crowds out the native grasses, damages
species is also
wildlife habitat and cattle rangelands,
valued for
and contributes to erosion (Lazell 1989,
its medicinal
Lacey et al. 1997). Knapweed spreads,
properties.
in large part, via movement of seeds on
vehicles along roadways.
Perhaps the most well known exotic
pest, the Gypsy Moth (Lymantria dispar),
has caused massive defoliation of a
12
Fragile
wildflowers are
often displaced
by intrusive
exotic species.
Photo by
Mark Alan Wilson.
variety of host trees, especially in the eastern United States
(Liebhold et al. 1995). Exotic pathogens also are a problem.
For example, Port-Orford cedar root rot (Chamaecyparis
lawsonia) is a soil-borne disease that is known to spread by
movement of soil infected with the fungus (Castello et al.
1995, Perry 1988). The disease often spreads with the
construction of wildland roads.
Exotic Invasions and Disturbance
It is widely accepted that invasions by exotic organisms
are facilitated by disturbance (Elton 1958, Mooney and Drake
1986). Pickett and White (1985) define disturbance as “any
relatively discrete event in time that disrupts ecosystem,
community or population structure and changes resources
substrate availability, or the physical environment.” Grime
(1979) views disturbance as any process that removes or
damages biomass. Those involved in the debate on defining
disturbance seem to agree that it is a discrete event that
changes the conditions in an ecosystem. According to these
definitions, roads are clearly a form of human caused ecosys-
tem disturbance. The disturbance caused by roads allows
exotic invaders access to undisturbed ecosystems.
Roads and Exotic Plants
Roads foster the entry of exotic plants by providing access
for dispersal through human activities. Vehicles and machin-
ery are major transport mechanisms that spread exotic plants.
When a vehicle drives through a weed infested area, seeds,
spores or vegetative parts may become lodged in the tire treads
and undercarriage. They can travel for miles before becoming
dislodged in uninfested areas (BLM 1993, Cale and Hobbs,
Sheley et al. 1997). For example, the arrival of Tansy Ragwort
(Senecio jacobaea) in Montana is directly attributed to seeds
moving in on logging equipment from Oregon (Kollmeyer
1997). Tansy Ragwort is a noxious Eurasian weed that is toxic
to livestock, and can outcompete native vegetation. Tansy
thrives in grasslands and disturbed sites, including the com-
pacted soil of roadbeds (Kollmeyer 1997).
The Road-RIPorter January/February 1998
 Soil disturbance plays a major role in the spread of exotic
plants (Elton 1958, Mooney and Drake 1986, Hobbs and
Huenneke 1992, Pickett and White 1985). Soil disturbance
caused by road building changes the microclimate of the area,
allowing opportunistic exotic plants the opportunity to
colonize. Several studies have focused on experimental soil
disturbance (Kotanen 1997, Zink 1996). Both studies found
that when soil was excavated and biomass removed, exotic
plant species colonized quickly and completely, outcompeting
native vegetation. Johnstone (1986) asserts that plant invasion
is caused by removing a barrier that previously excluded a
plant from a site. An exotic seed or propagule can “wait” as a
dormant seed or suppressed seedling until some disturbance
destroys its
competitors.
Roads clearly
Roads provide access for remove barriers
(vegetation/
the dispersal and biomass) that
introduction of exotics. exclude plants
from a site.
Roads and Exotic Pests and Pathogens
Roads facilitate invasions by exotic pests and pathogens.
As with exotic plants, ecosystem disturbance can cause
“outbreaks” of exotic pests and pathogens. For example, an
exotic species may be present at low levels and not drastically
impact the ecosystem. With human disturbance, outbreaks can
occur where one or two species rise to higher levels of
abundance than in undisturbed areas (Dobson and May 1986).
Roads change the microclimate of the area, causing
outbreaks that can have serious ecological implications. Roads
also provide access for intentional or unintentional human
introduction of exotics. One common method for human
transport is in the soil of diseased nursery stock (Liebhold et al
1995). Exotics also can vector each other, causing additional
invasions (Lazell
1989). For
example, an
invading pest
might be the
vector, or means
of transport for an
exotic pathogen.
There even are
soil-borne
pathogens, like
Port-Orford cedar
root rot, which
can be spread
directly by road
construction (Cale
and Hobbs 1991). The infamous Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea
maculosa).
Conclusion
It is important to note that much of the literature on
invasions and ecosystem disturbance does not mention roads
directly. The information can be applied to roads, but few
studies were designed specifically to study the effects of roads.
More studies need to be conducted. The literature acknowl-
edges that roads contribute to the spread of exotics in a
“matter of fact” way, but does not provide suggestions about
The Road-RIPorter January/February 1998
what can be done. The traditional approach to invasions is
retrospective, focusing on control methods, including chemical
pesticides, herbicides and biological methods.
The damaging effects of exotics on ecosystems are clear,
but the focus on control rather than prevention exacerbates
the problem. Managing an area to prevent further disturbance
would be most effective in stopping the spread of exotics. This
would include a policy to prevent new road construction in
undisturbed areas. The ecological costs are too high to allow
exotics to spread. Preventing invasions by leaving areas
undisturbed is a viable, yet rarely considered alternative.
Erin Ebersberger is a graduate student in Environmental Studies
at the University of Montana.
Bibliography
Bureau of Land Management Publication. 1993. Noxious
Weeds: A Growing Concern.
Cale, P. and R. Hobbs. 1991. Nature Conservation 2: The Role
of Corridors. Saunders, D.A. and R. J. Hobbs eds. Surrey
Beatty, New South Wales, Australia.
Castello, J.D., D.J. Leopold and P.J. Smallidge. 1995.
Pathogens, Patterns and Processes in Forest Ecosystems.
Bioscience, v. 45.
Dobson, A.P. and R.M. May. 1986. Patterns of Invasions by
Pathogens and Parasites. The Ecology of Biological
Invasions of North America and Hawaii. 1986. Springer-
Verlag, New York.
Grime, J.P. 1979. Plant Strategies and Vegetation Processes.
Wiley, New York.
Hobbs, R.J. and L.F. Huenneke. 1992. Disturbance, diversity
and invasion: implications for conservation. Conservation
Biology, 5: 324-333.
Johnstone, I.M. 1986. Plant invasion windows: a time based
classification of invasion potential. Biological Reviews, 61:
369-394.
Kollmeyer, J. 1997. Tansy Ragwort control project: Proposed
action plan. U.S. Forest Service. Flathead National Forest,
MT.
Kotanen, P.N.M. 1997. Effects of experimental soil disturbance
on revegetation by natives and exotics in coastal California
meadows. Journal of Applied Ecology, 34: 631-644.
Lacey, C.A., J.R. Lacey, P.K. Fay, J.M. Story and D.L. Zamora.
1997. Controlling Knapweed on Montana Rangeland.
Montana State University Extension Service C.311.
Lazell, J. 1991. The evils of exotics. Sanctuary, 31 (1).
Liebhold, A.M., W.L. MacDonald, D. Bergdahl and V.C. Mastro.
1995. Invasion by exotic forest pests: A threat to forest
ecosystems. Forest Science Monograph.
Mooney, H.A. and J.A. Drake, (eds.). 1986. Ecology of
Biological Invasions of North America and Hawaii.
Springer-Verlag, New York.
Perry, D.A. 1988. Landscape patterns and forest pests. The
Northwest Environmental Journal, 4.
Pickett, S.T.A. and P.S. White. 1985. The Ecology of Natural
Disturbance and Patch Dynamics. Academic Press, Inc.,
Florida.
Sheley, R., M. Manoukian and G. Marks. 1997. Preventing
Noxious Weed Invasion. Montana State University
Extension, MT 9517.
Zink, T.A. M.F. Allen, B. Heindl-Tenhunen, and E.B. Allen. 1996.
The effect of a disturbance corridor on an ecological
reserve. Restoration Ecology, 3 (4): 304-310.
13
 Ask Dr. Roads
Dear Dr. Roads,
Why build a road along a pristine river, when
by doing so you increase your risk of drowning?
— B. Trout, Whitefish, MT
Only an arrogant bureaucrat would even consider it. Some
uncaring cretin with a bulldozer, tax exempt diesel fuel, a barf
green shirt and a bottom line attitude. If you or I put our kid in
that kind of risk, the powers that be would take the little ankle-
biter in a minute and leave its mother with no one to run to the
store for cigars and beer. But if the USFS builds a road next to a
river and imperils thousands of innocent “forest visitors” they get
candy, cookies and other goodies from fat people that are too
lazy to get off their spreaders and on to their feet. What amazes
me is that these are the same fat people that will be the first to go
when the damn road falls in the river and they take the (Pontiac)
plunge. It makes the old doc sick to think that we continue to
spend tax dollars on the construction of these riparian death
traps while at the same time asking the Red Cross to hold a bake
sale to pay for swimming lessons. These are sad times.
P.S. Pristine is only a state of mind. A social construct. Native
people were driving their 4x4’s through here before Columbus so
get off your eco-elitist high horse.
— D. Roads, MLA
Dear Dr. Roads,
Why can’t we build a few more roads on our
national forest even though we don’t need them?
— Fred E. Bilder, Washington, DC
We can’t because Dr. Roads says so. And Dr. Roads does not
like to have to tell smokey the jokey and woodsy the wimp more
than once. Got it? Once again you qualify your question with
some namby-pamby mush word like “need.” What is with you
people? Of course we “need” more roads — just ask the nearest
forest supervisor or engineer. Roads allow access to our land so
all the people can drive all their cars and trucks out to the forest
products display and enjoy the peace and tranquillity offered by
the working forest. They allow for bigger budgets and more
employment. Are you for skyrocketing unemployment? Are you
against jobs? Are you anti-American? I didn’t think so. God Bless.
— D. Roads, MA
Dear Dr. Roads,
I’m afraid my teenage daughter is going off
onto FS roads to neck. What should I do?
— N. Nelly, Virgin, UT
Necking is dangerous. Look what happened to Big Nose Bill.
You should tell her to “just say no.” If that doesn’t work you can
always have her pierce her lip with a horseshoe. Now, as for the
road, there are several ways to view this unfortunate intrusion.
1) At least you know where she is. Ask the Forest Service for
a map of their roads and then you can spend the next four years
trying to find these same roads on the ground. By that time your
daughter will be away at college and out from under your
obviously overfed paranoia and totally weird guilt trip. Lay off.
Send questions to:
Ask Dr. Roads, c/o
Wildlands CPR
PO Box 7516
Missoula, MT 59807
or
wildlandsCPR@wildrockies.org
“Kids today know what’s what and they know when they are
naughty or nice” (S. Clause). Accept that your precious brat is a
product of your YUPPIE lifestyle and prescription drug abuse and
be happy. Be open and honest with her and she will tell you when
she feels the need to express her rage.
2) Close the road and force she and her friend/s (as the case
may be) onto more open county roads or into dark alleys in town.
Note: do not let her know you have done this (see above).
3) Trundle her away to an all-girls school in Topeka where
they have no FS roads.
— D. Roads, MSW
Dear Dr. Roads,
I’ve heard that both cows and cowbirds use roads
to get into the forest. Which one is better/worse?
— R. McDonald, San Juan, Costa Rica
BOTH ARE WORSE THAN BETTER. Imagine cow bird
collisions. The stinking little invaders muck up your windows and
leave cowbird piles on your tent. This of course is in contrast to a
cow that leaves cow pies on the trail. I would recommend that we
try to keep these creatures in their place. There is nothing worse
than an uppity cow bird. If you can eliminate cow birds, you will
eliminate cows. That’s my take on it.
— D. Roads, BS
Dear Dr. Roads,
What type of road was Jack Keroac on?
– H. Thompson, Haight & Ashbury, San Francisco, CA
First let me say I knew Jack Keroac and you are no Jack
Keroac. I know this may come as a shock, but Jack was not on
any road. Jack was on various pharmaceuticals and hallucino-
genic native biota. He was often under the impression that he was
on the road but he was really in a studio in Hollywood. There are
roads in studios in Hollywood and they tend to be paved in gold.
Ha, only kidding. The roads in Hollywood are no damn different
than the roads in Tucson or Missoula. They are smelly, black tar
that leaks all kinds of chemical mush into the LA River by way of
university parking lots. Jack always said that he wished he could
have spent time on forest roads but there just weren’t that many
in them daze. Today with our present forest policy, any young
Keroac hack can spend the next five life times walking forest
roads. Provided he/she proves his/her worth and doesn’t spend
too much time practicing their dharma and not watching for the
rednecks in their oft pathetic CARma (sic). Put that in your pipe
and smoke it.
— D. Roads, MS, pending
 Join Wildlands CPR Today!
Membership benefits both you and Wildlands CPR. You
lend your support to our efforts, giving us more leverage in sub-
mitting comments, filing lawsuits, and creating pressure to pre-
vent and close roads on public lands. In addition, your financial
support helps us to continue providing information and re-
My Friend sources to activists throughout North America.

As a Wildlands CPR member, you'll have better access to

I stopped to help a friend today these resources, because you’ll receive:
He could no longer ❇ Our bimonthly newsletter, The Road-RIPorter.
help himself ❇ 10 free bibliography searches per year.
❇ National support for your campaign through our newsletter
He lay quiet in man’s path, and alerts.
asleep forever ❇ Access to activist tools and public education materials.
❇ Connections with groups working on similar issues, and net-
A tear came in lifting the works with experienced road-fighting activists, lawyers and
once warm body scientists.
❇ Discounts on Wildlands CPR publications.
Thinking it as my own
He rests now, under a tree, Wildlands CPR Publications:
Road-Ripper's Handbook ($15.00, $25 non-members)) —A
where he dwelt comprehensive activist manual that includes the four Guides
Without sign nor chatter, listed below, plus The Ecological Effects of Roads, Gather-
ing Information with the Freedom of Information Act, and
he was there more!
Road-Ripper's Guide to the National Forests ($4, $7 non-mem-
Watching from the other side.... bers) —By Keith Hammer. How-to procedures for getting
Roadkill roads closed and revegetated, descriptions of environmen-
tal laws, road density standards & Forest Service road poli-
cies.
Jeff Striebel, Midland, MI Road-Ripper's Guide to the National Parks ($4, $7 non-mem-
bers) —By David Bahr & Aron Yarmo. Provides background
on the National Park System and its use of roads, and out-
lines how activists can get involved in NPS planning.
Road-Ripper's Guide to Off-Road Vehicles ($4, $7 non-mem-
bers) —By Dan Wright. A comprehensive guide to reducing
the use and abuse of ORVs on public lands. Includes an ex-
tensive bibliography.
Road-Ripper's Guide to the BLM ($4, $7 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.

Join Wildlands CPR Today!

____$30 Standard Name:__________________________________________________
____$15 Low Income
____$50 Friend
____$200 Supporter Organization:____________________________________________
____$500 Sponsor
____Other: $____________ Address:________________________________________________
____$15 ($25 non-members)
Handbook (includes all 4 guides)
City/State/Zip:___________________________________________
____$4/Guide ($7 non-members)
- circle your choices BLM, ORV, NF, NP Phone/Fax/e-mail:________________________________________
____Total enclosed $______________ ________________________________________________________
Visions...

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

Wildlands Center for Preventing Roads

P.O. Box 7516
Missoula, MT 59807

“I have always thought that the

substitution of the internal combustion
machine for the horse marked a very
gloomy milestone in the progress of
mankind.” -Winston Churchill