Road closure meetings begin
At the Three Rivers Ranger District on Feb. 19, the first of four travel analysis discussions put together by the Kootenai National Forest was held to show how their online interactive map can be used for the public to post comments on any of the forest’s inventoried roads. Several hard copy maps were on display for people to view and give input on if they are unable to access the online version.
Forest Service Transportation Planner Shelly Anderson sat in front of a large flat-screen and wielded a computer mouse to show how the map worked. The vast majority of roads on the map were depicted in green, with a minority marked in red. Roads marked in red are deemed roads not likely needed for future use.
There was a total of 93 miles of road determined to possibly not be needed in the future, 92 miles of which are already closed to public use.
Anderson described how the Forest Service decided roads were not likely needed in the future, “There were a bunch of benefit questions for why we might need a road, and a bunch of risk questions for what might cause problems if we keep a road,” she said.
A total of 15 questions were used to determine whether a road will be needed in the future, which included 8 benefit and 7 risk questions.
Most of the road benefit questions involve continued access to private property, management and special use areas, research areas and recreation sites. The risks posed by roads include damage to watersheds and aquatic life, soil destabilization, fragmentation of wildlife habitat and the spread of invasive plant species.
The travel analysis process lays the groundwork for future travel related projects, but site-specific decisions are not proposed during analysis. The procedure, however, will ultimately direct travel management direction.
In 2001, the Forest Service put forth a long-term plan for managing their road system. They recognized the need to identify a budget friendly system allowing access for varied purposes as well as restoration and protection of ecosystems. Although the plan was on the books, it took nearly a decade for the process to begin in earnest, because of numerous factors outside the agency’s control.
In November 2010, the Chief’s Office of the Forest Service circulated a directive titled, Travel Management, Implementation of 36 CFR, Part 212, Subpart A (36 CFR 212.5(b), to all line officers and program directors. The memo directed national forests nationwide to identify an ecologically and fiscally sustainable minimum road system by 2015.
Forest Service regulations at 36 CFR 212.5(b) (1) requires the identification of the minimum road system needed for safe and efficient travel and for administration, utilization, and protection of forest lands, while 36 CFR 212.5(b)(2) requires the Forest Service to identify roads no longer needed to meet forest resource management objectives.
In March 2012, the 2010 directive was reissued to affirm the agency’s commitment to completing a travel analysis report by Sept. 30, 2015. It goes on to state, any roads not included in a travel analysis report by the end of fiscal year 2015 will not be able to use capital improvement and maintenance funds for maintenance of those roads.
The Kootenai National Forest Plan states no more than 30 percent of Forest Service roads are scheduled to meet maintenance level requirements and between 150 and 350 miles of road will be decommissioned or placed into intermittent stored service during the plan’s 15-year lifespan.
During the past 20 years Kootenai National Forest has decommissioned approximately 1,000 miles of road, according to Forest Engineer Tim Rusdal. He also said the cost to decommission a road varies greatly, but on average can be between $5,000 and $10,000 per mile.
County commissioner Greg Larson attended the open house and believes the county can’t afford to go backward. “One concern is by using money in the budget for decommissioning they’re destroying something they already put in,” he said. He’s also troubled by the possibility of losing access to land where timber management might be needed or desired.
To Larson, road closures also exacerbate issues releated to fire fighting. With the cost of fighting forest fires increasing during the past 20 years, the budgets for other forest programs, including those that can help prevent and limit fire damage, have decreased, according to an August 2014 report from Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsak.
The proportion of the Forest Service’s budget for firefighting has risen from 16 percent in 1995 to 42 percent today, forcing cuts in other areas.
One of the areas that has suffered from budget cuts during the past several years has been active timber management. Cuts in the management budget adversely impact the forest service’s ability to offer evaluate and offer timber sales, which in turn harm the already-fragile economy of Lincoln County.
The road system on Forest Service lands was primarily constructed to develop areas for resource extraction. However, over the last several decades, uses on the National Forests have diversified to include more recreational activities; watershed, fisheries, and wildlife improvements; as well as timber harvesting and similar resource development.
Rusdal thought the meeting at the Three Rivers Ranger District went well. “I thought everybody had some very good questions to ask, that’s why we’re there, to answer questions and look for people to supply their input. That’s the purpose of the open house,” he said.
Open house meeting for public discussion and providing input on future road management decisions continue tonight in Trout Creek at the Cabinet Ranger District from 5 p.m. until 7 p.m. A meeting at Supervisor’s Office in Libby is planned on Feb. 25 and one in Eureka at Riverstone on Feb. 26. Both of those meetings are also planned for 5 p.m. to 7 p.m.