Winter Wildlands Alliance Grassroots Advocacy Conference - NOTES

Winter Wildlands Alliance Grassroots Advocacy Conference - NOTES

June 19, 2015

Session #1: Leslie Weldon, Deputy Chief, USDA Forest Service

1. Background: Forest Supervisor on Deschutes NF introduced me to winter travel management
2. New uses and existing ones
3. Shared love of wild places
4. Working together is paramount

1. MOU between USFS and WWA - SnowSchool
2. Conservation Education
3. Risk Management
4. Engagement with both young people and citizens in general, in partnership with orgs like WWA

1. NPS Centennial Next Year
2. Connect with every 4th grader in the country
3. Free passes for families

1. Risk Management
2. Avalanche Education
3. Outreach

1. Ecosystem Management
2. Invasive
3. Functional, healthy ecosystems at every scale
4. Partnerships on stewardship

1. The OSV Rule
2. Launched in 2005, under Chief Bosworth’s travel management initiative
3. Developing and identifying the minimum road system (Subpart A)
4. Designate roads and trails available for motorized use (Subpart B)
5. Over the snow, winter travel – OSV Rule (Subpart C)
6. Implementation
7. Existing winter use management is a starting point
8. Inventory being conducted across the country
9. Decision about which can be grandfathered into place versus which need to be reopened
10. Standard mapping protocol being developed
11. Work with the Regions to engage in new OSV travel planning
12. Intricacies
13. Places that will need additional clarification
14. Learning as we go along
15. Public participation
16. Need to focus on shared outcomes
17. What we see – groups like WWA have more eyes on the ground
18. Reflect data and perceptions back to the USFS – where are those places that the policies need to be stronger, clearer
19. Combine experience and problem-solving abilities
20. We will need to be creative

1. Questions:
2. How is the USFS prioritizing implementation regarding the timeline for rule implementation?
3. No specific end-date. There are too many variables. We didn’t want to create an expectation that we couldn’t meet
4. At the same time there is a need to engage because of the levels of use that we are currently seeing
5. Balance a complex and extensive process with the need to address impacts – giving ourselves some space
6. Regional Foresters will prioritize implementation once assessments are completed, based upon need to settle current travel management issues
7. What are “other public land resources” in the rule?
8. Meant to address emergent issues
9. Leaves space for local unit flexibility
10. How broad is “resources?” Why not use “values?”
11. I’m hearing that there is an experience that needs to be preserved
12. The value of the experience is part of the desired outcome within the resource values list
13. Is there any way to ensure uniformity on the National Forest regarding resource protection in the face of political pressure? Big differences between the units.
14. There is a big arc of learning that we will need to transfer from places that have gone through these processes and those that have not.
15. There is a level of consistency that is related to our guidance, and then a set of best practices that will get units there.
16. Jim Bedwell: That will be a regional office role. There will de directives and protocols that come from the rule, and it will be the Regional Offices that need to work with the Forests to create consistency. We’ll work on that.
17. AM I hearing that local folks need to be reaching out to both the Forests and the Regional Staff? Is there a role for a citizen’s proposal?
18. Yes – expressional of places that need to be preserved to both the Forest and the Region would be welcome
19. How will the OSV rule affect proposed ski area expansions?
20. Expansion permits need to be part of the whole public process
21. USFS responsibility to set up context
22. Work with local units
23. How will OSV planning be made financially feasible?
24. We need to focus on the outcomes that we want to get, and what needs to change to get those
25. We will always struggle with getting resources – need to make trade offs and work with others
26. What resources do we need to bring in?
27. Worried about grandfathering in uses that haven’t had public involvement – we will challenge it.
28. Line officers need to check in with the public on existing uses
29. Assessments will not be based upon the local line officer’s opinions, but on objective criteria that are ground-truthed with public stakeholders
30. Grandfathered in uses during the mapping phase will also need to go through a layer of public input

Session #2: Alison Flint, The Wilderness Society National Forest Action Center

A Technical Breakdown of the Forest Service’s Over-Snow Vehicle Rule

1. 1960s – motorized recreation explosion on public lands, user conflicts
2. 1970s – Congress was taking notice
3. 1971 – President Nixon issues executive order 11644 to management motorized rec on public lands that will minimize damage to the resources, wildlife, and user conflicts (“minimization criteria”)
4. 2005 – Bush Admin. travel management rule to implement Executive Order
5. Snowmobile exemption
6. Vast majority of USFS system open to over snow vehicle travel, only limited by their capability (53% open, 19% wilderness)
7. 2013 – WWA v. U.S. Forest Service – Court ordered agency to go back and develop new rule to be consistent with minimization criteria in Executive Order 11644
8. The OSV Rule, 36 C.F.R. § 212
9. Shift to a “closed unless designated open” system
10. USFS has struggled to apply criteria in the summer, resulting in litigation (e.g. Salmon-Challis NF, Idaho Conservation League v. Guzman)
11. There is a substantive obligation to be applying minimization criteria in the agency’s RODs, and to communicate this to the public
12. See WWA’s set of “Best Management Practices” to satisfy this obligation, and Cailin’s presentation tomorrow
13. Area Designations
14. Areas must be discrete and specifically delineated
15. Must be smaller than a Range District, though we have some concerns about this provision
16. Grandfathering previous designation decisions
17. Many decisions made in the 1980s and are out of date with user trends, technology, current wildlife science, and climate change
18. We would like the agency to take a very careful look and apply the minimization criteria screen
19. Adequate snowfall is a requirement
20. Projected and current climate change impacts
21. Address unreliable and changing snowpacks to minimize adverse impacts – time/seasonal restrictions
22. Minimum snowpack requirements
23. Routes within open areas
24. Concentration of use can be an outcome
25. Must also be subject to minimization criteria to address impacts
26. Mitigation versus minimization
27. Seasonal restrictions
28. Trails and areas be located to minimize impacts at the outset
29. How can impacts be further reduced through BMPs
30. Executive Order and OSV Rule provide a framework to make really good decisions
31. Dependent upon agency implementation, which has been a problem in the summer
32. Need to take a collective approach to get to good outcomes

1. Questions:
2. Snowbikes and increased distance that they can travel into wild places with potential to disturb wildlife
3. Minimization criteria – make sure agency knows location of critical calving grounds
4. See soundscape analyses used in Yellowstone NP
5. Bring and cite materials in comments submitted to agency
6. Forest Planning versus Travel Mgmt Planning – how to address these issues, and best forum to do so?
7. Something we’re struggling with as well
8. Have conversations with line officers on your forest
9. Is the BLM doing anything regarding OSV planning?
10. BLM has its own recommendations regarding the Executive Order
11. There are some areas where BLM has done this planning, but those areas are rare. BLM has also been a little slower.
12. Grandfathering versus new decisions?
13. Public notice without public involvement is only allowed if the previous decision was made with robust public involvement
14. Reasonable mitigation?
15. When we’re talking about designating the system we need to draw lines on the map that minimize impacts
16. Really fact specific regarding individual instance of mitigation provisions
17. Recreational users need to share information – OSV planning only applies to motorized use, but all users need to be engaged.

Session #3: Panel Discussion on Lessons Learned from Previous Travel Planning Efforts – Bob Moore, Backcountry Snowsports Initiative; Rich Doak, White River NF; Vera Smith, TWS National Forest Action Center

1. Bob Moore – BSI, National BLM planning experience.
2. White River NF Travel Mgmt Plan and Forest Plan
3. Check out CO Hut and Yurt Alliance
4. Get involved early, often and throughout the process
5. Vera Smith – TWS
6. Things agencies should do
7. Plan for off-road vehicles in a larger recreation context
8. Mistakes:
9. Making ORV designations without taking a hard look at the larger recreation context
10. Recreation and travel planning determined by default based on other resource allocations
11. Not minimizing conflicts with other recreational uses
12. Good example
13. Plan non-motorized and motorized uses together to ensure that non-motorized uses don’t just get relegated to the spaces in between, but actually that we are planning for them in a proactive way
14. For instance, when planning, consider:
15. The array of recreational uses, the required settings, and the desired outcomes
16. Recreation niche of the forest
17. Use trends
18. How ORVs affect the recreational experiences of others
19. Start with identifying the settings, then move on to designating trails and areas within those settings
20. Carefully craft public outreach strategies so that it leads to constructive engagement
21. Travel management is controversial and emotional
22. Structure public engagement to achieve specific purposes, and to avoid unnecessary conflict – e.g, encourage information sharing, communicate agency requirements and information needs, and foster solutions
23. One on one interview with VIP stakeholders (BLM example)
24. Field Trips
25. Things activists should do
26. Participate in process beyond comment writing
27. Go talk to other stakeholders
28. Go talk to agency – raise your concerns early and often, and provide supporting information and constructive recommendations
29. Provide as much supporting information as possible
30. Take lots of pictures and collect field data about resource damage, conflict and use patterns and submit it to the agency
31. Be as specific as possible – identifying and documenting particular problem routes or locations
32. For example, snowmobile overflights in ID monitoring tracks
33. Rich Doak – WRNF
34. Finished winter travel planning prior to OSV Rule (2011)
35. Ask about jargon and acronyms
36. Tied forest plan revision with travel management planning
37. Modes of transportation are a means to an end experiencially – family, friends, solitude, recreation, etc.
38. What is the experience you’re trying to provide?
39. What are the elements needed to get there?
40. Decisions needed to be implementable and reduce conflict
41. Agencies need help from the public – patience is needed on all sides
42. Equitability
43. Balancing what we do
44. Not about meeting all demand
45. Sense of place
46. Many emotions tied to that
47. Very real need to deal with these in the planning initiative
48. We need to go way beyond “acres and miles” – don’t let the dialogue devolve into that
49. Balance experience being provided with settings
50. Be sure to talk about the TYPE OF EXPERIENCES that you are looking for, and volumes of users before you start drawing on the map
51. Created non-motorized “bubbles” around the huts in the systems, including slopes to ski and access trails. Based upon emotional experiences.
52. Take into account national users not just local populations
53. Use risk management, avalanches, access points, sensitive areas, management capabilities etc. to determine what is reasonable and practical for winter use
54. Land management agencies can only manage the physical and social settings through managerial controls – we can’t do everything
55. Long-term sustainability also needs to be considered
56. Use natural or man-made boundaries as your winter boundaries – don’t draw a line right through a meadow.
57. Look at long-term costs not just upfront costs
58. Population increases, trends and changes in technology change user experiences
59. Varying skill levels must be accommodated

1. Questions
2. Were there any travel management decisions made based on the ability of the agency to enforce them?
3. Yes, needs and efficiency of LEO enforcement considered

Session #4, Hilary Eisen, Winter Wildlands Alliance Recreation Planning Coordinator

Effectively engaging in winter travel planning to protect your favorite backcountry areas

a)NEPA definition

b)Winter travel planning fits into NEPA

1. EA – with finding no significant impact
2. EIS with Record of Decision

c)EIS – Environmental Impact Statement

1. Scoping - USFS gathers information on proposed action, public can submit public comment (any concerns, areas of focus)
2. Alternative Development and Analysis – USFS develops set of alternatives based on the Purpose and Need (what are we planning to do and why are we planning to do that)
3. Time to meet with the USFS, get into the field, attend public meetings
4. Draft Environmental Impact Statement – look to see if the USFS addressed the things you noted in the scoping process?
5. Public provides input and comments on the Draft.
6. USFS provides purpose and need, proposed alternatives, affected environment and environmental consequences in this document.
7. Final EIS and Draft Record of Decision – USFS lays out the plan. Last chance for the public to comment on/object to the plan before it is released.
8. In objections, public must highlight specifics and give pointed feedback.
9. Also, it’s encouraged to give positive feedback, if necessary, directly to USFS.
10. Record of Decision – final record but there is still opportunity to litigate.
11. Implementation – working collaboratively with all stakeholders as well as the USFS to implement the final plan.

Session #5: Thoughts and Perspectives from the Snowmobile Community (panel discussion)

Sandra Mitchell, Fred Wiley, Scott Jones

a)Fred Wiley – former president of the CA/NV Snowmobile Assoc. – working collaboratively with all winter user groups.

1. Access in CA is a large component of travel management planning
2. RTP – in CA, 70% of those funds go to non-motorized projects
3. Education – direct with skiers, agencies and snowmobilers.
4. Maintain respect – for people, landscape, wildlife
5. Collaboration is the only way to resolve issues
6. Perfect travel management plan is inclusive

b)Scott Jones – CO Snowmobile Assoc. – funding

1. Access in CO is a large component of travel management planning
2. Grooming – this provides safety for a large number of users, dog musher access, xc skiers.
3. Maintaining parking lots – finding opportunities that work for everybody in summer and winter
4. Many of our users are also part of the multiple use model – they fish, hunt, ski, etc.
5. We need to focus on the things that we agree on.
6. Holistic approach to TMP

c)Sandra Mitchell – Public Lands ID State Snowmobile Assoc. – responsible shared use is our philosophy.

1. closures have to be manageable and definable – we respect closures
2. We are all out there to enjoy the backcountry for the same reasons.
3. Collaboration has not always been easy.
4. Fat tire bikes and mushers have to buy snowmobile stickers in Valley County, ID
5. Perfect travel management plan has to be flexible, all-inclusive

Session #6: Working with diverse stakeholders to find collaborative solutions

Chuck Ogilby – Vail Pass Task Force, Jonathan Hare – VPWRA Winter Backcountry Snow Ranger, Steve Bonowski – Vail Pass Task Force

a)Jon Hare

1. Strategic sign placement
2. Challenges from damage snowmobiles using the area when there is not enough snow
3. Better education needed for hybrid users
4. Hybrid skiers –hybrid skiers are the biggest supporting user group at Vail Pass. Support rules, fee, enforcement of rules. Most likely to talk with John about snowmobile trespass, most likely to approach people to talk about rules and regulations (social pressure)
5. Most likely to be organized and active too.
6. One of motorized reps on task force is a hybrid operator

b)Steve Bonowski – current president of VPTF

1. what can VPTF do as a support group for the USFS?
2. Staffing and volunteers are the best ways right now.

c)Chuck Ogilby – founding member of VPTF

1. late 80’s and early 90’s were chaos up on Vail Pass – folks needed to take responsibility

d)current map:

e)Future of the VPTF/VPWRA

1. big challenge is keeping bank account solvent
2. working with community stakeholders – a lot of stakeholders don’t even realize they’re stakeholders at this point

1