Building Roads on Federal Lands ESP Seminar Brian Hopkinson & Theresa Carpenter 20 October 2005.

Building Roads on Building Roads on Federal LandsFederal Lands

ESP Seminar

Brian Hopkinson & Theresa Carpenter

20 October 2005

Background

In 2001, USDA announces Roadless Area Conservation Rule

This rule established prohibition on road construction, re-

construction and timber harvesting on inventoried roadless

areas (IRA) in National Forest Service Lands.

58.5 million acres in 38 States and Puerto Rico

31% of Forest Service Lands

97% in 12 States (Western US)

24.2 million acres already prohibit road construction and

re-construction under current land management direction.

January 2001 - Roadless Area Conservation Rule signed by President Clinton in “final days” of administration and publishedin Federal Register on January 12, 2001, withimplementation date of March 2001

May 2001 – USDA announces implementation will proceed, but amendmentswould be considered due to concerns expressed bylocal communities, tribes and States.

Roadless Rule challenged by nine lawsuits in Idaho, Utah, North Dakota, Wyoming, Alaska, and District of Columbia

July 2003 – US District Court (Wyoming) finds Roadless Rules promulgatedin illegal manner, and violates National Environmental Policy Act and the Wilderness Act (appealed to 10th Circuit Court)

May 2005 – USDA announces final rule, which provides nationally-directed stewardship of Roadless Area and petition process forState governors to seek individual rulemaking for managingIRA in their States.

September 2005 – USDA awards $115,000 to State of Colorado for petition preparation.

Timeline

Ten Lakes IRA in Kootenia NF, MT (photo from roadless.fs.fed.us)

Argument Against Building Roads on Federal Lands

Conservation of these pristine Federal land areas desired

because they possess “social and ecological value and

characteristics that are becoming increasingly scarce”. (USFS)

Scientific literature generally notes negative ecological effects of roads

(Trombulak & Frissell, 2000).

Including:

Habitat Degradation

Fragmentation

Animal Behavior

Modification

Invasive species

Argument Against Building Roads on Federal Lands

1. Ecological Impacts

Fragmentation is the division of large, continuous ecosystems into smaller

areas surrounds by altered or disturbed areas. By removing habitat and

creating “high contrast edges” in otherwise continuous vegetation,

roads cause fragmentation of ecosystems.

Source: Trombulak & Frissell, 2000

Both direct (habitat destruction) and indirect (behavior modification)

fragmentation effects lead to changes in demographics,

in-breeding, loss of genetic variability, and population extinctions.

‘Road avoidance behavior’ and changes in ranging is common, for

larger animals such as elk, grizzly and black bears, wolf, and bighorn

sheep, to white-footed mice and other rodents to land snails.

Other effects include shifts in home ranges, population size, reproductive

success and changes in physiology.

Argument Against Building Roads on Federal Lands

1. Ecological Impacts

Road construction disrupts and stresses native habitat, allowing for

penetration by invasive (non-native) species.

Road presence allows for a “corridor of movement” for further spread

of invasive species.

Photos of roadside infestation and control of Tree of heaven (www.invasive.org)

Argument Against Building Roads on Federal Lands

Increased soil compaction

Increased temperature

This draws certain species of animals causing increased

potential for mortality by vehicle collisions.

Increased concentration of heavy metals, salts

2. Additional Physical and Chemical Changes

Hydrologic changes

Roads act as barrier to natural flow paths (both surface and

subsurface) leading to concentration of flows and flood potential.

Also, the concentrated flow and unpaved roads increase

sediment delivery to streams impacting aquatic environment.

Geomorphologic response

Increased risk of land slides and debris flow

The Tongass National Forest,

encompassing the southeastern

pan-handle of Alaska, remains

part of the largest intact temperate

rainforest, and currently has

~4 million acres of old growth forest.

Over the past ½ century, Tongass

has lost ~1 million acres of old

growth forest to clearcut logging

and access roads.

Tongass has been exempted from the Roadless Rule under settlement

of a lawsuit brought by the State of Alaska and others (12/2003).

Argument Against Building Roads on Federal Lands

3. Protecting Old-Growth Forests

Source: www.savebiogems.org

Photo from redwood.forestconcil.org

Timber from National Forests makes up

only 3.9% of U.S. annual wood consumption –

Other methods may make up this percentage.

Argument Against Building Roads on Federal Lands

4. Unnecessary to Log in National Forests

5. Economics

FS manages 386,000 miles of roads (that’s 8 times the national highway system!)

Backlog of road maintenance and re-construction of existing road system

exceeds $8.4 billion.

(Source: USFS EIS)

Timber sales from National Forests, initially authorized to generate revenue,

now operator at a net LOSS. ($200 million to $1 billion annually)

(Source: The Economist, 12/11/1997; pro-roadless websites)

Basic “For” Arguments

• Wood is an environmentally friendly resource

• Importing wood can be more detrimental than domestic production

• Harvest from National Forests will decrease with Roadless Rule

• Impacts of logging can be minimized

Wood as a Resource

• Renewable

• Native Species

• Cultivated as an ecosystem

• Maintain ecosystem functions

Alternatives for Paper: Kenaf and Hemp

• Grown in monoculture

• Non-native plants

• Requires replacement of natural ecosystem

http://www.kenafsociety.org

Alternative Building Materials

• Steel – Non-renewable– Energy intensive and polluting to extract and

process

• Concrete– Production of cement is energy intensive

Wood Imports

• From Canada– Softwoods: building, paper– Destruction of boreal forests– 80% of harvest exported to

USA

• Others–Imports of tropical hardwoods; small but increasing

http://www.nrdc.org/land/forests/boreal/intro.asp

Timber Harvest in USA

• 80% public land, 20% private land

• Decline in harvest from National Forests

• Only 20% of new growth is “lost” each year

Williams, 2000

Roadless Rule

• Decrease timber offerings by 6% from current levels

• Sets aside 30% of forests from essentially all management or harvesting action

• Thinning small trees for fire suppression not cost effective w/out roads

Williams, 2000

Environmental Impacts

• Habitat Fragmentation - leave large tracts of forest

• Soil Disturbance – cable logging, minimize trail distances

• Nutrient Depletion – leave bark, small limbs

Smidt and Blinn, 2005

Cable Logging

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/dsc/album/album5.htm

ReferencesTrombulak, S.C., and C.A. Frissell, 2000: Review of ecological effects of

roads on terrestrial and aquatic communities. Conservation Biology,

14(1), 18-30.

USDA, 2000. Forest Roads: a synthesis of scientific information.

USDA Forest Service Report, H. Gucinski, M.J. Furniss, R.R. Ziemer,

and M.H. Brooks, eds., June 2000, 117 pp.

Williams, M., 2000. Forest Service Roadless Area Conservation: Final

Environmental Impact Statement, Forest Management Specialist Report.

USDA, USFS, Nov. 2000, 48 pp.

Smidt, Mathew and Blinn, Charles R. . Logging for the 21st Century:

Protecting the Forest Environment, 2005 http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/naturalresources/DD6518.html

Natural Resources Defense Council. The Boreal Forest: Earth's Green Crown. http://www.nrdc.org/land/forests/boreal/intro.asp