County miffed over lack of standing to object to BNF travel plan

By Michael Howell

Last Tuesday, the Ravalli County Commissioners met to consider filing an objection to the recently released Record of Decision (ROD) and Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Bitterroot National Forest Travel Plan. Instead, they voted simply to send a letter to BNF Supervisor Julie King reminding her that the County’s Natural Resource Policy should be considered as an official comment by the county on the proposed travel plan.
The draft ROD and FEIS are subject to public objection under Code of Federal Regulations §218, but objections may only be filed by those who previously submitted comments specific to the project. According to Forest Supervisor Julie King, since the county failed to submit any comments specific to the proposed Travel Plan during the public comment period, it now lacks standing to file any objections.
Commission Chair Jeff Burrows expressed dismay at the fact that King called to inform him that the Board of Commissioners had no standing to file an objection only after the public comment period was closed. Burrows believes that under the laws requiring “coordination” with local government in their decision making process the Forest Service should have included them directly in the process. Instead they are being treated as though they were simply “John Q. Public,” he said.
Burrows stated that he had invited the Forest Service to send a representative to their meeting to discuss details of the Travel Plan but that King had declined, so instead he invited Mike Jeffords, a member of a few different off-road vehicle organizations, to give them an overview of the plan.
Jeffords concentrated on the effects of the plan on off-road vehicle users in his presentation. He said that although the plan includes many miles of road for motor vehicle use his groups were more interested in off-road use of trails and the plan excludes them. Both off road vehicles and bicycles have been excluded from some prime areas that they traditionally used, he said. He believes these user groups, unlike any others, were singled out unfairly to absorb more restrictions in the plan than any other use. He said he was not authorized to speak about the details but his organizations would be filing an objection to the decision.
Following Jeffords presentation, the meeting was opened to public comment. Commissioner Burrows said he was “disappointed” in the presentation. “I was looking for details and facts, not a soap box presentation,” he said.
Although a few other off road vehicle users, including mountain bicycle users who have been excluded from the Wilderness Study Areas as well as the wilderness, spoke in objection to the plan, most of the public comment was overwhelmingly in support of the plan.
Many supporters expressed a few complaints based on their own special interests and/or in the interests of wildlife, most said they were, on the whole, satisfied that the Forest Service had made a good faith effort to reconcile all the competing interests and had succeeded for the most part.
“No one got everything they wanted in this plan,” said Kirk Thompson.
Commissioner Greg Chilcott said that he believes the Forest Service erred in not considering the county’s Natural Resource Policy as their official public comment on the Travel Plan. The policy does state that the county is in opposition to the closing or decommissioning of any roads on the forest.
“During wildfire season we are partners,” he said. “I don’t understand how we can be partners one day and out of the loop the next.” He said the county wanted to be a part of the discussion but was not invited to the table.
“We did make a comment. That’s why we produced a Natural Resource Policy, and it should be heard,” said Chilcott.
Commissioner J.R. Iman suggested that the Commission could consider another alternative.
“If there are people who are going to object and we share their views then we should figure out how to give that more weight,” he said. He said the forest road system needed to be kept open to fight fires.
Burrows said that the real issue was not so much objecting to the decision that was reached, but to the process.
Commissioner Ray Hawk stated that the Forest Service was not following the law when they refuse to coordinate with local government.
Iman suggested that they get a legal opinion about the question of their standing to object.
Deputy County Attorney Howard Recht said that he had not researched the issue of standing but neither had he seen any facts they met the requirements of “coordination.”
Chilcott made the motion to send a letter to the agency reminding them of the county’s submittal of its Natural Resource Policy for consideration and the legal requirement to coordinate with local government. The motion was approved unanimously.
Last week’s release of the Travel Management Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Draft Record of Decision (ROD) comes after more than five years of public involvement and a record 13,400 comments received following scoping and the release of the Draft EIS in 2009.
These areas will be designated on a new motor vehicle use map (MVUM) and over-snow vehicle use map (OSVUM) the forest will develop and make available to the public free of charge. The new maps will help clearly define which areas on the forest are open/closed to motorized use. The maps are expected to be available later this year.