Bitterroot National Forest Supervisor Dave Bull and a team of Forest Service specialists joined members of the Ravalli County Resource Advisory Committee last week on a trip up Cow Creek for an on-the-ground assessment of the effects of the Blodgett Creek Fire that came roaring out of Blodgett Canyon in the year 2000.

Fire

Bruce Windhorst, Fire Management Officer for the Stevensville and Darby Ranger Districts, described how the Blodgett Fire blew out of the canyon on July 29. The initial response to the fire was a mutual aid response involving various local fire departments and good progress was made in battling the blaze the first day.

According to Windhorst, the fire was pushed back into the rocks at the base of the mountain and by nightfall crews thought that the blaze had been “locked in” at the rocks. But the fire climbed up the mountain through the rocks and emerged on the ridge top above Pinesdale. Retardant was dropped but the fire was essentially out of control. Over a period of several days it marched north, crossing over into Canyon Creek and spotting across Mill Creek. It also burned down slope toward Pinesdale and burned within a few hundred yards of homes in the lower portion of the Cow Creek drainage. The fire was not officially declared out until October.

Windhorst explained how unpredictable fires blowing out of the Westside canyons can be due to the swirling effects of winds at the mouth of the canyons, with temperature, weather and topography all playing a role.

Timber

Sue MacMeeken, a Forest Silvaculturalist and Timber Management Officer, then described the difference between “what we thought would happen and what actually happened after the fires.”

About 300,000 acres were burned on the forest that year. About half (160,000 acres) of the burned acres were classified as high intensity and moderate intensity burns that the Forest Service believed would require reforestation efforts by the agency. The plan was to plant about 50,000 acres over a nine-year period.

Things didn’t go as planned, however.

In the eight years that have passed, only about 16,000 acres have been planted. By year nine the total acres replanted could reach about 18,000 acres. That amounts to only about 10 percent of what was planned and totals about 6 million trees.

The plan was to primarily manage the land for restoration of Ponderosa pine, but a combination of factors thwarted those aims. First off, virtually no natural regeneration of Ponderosa pine was observed in the burned areas. Secondly, the agency’s ‘seed bank’ was empty and there were no seedlings available for planting.

Then in 2002 and 2003 there was a phenomenal production of pine seeds, so the plan was to plant Ponderosa Pine and let the other trees, primarily Lodgepole pine and Douglas fir, regenerate naturally.

The agency expected Douglas fir and Ponderosa pine to begin naturally reseeding inward from the edges of the burns, and that only the middle of the burns would have to be re-seeded. But what happened was the Douglas fir and the Lodgepole pine showed a remarkable ability to begin reseeding themselves in the middle of the burned areas.

As a result of all this, according to MacMeeken, the recovering areas are becoming a mosaic of mostly fir and Lodgepole pine, with some planted Ponderosa, and some open, unregenerated areas.

“We are O.K. with that,” said MacMeeken. She explained how such varied regeneration in a patchwork across the landscape can play an important role in how future fires burn by creating natural firebreaks. As future fires burn in the area they will also bump up against old burn areas in various stages of regeneration and recovery. This, too, will affect the way future fires burn, possibly reducing potential for fires to crown out in some areas.

As far as regeneration of trees in the burned areas goes, the biggest surprise is what’s happening with the Aspen trees. It is a species in decline throughout the West, according to MacMeeken. Concerned about the fate of Aspen in the burned area the agency began mapping and monitoring the trees. It was believed that special efforts might be required, such as fencing, to protect the new seedlings or sprouting clones from being ravaged by grazing animals. But what the agency found is that the trees are recovering phenomenally well.

“We have hundreds of thousands of acres of Aspen trees coming up,” said MacMeeken. “more than we know what to do with.”

The trees reproduce both by making seeds and by new shoots coming up from the roots, a process called cloning. She said it is generally thought that reproduction by seeding rather than cloning is rare, but that is not the case here. Almost all the regenerating Aspen in the burned areas are seedlings. Where did all the seeds come from? It is a surprising phenomenon that is not yet understood.

MacMeeken also noted that the notion of planting grass over an entire burned area to reduce post-fire erosion was also problematic. For one thing, the most significant erosion will take place in the first year after the fire, before the grass can take hold. Another problem is that where grass does take hold it will inhibit the recovery of trees in that area. She said that it is better to use physical barriers such as logs or even bales of straw to address immediate erosion concerns.

Infestations of burned areas by weeds can also be a problem. In areas with good aspect – such as a north facing slope with the right moisture – native grasses may beat out unwanted invasive species like knapweed. But on dryer south slopes knapweed can be a big problem. The agency uses both chemical spraying and biological controls on the knapweed and has some success.

One problem with successfully ridding an area of knapweed, however, is that another noxious weed, cheat grass, commonly comes in behind and getting rid of cheat grass is even harder than getting rid of knapweed, it seems.

Birds

Trees are not the only thing affected by fire, of course, there are also the animals. But ornithologist Paul Belanger cautioned the group against talking about the destruction of habitat. Instead, he said, we need to recognize that it is really just a change in habitat. There are certain birds, like the Black-backed woodpecker, and the Lewis’ woodpecker, that are only found in burned areas.

Birds, said Belanger, fill all sorts of niches in the forest. There are birds that nest in the crowns of trees, others that nest in branches, some that nest in tree cavities, and others that nest on the ground. Birds also have different foraging habits. Some, like the Piliated woodpecker, glean insects off branches and bark. Other woodpeckers will drill into the trees to get woodboring insects. Some birds, like the Towhee, glean insects off the ground. Some prefer to catch their insects on the fly, like the Lewis’ woodpecker. As a result, any type of forest, even a recently burned forest, is preferred habitat for some birds.

Belanger has studied a section of the burn along Cow Creek above the town of Pinesdale with funds from the National Forest Foundation. In this plot, over the last two years, he has observed eight nesting Lewis’ woodpeckers, which only live in burned habitat. He noted that a lot of his research about birds has been confirmed by his observations. For instance, the fact that primary cavity nesting birds, like the Lewis’ woodpecker, prefer broken topped trees, probably due to increased rot from catching rainwater and the increased insects that this attracts. He said that 70 percent of the Lewis’ woodpeckers he observed in the study plot were using broken-topped trees.

The removal of the tree canopy by fire also encourages the growth of shrubs and grasses that take advantage of the sunshine. This in turn attracts insects that thrive on the green foliage, which in turn attracts flycatching birds taking advantage of the numerous insects and the open space they need to catch the insects in the air.

Belanger noted, as a hummingbird flew past us on the site, that many of the newly thriving shrubs taking advantage of the open canopy and sunshine also produced flowers that in turn attract nectar-loving birds, like the hummingbird.

As a sharp shinned hawk swooped through the air nearby, Belanger noted that burned areas also attract birds that like to dine on other birds and take advantage of the open space between burned trees for that purpose.

Water

Forest Hydrologist Ed Snook explained how under burning and thinning of the timberland in the watershed above Pinesdale helps the municipal water system in the long term by reducing treatment costs and also producing a little more water.

Snook also explained the significant effect that forest fire has on the hydrology of the forest and its streams. Fire can cause more water to run off a given area in a number of ways. This happens by the reduction of “interception” of precipitation by the forest canopy and the reduction in water loss due to evapotranspiration since many of the trees, besides being stripped of needles, have also been killed. There is also the associated loss of storage capacity by the burning of the duff layer covering the forest floor, which ordinarily acts as a sponge collecting and holding water in the area.

The increased surface water flow from a burned area creates a lot of surface erosion, adding to sediment loads in the streams. It also increases the chance of flash flooding in the area, and greater debris floods that can plug culverts, creating additional flooding across roads. The increased level of runoff may also cause additional erosion on the roads and along the roadsides. The opening of the forest canopy following a fire also leads to earlier snowmelt and thus earlier runoffs. This also leads to diminished stream flows later in the season.

Post-fire effects upon hydrology are not all negative from the human point of view. The increased amount of woody debris and large trees in the stream may actually enhance fish habitat. The surge of growth in vegetation along burned over stream sides also may increase nutrients in the riparian area, supporting more insect life and making for bigger, healthier fish populations.

Studies of harvested areas along streams have shown that if 20 percent or more of a fully stocked stand is removed, effects upon the hydrology may be observed. It takes about 40 years for the stream to return to pre-harvest hydrological conditions. It may take longer with fire, he said, and even longer the higher the elevation.

Precipitation differs drastically on the forest depending on the elevation. It averages about 14 inches per year in the valley bottom but may reach 30 to 40 inches at 6,000 feet and up to 80 or 90 inches per year at 8,000 feet.

Snook said that on the forest it is fisheries concerns that are driving riparian area management. The biggest effect on fisheries is the increase in sediment levels in the streams.

“It is a water quality issue,” said Snook. He said that studies have shown that a 300-foot buffer zone along the streams will filter out about 90 percent of the sediment in the runoff flowing into the streams.

Mitigation efforts used by the agency after a fire may include placing barriers on the forest floor to slow runoff, developing sediment traps along roadsides, and increasing the size of culverts to handle the increased water flows.

When all is said and done, there is a lot of variety in the effects on fisheries after a fire. In some cases the effects will benefit the fishery and in other cases it will not, he said.

Planning staff recommends zoning deadline extension

By Michael Howell

The Ravalli County Planning Department made a recommendation to the County Commissioners last Monday to extend the deadline for adopting new countywide zoning regulations to sometime in May 2009. The current schedule calls for adoption of new zoning regulations in November, 2008, when the current Interim Zoning regulations are set to expire.

The planning staff told the Commissioners that it was evident, after comments upon Draft B, that they needed more time to make necessary changes to the zoning regulations. There is also the matter of transitioning to a new planning director, which is currently underway in the wake of Planning Director Karen Hughes’ recent resignation, referred to as “personnel changes.” And, to top it off, the Planning staff wants to take on the zoning project’s mapping process. The current contract with Clarion Associates assigns that task to the consulting company.

The new plan would also call for putting the mapping process on hold until work on Draft C zoning regulations is hammered into some “publicly acceptable” document. The staff outlined in a memo to the Commissioners a step-by-step process to the adoption of the regulations and maps. All dates set as goals in the new schedule are “the earliest dates possible” for each component. However, any delay in any one part of the project, notes the staff in its memo, is likely to result in the delay of the other components, as well as the final adoption process. That means, given any delays in any part of the process, the end date of May 2009 may have to be pushed even further out.

First priority would be to complete Draft C of the zoning regulations by the end of July. The staff noted three issues that could serve to delay that draft. One was the need to decide between a one dwelling unit per 10-acre district, or a one-per-10 and a one-per-40. The second was any delay in getting feedback from municipalities and sewer districts on the urban district proposal. The third involved questions concerning proposals to change the landowner tools such as cluster/conservation design developments.

The staff also recommended that the staff and the commissioners “conduct an internal review of Draft C to identify any ‘red flags’ prior to broad public release.”

Clarion Associates is set to return to the valley in the first half of August to conduct a public presentation/workshop on the Draft C zoning regulations.

Public comment on the draft will be accepted for a month following publication. The Planning staff will then conduct the same kind of review and compilation of the feedback as they did for Draft B. That is scheduled to be published in September.

If all goes well and without a hitch, a fine-tuned version is set to be released in October as Draft D and forwarded to the county for departmental and legal review.

Attention would then shift to production of Draft 2 zoning maps and would be produced by the Planning Department, using Clarion as a technical advisor. Meetings with citizens and organizations would be held from September to November. The Draft 2 zoning map is scheduled to be published by the end of November 2009.

Final public comments would then be heard on both the zoning regulations and the maps through the end of the year. The Planning Board would hold public hearings in January and February, with a final recommendation issued in mid-February. The Board of County Commissioners will publish a draft toward the beginning of March and hold public hearings in March and April 2009. If adopted, an “intent to adopt” would be issued in April. A thirty-day protest period follows. If no protest action succeeds, the new regulations would become effective around May 2009.

Commissioner Thompson noted that he would not be around to vote on the question under this new timeline and he regretted that, but he thought it was the wise course of action for the county.

“The bulk of the comments I’ve heard,” said Thompson, “are to slow down, take your time, because we want a quality project.”

Commissioner Chilcott was in agreement with Thompson and so was Commission Chair Carlotta Grandstaff.

“I wanted a quality product by the deadline, but that does not seem possible now,” said Grandstaff.

Commissioner Kathleen Driscoll was absent.

Commissioner Jim Rokosch registered some reservations about the plan. He said that he could not agree with simply letting the Interim Zoning regulations expire and go for a period with no zoning regulations. He suggested that the Board consider enacting a new set of Interim Zoning regulations to govern until the county wide zoning process was completed.

“I think it would be an absolute disaster to go back to no zoning,” said Rokosch.

There was also discussion among the commissioners about the possibility and the legality of adopting zoning regulations before adopting any maps. Commissioner Greg Chilcott saw the attempt to adopt any zoning regulations without accompanying maps as “a real problem” and possibly illegal.

“To use them in the subdivision review process without maps is also problematic,” said Chilcott. He said that it could be viewed as a “back-door” effort to do something sneaky without any corresponding maps.

Stewart Brandborg, President of Bitterrooters for Planning (BfP), said that a delay was probably appropriate because there were many issues that required more time to be fully addressed by the public. “BfP sees that basic resource evaluations still need to be considered and integrated into the document.”

He said that soil conditions and wildlife habitat all need to be evaluated and addressed in the process. He also recommended the commission get careful legal determination about how to prevent a flood of subdivision applications when the current Interim Zoning expires.

Other members of the public expressed frustration at all the work that was done by the Community Planning Committees that now seemed to be for nothing, about the all the legal issues being addressed so slowly, and the lack of any solid deadlines in the new schedule.

Another said that the extended deadline was “just what I’ve been looking for.” He said that “to ask for a quality project without assessment of these things won’t get us what we want.”

Scheduled only as a Planning Department update, no decision about the new plan could be made. It was tentatively agreed that the commissioners would seek an opinion from the County Attorney’s office about the legality of enacting another Interim Zoning ordinance when the current one expires, and then meet to discuss the matter further.

In the meantime, the Planning Department is operating under the “impression” that the Board is, generally, positively disposed toward adopting the new schedule.

County Attorney answers questions about zoning

By Michael Howell

On June 27, County Attorney George Corn answered a few questions posed by the Planning Department, Clarion Associates, the Clerk and Recorder’s Office, and the County Commissioners about the countywide zoning process.

Do statements regarding private property rights set forth in Ravalli County’s Growth Policy prohibit adoption of lawful zoning?

“No… there is nothing in the statutes supporting the argument that growth policy provisions may deny the authority of a county to enact zoning, because zoning is the primary way a county implements a growth policy,” said Corn.

Does the state law authorizing “local option cluster development regulations” require enactment of such zoning regulations to zone cluster development?

“No… I can find no requirement in Montana law that the County must adopt cluster development subdivision regulations in addition to zoning regulations.”

What are the guidelines for the county zoning “protest provisions” as set forth in Montana law?

Corn notes that several questions have been raised relative to these provisions.

Who is qualified to protest?

The criteria for protesting the creation or amendment of a zoning district or regulations is whether 1) a person owns real property within the district, 2) and their name appears on the last completed assessment role of the county. The zoning may not be adopted if 1) 40 percent of the freeholders within the district protest, or 2) freeholders representing 50 percent of the titled property ownership whose property is taxed for agricultural purposes or as forest lands.

How are protests counted?

Each freeholder gets one vote no matter how many parcels that person owns. The combined total ownership must represent 50 percent of the total property ownership in the district. All owners of jointly owned property or commonly held property must sign the protest before that property may be included in the protest.

What’s the definition of a zoning district?

Corn recommends that the regulations contain a description of the zoning district as the overall area to be zoned by the regulations and stipulate that zoning designations will be uniform within the district. As applied to the protest provisions, it means that the persons residing in the unincorporated area, or district, that will be affected by adoption of the regulations, would be qualified to protest.

Can the County define the zoning district according to school district boundaries for the purposes of the protest provisions?

To define the protest district as different from the boundaries of the zoning district itself is not possible. Although separate zoning districts set according to school district boundaries could be created, they must all have a uniform classification system throughout the entire unincorporated area of the county.

What are the obligations and opportunities for cooperation on city/county planning concerns?

Municipalities can only extend their zoning into the county if there is no county zoning or subdivision regulations. Several options are available for mutual cooperation through participation on boards, even consolidation of boards.

County zoning regulations by law “must, as nearly as possible, be made compatible with zoning ordinances of the municipality within the jurisdictional area.” Corn states that the zoning ordinances of municipalities should be taken into consideration in the zoning process “to achieve as much compatibility as possible given all other considerations.”

Is the county prohibited from zoning agricultural activities by the law?

“Yes, as to existing agricultural activities and no, in regard to future agricultural activities.” Corn notes that state law explicitly forbids any regulation that prohibits any existing agricultural activity. But there is no case law on how these might relate to future agricultural activities, he wrote.

May Ravalli County use certain zoning mechanisms?

Yes. The County may use such mechanisms as Transfer Development Rights, Planned Unit Developments, and density bonus provisions.

May Ravalli County adopt overall zoning regulations without specific maps?

Corn states that it appears generally that it could. But he questions the desirability or enforceability of regulations adopted without any specifically designated classified zones. It would also create the possibility of a “double protest” because each could be protested if they were done separately.

“The practicality and timing of such a process should be discussed fully with the professional agency contracted to assist with Ravalli County’s zoning. Any determination of the legality of such proposed general regulations would have to be made in light of the text of those regulations to ascertain whether a map is necessary.”

Permanent closure of Middle Bear Creek Road not likely

By Michael Howell

The County Commissioners entertained a discussion about the possible permanent closure of Middle Bear Creek Road last Monday, but, given the stiff opposition from many area residents who turned out for the meeting and the strong recommendation by county Road and Bridge Department Supervisor David Ohnstad against any permanent closure, a successful formal petition to close the road does not seem likely to succeed.

A set of multiple culverts on the road got clogged by debris in recent high water and the creek flooded over the road, basically washing it out. That was about the second week of May. Since then there has been no access across the damaged area by vehicles.

Then, in the middle of June, Commissioner Jim Rokosch was approached by a resident, who lives on the road near the closed crossing, Eugene Aarestad, and asked to consider closing the road permanently. Aarestad told Rokosch that the neighbors in the area were supportive of the idea and that he would donate the land required to make cul-de-sac turnarounds at the creek.

On Monday Aarestad presented the commissioners a petition containing about 18 signatures asking that the road be closed to protect wildlife habitat, to reduce dust pollution, and reduce traffic on the road.

A roomful of people then testified against any closure. They cited problems and expenses created by the current break in the road for emergency services, school buses, postal and other delivery services, as well as the convenience for local residents for having an open road.

Merle Unruh submitted documentary evidence of the long historic use of the road and, following a petition of residents, its adoption as an official county road.

Road Supervisor David Ohnstad, in his recommendation, said that fixing the road was not a budget problem. He said that his intention was to fix it, but that the department had been concentrating on other priorities such as emergency high water responses, emergency pavement repairs and dust abatement operations.

“The decision reflects priority and is not indicative of a lack of interest, nor is it a budget problem,” wrote Ohnstad. He said that at least a temporary fix was planned when the high water resides, and could be completed before the end of July.

Commissioner Alan Thompson told those present that before a county road could be closed, an official petition would have to be presented to the Commissioners and that the present list of signatures did not meet county requirements. A $400 fee was required when submitting an official petition for a road closure. The fee was used to pay for the cost of generating a report by an engineer and a commissioner after examining the road. Then a public hearing would be held.

“This is not something we can say today, ‘close the road’,” said Thompson. “I would certainly not be in favor of diminishing emergency access in the area.” He also said that he would not agree to close a road where there was some opposition from residents.

Commission Chair Carlotta Grandstaff asked for a show of hands of those opposed to closing the road and most everyone in the room raised their hand. It was more than 18, closer to 30.

Thompson said that someone could pay the fee and bring forward a petition to close the road, but there would not be great traction, given the number of people against it and the Supervisor’s recommendation against it.

Juvenile Detention needs licensed medication administrator

By Michael Howell

Ravalli County Commissioners received notice once again that the county needs to provide a licensed health worker to administer medication to all youth in the detention facility. The message came this time from Calvin Robinson, Director of the Juvenile Detention Facility.

In a letter to the Commissioners, Robinson explained that state law requires such an arrangement and it has to be implemented by August 25, 2008, which is the date of the County’s license review by state officials.

Spectra, the company that provides this service to the adult detention facility, has offered to provide the service to the Juvenile Detention facility for $30,000 per year.

“I have talked to Judy in public health,” wrote Robinson, “and she told me that she will not supply these services. To hire a private nurse would not legally take the burden off of Ravalli County as they do not carry malpractice insurance.”

Commission Chair Carlotta Grandstaff said that the County is currently in need of a County Health Officer and has not yet advertised the position. She said one option might be to change the job description to include these services to the Juvenile Detention.

Grandstaff said that it was problematic, no matter how you look at it, because the need for drug dispensation at the facility is not great. Last year only 16 juveniles at the facility needed the service and drugs were dispensed only 78 times. Yet the job means being on call twenty-four hours, seven days a week. She said that it is hard to conceive of a cost-effective way to get the job done.

Stevi swimming pool open

By Michael Howell

With temperatures forecast to hit the 97 degree mark Friday and the river still too swollen, rapid and cold to jump into, a lot of people will be happy to know that the Stevensville swimming pool is open for business. Especially the 75 kids that have registered for swimming lessons.

The pool was shut down last Friday afternoon due to a broken motor on the water pump, according to Town Water Supervisor George Thomas. It remained closed through Monday.

But on Monday, Swimming Program Director Rachel Ludington said that repairs had been accomplished and the pool would be opening Tuesday morning (July 1).

The swimming pool is open on weekdays to the general public from 1 to 4 p.m. and again from 7 to 9 p.m. On Saturday, open swimming is from 12 noon to 4 p.m.

Ludington said that a water aerobics course is being offered on Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday from 4 to 5 p.m.

Page One •	Valley News •	Op/Ed •	Sports •	Calendar •	Classifieds •	Links •	About Us •	Back Issues •	Email Us •	Home
©2008 Bitterroot Star This site was Done By Dooney