Utah drags its feet on roadless forests

States need to identify areas they want to remain off-limits to timber sales or energy development

By Joe Baird
The Salt Lake Tribune

December 12, 2005

As surrounding states have scrambled during the past six months to meet a Forest Service deadline to identify roadless forest areas they wish to remain protected, Utah has done comparatively little.
   That is beginning to change. Gov. Jon M. Huntsman Jr. now is asking for recommendations from the counties, the start of what could become a formal process. But to what end remains to be seen. And whatever the result, it is unlikely to satisfy environmental critics.
   The Bush Administration repealed the Clinton-era Roadless Rule in May, which extended protection to nearly 59 million acres of pristine and largely remote forest lands. But as part of the policy change, the Agriculture Department created a process whereby governors can petition to keep roadless protections in their states intact. The petitions are due next November.
    Colorado's legislature has created a task force to study the issue and make recommendations. Montana's governor has traversed the state, holding public meetings in affected counties to gain input from politicians and the public alike. And California, Oregon and New Mexico have filed suit against the federal government over the roadless change, arguing that the Bush policy violates environmental laws and creates an undue burden on the states.
   By contrast, Huntsman has been content to let the Forest Service planning process determine the best use for Utah's 8.1 million acres of forest lands, about 4 million of which was designated as roadless - and hence, off-limits to timber sales or energy development. At least until the Bush repeal.
   But state officials ultimately determined the federal planning process would take too long. Huntsman's public lands policy coordinator said last week that the governor will now seek input from county officials on the roadless issue, which could in turn lead to a petition. However, Lynn Stevens makes it clear that the state's real priority is to make sure that existing forest roads remain open and accessible.
   "The focus is not to create new roads, but to maintain the current roads and ensure multiple use," he said. "There may be [development] potential in some areas where new roads will need to be built. But I'm not convinced there will be many cases like that. And my sense is that forest planners will recommend some areas for closure. If there are no disagreements, then the governor won't need to get involved."
   Stevens is confident there will be little to argue about. Unlike Utah public lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management, the state has no current disputes with the Forest Service over road ownership. He says the federal agency has done a sound job of managing Utah's forests, and believes that will continue.
   "The overall health of the forest has been maintained by the existing management rules," Stevens said. "I don't see anything that would mandate additional restrictions on multiple use. The current management of the forest has been in place a long time and is working."
   That assessment is not shared by the environmental community, which has harshly criticized the Bush repeal of the Roadless Rule, and frets that states such as Utah - which aren't actively engaged in the petition process - are creating a scenario where large swaths of once-protected forest lands will be opened for development.
   "With no petition forthcoming, there's no policy. The Forest Service can decide what to do - to preserve and protect, or not," said Kevin Mueller, executive director of the Utah Environmental Congress. "The power to develop, the input, is shifting to county officials. In the process, you're going to see a shift from ecosystem management and biodiversity to resource extraction and recreation. It's a paradigm shift toward [state] and private rights."
   Forest Service spokeswoman Erin O'Connor believes conservationists are exaggerating the impact of the Bush roadless policy. She says the new rules will make for grass-roots management of the forests - with state and county officials, and the public, all having a say in the process. She also says the job on the ground won't change.
   "One of the criticisms of the Clinton rule was that local interests were not considered," said O'Connor. "That was set aside by several judges, who ruled we will make informed decisions, and local concerns will be addressed. We're committed to working with the states and local communities so we can protect our national forests. The petition process is in place to address the fact that different states have different needs."
   Observers note that Utah's approach to the roadless petition process most closely resembles Idaho, where Gov. Dirk Kempthorne fought for the roadless policy change, used existing forest plans as a starting point and leaned heavily on county commissioners to help drive the process. The criticism of that approach, as with Utah's, is how much opportunity will the public have to be involved?
   "If the governor of Utah wants to engage in this process, he should go about it with 100 percent effort and really have an open dialogue - and not only with the citizens of Utah, but the rest of the country, about how to manage these treasures that the state has to offer," said Robert Vandermark, director of the Washington D.C.-based Healthy Forest Campaign.
   Critics of the Bush forest rules acknowledge that the picture is not entirely bleak. The Forest Service will continue to protect what it now calls "undeveloped areas" through its planning process. And there are large chunks of forest that are so remote and inaccessible that they will never realistically be visited by loggers or coal, gas and oil developers. And no one has control over valid existing leases, which predate the Clinton forest restrictions and can be developed at any time.
   But of Utah's inventoried roadless areas, 466,000 acres are designated as off-limits to road construction under current forest plans. The fear is that pristine areas which aren't leased and are rich with oil and gas development possibilities, will eventually be plundered.
   For instance, Utah Environmental Congress director Mueller says a 2004 report from the Fishlake National Forest, obtained by the conservation group through an open-records request, shows a total of 38 "reasonably foreseeable" oil or gas wells in the next 10 to 15 years, including an average of 5 miles of new road needed for each of the well pads. If built out, that translates into 190 miles of new roads in just one national forest.
   Which is why Mueller and other environmentalists say public involvement is so vital during the ongoing petition process.
   "These are the national forests, not the county forests," he said. "There needs to be enforceable standards ensuring that the public's input will be as considered as the county's input. If not, the counties should just go ahead and purchase the forests, because they're not national forests anymore."
    jbaird@sltrib.com