The Flathead Forest Snowmobile Access Accord
was made public
on March 12, 2002. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement, DEIS, for Winter Recreation Amendment
24 to the Flathead Forest Plan was made public
on 6/20/03. We were given just 45 days to comment.
Three and a half years later the FNF made their final decision.
We
have been involved in the NEPA process from the
beginning scoping phase thru the final EIS and beyond.
The accord is the result of a lawsuit by
Montana Wilderness Association to ban most snowmobiling on the
Flathead. Judge Malloy ruled that a settlement must be
negotiated. The negotiators presented this agreement as a good thing
for snowmobilers. They said that it saves 90% of the favorite areas for
snowmobilers. How could the TWO people who negotiated on behalf of snowmobilers
know about the favorite areas of thousands of snowmobilers? Especially when only
one of them is from this area.
Now that the plan amendment is adopted it will be
molded into the new forest plan and cast in concrete for 15 years.
We will lose much of the open areas to tree growth before this agreement is
re-opened. Nor will snowmobilers be able to use areas that open up in the
meantime due to fire, logging or disease. As the agreement now stands most of
the snowmobile access will be on roads and trails with some play areas set
aside. As time passes the play areas will become unusable and snowmobiles will
be limited, like OHVs, to roads and trails only.
In addition to the closures this agreement contains two very
hateful stipulations. First, all parties have agreed to actively combat any
opposition to the accord. Thus, if the Flathead Snowmobile Club disagrees with
the accord, the Montana Snowmobile Club must debate and dispute its own members
and the Forest Service must oppose its public constituency the citizenry of
Northwest Montana.
Secondly, this agreement includes a plan to spend federal money to
facilitate, encourage and promote crosscountry skiing and snowshoeing. The Feds
will use the taxes of one group, snowmobilers, against them while also using
those taxes to benefit another group, skiers etc, who have often expressed
opposition to the snowmobilers.
This issue is important to everyone whether you have a snowmobile or not.
This ban is another step in the decades long green war against our access to
public lands. Furthermore, it represents a change in public policy. The primary
principle of a free society is that all things in the public domain that do not impair the freedom or
welfare of another are available to all individuals- unless specifically
prohibited or limited. The freer the society the fewer limitations it will have.
In a totalitarian society, all things are prohibited except those specifically
permitted. This snowmobile agreement is a move towards a prohibition of all
snowmobile use in the Flathead National Forest except in designated areas. The
National Forest is becoming the King’s Forest.
The loss of your snowmobile access is just one more
piece in the Wildlands Project puzzle.
The FEIS and Record of
Decision was issued in late 2006. MFMU made an administrative
appeal. As expected our appeal was rejected.
Our only hope now is our ongoing
lawsuit. Opposition to this amendment is an
important part of our lawsuit. Oral arguments are
scheduled to be heard on March 9, 2007 by Judge Hogan, the chief
administrative judge for the Washington, D.C. Federal District
Court
MFMU has officially
commented on the proposed amendment. You can see our comments HERE.
Even before the new closures are formally adopted at least one
greenie attacked the snowmobile agreement. In order to
implement the agreement the FS must leave 3 culverts in place on
road FS 316 that were scheduled to be ripped out so that snowmobiles can
continue to use that road in the winter as a groomed trail. But
Keith Hammer of Swan View Coalition has sued FNF to force them to rip
out the culverts thus violating the agreement. Even if the
preferred alternative is adopted, it is certain that the greens will
continue to use the court of "No Stumps" Molloy to take away
even more snowmobile access. Furthermore Hammer has threatened to
sue to prevent FNF from rebuilding a stream crossing on Lost
Johnny. FNF backed down and will not rebuild the bridge thus
leaving in place a safety hazard for snomobilers who use that
trail.
The loss of your snowmobile access is just one more
piece in the Wildlands Project puzzle.
WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY, ORGANIZATION OR EXPERTISE THAT THE GREENS
HAVE. WE BELIEVE THAT YOU, THE PEOPLE ARE
OUR BEST ASSET. WE ARE FIGHTING TO KEEP PUBLIC LANDS OPEN FOR
AND WE WILL NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE DONATE
TO OUR LEGAL FUND
TOP
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On March 28, MFMU held
a meeting at the fairgrounds to inform the public about the recent
snowmobile agreement between Montana Wilderness Assoc., Flathead Forest
and Montana Snowmobile Assoc.. The agreement was forced when
MWA sued FS to close areas in the North Fork to snowmobiling.
Magistrate Erickson who worked under Judge Molloy on this case,
agreed with the MWA interpretation and offered the parties a chance to
negotiate a settlement or accept his interpretation that snowmobiling
was not allowed. Allan Brown, who negotiated for Montana Snowmobile
Assoc. felt that if they didn’t give up some of their access they
would have nothing. So he negotiated away 98% of the land base in the
North Fork of the Flathead River and large parts of the South Fork and
Swan River drainages as well. Editor: it is now
apparent that Brown's concessions were all for nothing because the
greens continue to sue to shut down more access without even waiting for
the previous closures to be implemented.
We learned all this history from Fred Hodgeboom and Clarence Taber at
the meeting. They also revealed that the confusing or misleading text in
the original forest plan could have been cleared up by Amendment 7 to
the plan which was developed but never implemented. No one knows why.
Allan claimed that he saved 97% of the areas used by snowmobilers.
But several folks at the meeting declared that they were not represented
and were not given an opportunity to input their concerns. Allan claims
that timber and terrain prevent riding on most of the forest. While this
may be true, that changes over time as timber grows in some areas and
dies or is logged in others. But the agreement does not have the
flexibility to accommodate those changes. Thus the areas left open by
the agreement will revegetate and become unaccessible to snowmobiles
while other areas that become available will not be opened to
snowmobiles.
Mr. Brown stated that most of the North Fork is inaccessible to
snowmobiles because of "terrain and timber." This may be true
right now but it is misleading because he stubbornly and consistently
refuses to point out that any areas that might in the future become
usable to snowmobiles due to creation of forest openings by logging,
fire or disease will not be available to snowmobilers. Nor does he
mention that the play areas "saved" by the agreement will
become unusable due to timber growth. In short, the areas left open will
naturally close and they will not be replaced by other areas - such as
the fire caused openings in the Moose Fire. In a few years there will
certainly be less play area available. Once the agreement is locked into
the Forest Plan it will remain for 12-15 years or more.
Most of the 300 in attendance walked to the microphone to express
their opinion to the assembled government officeholders and office
seekers, including Denny Rehberg, Dale Williams, and all Republican US
Senate candidates. Conrad Burns sent a representative but Max Baucus did
not attend or send a representative. The line to speak extended half way
around the room and was replenished by new speakers for at least an
hour.
By the terms of the agreement the Forest Service is required to
support and implement the agreement How then can Brown and forest
officials say that the final forest plan amendment will be any different
than what the Forest Service is pledged to support and implement?
Although we must participate in the forest amendment process in order to
accrue any status for a judicial appeal, we should not expect any
changes to the snowmobile access agreement in the final Forest Service
documents. .
In medieval England, the King’s forest was closed to all except
those favored with his special permission. In America, the forest used
to be open to all. But no more
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~