Minutes from SW
Idaho Resource Advisory Committee Meeting
June
23, 2004 Cascade, Idaho
In
attendance:
SW
Idaho RAC Members/Replacements: Phil Davis (Chairperson), Tom
Glass, Bob Baker, Dale Hanson, David Whaley, John Gebhards, Darel Harris, Lois
Van Hoover, John McCarthy, Ed Mansfield, Barry Ross, Randy Harrison, and Sandra
Mitchell
Designated
Federal Officer:
Randy Swick
Others: Boyd Hartwig (Payette National
Forest), Andy Brunelle (Legislative
Affairs, USFS), Weldon Branch (Rancher), Larry Donohoo (Mountain Home Ranger
District), Carl Phares and Wayne Tyndall (Mountain Home Highway District).
ü Chairperson Phil Davis called the meeting to order
at 10:40 a.m. DFO Randy Swick indicated that a quorum was present for
conducting routine business, but not for recommending proposed projects to the
Forest Supervisor.
ü Chair Phil Davis
initiated the Form Part 1 and Form Part 2 review of projects. The reviews were conducted in accord with the
RAC’s operating guidelines for project proposal screening and evaluation.
Project Log #: 04022
Project Name: Indian Mountain Allotment Bull Trout
Project Sponsor: Weldon Branch
Discussion: Weldon
provided an overview of the project and a brief history of the need to keep
cattle out of the riparian area to protect bull trout and stressed the
importance of a rider to monitor and maintain the fence in this allotment. He
said the fence typically goes up August 15 and is taken down at the end of
November. He said the cattle in this allotment are supposed to be out of the
area by October 15 but noted that sometimes that deadline is not met because
some cattle may not be located by that date. He said the rider makes sure the
electric fence is working and is keeping cattle out of the riparian area.
Darel Harris asked
what share of the RAC funding would go to the rider. Weldon said the rider
would get $6,000. He said the rider would work just about every day during the
period that he is employed, about three months. He also noted that the grazing
association would provide a $1,500 match toward putting the fence up. Tom Glass
asked if the fence monitoring has shown any benefit to the bull trout
population in the area. Weldon said there was improvement in riparian habitat
condition based on Forest Service monitoring and that he had personally
observed an improvement in vegetation along Anderson Creek.
ü Chair Davis noted that with the arrival of John McCarthy,
there was now a quorum for recommending proposed projects to the Forest
Supervisor.
David Whaley said that
he stated last year that he wouldn’t support this project any further if it
were going to be a multi-year funding request.
It will just go on and on funding a rider. He said a permanent fence is needed. Weldon said that because of heavy snowfall in
the area, a permanent fence would not work.
Dale Hanson asked if
there wasn’t a benefit from grazing on controlling weeds and reducing fire
risk. Weldon agreed. Darel Harris asked Weldon if he applied to
Idaho Dept of Fish and Game for funding assistance since both noxious weeds and
bull trout were of concern. Weldon said
he had asked for help from everyone, including Idaho Department of Fish and Game. The RAC and
Forest Service were the only ones to respond.
He said that the Forest Service had assisted with the Fish Creek fence
and had performed the monitoring, but had no money for other projects. Darel
followed up and felt the USFWS and IDFG should be involved. Weldon felt like the fence requirement was an
unfunded mandate by the federal government. He noted that it was not an option
for him to not have the fence in place. Chair Davis said that if federal agencies had to fund these
requirements they would have a different attitude about them. Weldon said that
without this allotment he could not maintain his cow/calf operation.
Darel asked who was
providing matching funds. Weldon
identified $1500 from the permittees and $2000 from the Forest Service. David Whaley indicated the original request
identified other funding partners, but now the burden is falling mostly on the
RAC.
Sandra asked if the
RAC could make a motion to adopt the rating criteria from last year’s decision
on this project. Chair Davis said that last year’s Form Part 1 rating was “yes” for all criteria.
Bob Baker asked if the project was having an impact on the bull trout – if it
was accomplishing the task. DFO Swick noted that last year Dave Hogan, a fish
biologist with the Payette National
Forest, presented to the RAC a slide presentation that showed significant
improvements in riparian habitat from the fencing.
A motion to adopt last year’s evaluation of Form
Part 1 (all yes) and Form Part 2 (34) for the same project, and to recommend
the project to the Forest Supervisor for funding for two years was made by
Sandra Mitchell and seconded by Dale Hanson.
Discussion: Barry
asked for clarification on what the RAC was doing. DFO Swick noted that with
the present motion the RAC would adopt the rating from last year: yes for all
criteria in Form Part 1 evaluation, and a total score of 34 for Form Part 2
evaluation. Darel asked if the RAC had approved any multi-year projects before.
DFO Swick noted that the RAC had approved the South Fork Payette River noxious weed project for two years.
The question was
called for. There was no consensus. A roll
call vote by sub-group was made.
Sub-Group A Sub-Group
B Sub-Group
C
David Whaley: No Barry
Ross: No Phil
Davis: Yes
Sandra Mitchell: Yes John McCarthy: No Dale
Hanson: Yes
Lois Van Hoover: Yes Tom Glass:
Yes John
Gebhards: No
Bob Baker: Yes Darel
Harris: No
Randy Harrison: Yes
The motion failed; it
did not receive a majority (three of five) from two of the sub-groups.
Project Log #: 04024
Project Name: Boise Peak User Created Trails
Project Sponsor: Larry Tripp, Boise National Forest
Discussion: Larry
Donohoo presented an overview of the project and described the general problem
of user-created trails and the difficulty of getting some people to comply with
rules. He noted that the unauthorized trails have serious erosion problems,
with the dust being ankle deep. He said they had tank-trapped and placed barbed
wire in the area but had not stopped people from using these routes. Larry said
the plan was to put highway guard rails in the area to force compliance. He
noted that volunteers would perform some work for the project, such as putting
in water bars. He said carsonite signs would also be erected.
Darel Harris asked if
the project would impede fire access.
Larry said there would be no affect on fire access. The project would not involve closing any
roads. Motorized users should not be off designated trails in the area, as
outlined in the Boise National Forest Travel Management Plan. David Whaley
asked if users create the trails what was to prevent them from building new
trails in the same area. Larry said the plan is to install 50’ wide barriers
with barbwire extensions of another 100’.
He provided pictures showing a sample device. Once the project work is complete it would be
difficult for people to get around the barriers.
Bob Baker said
off-trail vehicle travel is a growing problem for both the Forest Service and
the Bureau of Land Management. He said carsonite markers are not effective
because they are too small and hard to read. Bob noted that if $15,000 is spent
on closing a road, then $500 should be spent on signs that are difficult to
remove and easy to read and understand. Larry said law enforcement determines
the signing mechanics. They do plan to
install a travel management sign off 8th street. Chair Davis asked if he had addressed the issue with the
sheriff. Bob felt a big sign was needed
at the point of closure. Larry indicated the cost might be prohibitive. Lois
Van Hoover also agreed a large sign was easier to see and obey, and indicated
the State and county should have corresponding enforcement statutes. David Whaley said small signs don’t do much
because they are often not even seen by motorcyclists who are traveling fast.
He was also concerned with the safety aspects of using barbed wire.
Dale Hanson asked
Larry to elaborate on the barbed wire.
Larry said they would install 100’ barbed wire wings off both ends of
the guard rail. Dale felt someone would
get cut or hurt by the wire. Bob Baker said it’s not possible to make an area
impenetrable or a sign indestructible.
You have to rely on the good nature of the general public, ninety
percent of whom will do the right thing by following the rules. Larry said they
had limited experience with the guard rail, but it seems effective. Barry Ross said the problem is people are not
following the law. They are required to
stay on designated routes but don’t. Tom
Glass suggested the barriers be combined with user education through the Bird
Conservatory, Idaho Statesman, etc.
Chair Davis agreed. Larry said he’d be happy to make contacts.
Bob Baker said he
would like to caveat any funding recommendation with a requirement for proper
signing. John McCarthy asked who would
pay for the signs. Darel asked if the
ordinance would be written on the signs.
Larry said they don’t typically do so; they expect people to follow the
travel map. Lois indicated folks don’t
always have the map and writing it on signs shows the logic. Larry was concerned that would lead to a
proliferation of signs.
A motion that the project proposal be amended to
include legible and informative signs at points of closure was made by Bob
Baker and seconded by Barry Ross.
Discussion: Chair Davis asked what the material and supply needs were. Larry said guard rail was the primary barrier
material. Chair Davis asked if there wasn’t some readily available from
the State. Larry said they had checked,
but the State reuses guard rail unless it is mangled. Dale Hanson said the county had previously
procured some from the State. David Whaley
asked if it was ok for the RAC to add $2,000 to the funding request to cover
sign costs. DFO Swick said the motion
could be amended. Bob and Barry
indicated they were agreeable to an amendment to their motion. Larry Donohoo also indicated he was agreeable
to the modification. Larry said he would
have to research the best type of sign and find out how much they cost. Darel
asked how many signs would be required for the project. Larry said six signs
would be needed
The amended motion
reads: Provide large and readable
signs at each point of closure (6) and increase the Title II funding request by
$2,000 to a total of $8,500 to cover additional sign costs.
The question was
called for, and the motion carried unanimously.
Chair Davis directed
the RAC to proceed to Form Part I evaluation for Project #04024, Boise Peak
User Created Trail Rehabilitation as amended.
The RAC completed the Form Part I evaluation:
|
Matching
Funds
|
Multiple
Benefits
|
Affordable
|
Completed in
One Year or Annual
Increments
|
Long-term
Benefits
|
Finite
Project
|
Admin
Costs
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
N
|
RAC Decision: A motion to advance the project
from Form Part 1 to Form Part 2 was made by David Whaley and seconded by John
Gebhards. The motion carried unanimously
(12-0).
Chair Davis directed
the RAC to proceed with Form Part 2 evaluation for Project #04024.
Evaluation Relative to Criteria: 32
|
Multiple Benefits
|
Community
Stability and
Job Opps
|
Cooperative
Relations
|
Benefit/
Cost and
Affordable
|
Project
Quality
and Coord
|
Matching
Funds
|
Urgency
To
Implement
|
Tangible
Outcome
|
|
4
|
0
|
5
|
4
|
4
|
|
5
|
5
|
RAC
Decision: A
motion to recommend Project #04024, Boise Peak User Created Trail
Rehabilitation, as modified, to the Forest Supervisor was made by David Whaley
and seconded by Sandra Mitchell. Motion
carried unanimously (12-0). The recommended
funding amount is as modified by the RAC with agreement from the project
sponsor, $8,500 ($2,000 of which is for the signs at the 6 points of
closure). Project approval and agreement
forms will be prepared. The RAC further
instructed that the project sponsor provide pictures of the completed signs.
ü Lunch: A working lunch
was provided.
ü
