Protecting Roadless Areas Requires Public Zeal

by Mac Blewer

My friend, Scott Woodruff, proudly keeps a picture of Teddy Roosevelt hanging in his living room next to a mounted moose head. Like Teddy, Scott is a liberal Republican, an avid hunter and a lover of the outdoors. When I asked him why he keeps a portrait of our late rough-riding president, he smiled and said that Teddy "understood nature and had guts. He could see the importance of wilderness and the necessity to protect it."

He pondered a moment and then continued. "And, frankly, he had a vision, don’t you agree? I’m no fan of the federal government, but he had a mission. From his army days in the Spanish-American War to his presidential years, he went after what he wanted. He faced his fears. I have to admire a leader who can take the reins and do that."

His words rang true with me. Whether or not you like the man or not, you have to admit, Teddy had tremendous vision. And guts. And one of the gutsier things that he did during his tenure as president was the development of the National Forest system. Opening up the first-ever Forest Congress 95 years ago, Teddy emphasized that he wanted "the active and zealous help of every man far-sighted enough to realize the importance…of the nation’s welfare in the future of preserving the forests...The forest is for use, and its users will decide its future."

And now, just as then, Americans still need the "active and zealous help" of every person who sees the need to protect roadless areas from development. Today, users of our national forests are faced with an initiative instilled with as much vision and controversy as Roosevelt’s National Forest system expansion: the Clinton Administration’s Roadless Area proposal*. It will be up to the people, the users of the national forests, whether or not this proposal succeeds. If the people support the proposal, chances are it will. If the majority of Americans oppose it, then it will go down in flames. I believe that the former is more likely.

National polls again and again have confirmed that Americans support increased wilderness protection. In mid-January, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Alliance, an organization comprised of sportsmen and women, released its findings that over 80% of anglers and hunters nationwide support the administration’s roadless area protection proposal. While that news is heartening to me and to many others throughout Wyoming and the West, it does not surprise me in the slightest. The hunters and anglers I have talked to support the concept of roadless area protection. Judging from the roadless area pubic meeting that I attended and the feedback I have received from the citizens who attended other open houses, it is the fear of road closures and fear of the unknown that seem to be most worrisome to the public. That is understandable. This is an impressive proposal, and it shouldn’t be taken lightly.

Although the administration’s preliminary documents spell out that the plan proposes no new road development in roadless areas, and NOT road closures, it does fail to address the fear of the unknown that it has awakened in some citizens: fear that Washington, DC has yet again crafted a plan behind closed doors; fear that the "green agenda" is being pushed for political reasons during an election year. These are largely fears without foundation, chimeras given life by some conservative Congressional leaders and industry representatives who want to see this proposal buried for good. It is fear that will stop this proposal unless those of us who support it speak out on its behalf.

What would Teddy Roosevelt have said about our reticence and fear? It’s difficult to say. Unlike President Clinton, who has initiated a very open and public process for this plan’s creation, Roosevelt paid little heed to critics’ stinging words when he decided to develop the National Forest system. He sought little public comment or input. His "big stick" policy with this action and other maneuvers aimed at de-fanging big industry, would barely have stood up in today’s society.

Roosevelt might have understood our fear, he might have "felt our pain," but he wouldn’t have tolerated public indecision or debate for very long.

I can almost see him now, standing on a slope in the Dunoir Valley or in a public meeting in Riverton waving his arms and imploring us to have hope, courage and an eye towards the future. He may have ended his talk with these words, which he spoke a century ago: "Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."

Well said, Teddy.

I hope that at the end of the day, citizens will understand that the administration has given us a golden opportunity to ensure that there will always be wild places where peace and solitude prevail and where fish and wildlife thrive undisturbed by human development — a natural legacy that we can leave those who come after us. If we seize this chance, we will have ensured the conservation and continued use of our national forests well into the new millennium.

Let’s honor Teddy Roosevelt by supporting the Roadless Area initiative.

Let’s "dare some mighty things."

*************************************************************

* The U.S. Forest Service has proposed a new policy to discourage road-building in the country’s 155 national forests. The policy would require forest managers to conduct environmental impact studies and analyses, show a "compelling" need for proposed new roads, determine their maintenance costs and get road-building approval from regional foresters.

The new policy will allow the Forest Service to focus on maintaining existing forest roads. Many of the 380,000 miles of existing national forest roads, built mostly for logging companies, are in bad condition The agency’s current backlog of unmet road-maintenance needs exceeds $10 billion.

The policy would also remove old forest roads that are no longer needed to reduce threats to wildlife and watersheds. Roads fragment wildlife habitat into isolated islands, cutting animals off from their own species, food, water and cover. Forest roads also damage fisheries by generating sediment, which fills in pools and smothers streambed cobbles vital for spawning. In addition, roads accelerate soil erosion rates from 30 to 300 times, causing landslides that damage streams and threaten human life.