PCT Repair - Suiattle River Crossing EA

BCHW ACTION ALERT
RESTORE STOCK ACCESS TO THE PACIFIC CREST TRAIL
COMMENT NOW (The comment period only runs through April)

In 2003, the historic Skyline Bridge over the Suiattle River in the Mt Baker-Snoqualmie (MBS) National Forest was washed away. The Skyline Bridge was a critical crossing for the Pacific Crest Trail in the Glacier Peak Wilderness. In fact, several other bridges were also lost due to the horrific storm damage, though the large span Skyline Bridge was by far the most substantial.

Restoration of stock access through the Glacier Peak Wilderness on the Pacific Crest Trail remains to this day not passable. This truly compromises the stock and hiker purpose of the historic trail. The Pacific Crest Trail is one of the two original trails (the other being the Appalachian Trail) authorized under the National Trails System Act of 1968, making it just about as old as another famous congressional piece of legislation, the Wilderness Act of 1964.

In 2007, the MBS released a scoping letter asking for public comments on what was the best route for restoring access to stock and hikers across the Suiattle River. It was clear that the old Skyline Bridge location was no longer feasible. A new bridge location was identified with strong rock footings on each side of the river bed, but this site was a few miles downriver and would require a new 3 mile reroute segment of the PCT to be built on the south side of the river, and a .5 mile segment on the north side of the river connecting to the Suiattle River Trail, and would also entail abandoning old trail segments along the old Skyline Bridge route. BCHW responded that lacking no other reasonable alternative (the only other combination trail option would have been to use the Milk Creek Trail adding many reroute miles and still relying on a bridge over the Suiattle), we fully supported a new bridge re-sited downriver, and that this was essential to preserving the congressional purpose and integrity of the Pacific Crest Trail.

In 2008, the MBS released a second scoping letter asking for public comments on moving forward with the new bridge and the logistics of the best methods to accomplish this. Again, many BCHW members responded giving support to a Minimum Tool Analysis exemption that would permit the new bridge to be flown into the Wilderness by helicopter and use power rock drills to anchor the bridge. Also, the scoping letter suggested expediting the new trail construction by using chainsaws and a mini-excavator.

We want to very much wholeheartedly thank each of our members who took the time to comment on the 2008 scoping letter. HOWEVER, there are many members that we think missed the opportunity (the comments are listed by person in the EA). Rather than chastise you, we are GIVING YOU ANOTHER CHANCE!!!

The MBS has now posted an Environmental Assessment (EA) on their website with a 30 day comment period further defining the input received in the 2008 scoping letter. DO YOU WANT THE PCT TO REMAIN A STOCK TRAIL? Hikers have been able to use the rather dangerous footlogs across the river, so we are the most impacted user group. It is time to send in your comments NOW!!!

Alternative 1 – No Action (This is not acceptable as it means no stock passing on the PCT.)
Alternative 2 – Use a helicopter and rock drills for reestablishing a new bridge. ALSO, use chainsaws and a mini-excavator for constructing the new trail access segments.
Alternative 3 – Use a helicopter and rock drills for reestablishing a new bridge. Use traditional non-mechanical methods for constructing the new trail access segments.

BCHW Review: While Alternative 3 is by far the most appealing from a baseline Wilderness use principle, it would require a much longer period to implement than using chainsaws and a mini-excavator and would require much more rock blasting. Based on overall impacts as the MBS analysis shows, the use of chainsaws to complete 3.5 miles of new trail is clearly justified. The use of a non-handheld tracked mini-excavator is more debatable for appropriate use in the Wilderness. When you look at weighing the short term use of this excavator over multi-season blasting and large camps for user crews, the MBS has made a good argument for utilizing this piece of equipment. (Use should be kept as minimalistic as possible confined to where other routing and traditional construction options aren't reasonably possible.)

We therefore recommend the following (include in your words in your comments):

1. Alternative #1 (no action) of the Pacific Crest Trail Repair Suiattle River Crossing Environmental Assessment is not an option. Access for the Pacific Crest Trail across the Suiattle River must be re-established by construction of a new bridge in a sustainable site – as identified in Alternatives #2 and #3. A new bridge is the only safe solution both for stock users and for hikers trying to cross the river.

2. Alternative #2 is our preferred option. A new bridge must be constructed and moved to the site. Using pack stock to move materials for the new bridge is not feasible as even the Suiattle River Road is washed out and there are no other access options. Use of a helicopter to move materials is fully justified, and no landings of the helicopters in the Wilderness will occur. Power rock drills are the most functional method to anchor the bridge. The significant amount of new trail construction to access the bridge site justifies the use of chainsaws. The savings in impacts from rock blasting, stump removal, and large crew impacts justifies the use of a mini-excavator.

3. Alternative #3 is our less preferred option. It does replace the bridge as in Alternative #2 – and that is the most critical component. However, without considerable resources, it would make the new trail construction much more difficult and drag it out over a number of seasons.

SEND IN YOUR SUPPORT NOW!!! Your names will be joining the dedicated names of our members who have acted in prior years (published in the EA Pages 47-48) and whom we hope will follow up with another comment in this third year of this effort. Show your support for stock use in Washington State on the Pacific Crest Trail.

Send your comments to Dawn Erickson, Team Leader, Darrington Ranger Station at
comments-pacificnorthwest-mtbaker-snoqualmie-darrington@fs.fed.us

Or by mail to Dawn Erickson at 1405 Emens St, Darrington WA 98241

The full Environmental Assessment and materials can be found at the Mount Baker Snoqualmie website at.

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/mbs/projects/pct-repair-suiattle-crossing/index.shtml

Part of the Skyline Bridge in 1999 when extended to 260 feet to cover a shift in current:


The same Skyline Bridge site after the flooding October 2003:

BCHW PLC Action Roundup
KEY:
Scout – Investigation and Discussion
Ride – Take Individual Action as deemed appropriate
Pack String – Take Action now!!

1. DNR Feb 3rd hearing to adopt Recreation WACS.
ACTION: Attend the Natural Resources Board meeting where consideration of adopting the new recreational WACs if you are intto the legislature. See DNR Rec. WACs Update

2. RCO Accepting Applications for Grant Advisory Committees
ACTION: The State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) is looking to fill 17 positions on grant advisory boards including the Recreational Trails Program (RTP) Advisory Committee, NOVA, and the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Advisory committee. Equestrians are specifically requested for RTP. Application due date for RTP, NOVA, or LWCP is February 13, 2009. Go to this site for application forms and more information.RCO Grant Advisory Positions

3. Support Keeping Fall City Park under King County Ownership
ACTION: Trailhead and arena facilities may be at risk under existing proposed transfer agreement. Write King County Councilmembers now. See Fall City Park Campaign


4. 2009-11 Budget proposal for WSP may lead to Park Closures
NEWS: Some Washington State Parks may be closed or change hands. Feedback requested. See WSP Possible Park Closures

5. Proposed Rule Change allowing Mountain Bikes in National Parks
ACTION COMMENT: Comments accepted by Park Service through February 17, 2009. See PLC-MBersNPS

State House and Senate Natural Resource Committees Hearings

The following are videos from TVW that are of this past Thursdays committee hearing held in both the House and Senate.
The House Natural Resource Committee Hearing includes discussion of:
HB1114, HB1116, and HB1118
HB1114 requires and adult with hunters under 14 years old.
HB1116 requires all recreational folks to wear "hiker orange" during large game hunting seasons.
HB1118 would require more signs to be posted on DNR and WDFW regarding recreation closed areas.


The Senate Natural Resources, Ocean, and Recreation Committee includes discussion of:
SB5070, SB5069, and SB5422.
SB5070 establishes a grant fund to fight invasives species.
SB5069 extends the recreational liability statute to agencies and landowners that charge fees (such as DNR, WDFW, WSP and landowners allowing fun rides).
SB5422 extends the recreational liability statute to water sports near hydroelectric facilities.

DNR Recreational WACs Update #2

DNR plans to adopt the Recreational WACs at the February 3rd Natural Resources Board meeting. This was considered for adoption at the January 6th meeting, but was delayed in order to address a few additional concern. This work leading up to the Jan 6th meeting is covered in a prior blog:
DNR Recreational WACs Update

Again, members are encouraged to attend this meeting. There will be a public comment period at the beginning, and again later on near the end of the meeting. BCHW may make comment at that time as well.

The Natural Resources Board meeting is at 9:00am, Feb 3rd in Room 172 of the Natural Resources Building, 1111 Washington Street SE, Olympia, WA 98501.
Agenda

DNR Introduction - House Natural Resource Committee

The following video is the 2009 opening presentation/briefing given by the Department of Natural Resources to the House Natural Resource Committee on Jan 15, 2009. It has a brief introduction by new Public Lands Commissioner Peter Goldmark, followed by a briefing on DNR's functions and history, and later about their budget and involvement is the Governor's proposed reductions.

This is an interesting assessment, particularly the responses to some of the questions from the House Committee. The Representative from Skamania County was interested in how DNR is working with the USFS on land management, particularly when dealing with bark beetles and other infestations. He also brought up the swapping of DNR in some cases from owning timberlands to owning agriculture lands, some used for vineyards. Part of the answer was that DNR was seeking to be more actively involved as a cooperative partner with the USFS on such matters as spotted owl habitat as well as forest planning, the latter specifically with the Wenatchee - Okanogan USFS.

When DNR's Budget Director Bob Van Schoorl brought up (27 min. in) that the budget no longer includes the Sustainable Access operating budget item which would fund additional FTEs and services at Yacolt, Reiter, and Ahtanum (something we have been lobbying for), Representative Kirk Pearson of Monroe expressed his concern that this would affect recreation efforts in those planning areas, particularly Reiter Foothills. Budget Director Schoorl expressed assurances that at least the planning processes would be completed. Once more though, the Trail Stewards plan gets thwarted. One question was asked by Rep. Chandler as to how DNR prioritizes what gets done and what doesn't. Commissioner Goldmark said that it was an internal assessment but that the public should be more involved. Is that a good idea? We will see.

Here's the full video.

DNR-SRWG Update

The DNR Sustainable Recreation Work Group (SRWG) formed by Legislative direction in 2008 has concluded their 2008 meetings and work. Most of the monthly meetings in 2008 were orientation sessions for familiarizing work group members with DNR managment policies as well as starting the process of identification of issues. A field trip to the Ahtanum was also included, attended by BCHW-PLC member and BCHW Director Mike Drougas.

The SRWG is sending a report to the Washington State Legislature of their 2008 progress. There are no recommendations for recreational changes in this report. The recommendations will come at the end of this year (2009).
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/amp_rec_srwg_progress_report_december2008.pdf

Our next two SRWG meetings will be held as web teleconferences (GoTo Meetings), and we will be covering two of the most intensive topics - Funding and Access. Please take a minute to fill out the on-line survey that DNR has set up for public input for these meetings (deadline Jan 20th). As your PLC equestrian representatative on the SRWG, I certainly will appreciate that many of our BCH members again take advantage of this opportunity to express their interests in continued horseback riding on DNR lands. YOUR SUPORT IS NEEDED NOW. Survey of your input on Funding and Access to DNR lands

BCHW PLC continues to be an active participant in the SRWG, and we anticipate continued positive on-going relationships between DNR staff and BCHW members and volunteers. While it is true that budget shortfalls are severe - we can all pool our efforts to keep our state trails system open to riders and hikers.

DNR Recreational WACs Update

The Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has finalizing the changes to the rules addressing recreational conduct on DNR managed lands. These final revised rules are posted on the DNR site at http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/amp_rec_draft_recreation_rules_for_bnr_approval.pdf

SEPA rules detail document (added Dec 31):
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/amp_sepa_nonpro_recwac_nfd.pdf

These revisions were considered for adoption at the DNR Board of Natural Resource meeting on January 6 in Olympia.

(Jan 6 Update Note) "Action delayed on final proposed recreation rules. The Board delayed action on the adoption of rules pertaining to recreation and public use on DNR-managed lands, Chapter 332-52 of the Washington Administrative Code. Board members said they generally approved of the rule revisions – the first comprehensive update since 1970 ¬– but asked for clarification of portions relating to campfire restrictions. "


Over the past several months, members of BCHW have participated in the open meetings on the recreational WAC development and have submitted extensive change requests, most all of which have resulted in improved language within the DNR WACs. While no document is perfect, particularly when it comes to regulating our access to public lands, DNR staff have shown a high standard of professional conduct in working with volunteer organizations, and we look forward to a strong and healthy cooperative relationship with DNR and other volunteer partners throughout the coming years.

Please review the final rules and let us know what remaining issues may be problematic. Just a few of the items your PLC did address (and were suitably changed) were: A better definition of an organized event requiring a permit to avoid burdening some group camping; separating deliberate damage to trails and infrastructure from normal wear and tear; allowing normal trail maintenance without requiring written authorization; and allowing stock to pass through some areas not otherwise open to stock in order to access appropriate trails. These changes are even more important considering the bleak state budget picture for the next biennium and the constraints on staffing which would have created paperwork backlogs that would not doubt have frustrated trail users. Again this is another reason why sustainable access to DNR managed lands will require sustainable funding commitments by the Legislature.