Alaska Roadless Rule for the US National Forest

Discussion in 'Alaska' started by The_Precious_Juice, Oct 12, 2018.

  1. The_Precious_Juice

    The_Precious_Juice The Virginian

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2013
    Oddometer:
    8,834
    Location:
    University of Montana
    Greetings fellow North Americans,

    I'm doing a report on this issue for a Environmental politics and policies class.
    I'm interested in this issue because ADV TOURING MC like forest roads!!
    Well, mainly for the balance of economy development and Conservation.
    Plus, the inland passage is big time.

    I would really appreciate any boots on the ground intel so I can better understand the stake holders and policy actors.

    The US Forest Service are to roll back the Roadless Area Conservation Rule.
    In August of 2018, they announced a Alaska specific version of the Roadless Rule.

    Without posting your strong political opinion, please help me understand the points of view of the local stakeholders.
    Counties:
    Juneau; Ketchikan Gateway; Prince of Wales-Outer; Sitka; Wrangell-Petersburg; Yakutat


    Thanks for reading.
    #1
  2. The_Precious_Juice

    The_Precious_Juice The Virginian

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2013
    Oddometer:
    8,834
    Location:
    University of Montana
    From what I'm seeing now, there is so much wilderness that connecting forest roads would be impossible with all of the islands.
    Glacier Bay Wilderness is a big road block.

    Juneau to Haines would be possible for a US forest road. Really expensive to build, but would be a great Adventure.

    I guess the is mostly for timber harvesting, not tourism.
    Should be interesting.
    #2
  3. Kruzof

    Kruzof independently poor

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2015
    Oddometer:
    6,772
    Location:
    Alaska's drippy nose
    There are wilderness areas in SE AK but they should not be confused with land that is not currently being developed, as in this thread:

    https://advrider.com/f/threads/logg...onal-forest-wilderness-now-with-pole.1324551/

    The difficulties of road-building are related more to geography and profitability than any concern for wilderness.
    #3
    The_Precious_Juice likes this.
  4. The_Precious_Juice

    The_Precious_Juice The Virginian

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2013
    Oddometer:
    8,834
    Location:
    University of Montana
    Thanks for the link!
    #4
  5. The_Precious_Juice

    The_Precious_Juice The Virginian

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2013
    Oddometer:
    8,834
    Location:
    University of Montana
    https://www.juneauempire.com/news/support-for-roadless-rule-extends-through-state-country/

    After completing my report, my opinion is that Alaska got a raw deal with the 2001 RR.
    The Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) is a United States federal law passed on November 12, 1980, by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter on December 2 of that year.

    Under this deal, only Congress could take away federal land, but the POTUS Administration did in 2001.
    However, USFS has been in charge of the Tongass well before 2001, so state land was not taken away.

    The second thing I have an opinion on is that the new Chief of the Forest does not have the ability to do make the right call to the POTUS. They've only been in the USFS for like 10 years. But the POTUS most likely put them in command to piss off lifer USFS personnel.

    In the end, I felt confident that the stakeholders will get it right.
    The folks in command in Alaska know that tourism is where the future is at.
    The businesses and non profits have the land and resource management plans (LRMP) and of course the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA).

    Having tax payers pay for as many forests roads as possible is tempting while the window is open...

    Best case scenario, more forest roads improve tourism infrastructure and recreation opportunities, while logging takes place far away.
    #5