chainsaws and trail conditions in wilderness areas

[mcds]

The USFS monitors visitors and reports the results. In 2011, wilderness visitors gave a 4.8 out of 5 for Trail Condition in the wilderness areas in the Gorge. The Mt Hood NF wilderness trails received a rating of 5.0 out 5.0, which was up, remarkably, from a 4.5 rating in 2006. Similarly high ratings were given to Gifford Pinchot NF (4.4) and Willamette NF (4.7)

Given such excellent ratings, it would seem hard to argue convincingly for weakening the Wilderness Act, and weakening Forest Service policy by allowing chainsaws.

To use National Visitor Use Monitoring website:

1. visit http://apps.fs.usda.gov/nrm/nvum/results
2. select the tab 'Single Forest'
3. select Round 3
4. select PNW Region 6
5. select the forest of interest
6. then click 'Use This Forest'

A new page will load.

One way to view the data I've quoted is to download a PDF by clicking on 'Master Report'. The final page contains the data:

• Table B-4: Satisfaction for Visits to Designated Wilderness

To select a different forest, click the link in the upper middle of the page 'Change Units'.

[Eric Peterson]

Too bad battery operated ones couldn't get a pass maybe, or is it really a npuse issue that perturbs the wilderness and it's inhabitants?

[retired jerry]

hard to argue with that, chainsaws in MHNF and gorge wilderness probably not required

[Lumpy]

Personally I am pro chain saw use in Wilderness in some cases where a lot of work needs to be done and could be accomplished in a day or two with a chain saw vs days or weeks of work with other quiet saws, but I can't get over how many times I've seen with my own eyes chain saws produce sparks. Many were certainly preventable, but I've seen it, and it gives me pause.

[raven]

EP,

Are you suggesting as a means of noise mitigation and spark saftey a crew of 1 person with an electric chainsaw with a support staff of five to ten running back and forth with batteries to the trail head where a generator can charge them? Or are you secretly making an argument for research into a better hand-powered saw by making us envision the teamwork needed to keep an electric chainsaw working much of a day?

[Lurch]

I think there's a lot of citing of 'wilderness areas' and the 'wilderness act' without people actually digging down to the wording and intent of where it all came from, and why the rules are in place. The BLM has a pretty good writeup for their line managers explaining it. But to cliff notes it for you guys..

There are 4 elements that the Wilderness Act specifies as 'mandatory qualities', and I don't think there's much room to argue against them.

1. Untrammeled:Here, used metaphorically, “untrammeled” refers
   to wilderness as essentially unhindered and free from modern human control
   or manipulation. This quality is impaired by human activities or actions that
   control or manipulate the components or processes of ecological systems
   inside wilderness.
2. Natural:In short, wilderness ecological systems should be as free as possible from the effects of modern civilization. [...] Fire, insects, and diseases are allowed to play their natural role in the wilderness ecosystem except where these activities threaten human life, property, or high value resources on adjacent non-wilderness lands.
3. Undeveloped:Wilderness has minimal evidence of modern human occupation or modification. This quality is impaired by the presence of structures or installations, and by the use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment, or mechanical transport that increases people’s ability to occupy or modify the environment.
4. Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation: Wilderness provides opportunities for people to experience: natural sights and sounds; remote, isolated, unfrequented, or secluded places; and freedom, risk, and the physical and emotional challenges of self-discovery and self-reliance. [...] This quality is impaired by settings that reduce these opportunities, such as visitor encounters, signs of modern civilization, recreation facilities, and management restrictions on visitor behavior.

Think back to why these protected areas exist, before asking for special permissions to violate the rules. And yes, in my book chainsaws, or any "mechanical equipment" is a violation of the rules, although sometimes necessary.

Per the BLM definition

motorized equipment. Any machine that applies force by transferring energy from a motor, engine, or other non-living power source. “Motorized equipment” includes, but is not limited to: chainsaws, power drills, suction dredges, and generators. The prohibited power sources include, but are not limited to: internal combustion engines, batteries, wind, solar, and hydro-power. “Motorized equipment” does not include machines where no force is applied (electronics), or small personal equipment where the force is negligible (such as watches, electric shavers, or flashlights). Use of motorized equipment may only be allowed in wilderness areas if it is associated with a valid existing right (as noted in 1.6.B.3.b), if necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the area for the purpose of the Wilderness Act (as noted in 1.6.B.3.c), including measures required in emergencies involving the health and safety of persons within the area, allowed under a special provision of Section 4(d) of the Act, or explicitly identified in the legislation designating a particular wilderness.

/rant done

[retired jerry]

Exceptions are allowed if it's the minimum required to provide access

If they maintain all the major trails with handsaws (which are also an exception) then that would be more minimal than chainsaws

If they weren't able to maintain all the major trails with handsaws but they would be with chainsaws, then you could argue that chainsaws were allowed, but I think this is rarely done

Probably good to count trees across trails in addition to looking at survey data

[Lurch]

Exceptions are allowed if it's the minimum required to provide access

If they maintain all the major trails with handsaws (which are also an exception) then that would be more minimal than chainsaws

If they weren't able to maintain all the major trails with handsaws but they would be with chainsaws, then you could argue that chainsaws were allowed, but I think this is rarely done

Probably good to count trees across trails in addition to looking at survey data

I would argue that a tree across a trail, the vast majority of the time does not inhibit access, it just makes it less convenient. There's nothing that says you must remain on maintained routes only. In fact it seems the whole intent of it was to drastically cut down on the maintained routes and the impact they have on the land, and have a more 'natural' backcountry off trail type experience.

A tree across the limited roads in wilderness areas *do* impact access, a tree across a trail does not (generally) IMHO.

[retired jerry]

When it's a steep slope and the tree is long it's very difficult to get around

Yeah, most places you can just walk around or over

[mcds]

I think there's a lot of citing of 'wilderness areas' and the 'wilderness act' without people actually digging down to the wording and intent of where it all came from, and why the rules are in place. The BLM has a pretty good writeup for their line managers explaining it. But to cliff notes it for you guys..

There are 4 elements that the Wilderness Act specifies as 'mandatory qualities', and I don't think there's much room to argue against them.

1. Untrammeled:Here, used metaphorically, “untrammeled” refers
   to wilderness as essentially unhindered and free from modern human control
   or manipulation. This quality is impaired by human activities or actions that
   control or manipulate the components or processes of ecological systems
   inside wilderness.
2. Natural:In short, wilderness ecological systems should be as free as possible from the effects of modern civilization. [...] Fire, insects, and diseases are allowed to play their natural role in the wilderness ecosystem except where these activities threaten human life, property, or high value resources on adjacent non-wilderness lands.
3. Undeveloped:Wilderness has minimal evidence of modern human occupation or modification. This quality is impaired by the presence of structures or installations, and by the use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment, or mechanical transport that increases people’s ability to occupy or modify the environment.
4. Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation: Wilderness provides opportunities for people to experience: natural sights and sounds; remote, isolated, unfrequented, or secluded places; and freedom, risk, and the physical and emotional challenges of self-discovery and self-reliance. [...] This quality is impaired by settings that reduce these opportunities, such as visitor encounters, signs of modern civilization, recreation facilities, and management restrictions on visitor behavior.

Think back to why these protected areas exist, before asking for special permissions to violate the rules. And yes, in my book chainsaws, or any "mechanical equipment" is a violation of the rules, although sometimes necessary.

Per the BLM definition

motorized equipment. Any machine that applies force by transferring energy from a motor, engine, or other non-living power source. “Motorized equipment” includes, but is not limited to: chainsaws, power drills, suction dredges, and generators. The prohibited power sources include, but are not limited to: internal combustion engines, batteries, wind, solar, and hydro-power. “Motorized equipment” does not include machines where no force is applied (electronics), or small personal equipment where the force is negligible (such as watches, electric shavers, or flashlights). Use of motorized equipment may only be allowed in wilderness areas if it is associated with a valid existing right (as noted in 1.6.B.3.b), if necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the area for the purpose of the Wilderness Act (as noted in 1.6.B.3.c), including measures required in emergencies involving the health and safety of persons within the area, allowed under a special provision of Section 4(d) of the Act, or explicitly identified in the legislation designating a particular wilderness.

/rant done

The best 'read' that I've come across is "Untrammeled," "Wilderness Character," and the Challenges of Wilderness Preservation 2001 by Douglas Scott. Here is a link the 8 page PDF:

https://www.wilderness.net/toolboxes/do ... rticle.pdf