Research shows road closure benefits

Regarding the North Fork Views column in the April 11 Hungry Horse News (“Snowcats needed for winter rescue”), there is no debate about the need for snowmobiles for winter search and rescue operations. Snowmobiles have been used successfully in rescuing winter recreationists and can be effective in helping save lives.

What is debatable is whether SAR training is seriously hampered by a lack of North Fork roads open for snowmobile use. As acknowledged in the column, “there are some exceptions [north of Canyon Creek], where unplowed roads are open.” And extensive areas are open to snowmobiles, and available for SAR training, a short drive to the south.

Larry has made it clear that he is unhappy with the compromise over snowmobile access in the Whitefish Range. Many people are unhappy with it, on both sides of the issue; some wanted more snowmobile access, while others wanted less. That’s the nature of compromise.

My previous comments (letter of April 4) were less concerned with winter SAR training, or snowmobile use, but with the statement from the March 7 North Fork Views column complaining about “Forest Service closure of most public land in the area.”

Such broad statements are increasingly commonplace, not only in reference to winter use but for summer access as well. These distortions should not go unchallenged because they are false. If you mean that areas are closed to motorized use, then make that clear. Because the public may get the impression that their public lands are closed for all access, it should be made clear that road closures do not prevent public use.

Whether or not road closures are beneficial to wildlife is hotly debated, at least among the public. That reflects a failure of the agencies responsible for managing wildlife and wildlife habitat, as well as the media, for providing information essential for addressing this issue. There is little debate among wildlife biologists. Research over the past 30 years has firmly established the benefits of roadless areas and roads closed to motorized use for maintaining wildlife populations.

All forms of recreation can impact wildlife, yes, even snowshoeing, skiing or hiking. But the benefits to wildlife, as well as hunter success, from non-motorized areas are well documented. Anecdotes about seeing wildlife on roads are meaningless compared to the results of decades of research documenting impacts from open roads.

I respect Larry’s opinion and don’t want a protracted debate, but because he didn’t seem to get the gist of my earlier comments, I felt compelled to respond.

Steve Gniadek lives in Columbia Falls.