Removal of old logging roads

[SAJ-99]

A good topic for discussion. I can see some positives and negatives. Maybe someone in the area that has seen the work can give some insight.

The Case for Destroying Old Forest Roads

Can demolishing abandoned dirt paths point the way to a more sustainable future?

www.smithsonianmag.com

 

[44hunter45]

Ha - NP/Clearwater spent wheelbarrows of money on this 15-20 years ago. Then they built an ATV trail system right on top of it.

 

[Perlodid]

Good article. I haven't spent any time in those forests in Idaho, but it tracks with my experiences roaming the decommissioned roads on the Oregon coast. It's a fascinating topic in my opinion, and one that doesn't get enough interest. The amount of decommissioned roads in some places is absolutely staggering. Important to note that road decommissioning procedures have changed quite a bit in recent history, and it was really making a difference in the places I saw. That focus on "microtopography" and heterogeneity was not part of the process before. There were roads decommed 30-40 years ago out there that were still compacted and could barely grow anything because they didn't tear it up (usually hoping to come back in to log), and then there were roads decommed within the past 5 years that were full of huckleberry, ocean spray, salmonberry, hazel, young alder, you name it. Pretty interesting to see what can grow on the old roadbed. Glad they mentioned the invasive aspect of it though, that disturbance really makes it easy for some problem species to take hold quickly. Especially without any further management.

 

[BigHornRam]

I've seen some obliterated logging road jobs that did more harm than leaving them alone and letting nature reclaim them. Some old roads in north Idaho, the only way you knew it once was a road, was that it was flat. No issue with gating the roads and pulling out defective culverts though.

 

[rjthehunter]

I've seen some obliterated logging road jobs that did more harm than leaving them alone and letting nature reclaim them. Some old roads in north Idaho, the only way you knew it once was a road, was that it was flat. No issue with gating the roads and pulling out defective culverts though.

In MT this past fall, we used some old logging roads that have been gated for years. Lots of trees, almost impassable on foot in areas.

I think it would be unnecessarily expensive to go in and "remove" the roads. Just make sure all equipment and trash is out and let mother nature reclaim it!

 

[np307]

Yet another massive difference in east and west. Where I hunt, you have to be actively maintaining a road or else the forest will swallow it whole in a very short amount of time.

 

[BigHornRam]

Yet another massive difference in east and west. Where I hunt, you have to be actively maintaining a road or else the forest will swallow it whole in a very short amount of time.

Places in the West where it is wet enough to grow trees suitable for logging, brush and seedlings take over unused roadways in a few years too.

 

[Deleted member 48080]

I've spent my entire life walking on logging roads in the Lolo National forest. It's 95% of the hiking and hunting I've done in my life. Many of which have been re-claimed.

The comparison they keep making in the article are motorized roads vs re-claimed roads. I think what's important is re-claimed roads vs. gated roads. Once you get past the fisheries/hydrology and weed hurdles, I think re-claiming the roads vs gating and letting the forest do it is largely feel-good work that isn't really that beneficial. Especially to wildlife.

I have hundreds of videos of grizzlies, black bears, lions and wolves walking on gated logging roads in the Lolo NF. I have a hard time believing the roads are hurting those species that much, but I am not an expert.

I know of multiple roads that show as being open to motorized vehicles on FS MVUMs, that also have 30+ year old pines growing between the tire tracks. Does it really make sense to re-open those roads just to re-claim them?

I personally have no issue with them re-claiming these roads (other than having to listen to my dad complain about rolling his ankle on them), but the whole article is pretty eye-rolling to me.

 

[Deleted member 48080]

It's also pretty ironic that at the same time FWP is saying there's too many predators and we need to up harvest, USFS is saying we need to prevent access to the forests so hunters can't get to them.

 

[BigHornRam]

I've spent my entire life walking on logging roads in the Lolo National forest. It's 95% of the hiking and hunting I've done in my life. Many of which have been re-claimed.

The comparison they keep making in the article are motorized roads vs re-claimed roads. I think what's important is re-claimed roads vs. gated roads. Once you get past the fisheries/hydrology and weed hurdles, I think re-claiming the roads vs gating and letting the forest do it is largely feel-good work that isn't really that beneficial. Especially to wildlife.

I have hundreds of videos of grizzlies, black bears, lions and wolves walking on gated logging roads in the Lolo NF. I have a hard time believing the roads are hurting those species that much, but I am not an expert.

I know of multiple roads that show as being open to motorized vehicles on FS MVUMs, that also have 30+ year old pines growing between the tire tracks. Does it really make sense to re-open those roads just to re-claim them?

I personally have no issue with them re-claiming these roads (other than having to listen to my dad complain about rolling his ankle on them), but the whole article is pretty eye-rolling to me.

After a little bit, I started skimming the article. It was written by someone who has spent more time reading about the subject, then time in the woods. I also got the feeling the author was not so keen on hunting, but I could be wrong.

 

[Perlodid]

I've spent my entire life walking on logging roads in the Lolo National forest. It's 95% of the hiking and hunting I've done in my life. Many of which have been re-claimed.

The comparison they keep making in the article are motorized roads vs re-claimed roads. I think what's important is re-claimed roads vs. gated roads. Once you get past the fisheries/hydrology and weed hurdles, I think re-claiming the roads vs gating and letting the forest do it is largely feel-good work that isn't really that beneficial. Especially to wildlife.

I have hundreds of videos of grizzlies, black bears, lions and wolves walking on gated logging roads in the Lolo NF. I have a hard time believing the roads are hurting those species that much, but I am not an expert.

I know of multiple roads that show as being open to motorized vehicles on FS MVUMs, that also have 30+ year old pines growing between the tire tracks. Does it really make sense to re-open those roads just to re-claim them?

I personally have no issue with them re-claiming these roads (other than having to listen to my dad complain about rolling his ankle on them), but the whole article is pretty eye-rolling to me.

Those are big hurdles to get past though. The issue of gating vs. more intensive decommissioning to me ultimately revolves around sediment - what are the odds that this specific road will noticeably increase the sediment load in the watershed if we leave it? What are the odds of a landslide dumping tons of fine material in a stream if the roadbed is still intact versus if it was reclaimed? These questions are all road/site-specific, but they amount to much more than feel-good work when you factor in how likely these roads are to fail eventually. But I don't have the experience in the Lolo, so I have no clue if it's actually worthwhile in this specific case. It's definitely not a good idea to do this everywhere. I just don't think it should be discounted as a management tool.

Besides those concerns - 100% with you. A bunch of animals seem to love gated roads, as I'm sure a lot of people here can attest to. Waste of time and money to open up the ones that are already on their way to a relatively natural state.

 

[eshunt]

I have spent a few summer seasons decommissioning/removing logging roads. I am not familiar with the area in this article though. My experience has been in northern CA. There's a few different levels of decommissioning or removing old roads. And really, it doesn't have to be logging, can be a road that was used for any reason.

Decommissioning usually means minimal work, usually pulling culverts and making sure there aren't any outside berms to channel water and filling in any inboard ditches. Basically letting water sheet off road without channeling. If the road is hard surfaced such as with rock, then using a dozer to rip the hard surface is beneficial so that new plants and trees can get roots into them. I have seen rock roads that haven't been driven on for almost 40 years that hardly have any new growth of trees in the road surface.

Removal often involves moving a bit more material. Typically will not just pull culverts, but also remove most of the fill material that was in the crossing as well. Then much of the fill from the outside of the road will be brought back to the inside of the road to create a steep outslope on the road. This brings the road back into a more stable state and there will be less possibility of material eroding away and causing silting issues downstream.

The third and most extreme is total landform restoration. This involves trying to remove all material out of stream crossings and returning the stream back down to the pre-road condition. Then in the other road sections, all of the outside fill is removed down to pre-existing soil and moving back to the inside of the road. This would reestablish the pre-road landform condition along the entire length of the road. This often used where the soil and moisture types require as much soil stabilization as possible to prevent further erosion and silt transport into streams further down the watershed.

There is definitely no one size fits all solution. And obviously there are some pretty large expenses involved in total landform restoration. But there are some amazing examples in Redwood State and National Parks up in N. CA. I can show you some photos of before and after that are pretty unbelievable. Within just a few years after some of the projects have been completed, its difficult to know there was ever any road or disturbance there.

In stable soils, basic decommissioning will be plenty. And it will keep the idiots that drive around gates from driving down the roads also.

 

[BuzzH]

I've spent my entire life walking on logging roads in the Lolo National forest. It's 95% of the hiking and hunting I've done in my life. Many of which have been re-claimed.

The comparison they keep making in the article are motorized roads vs re-claimed roads. I think what's important is re-claimed roads vs. gated roads. Once you get past the fisheries/hydrology and weed hurdles, I think re-claiming the roads vs gating and letting the forest do it is largely feel-good work that isn't really that beneficial. Especially to wildlife.

I have hundreds of videos of grizzlies, black bears, lions and wolves walking on gated logging roads in the Lolo NF. I have a hard time believing the roads are hurting those species that much, but I am not an expert.

I know of multiple roads that show as being open to motorized vehicles on FS MVUMs, that also have 30+ year old pines growing between the tire tracks. Does it really make sense to re-open those roads just to re-claim them?

I personally have no issue with them re-claiming these roads (other than having to listen to my dad complain about rolling his ankle on them), but the whole article is pretty eye-rolling to me.

Couple comments.

There are a couple good things that can come from reclaiming roads, primary has been mentioned, reducing TMDL's in streams and sediment from a fishery standpoint (if applicable).

The other thing is also limits hunting and receational access into areas as well.

In order:

1. Drivable roads with a vehicle, people will drive every last mile
2. Gated roads, no more motorize access but walking 5-6 miles behind a gate is not a big deal.
3. Reclaimed road, much harder to walk less people going as far back.
4. Hiking trail, similar to reclaimed road.
5. Cross country no trail, 5-6 miles is a long way.

Probably some value to provide wildlife security by reclaiming roads, but again case by case.

 

[eshunt]

Here's just on series of examples on a complete landform restoration of a road.

 

[Deleted member 48080]

Those are big hurdles to get past though. The issue of gating vs. more intensive decommissioning to me ultimately revolves around sediment - what are the odds that this specific road will noticeably increase the sediment load in the watershed if we leave it? What are the odds of a landslide dumping tons of fine material in a stream if the roadbed is still intact versus if it was reclaimed? These questions are all road/site-specific, but they amount to much more than feel-good work when you factor in how likely these roads are to fail eventually. But I don't have the experience in the Lolo, so I have no clue if it's actually worthwhile in this specific case. It's definitely not a good idea to do this everywhere. I just don't think it should be discounted as a management tool.

Besides those concerns - 100% with you. A bunch of animals seem to love gated roads, as I'm sure a lot of people here can attest to. Waste of time and money to open up the ones that are already on their way to a relatively natural state.

My post probably reads more harshly than I intended. I don't know Switalski but I know the Clark Fork coalition and they do good work. I'm sure they're benefitting the forest with these projects.

I just also know that these agencies have specifically re-claimed roads in order to change the inventoried mileage of roads within a drainage, and when I walk those roads before and after I'm not seeing how it's directly benefitting.

That's just one hunter's opinion though, and I'm sure I'm missing stuff. I'm not a scientist. I just felt like sharing my perspective since I'm on the ground in the area so much.

If this is how much the large predators are using the gated roads, I can't imagine how much traffic they'd get it they re-claimed these. This is in the very specific area that Switalski is working.

 

[eshunt]

Here's a complete crossing removal. And this was a "small" one for this project. Only removed about 2500 yds of material from this one. Some were tens of thousands of yards of material.

 

[Trial153]

I have spent a few summer seasons decommissioning/removing logging roads. I am not familiar with the area in this article though. My experience has been in northern CA. There's a few different levels of decommissioning or removing old roads. And really, it doesn't have to be logging, can be a road that was used for any reason.

Decommissioning usually means minimal work, usually pulling culverts and making sure there aren't any outside berms to channel water and filling in any inboard ditches. Basically letting water sheet off road without channeling. If the road is hard surfaced such as with rock, then using a dozer to rip the hard surface is beneficial so that new plants and trees can get roots into them. I have seen rock roads that haven't been driven on for almost 40 years that hardly have any new growth of trees in the road surface.

Removal often involves moving a bit more material. Typically will not just pull culverts, but also remove most of the fill material that was in the crossing as well. Then much of the fill from the outside of the road will be brought back to the inside of the road to create a steep outslope on the road. This brings the road back into a more stable state and there will be less possibility of material eroding away and causing silting issues downstream.

The third and most extreme is total landform restoration. This involves trying to remove all material out of stream crossings and returning the stream back down to the pre-road condition. Then in the other road sections, all of the outside fill is removed down to pre-existing soil and moving back to the inside of the road. This would reestablish the pre-road landform condition along the entire length of the road. This often used where the soil and moisture types require as much soil stabilization as possible to prevent further erosion and silt transport into streams further down the watershed.

There is definitely no one size fits all solution. And obviously there are some pretty large expenses involved in total landform restoration. But there are some amazing examples in Redwood State and National Parks up in N. CA. I can show you some photos of before and after that are pretty unbelievable. Within just a few years after some of the projects have been completed, its difficult to know there was ever any road or disturbance there.

In stable soils, basic decommissioning will be plenty. And it will keep the idiots that drive around gates from driving down the roads also.

Fantastic information.
Highlights the fact the multifaceted issues rarely have a one side fit all simple solution.

I think all avenues should be on the table and then choose the solution that best addresses the issue at hand with the road.

 

[Deleted member 48080]

Couple comments.

There are a couple good things that can come from reclaiming roads, primary has been mentioned, reducing TMDL's in streams and sediment from a fishery standpoint (if applicable).

The other thing is also limits hunting and receational access into areas as well.

In order:

1. Drivable roads with a vehicle, people will drive every last mile
2. Gated roads, no more motorize access but walking 5-6 miles behind a gate is not a big deal.
3. Reclaimed road, much harder to walk less people going as far back.
4. Hiking trail, similar to reclaimed road.
5. Cross country no trail, 5-6 miles is a long way.

Probably some value to provide wildlife security by reclaiming roads, but again case by case.

Those are all great points. And youre right, it's just so dependent on each individual road.

If a road is gated and has any stretches on northern lodgepole exposure, they're completely impassable in five years. If it's south facing ponderosa, our nieces and nephews will still be still-hunting them long after we're gone.

 

[np307]

Places in the West where it is wet enough to grow trees suitable for logging, brush and seedlings take over unused roadways in a few years too.

I figured there had to be at least some areas like that. A major contributing factor here is that loblolly is the dominant tree species and they grow like crazy.

 

[BigHornRam]

Here are a few pics of one of the areas talked about in the article. Old Plum Creek land, then TNC, and now Lolo National forest. Don't see where hauling in equipment to remove these roads is a good idea.