Mineral County Resource Advisory Committee Meeting
Meeting Notes
Meeting Location: Mineral County Courthouse
Commissioner’s Room
Superior, MT 59872
Designated Federal Officer: Robert Harper
Facilitator: Sharon Sweeney
Recorder: Sandy Green
RAC Members Present: Michael Byrnes, James Lommen, Scott Burnham, James Arney, Gordon Hendrick, Patrick Hayes, Dennis Hildebrand, Philip Donally, Dale Harris, Wendy Ninteman, B.J. McComb, Anngela DeAnne-Boutelle
RAC Members Absent: Denely Loge, Raymond Rugg
RAC Replacement Members Present:
Others Present: Glenn Koepke, Wanda Galloway,
Larry Price, John Q. Murphy, Lee Kramer,
Ed Webber, Pat Sweeney and Lee Kramer
Meeting Minutes Review – The meeting was called to order by Chairman Mike Byrnes at 1803 hours. The minutes from the April 8, 2003 meeting and the agenda for this meeting were approved.
Rob Harper wanted to inform the committee that some of the selected projects had to be rewritten to meet criteria. The dollar amounts stayed the same but the wording was changed. Rob also stated that the deadline for RAC member applications has been extended into May. He has received four applications to date and is expecting two more. The applications received are from Bruce Duffalo, Larry Price, Mike Gullette and Shauna Hudson.
Sharon Sweeney introduced the Forest Plan team consisting of Ed Webber, Pat Sweeney, Lee Kramer and Chuck Sperry. Lee Kramer asked the question “What is the Forest Plan?” He explained that it is the goals, management standards, direction, monitoring specific area designations, monitoring and evaluation. Lee had a power point presentation covering the overview of the revision of the plan. Lee pointed out that the team does not make specific decisions; it’s a revision process and not starting over with a new plan but what needs to change in current plans. Law states that Plans need to be revised every 10-15 years and by doing all three Forests (Flathead, Lolo and Bitterroot) provides a look at the bigger picture, more consistency, costs less, can afford expertise and each forest will retain its individual Forest Plan.
The final decision is scheduled for February, 2006.
Lee informed the RAC that required revision topics under the NFMA are timber suitability and ASQ, species viability, wilderness recommendations and special area designations.
Pat Sweeney spoke on the threatened and endangered species and sensitive species which apply to fish, animals and plants. There are basically three laws that are dealt with, NEPA, NFMA and ESA. NEPA requires BEs (Biological Evaluation) for sensitive species and ESA (Biological Assessment) for threatened or endangered species. After Pat’s presentation, the meeting was opened up for questions.
Dennis Hildebrand asked if all three Forests sink or swim together and Lee responded that each Forest has its own independent decision. Dennis wanted to know if this decision/evaluation would be broadly managed or micro managed. Lee told him it would be broad. The Ranger needs authority to take a broad decision and make allowances and flexibility with limits for each area and follow through with the plan strategy. Dennis was very concerned about micro managing and asked many “what if” questions that brought answers from Lee and Rob.
Jim Arney asked if we have been following the 1986 Plan. Lee responded that the 1986 Plan made projections and they have happened. The data bases and maps are very current showing this. Pat Sweeney informed the committee that many amendments over the years have been implemented. Chuck Sperry said a lot didn’t get done due to budgets. He gave a good visual example on the constraints the Forest Service encounters. Jim asked the status of our Forest health presently.
Larry Price wanted to know the exact definition of “road less area”. Does it mean no roads, abandoned roads, etc? Lee said there is a whole set of criteria to evaluate those areas. Gordon Hendrick felt that the language must be correct to keep attorneys and environmentalists from interpreting the definitions differently.
Pat Hayes informed the group that there is a big gap in the trust issue. Communities need to have collaborative processes for public comment. Dale Harris said that RACs need more authority. Sharon Sweeney interjected with Washington and Oregon RACs have more authority than our RACs. While the legal and professional skills to appeal and litigate are well developed, Rob said that he has found it difficult to locate regional representatives or national environmental groups that have negotiating skills. Pat Hayes stated that the RAC is formed by the Forest Service and there are things the Forest Service cannot do but a community can. Mike Byrnes said that the RAC needs press with a “lenient ear”.
Chuck asked the RAC “Where do you see this RAC going?” Mike said that they want to be involved in the Forest Plan and assist the County Commissioners with Title III money. Dale wanted to know how to make sure the Forest Service doesn’t get in our way. Rob advised that the RAC keep going until they hit a wall. Mike said that a decision had to be made to have the RAC be involved in the Forest Plan. Rob pointed out that Mineral County is the least populated county in Western Montana and we need representatives from groups we are not used to dealing with. Sharon asked the group “What if the 3 RAC’s (Flathead, Bitterroot and Lolo) got together for diversity?” Chuck responded that RAC members can bring in diversity from the members connections with the community and groups.
Rob asked the group “Where do we see ourselves in the next 4 – 6 months?” Gordon would like to see our chosen projects and the progress they are making. Chuck advised the group to focus the energy where we can make a difference.
After a 10 minute break, Mike called the meeting back to order for the Title III presentation. Mike explained that Title III projects are county projects. He went over the highlighted areas of his handout on Title III and said that presently there is approximately $140,000.00 available now in Mineral County to be divided between Title II and Title III and it stays in the fund until projects are authorized. Wendy Ninteman asked how to solicit funds for the proposals and Mike said that different entities have made application (Search and Rescue, Fire Department, County Planner, Sheriff’s Office). Dennis said that there was very little time to decide on where the funding should go as there was such a short turn around time. Mike said that the money is rolled over from previous years and we will have the report of total money available by the next meeting. He suggested 30 days for the deadline for proposals and he will get the County Commissioners to publish the request for projects in the paper. Mike then showed a power point presentation on Title II and Title III that he obtained at the conference in Reno this year.
Jim Arney brought up the Route of the Hiawatha and Rob said
that perhaps that project could be considered under LWCF funds. It would involve purchasing land or
easements. Mike and Gordon will have
the RAC present projects to the County Commissioners for approval.
Rob asked if there were fixed costs or programs that depend on Title III money. Mike said that Search & Rescue and Youth
Camp were two that came to mind.
June 3, 2003 is the next meeting date. The meeting will be held 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm in the County Commissioners room at the Courthouse.
Items for the next agenda include: More discussion on projects for Title II and Title III money; total amount of money that is available in Title III and project proposals.
Phil Donally made a motion to adjourn and it was seconded by Jim Lommen at 2100.