Pigeon River Country Association Newsletter – Spring 2009

Annual Open Meeting: July 12th, 2009 at the Pigeon River County Forest Headquarters and Information Center. Lunch will be provided at noon and the meeting will commence at 1 PM. All members of the PRCA and other interested parties invited. Please note that due to the replacement bridge work taking place where Sturgeon Valley Rd. crosses the Pigeon River, an alternate route will have to be taken to reach the meeting.  The official marked detour from Gaylord goes out Sparr Rd. (F-44) to Tin Shanty Rd, and northward from there to Hardwood Lake Rd., then back westward to the Headquarters.  An alternate route would be to take Old Vanderbilt Rd. eastward to Round Lake Rd., then north to the corner where it meets Twin Lakes Rd.

Song of the Morning Dam Lawsuit:

A preliminary pre-trial hearing was to be held before Judge Dennis Murphy in the downtown Gaylord Otsego County Courthouse on May 6, with Attorney Pete Gustafson representing both Michigan Trout Unlimited and the Pigeon River Country Association in their desire to have their say in the settlement of this crucial case launched by the Michigan DEQ against Song of the Morning Ranch. However, a verbal agreement made the pre-trial meeting unnecessary. We hope this preliminary agreement bodes well for a satisfactory solution to removal of the hazard that this dam (pictured below) and the damage that its continuing operation has repeatedly caused to the Pigeon River and its fishery.

Report on April 19th Advisory Council Meeting: ORV use

While nothing has been finalized, it appears that Cheboygan County will allow use of ORV’s on all roads under their jurisdiction. Otsego County appears headed toward limiting use to exclude roads in the PRCSF while allowing use on at least some other county roads. Similar action is expected from Montmorency County however, they are considering allowing access to private properties within the PRCSF boundaries.

Horseback use

A Horseback Committee meeting was recently held in Gaylord. There were several members of the public that voiced opinions on the issues they feel need to be addressed, such as safety with riding on county roads. While on the surface this may seem to be a valid point one needs to remember that these same roads have been used by riders for years. It was only after restrictions were placed that horseback users raised a safety concern. The message from Horseback users at meetings I have attended is very clear: they want NO restrictions. We should all consider that hunters, fishermen, and trappers have been restricted for years. The hunting and trapping guide is 47 pages more or less, and the fishing guides are over 80 pages. Many of these restrictions were recommended by the user groups that are affected by the regulations in an effort to provide a higher quality experience for everyone. These user groups have provided most of the funding support for the purchase and management of the lands used by all. Others reported use and camping in closed areas last fall. After a trip to the area on September 14, 2007, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service sent a report [re. the P-R] funding.to the MDNR regarding this very issue and in part stated that “In the PRCSF and other areas where horseback use is permitted, the Wildlife Division should work to eliminate or regulate and monitor the use...We believe that the Concept of Management for the Pigeon River Country, produced by the Michigan DNR in 2007 is likely to accomplish these objectives.” Further the report states that “I did not believe that the current use of the license fee acquired lands was consistent with the provisions of the Act, and that the activities could constitute a diversion of Federal Pittman-Robertson funds which could result in sanctions to the Department, up to and including loss of federal government funding.

            Dave Smethurst, chair of the Horseback Use Committee, informed the Council that the focus of the meeting was to gather information, a process which will continue throughout the summer season. There are no plans at this time to ask for changes in the Director’s Order restricting use, until we can see what impacts both positive and negative have resulted.

            While this process continues, the Council was asked to keep reminding the public of just what the restrictions are. There are still approximately 370-miles of trail and road open to horseback users. The DNR will work toward putting together a map to help with this and better train volunteers working throughout the summer at the PRCSF Headquarters. One item that seems to be a regular point of misinformation is roads. Many interpret this as “County Roads”, which is incorrect. While county roads are open, so to are those forest roads listed as open under the vehicle access plan. It was stated by the PRCSF Unit Manager that in general horseback use is allowed where you can drive a car, if you would have to stop and turn around with your vehicle you will also have to do so with a horse. If there is a berm, posts or a gate that restricts vehicle access then horses are not allowed unless signs indicate specifically otherwise. However, where there are signs that say “Keep it Wild, Walk In” they mean human foot traffic only, not horses.

Oil  & Gas Issues: in-holdings and boundary lands

Acquisition of mineral rights under the Blue Lakes Tract continues to be a priority issue. However, information has been received that a current minerals lease effective until 2011 for the State owned portion of the Blue Lakes Tract exists. Therefore, while talks will continue it is unlikely that anything will be finalized until the lease expires.

            On another in holdings issue it appears that the State is moving forward with attempts to secure a trust fund grant for the purchase of a portion of the Ford property including approximately 800 acres reported earlier. This would be a great addition to the forest, and supported by the Advisory Council.

            The Oil & Gas Committee has been very busy lately, meeting three times since the last Council meeting. Several matters were discussed the most important of which the Committee heard two proposals for Non-Development Leases in the PRCSF under portions of the Green Timbers Tract. After long discussions as to the proposals, the Oil & Gas Committee recommended denial at this time. Concerns which prompted this action were on proposal #1 the Environmental Assessment provided with the information packet failed to address the impacts of possible releases of products other than natural gas. There was no mention of Brine, Chlorides, BTEX, or other possible contaminants. Proposal #2 did not include an environmental assessment. The Committee felt these issues should be addressed prior to issuance of leases. Unfortunately, the Advisory Council did not agree, during their discussions the main focus was that since drainage of State owned minerals is likely already happening and there is no compensation to the people of Michigan. The Council felt the only way to correct this situation was to issue leases which would then entitle the State to royalty fees for minerals under the Green Timbers tract. While we might agree that a wise use of income has been that Natural Resources Trust Fund, we must also ask, “At what cost to the PRCSF as a special resource?” We must look first at the resource, its value, and all possible negative impacts.

            In other Oil & as matters the Committee heard reports on four spills within the boundaries of the PRCSF. While some are considered minor and do not appear at this point to be a significant risk, any release that is near a water source is certainly cause for concern to the Committee and will be monitored through close contact with the DNR and DEQ. One of the spills which were discovered in 2005 was a large volume spill of undetermined origin except that it was within the fenced confines of the Charlton 4 CPF on Houses Lost Cabin Trail. Of particular concern is the fact that the actual cause of this release may never be known. The question being, how can we be assured that protections against future releases are in place when the operators and government officials charged with preventing such occurrences aren’t sure just what they are going to prevent?

Biodiversity

The Advisory Council heard a report on “Biodiversity Stewardship Area Planning” this is a very involved process which has been in the development stage for several years and will effect all State Lands to some varying degree. I won’t pretend to give an accurate and complete description of the process and its intended results, but will attempt a very simplified view of my understanding.

            In effect, the program will seek to identify areas with specific characteristics and management needs. Upland hardwoods, Lowland swamps, Wetlands, Fens and Bogs. Habitat specifically required by wildlife species, Ducks, turtles, snakes, Owls, Hawks, Eagles, Osprey, Elk, Bear Bobcat, White-tailed Deer, Salamanders, various Trout species, Sturgeon, Pike, Bass, Pinfish. Perhaps a shorter way to describe the process is, “If it’s alive, it has specific needs, and the program will seek to identify, what it is, where it is, and what it needs. Then develop management practices best suited for the most sensitive of these life forms within the particular area.” While more in depth this process seems, at least to a grass roots user of the PRCSF, to be not unlike the management practices used in the PRCSF for the last half century or more. (Report by Michael Brown: PRCA Representative to the Advisory Council)

Special Note: However, since the April 19th Advisory Council meeting it was disclosed that on April 28th a special hearing by State legislators to review a proposed State House Bill (#6410-2009) proposed back on March 18th was to be held in the capitol building Lansing. This bill would amend the 1994 PA 451 Natural Resources Act, section 72101, by adding a new section redefining the original act in a way that would reopen “all trailways, open access roads, management roads, forestry access roads, and established 2-track and single-track trails,” in such a way that “all trailways and other areas on state owned land that were open on May 7, 2008 and available for use by pack and saddle animals shall remain open and accessible for use by pack and saddle animals”, etc., and would mandate that “the Commission” (what commission is referred to is not specified, but one assumes the Natural Resources Commission is what is meant) is to “not later than July 31, 2009, … establish a network of trailways on state owned lands that may be used by pack and saddle animals.”

            One question that immediately comes to mind is how and why the Advisory Council was not informed of this sweeping attempt to rescind the DNR’s power to control public use of state land before this late date. Dave Smethurst was informed by an alert member of the MUCC as to what was going on in Lansing just a day and a half before the scheduled hearing and was able to make a last minute attempt to be scheduled to speak at that meeting. He did so, and reports that as usual, a great deal of misinformation and outright ignorance regarding the Pigeon River Country Forest and its special regulations was aired at the hearing. The bill was then supposed to be sent back to committee for further modifications. We can only hope now that the legislature will come to its senses. (R W Kropf, editor)

Getting to Know the New PRCF Manager:

Since last December, the Pigeon River Country Forest has had a new manager, replacing Joe Jarecki who retired from this post this past year. He is Scott Whitcomb, son of the well-known retired district DNR wildlife manager Douglas Whitcomb. Scott grew up living practically within the forest, as the Whitcomb homestead is very close to the NW corner of the Green Timbers Tract. Graduating from the Wolverine Public Schools, Scott early on decided to follow in his father’s footsteps, earning his Bachelors degree in fisheries and wildlife management at MSU and then going on to earn a Masters degree in the same field at the University of Maine, doing research on spruce grouse in Acadia National Park on Mt. Desert Island for his Master’s dissertation.

            Scott then moved on to become an employee of the Fish & Wildlife Department of the State of Virginia, where he worked for four and half years in the mountainous SW corner of that state. Returning to his home state, Scott has been working as a special fisheries and wildlife consultant for the Lands Management Division of the DNR in Lansing, but jumped at the chance to return to live and work back in his home turf. We welcome him back home to God’s country!

PRCF Manager Scott Whitcomb—at where the buck stops

            When I asked Scott what he sees as being his biggest challenge as the Manager of the PRCF—next to getting the job done with a greatly reduced operating budget—he said that it would be trying to solve all the conflicts between competing forest users. So I promised that I would address this issue in our newsletter, which resulted in the following thoughts.

Getting to the Heart of the User Conflict Problems:PRIVATE  

Many years back, while attending one of the quarterly meetings of the Pigeon River Country Advisory Council, I remember how the PRCA's representative on the council at that time explained the purpose of the Association. It is not to represent any particular user group, but simply to represent the Forest itself. This simple, but perhaps enigmatic, statement not only contains a wealth of meaning, but has profound implications.

            For one, it means that the PRCA and its membership not only is dedicated to making sure that any one group and its activities, as well as all of them put together, do not dominate the way the forest is used, or even worse, abused, leading to its deterioration. Originally organized to protect what Michigan's premier state forester, P.S. Lovejoy loved to call "The Big Wild" from the ravages of the oil and gas industry, we are equally determined to protect if from the timber products industry, as well as from being overrun and dominated by any particular group of recreational users, be it hunters, fishermen, horseback riders, bicyclists, or even by campers, hikers, mushroom pickers, or, despite the Association's earliest beginnings sparked by members of the Audubon Society, even bird watchers!

            The reason for this attitude has, I suppose, its rationale in human psychology. Mankind seems to have built into it an inevitable bias towards self-interest and self-gratification. Perhaps this is a result of evolution which seems to favor, at least in the short term, those individuals who look out for number one, themselves, rather than those who sacrifice themselves for the sake of the group or for others. And although such an attitude is probably going to turn out to be detrimental to everyone, including its perpetrators, in the long-run—just look where such a philosophy has gotten us when applied to economics—this competitive "me first" bias is deeply rooted in our culture, indeed, America's cult, of "freedom."

            To go one level deeper into this analysis of human behavior, I suppose it is a result of our inevitable tendency to mistake means for ends, to do something simply because we enjoy doing it, without thought of why we may have had to do it in the first place. For example, in the beginning, people had to hunt to eat, seek shelter (make camp) to survive the elements or had to hike in order to get to where they needed to go. Then they found that by taming horses (or fashioning skis, or riding bicycles or driving vehicles powered by internal combustion engines) they could get there more efficiently and quickly. In addition, even more, as a kind of bonus, a lot of these activities proved enjoyable, or even if sometimes painful, nevertheless gratifying because they conveyed a sense of self-worth and accomplishment.

            Yet notice the subtle switch in priorities that such an attitude (especially in what we call "recreational activities") involves. It is no longer a case of appreciating nature for its own sake, or respecting and protecting it because of our dependence on it. Instead, it too often becomes only a backdrop for something we like to do, because we find it pleasurable and/or in some way self-enhancing. So in the process we have, (to use a particularly ugly modern term) become to some extent "self-absorbed," most likely without realizing it.

            So how do we know that we have fallen into such a trap? I suppose one litmus test would be to ask if what we are doing is, in any way, interfering with what others would like, or even think they need, to do. If the answer is yes, then probably what we are doing, legitimate as it may be, probably borders on overuse or is or will sooner or later be a cause of user-conflict.

            However, I would suggest another, perhaps more graphic or visible test. It is to ask if what we are doing is leaving any trace of our having been here, even if it is only our footprints. Nevertheless, if so, then we should ask ourselves why we are here in the first place. Is it merely for our own enjoyment or, at least in the long run, for the sake of the forest?    (R W Kropf, editor)            

Other News:

Summer Intern: As has been customary in the past, the Association will be funding a college forestry, wildlife, or conservation student to work in the PRCF as summer intern. This year that intern will be Matt Storey from Central Michigan University. One advantage afforded at present by the CMU schedule will be that Matt will be available to work for thirty weeks, beginning on May 11th. Scott Whitcomb, the Forest Manager, already has a whole list of jobs for him to assist with, which include: assisting in campground, trail, and pathway maintenance, and supervising volunteers engaged in the same tasks; placement of signs necessary to implement standards mandated by the 2008 update of the Plan of Management for the PRCF; locating and recording, with the help of a GPS device, those areas where unauthorized roads, trails, and resource damage has taken place as well as dispersed camping activity may pose a problem; and, finally, (especially on rainy days) helping to further develop interpretative and educational materials for or to be available at the PRCF Headquarters and Information Center.  We will looks forward to hearing from Matt at this year’s (July 12th) annual PRCA meeting.

More Students: This spring, also on the morning of May 11th, the PRCF Headquarters will host a group of students from Michigan State University for an “orientation tour” conducted by several of their professors with the assistance of the Forest Manager. This session will also bring an opportunity for one or more members of the PRCA to familiarize the students with the history of the Association and its mission and (hopefully) to recruit a few new members.