Mount St Helens advisory committee meeting.

Here are Jon Kennedy's notes from the April 24th meeting.  Jon is the volunteer director for BBTC (Backcountry Bicycle Trails Club in Seattle.

St. Helens Advisory Committee Meeting4/24/2008 

Thursday April 24th marked the first of six fact finding meetings being held by the Mount St. Helen’s Citizen Advisory Committee in Kelso, WA. The committee was formed by U.S. Senators Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray and Representatives Brian Baird and Norm Dicks. The goal of the advisory committee is to “explore the community’s vision for the future of the Mt. St Helen’s Monument and make a recommendation regarding the best course of action for ensuring that Mount St. Helens remains a key tourist destination and economic engine for the area while preserving its natural resources and allowing it to remain a world leader for scientific research.” It is the intent of the advisory committee to be independent and not debate over management of the area. Once this process is complete, it will be the responsibility of the committee to formulate a recommendation for congress.

The attendance was great at the first meeting. I would guess that roughly 70 to 80 people attended. The focus was on recreation for the 110,000 acre monument. David Freece from the Cowlitz County Museum gave an introductory presentation on this history of the mountain and shared various historic photos of recreation throughout the mountain’s past. Freece stressed the great value and importance of recreation as a part of the monument’s history.

 Next up was a presentation from Tom Mulder, Forest Administrative Officer for the Gifford Pinchot National Forest. Mulder started off by outlining the Monument’s Core Mission, which has five parts:

1. Protect significant monument features
2. Public health and safety
3. Provide for natural recovery and process
4. Emphasize recreation and interpretation
5. Encourage opportunities for study and research

Tom also outlined the three settings throughout the forest as deemed by the Gifford Pinchot National Forest staff and gave visual references on a map as to where these types of areas were located. The three settings were:

1. Front Country – Accessible via an easy day trip to folks from outside the area.
2. Back Country – Remote/rustic, multi-day excursion accessible (mostly by hikers, bikers & equestrians).
3. Solitude – Monument, legislative set aside, wilderness setting, little to no development, very remote.

Tom was commended on the work that he and the Park Staff are able to do with such limited resources. Folks in the audience seemed to really understand this. The final session rounded out the evening with a participant panel representing the various recreational user groups within the area. Represented were Community recreation associations, hunters, fishers, snow mobilers, the Gifford Pinchot task force, equestrians, astrologers, and mountain bikers.  Many folks highlighted the legacy that their user groups lead around the mountain and some the illuminated the need for improvements for various forms of recreation. I stated that our main concern was to retain access to all existing trails open to mountain bikers regardless of the committee’s recommendation to remain a monument or to change to a National Park. I stressed the importance of this particularly unique area to our user group and emphasized IMBA’s partnership agreement with the National Parks Service when asked about the possibility of access within National Parks. I reiterated that we’d consider supporting either stance as long as we were able to preserve all existing mountain bike access and that we were presently happy with our current access. The committee seemed quite receptive to this and according to PUMP’s David Anderson in a recent email, “Jon from the BBTC made a very good impression on the committee”. J In all, I think the meeting went well and I believe that many user groups made a strong argument for continued recreation on the mountain. I am going to try to attend the subsequent meetings but want to continue to encourage those who can make it out to do so. Our work is not finished just because the recreation meeting has passed. Anyone who might have any applicable recreation tourism info, please feel free to contact me at jon@bbtc.org.   

The meetings will be held the fourth Thursday of every month from 5:30 – 9:30 pm. The following is a schedule of the six meetings and the topic to be discussed:

·         April 24, 2008 will be held in Kelso at the Courthouse, 207 4th Ave., Kelso, WA.  This meeting will focus on recreation.

·         May 22, 2008 will also be held in Kelso at the Courthouse and will focus on the tourism industry.

·         June 26, 2008 will be held at the Lewis County Courthouse in Chehalis, WA and Science and Conservation will be explored.

·         July 24, 2008 will be held in Kelso at the Courthouse and commercial industry will be discussed.

·         August 21, 2008 will be in held in Kelso at the Courthouse and infrastructure will be discussed.

·         September 25, 2008 will be held in Stevenson, WA at Rock Creek Center and there will be discussion on “what if St. Helen’s were a National Park.

The committee consists of: 

·         Paul Pearce (arce@co.skamania.wa.us)

Skamania County Commissioner

·         Lee Grose (bocc@co.lewis.wa.us)

Lewis County Commissioner -

·         Axel Swanson (swansona@co.cowlitz.wa.us)

Cowlitz County Commissioner

·         Mark Plotkin (mark@visitmtsthelens.com)

Tourism Director of Cowlitz County Tourism Bureau

·         Maree Lerceh (maree@windermere.com)

Executive Director, Destination Packwood

·         Mark Smith (ecoparkman@mac.com)

Owner/Operator, Eco Park Resort

·         Nancy Parkes (n.parkes@comcast.net)

Professor, Evergreen State College

·         Jim Sedell (jimsedell@yahoo.com)

National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

·         Peggy Bryan (???)

Skamania County Economic Development Council

·         Jim & Debbie Waters (info@carsonridgebnb.com)

Owners of Carson Ridge B & B

·         Mariah Reese (mariah_reese@excite.com)

Director, Lelooska Foundation

·         Mary Kay Nelson (Info@VisitRainier.com)

Visit Rainier Executive Director

·         Debbie Slack (slack@co.skamania.wa.us)

Administrative Assistant to the Board

·         Casey Roeder (casey@skamania.org)

Executive Director Skamania County Chamber of Commerce

·         Paul Pearce (pearce@co.skamania.wa.us)

Skamania County Commissioner Dist. 1 

" PUMP ride September 2006

Pressure is building around Mount St Helens, and I don't mean geological either!  The Advisory Committee has recommended that the Monument not be transferred from the Forest Service to the National Park Service.  Pressure is building among groups who support the transfer to write letters or attend the two upcoming meetings where comments will be taken.

The transfer from one Agency to another is based on the funding shortfall that the Monument has suffered from. Would the Monument receive better funding under the National Park Service?  Maybe, or Maybe not.  The question needs to be asked why can't Congress see that the Monument receive adequate funding under the Forest Service?  Congress is afterall the portion of our Government that controls the purse strings.

Mountain Bikers have a reason to be leery of the proposed transfer of the Monument to the National Park Service - regardless of MOU's that IMBA may have with the NPS.  There is a large vocal constiuency who is rabidly opposed to mountain bikes in 'natural areas'.  Just look at the opposition to us wanting increased access to trails in Forest Park.  Also check out the National Parks Conservation Assoc and and especially the National Parks Traveler websites to see how they feel, or don't, about mountain bikes in National Parks.

As Mountain Bikers we need to make our views known that we expect our access to the trails be kept regardless of which agency operates the Monument.  We also expect that the Monument be adequately funded.  That is the single main reason why the proposal to change managing Agencies is being made.  And, it is Congress that can adequately fund the monument regardless of managing agency.

I personally like some of the recommendations made by the Advisory Committee.  Most large and famous National Parks have destination Lodges.  Why not transform the former Coldwater visitor center in to a destination Lodge?  Why not have a spur road from State Route 504 to Highway 12?  Wouldn't that help increase visitors to the Monument, which is one reason why that change to the NPS is being pushed?

For more information see the following three websites:

National Parks Conservation Assoc. website and letter to the Advisory committee:

http://act.npca.org/campaign/St_Helens_Taskforce

Natonal Parks Traveler website.  Do a search on their website and read what they say about mountain bikes and National Parks.  Do they support mountain bikes? 

http://www.nationalparkstraveler.com/2008/12/bush-administration-publishes-proposed-rule-mountain-biking-national-parks

From: The Stump, Oregonian see an oped that raises the funding issue:

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2009/03/neglecting_a_national_treasure.html

The Gifford Pinchot Task Force sent out this e-mail alert today:

Mount St. Helens a National Park? Voice your Opinion!             As a result of the continued funding obstacles facing Mount St. Helens, a congressional advisory committee was established in January of 2008 by US. Representatives Brian Baird and Norm Dicks, and US. Senators Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray. The advisory committee was tasked with exploring “the community’s vision for the Monument’s future” and to discuss and eventually make recommendations to Congress regarding the best course of action for ensuring the future of Mount St. Helens.               On March 2, 2009, The Mount St. Helens Advisory Committee, released their draft recommendations for the future of Mount St. Helens. Jessica Walz, the Gifford Pinchot Task Force Conservation Director, made two presentations to the committee in 2008 regarding recreation and conservation. In addition, a few of our members attended almost every committee meeting. We are pleased that the draft recommendations include a recommendation to maintain the restricted areas for recovery and integrity of the features, dedicating the monument scientist to science, expanding science funding, encouraging partnerships with voluntary organizations, and maintaining habitat protection. Unfortunately, the recommendations also encourage the expansion of roads near the monument, increased development in and around the monument, and fail to recommend national park status. We need to protect the Mount St. Helens region from increasing development pressures and also to encourage the committee to acknowledge that Mount St. Helens deserves the respect, funding, and effort that are given to other national icons. Please express your support for elevating Mount St. Helens to a national park. National park status is invaluable for Mount St. Helens and this region because national parks provide more stable, targeted, and predictable funding than the Forest Service. In addition, national parks increase tourism, which could provide economic input and jobs for surrounding communities.  You can find all the recommendations at the following website: http://www.skamaniacounty.org/SHAC/Press/SHACPress030309.pdf There are two public meetings that we encourage you to attend to voice your opinion about the recommendations. Monday March 30th for Public Comment in Kelso in the Commissioners Hearing Room from 6-9 PM. Monday April 13th for Public Comment in the Camas Police Department Community Room, 2100 NE 3rd St., Camas, WA from 6-9 PM. Comments may also be emailed to SHACComments@co.skamania.wa.us