Wilderness not the right call for Scotchman area

With the flurry of recent press regarding the future of the Scotchman area, many residents may be wondering why, when Bonner County voted the wilderness down in 2018. After that vote, U.S. Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, stated he would not introduce a wilderness bill. If a new proposal is ever realistically considered, it needs to be carefully crafted after accommodating long-standing uses and public concerns regarding forests in Idaho.

A recent letter by a FSPW board member stated that what matters most, is not the past, but the actions we take for the future. That’s interesting, because for the past 17 years, they have used an incorrect assertion regarding the history at Scotchman, as an argument for wilderness. The writer correctly stated that Scotchman has been recommended for wilderness but, to his credit, did not repeat the incorrect claim that it was managed as wilderness before 2015. In 2017, I met with the Forest Service to understand this history. Nothing could be found to even remotely be described as “managed as Wilderness” and the Forest Service acknowledged that assertion was not correct.

The culture of the Scotchman area includes snowmobiling for over 40 years, both from the Idaho and Montana side. I was first in the upper slopes of Savage and East Fork on a snowmobile in the mid-1970s. By 2015, Savage Basin, Thunder Creek and the upper reaches of the West Fork of Blue Creek had become popular for snowmobiling. I’m confident that more people on a weekend were enjoying the most remote reaches of the backcountry on snowmobiles, then in an entire winter with skis and snowshoes.

I doubt if most Idahoans would support more wilderness in areas of forest, where no effective management is possible. Forest fires in Idaho continue to grow in size and intensity. Insects and disease are increasing tree mortality at alarming rates. Growing up here, summer smoke was never anywhere near as bad as it is now. We can do something about this and that is to simply manage our forests for health. Careful logging, thinning and prescribed burning would reduce large fire threats and would improve wildlife habitat. The Trestle fire last summer provides a lesson. The fire grew quickly in a wind event, due to thick forest with abundant dead trees. Portions of that fire burned incredibly hot on steep slopes and intensely baked the soils, which will take decades to recover. Erosion is going to be a serious issue. Another part of the fire burned around replanted logging units. It’s pretty damn simple: dead trees burn easier than green trees.

Our Idaho Legislature doesn’t support more wilderness. Our governor didn’t support it. Prominent sportsman conservation groups and farm groups didn’t support it. Fish and Game commissioners didn’t support it. Our county commissioners and the city closest to Scotchman didn’t support it. Bonner County resoundingly didn’t support it.

Risch grounded residents as the primary stakeholders for the future of the area. Could any future collaborative effort that considered some form of protection for part of Scotchman be supported by Bonner County? If there were honest recognition of the history of the area with accommodation of long-standing uses, increased motorized access in a greater area and if other designations for smaller, special areas were considered, would residents support it? Only Bonner County can answer that.

STAN MYERS

Hope

Stan Myers is a geologist of 35 years and is an avid sportsman, hiker and multiple-use advocate.