Open Solution Thread (Hijacked by Rabid Environmentalist)
Updated post: May 20
Just what will happen to Tom Robak's beautiful dream log home on the West Fork of the Bitterroot River, just below the confluence with Nez Perce Creek? Will he have to tear it down before it's even finished or will he prevail in court? All we can say is stay tuned.
What does this have to do with forest management? Not much other than Tom Robak is the founder of Big Sky Coalition. But one guy named Matthew Koehler, WildWest Institute, makes it part of his business to keep you abreast of anything to do with this organization that might negatively influence how you feel about our organization's agenda.
To make it easy for you to think negatively about us, he's reposted two news articles concerning this issue as comments to this post.
We trust you can make up your own mind.
Meanwhile, back to our regularly scheduled programming:
Spectator or Activist?
Here's your opportunity to change the ongoing forestry dialog for the better. Leave a comment of any length about what you think are the most realistic solutions to mitigating forest overgrowth and fire management issues in the Bitterroot National Forest.
When it comes to the USFS, what policies and practices would you like to see improved, and why?
Regarding the dialog between stakeholders on forest management issues, what would you like to see improved, and why?
Just what will happen to Tom Robak's beautiful dream log home on the West Fork of the Bitterroot River, just below the confluence with Nez Perce Creek? Will he have to tear it down before it's even finished or will he prevail in court? All we can say is stay tuned.
What does this have to do with forest management? Not much other than Tom Robak is the founder of Big Sky Coalition. But one guy named Matthew Koehler, WildWest Institute, makes it part of his business to keep you abreast of anything to do with this organization that might negatively influence how you feel about our organization's agenda.
To make it easy for you to think negatively about us, he's reposted two news articles concerning this issue as comments to this post.
We trust you can make up your own mind.
Meanwhile, back to our regularly scheduled programming:
Spectator or Activist?
Here's your opportunity to change the ongoing forestry dialog for the better. Leave a comment of any length about what you think are the most realistic solutions to mitigating forest overgrowth and fire management issues in the Bitterroot National Forest.
When it comes to the USFS, what policies and practices would you like to see improved, and why?
Regarding the dialog between stakeholders on forest management issues, what would you like to see improved, and why?
Labels: open thread
posted by Jay at
5/08/2008 11:52:00 AM
To comment on this post via email, click here.
Subscribe to
10 Comments:
County says Big Sky Coalition founder built home in floodway
by ANTHONY QUIRINI - Ravalli Republic
May 12, 2008
Ravalli County is alleging that one of the founders of the Big Sky Coalition built his house in the floodway of the West Fork of the Bitterroot River.
County officials believe that Tom Robak’s house sits in the actual floodway, not just the floodplain, and that “significant” amounts of fill have been placed.
Placing fill and building in floodplains and floodways is strictly prohibited, and if the county is correct, it will require Robak to move the house.
Robak is one of the founders of the Big Sky Coalition, whose Web site touts as “environmentalists with common sense.”
Deputy Ravalli County Attorney Alex Beal wrote to Robak’s Attorney Dustin Chouinard saying,
“As I hope I have conveyed above, these are very, very significant concerns ... The placement of a home in the floodway is of significant concern to everyone. Not only is there the great probability of the Robak house becoming inundated with flood waters, but there is a possibility the home could wash down stream and destroy other property.”
Robak said he completed elevation studies and looked at floodplain maps before building his property.
“We did the elevation study and it showed that the house, driveway and property is out of the floodplain,” Robak said. “They would like me to tear the house down because they say I raised the elevation of the house.”
According to Robak, county officials came out to the building site to inspect where the house was being built three to four weeks into construction. Robak said he never heard from the county and then six months later they told him that the house was being built in the floodplain and floodway.
“That’s really one of the big issues with me,” Robak said, adding that the house is his dream home. “At this stage of the game we’re sick about it. It’s taking a lot of energy.”
According to county officials, placed fill may have altered elevation surveys.
“The Ravalli County Floodplain and Environmental Health Offices have seen significant quantities of fill placed on Mr. Robak’s property, much of which appears to be in the actual floodway not just the floodplain,” Beal wrote.
With more-than-average snowpack in the high country, officials are predicting significant flooding this spring.
“Floodplain violations have required houses to be moved in the past,” Ravalli County Floodplain Administer Laura Hendrix said, noting a home near the Conner Cutoff that the county moved recently.
Robak is taking the county’s concerns seriously.
“They are serious, they have done it in the past,” he said. “They got my attention... I guess it will eventually take a judge.”
This spring the county has issued two emergency floodplain permits so far. The permits allow citizens to build up banks or levies because of personal property damage from flooding.
This could be one of the worst flooding years in the Bitterroot Valley if proper conditions prevail.
Well, aside from the fact that Tom Robak is the founder of Big Sky Coalition, this article has nothing to do with Big Sky Coalition or forest solutions, Matthew. But this post does say "open" thread so I won't delete it.
I personally hope Mr. Robak sues Ravalli County's Floodplain and Environmental Health Offices for not having its act (story) together in the first place.
Aren't they are responsible for consistent enforcement and permitting? Why they initially blessed the project and waited another six months to condemn the project is grounds for litigation and punitive damages.
It's one thing to enforce a valid law, it's quite another to drum up a case against a guy who "did everything right" and being framed in a fire-ready-aim fashion by people whose job it is to make sure things like this don't happen in the first place.
I live a mile from the house he's building and know he didn't use "significant" amounts of fill. He didn't use any fill I'm aware of. And I think the evidence as presented by people who actually did the site work will prove it.
Just another cheap shot by Matthew Koehler. I swear he must have nothing else to do.
Simply passing along an article that was published in a local newspaper is a "cheap shot?" If so, here's another...
County investigates alleged floodplain violations
By Michael Howell
Bitterroot Star, May 14, 2008
A dispute between Ravalli County and the founder of the Big Sky Coalition, Tom Robak, over his alleged violation of the Ravalli County Floodplain Regulations is likely headed to court, according to Robak. Robak has also been an outspoken opponent of the county's efforts to establish streamside setback regulations. If the allegations prove true, Robak could be forced to remove a new home that is close to completion on property he owns along the West Fork of the Bitterroot River south of Darby.
In December of last year Robak was notified by Ravalli County Floodplain Administrator Laura Hendrix that a Department of Natural Resources and Conservation official, while conducting routine site visits in the fall, had noticed construction of a new house and the placement of fill on his property. The construction and the placement of fill was confirmed by her department.
County regulations prohibit most development within the mapped floodplain of the river. Although some development is allowed upon granting of a permit, the building of new houses and the placement of fill is prohibited. Since there was no floodplain permit issued for the property, and the house and fill were located within the mapped floodplain, Hendrix asked Robak to cease any work on his project.
To accurately assess the location of the house and fill, Hendrix requested Robak to retain a professional land surveyor or engineer to complete an elevational survey of the property showing the location of the house and the fill as well as any other structures and detailed elevation points and contours of the natural ground surface throughout the property.
A violation of the Floodplain Regulations may constitute a misdemeanor offense, with a maximum penalty of up to 10 days in the county jail and/or fines up to $100, for each day of the offense.
Robak did respond with a survey of his property showing the house to be at least one foot above the floodplain.
In April, however, Hendrix notified Robak that his response was insufficient. His survey did not reveal whether or not the home was built on fill that raised it above the natural elevation of the land or not. If that was the case, she wrote, then the construction and the fill would still be in violation of the regulations. She also requested again that he divulge how much fill he placed on the property and in what location.
In response Hendrix received a letter from Robak's attorney, Dustin Chouinard, stating that his client had indicated that the house was not placed on any fill and that the only fill placed on the property was in relation to the septic system. He asked her, if she disagreed, to supply the evidence for her contentions.
Ravalli County Attorney Alex Beal responded, stating that county officials had seen significant amounts of fill placed on the property, much of which appears to be in the actual floodway, not just the floodplain. He noted that the surveys of the property show at least part of the house is also located in the floodway.
"The placement of a home in the floodway is of significant concern to everyone," wrote Beal. "Not only is there the great probability of the Robak house becoming inundated with flood waters, but there is the possibility the home could wash down stream and destroy other property."
He asked that Robak comply with Hendrix's request.
A civil engineering specialist for DNRC, Larry Shock, responded to a request from the county for an evaluation of the situation in a letter dated May 7. He noted that Robak had told him last December that he was aware of the designated floodplain on his property and had looked at a floodplain map in his realtor's office before buying the property. Shock said that Robak told him at the time that he had not brought any fill onto the site but simply knocked down a "high spot" in order to construct a level building site.
Shock noted, however, that Robak did not provide any elevational data indicating the construction was elevationally above the floodplain prior to starting work on the house. The only surveys provided were conducted after the construction was under way.
Since Robak was aware of the floodplain maps and that they showed portions of his property were within the floodplain, writes Shock, "The fact that this narrow parcel is adjacent to the West Fork of the Bitterroot River and within the mapped 100 year floodplain should have at least indicated the need to gather additional information and/or proceed with caution when developing the site." Therefore, Shock concludes, Robak appears to be in violation of the County's floodplain regulations for failing to apply for a permit.
Shock also notes that the survey provided by Robak's own surveyor clearly shows that the house is located within the designated floodway. Since Robak was aware of all this, reasons Shock, he should have recognized the need to gather additional information before beginning construction. According to Shock, Robak appears to be in violation of both the County and State regulations prohibiting construction of a home in the designated floodway. He recommends that the violations be pursued and resolved in accordance with County Floodplain Regulations.
According to Hendrix that would mean requiring Robak to remove the home and the fill from the floodway.
Robak refused to comment to the Bitterroot Star on Monday under the advice of his attorney.
Knew we could count on you, Matthew. This second article also has nothing to do with Big Sky Coalition or the suggested post topic forest management solutions.
Let's leave Tom Robak's house situation to the courts to decide.
In the meantime, you've yet to respond to my reply to your latest interrogatory here.
Jay, You're asserting that these articles above have nothing to do with the Big Sky Coalition or your agenda.
However, I'm looking at an large newspaper advertisement written and paid for by the Big Sky Coalition in November 2007. The ad, which I should point out uses fear and misinformation to whip people into a frenzy, is specifically against Ravalli County's proposed streamside setback ordinance.
So, let me get this straight: The Big Sky Coalition runs large ads against Ravalli County's proposed streamside setback ordinance. Later, these same ads were run and paid for personally by Mr. Robak. Local newspapers run articles (posted above) that the Big Sky Coalition founder and current board member allegedly built his home in the floodway of the West Fork of the Bitterroot River.
These are certainly not the actions of a "common sense environmentalists," which you all profess to be. Furthermore, to attack me for posting these articles and call me a bunch of names and claim that these articles have nothing to do with the Big Sky Coalition or your agenda strikes me as really odd...all facts considered.
A decision to focus Big Sky Coalition's limited resources only on forest management issues was made by Tom and the BSC board of directors shortly after running those initial ads and learning more about the two issues. BSC has focused exclusively on forest management issues ever since.
We've evolved beyond hot button messages written in the heat of the moment by a citizen turned activist when Big Sky Coalition was two weeks old. But our goal is essentially the same: we seek to reduce fuel loads, breathe less wildfire smoke, and have healthier, managed forests and stronger local economies.
We've brought this single position to the public forefront, we've testified before Congress subcommittee, we've hosted a biomass symposium, and we've held two public rallies, all in six months.
What happens to Mr. Robak's property is ultimately his personal business. He can take care of himself. What happens to our national forests is everybody's business. Only you are confusing the two.
As for calling you a bunch of names, there was but one: 'rabid environmentalist' pretty well describes you and your oddly petty actions to inform the public of our supposed foibles, and on this web site no less. Isn't freedom of speech wonderful?
Common sense tells me that, surely, we environmentalists have more important work to do.
Perhaps this new study on biofuels and forest soil carbon may be of interest.
Using Forest Residues Reduces Soil Carbon Stock
http://www.sciencedaily.com/
releases/2008/05/080520211441.htm
ScienceDaily (May 21, 2008) - The use of harvest residues for energy production decreases soil carbon stocks. These changes in soil carbon stocks are remarkable compared to the other greenhouse gas emissions caused by the use of forest residues for energy. On a national scale, soil carbon stocks play an important role in forest carbon balances.
Changes in soil carbon stock need to be assessed reliably and transparently because we need more information on the effects of climate change and forest management on soil carbon. This is also stressed by climate conventions which have set practical reporting requirements for changes in soil carbon stock.
The large spatial variability of soil carbon goes together with relatively slow changes in stocks, which, in turn, hinders the assessment of soil carbon stocks and their changes by direct measurements. Models therefore widely serve to estimate carbon stocks and stock changes in soils.
A recent doctoral thesis developed and tested the soil carbon model YASSO for upland forest soils. The model was aimed to take into account the most important processes controlling the decomposition in soils, yet remain simple enough to ensure its practical applicability in different applications. The model was applied to study the effects of intensified biomass extraction on the forest carbon balance, to estimate the effects of soil carbon deficit on net greenhouse gas emissions of energy use of forest residues and to assess the national scale forest carbon balance for Finland's forests.
YASSO managed to describe sufficiently the effects of both the variable litter and climatic conditions on decomposition. When combined with the stand models or other systems providing litter information, the dynamic approach of the model proved to be powerful for estimating changes in soil carbon stocks on different scales.
Journal reference:
1. Liski, J., Palosuo, T., Peltoniemi, M. & Sievänen, R., 2005. Carbon and decomposition model Yasso for forest soils. Ecological Modelling 189(1-2): 168-182. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.03.005
SNIP from article below:
"Streamside Setback Committee Chairman Clay Dethlefesen said the ad was inflammatory and misleading. 'It's clear InFocus has no regard for fair play and honest informing. It's a scare tactic and in doing so, they are insulting the elderly and the handicapped. It's outlandish and unfair to the general public.'"
NOTE: Chris Daniel is owner of InFocus, the local consulting, public relations and marketing firm that paid for the advertisement. Mr. Daniel is also a board member of the Big Sky Coalition: Environmentalist with Common Sense.
Streamside setbacks ad garners attention
by JENNY HARRIS - Ravalli Republic
An advertisement in yesterday's Ravalli Republic is turning a lot of heads.
Aimed at two countywide projects - streamside setbacks and zoning - the advertisement casts a negative light on those efforts.
The advertisement described two situations.
The first was an elderly woman named "Mary" who'd bought retirement land only to see her property values drop by 70 percent due to streamside setbacks. The advertisement said "Mary" couldn't borrow money to build her home on land that was worthless.
"Too bad Mary," the advertisement said.
A second case spoke to a Hamilton man named "Greg" who was injured and wheelchair bound. The advertisement said the man's family applied for a variance to convert their shop to accommodate his wheelchair. The variance was denied and "Greg's" family was forced to move from their home of many years.
"Too bad Greg," the advertisement said. "This is the result of bad zoning. This could happen to you."
On Tuesday, the Ravalli Republic asked Chris Daniel and Amy Arnold - owners of InFocus, the local consulting, public relations and marketing firm that paid for the advertisement - about the two people portrayed.
Daniel said the pictures in the advertisement - one of an old woman holding her head, the other a young man in a wheelchair - were not photographs of the actual people described in the advertisement.
"The photos are not of the actual people, but their stories are real," Daniel said. "The pictures are there to get people's attention, but the stories are real and they happened. I think a lot of people feel as though there is a lot of work being done behind the scenes with little public input. We're an ad company and we're funded by clients who paid for this. Ads are meant to get people's attention."
Daniel said the elderly woman in the ad, "Mary," was a case that occurred in Kalispell.
Diana Brody, a planner with the Flathead County Planning and Zoning office, said she wasn't aware of a case where someone lost 70 percent of their property values due to setbacks.
"We have a few places that are zoned, with a 20-foot setback, but only in certain places," Brody said. "Regarding someone losing 70 percent of property value, I don't generally believe that's the case. We've had some controversy in increasing the setback, but there is already a floodplain provision to protect private property."
Greg, the ad's disabled gentlemen, lived in Hamilton years ago and was "denied a variance to convert the shop to accommodate Greg's wheelchair," Daniel said.
Daniel said he couldn't provide the pair's last names. He said both were deceased.
Ravalli County officials were dismayed by the advertisement.
"I was very appalled by the ad, especially because it's exploiting elderly and disabled people to make a political point," said Ravalli County Commissioner Carlotta Grandstaff. "The ad speaks to variances, although there are no current zoning regulations, so I can't help but wonder, to whom did the disabled man apply for a building variance? We are promoting good zoning and we're certainly not promoting bad zoning. The ad was very discouraging to people who are working very hard on these projects and it's just not a winning strategy."
In response to the amount of public commentary the InFocus ad has received, Arnold said that is what ads are for.
"We're an ad company and ads are meant to get people's attention," Arnold said. "These are very real situations that happened to real people. We're an ad company with clients who support this. In garnering public attention, it also helps to create attention on zoning and streamside setbacks and may help draw concern where there is a lot of gray area."
Streamside Setback Committee Chairman Clay Dethlefesen said the ad was inflammatory and misleading.
"It's clear InFocus has no regard for fair play and honest informing," Dethlefesen said. "It's a scare tactic and in doing so, they are insulting the elderly and the handicapped. It's outlandish and unfair to the general public."
Let me state it again, Matthew - You need to find something more productive to do with your time!
Post a Comment
<< Home