Teton County WPLI Advisory Committee
Meeting Summary
October 11, 2017
USFS Building, Jackson, WY
Approved
Committee Members Present:
Gregory Buchko
Amanda Carey
John Hebberger Jr.
Lisa McGee
Mike Mielke
William Resor
Don Saner
Rob Shaul
David Sollitt
Siva Sundaresan
Jim Woodmency
Mike Brennan
Dan Smitherman
Tom Turiano
Bruce Hayse (late arrival)
Abby Moore
Lloyd Dorsey
Members Absent:
Steve Kilpatrick, Dave Hodges, Harry Statter / Others Present:
Gary Pollack, National Park Service
Pat Factor, public
Rusty Kaiser, public
Ken VonBuetter, public
Phil Hocker, public
Mike Buennar, public
Tom Sergerstrom, Teton Conservation District
Len Carlman, public
Leah Zamesnik, Wyoming Wilderness Association
Jesse Combs, Advocates for Multi-Use of Public Lands
Reggie Benz, Advocates for Multi-Use of Public Lands
Mark Newcomb, Teton County Commissioner
Dale Dieter, USFS
Nicole Gautier, UW Haub School
Kim Springer
Ann Harvey
Agenda
  • Teton County WPLI Advisory Committee Roles & Responsibilities
  • Shoal Creek Outings
  • Announcements / Updates
  • Oil & Gas – Interests & Discussion (John Hebberger, Jr.)
  • Discussion: Outside Distractions & Collaborative Process
  • Generating Options: Range of Solutions Presentation: Paul Spitler, TWS
  • Discussion
  • Ongoing Discussion: BATNA/MLATNA, Interests & Options
  • Public Comment
  • Next Steps / November Agenda
/ Handouts
  1. October Meeting Agenda
  2. Draft Teton WPLI Interests

ActionsTaken
  1. Nicole Gautier will update the attendance roster on Google Drive
  2. Abby Moorewill take the lead on coordinating a public outreach meeting, or series of meetings, at the Jackson Public Library. Siva Sundaresan & John Hebberger (Jr.) volunteered to assist her.
  3. Lisa McGee will contact AshleyKorenblat about a potential cancellation of Ashley’s presentation at the November meeting.
  4. Abby Moore will share the link to the electronic record of the meeting that occurred in Lander with the committee.
  5. Committee members will record their interests in the Google spreadsheet prior to the November meeting

Meeting Summary
2PM Deb Kleinman begins meeting
Business/Administrative Matters
This meeting marked the one year anniversary of the WPLI process in Teton County. Deb asked the committee members to go around and restate their purpose for participating.
  • Amanda Careyis a die-hard mountain biker and a local. She knows how much mountain biking means to this community, and her constituents.
  • John Hebberger Jr. shared he is there to ensure petroleum industries interests are represented. He had 30 yr career with Chevron, and is a geologists by training. He worked in Wyoming and the Rocky Mountain West. He has now lived in Jackson for 12.5 years, and been removed from industry for that long.
  • Lloyd Dorsey is the conservation director of the Wyoming chapter of the Sierra Club, and represents three million members and supporters of Sierra Club. He is there to represent conservation interests, to fulfill obligations to Sierra Club members and supporters, andfulfill the commitment to the County Commissioners to participate in good faith.
  • Siva Sundaresan previously represented the JH Conservation Alliance, and now represents the Greater Yellowstone Coalition. He is interested in conservation and landscape level outcomes.
  • Tom Turiano represents backcountry skiers. He is there to preserve areas in which to enjoy a pristine environment, and quiet solitude.
  • Rob Shaul represents the general public. He sees an opportunity to do something outside the courts.
  • Lisa McGee works for Wyoming Outdoor Council (WOC). She shared that WOC just celebrated its 50thanniversary, so she has been thinking about what is special about Wyoming. She is committed to the process for long-term, durable, support for conservation, while trying to meet interests of others.
  • Abby Moore represents the general public. She has a focus on durability and finality. She is interested in process, transparency, local-based solutions, and the wide variety of stake-holders around the table. She emphasized that public lands management is give and take, and the importance of trusting the process.
  • Mike Mielke represents the snow machine community. He has attended every meeting, and wants to see the process through.
  • Greg Buchko represents motorized interests, including backcountry enthusiasts and summer motorized groups. He wants to see collaboration to protect these areas, and allow a level of multi-use.
  • Jim Woodmency represents multiple use: mechanized, motorized, human. He is a former park ranger, and has used the Palisades for 20 years. He is looking for a collaborative outcome.
  • Mike Brennan was out spring semester, and is back. His has 30 years experience as an environmental, natural resource, and wildlife lawyer. He grew up in Jackson. He believes in supporting and engaging in opportunities to work together instead of fighting.
  • Don Saner represents the equestrian community. The outcome he would like is to keep access, and quality of access, and have everyone come out a winner.
  • Dave Sollitt is a communications consultant. He works locally with the conservation community, representing the tourism industry. He shared that the biggest draws for Teton County include abundance of wildlands, wildlife, and status as the southern anchor of GYE. He is looking for sustainment or enhancement of wildlands in the long term interest of tourism economy.
  • Dan Smitherman represents the Wilderness Society. He is a member of the Sublette committee, and he is helping theWashakie committee. As a promoter of wilderness, he wants to identify values of the landscape, and thinks how it is protected is important. Smitherman has been involved four years, and wants to satisfy all interests at the table.
  • Bill Resor represents the agricultural community, and land owners adjacent to the WSA. His objective is a successful solution everyone can support.
  • Deb Kleinman shared she believes collaborative solutions are more robust, and that she believes deeply in the process.
Old Business
Shoal Creek WSA visits. Dave Sollitt commented on the spectacular character of the area, and Abby shared that looking closely at maps helped her better understand the WSA. Don Saner has not been able to organize a horseback trip due to scheduling. There might be a chance for a last minute ride if interested committee members stay in touch with him. The mountain bike outing planned by Amanda didn’t occur due to weather.
Public Outreach Meetings and potential public EcoFlight. Abby has an application in to hold a meeting for the general public at the library. She would like the first meeting to be process focused. Siva and John H Jr. offered to help. Abby also reached out to EcoFlight about the possibility of taking the public on flyovers, sometime in the spring, in order to generate constructive feedback.
John Hebberger Jr.: Petroleum Potential in Palisades and Shoal Creek
John’s presentation is available on the committee’s shared Google Drive, along with a Palisades slideshow:

The purpose of the presentation was to provide a technical basis for understanding the petroleum potential of the WSA’s, ensure petroleum industry has opportunity to have input, and enable committee to make well-informed decisions. A takeaway is that the more significant petroleum potential exists in Shoal Creek, not in Palisades. This is due to both geology and access. John alerted petroleum industry leadership and the Wyoming Geological Association and Petroleum Association of Wyoming to the WPLI initiative. He has received limited input back. The common message was that political, social, and legal obstacles are considered high near Jackson, which leads to economic hurdles.
There was discussion about shifts in technology that have opened up previously inaccessible or not economically viable areas to natural gas extraction. America’s ability to have energy independence was brought up. The industry is reluctant to take off the table forever areas with known potential.
Outside Distractions
Lawsuit
Mike Brennan (who is not involved in the litigation) offered a summary of the recent lawsuit filed by Winter Wildlands Alliance and WildEarth Guardians against the US Forest Service (USFS) in the Idaho District Court. The complaint alleges that the 2015 Travel Management Rule requires the Forest Service to consider Over the Snow Vehicle (OSV) routes, and that all other areas were to be closed to OSV activities. A grandfather provision exists that allows USFS to use existing Travel Plans, so long as USFS took into account resource protection rules. The Bridger Teton chose to use grandfather clause. The complaint further alleges that this grandfathering did not consider resource protection requirements. Instead of specifying areas open to OSV use, only areas that were closed to such use were specified. Areas not specifically closed to OSV use were presumed open into the 90’s, as OSV use and subsequent impacts have increased, including within the WSAs. The general principle has been that agencies can rely on prior environmental analyses. The complaint alleges that use of old maps violates the 2015 FS Planning Rule and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). With regard to Bridger Teton in particular, the complaint alleges that continued and greater use of OSVs in WSAs violates the Wyoming Wilderness Act. Bridger Teton redid their summer Travel Management Plan in 2008, but did not do so for winter planning. USFS Bridger Teton’s position is that they are compliance with the 2015 Rule with regard to the grandfather clause. The Government has 60-90 days to respond to the complaint.
Dale Dieter shared that when the USFS grandfathers something, there is a perception that they will never do a Winter Travel Plan again. The litigants are going for national precedence that you can’t roll things over. There was correspondence between USFS and the parties prior to lawsuit
Rob Shaul asked about the Timeline for resolution. Mike Brennen responded that first the government will file a motion to extend the time to respond. Mike said his broad guess would be within the 2-5 year range before a decision is rendered. That decision would then likely be appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court. The Feds may respond to the complaint before end of year, but we may not see an answer until the beginning of 2018.
Dale Dieter added that within the Notice Of Intent to sue, included a failure of the USFS to consult the Endangered Species Act. The Government had 60 days to respond. Abby shared that the date filed was August 29, 2017.
Reactions/Concerns
Deb opened the floor to share reactions and concerns about recent opinion pieces, and differences between motorized and wilderness perspectives.
Dan Smitherman shared that he doesn’t think it serves committee to fight this out in public, that rather, they should discuss it in the room. His concern is noise around edges, and the perception that the majority of land is locked out to recreation, particularly with the statement that 82 percent is closed. Deb clarified that accuracy around figures and data is needed.
Amanda was concerned that public is misinformed. She thinks the committee needs to take a stance and articulate it to the public, otherwise misinformation and noise will continue to permeate through the community.
John H. Jr.’s concerns had to do with the lawsuit underway, and whether or not it would make the WPLI process moot. He asked if a legal decision would preempt the work being done by the committee. Dan Smitherman said that this lawsuit is a wonky policy suit, and that he thought the chances of it impacting legislation are remote. Mike added that it takes congressional action to designate wilderness, that it cannot be dictated by a trial court outcome. A Congressional decision does not happen fast, and the USFS could be directed to go back and do winter travel planning. If a proposal comes out of this group, it behooves the USFS to take advantage of this process, and have it inform what they decide to do. They are required to balance the same competing interests.
Lloyd Dorsey shared that he appreciated the back and forth, as exchange a purpose of the process .He called for accountability and accuracy, and a duty to address inaccuracies in the public dialogue.
Siva shared that he would like to see productive/constructive behavior rather than drawing positional battle lines. He said these distractions could be used as reason to recommit to productive behavior.
Tom Turiano shared that he thinks the lawsuit is fortuitous in regards to working together. He brought up the interest of honoring past regulations and laws, which no one had previously expressed as an interest. He also expressed that the lawsuit is necessary at this time, regardless of any perceived disruption to our committee, because the Forest Service is planning to create a nationwide template for travel maps later this fall. Tom suggested that the lawsuit is necessary to ensure that the BTNF’s questionable application of the grandfather clause is not upheld and subsequently duplicated by other Forest Units nationally. Tom asked District Ranger Dale Dieter to acknowledge that a national mapping template will be created this fall and to comment.
Rob Shaul was disappointed to see the lawsuit. He asked if the conversation community representatives onthe WPLI committee knew it was coming. He thinks the lawsuit does not foster a spirit of working together.
This began a discussion of the knowledge conservation groups might have had about the lawsuit before it was broadly shared with the committee. Rob Shaul said it was underhanded not to share knowledge of the lawsuit earlier with the committee members.
Lisa McGee shared that the lawsuit and public discourse have allowed her to reflect on this group’s lack of ability to talk to each other freely. How to get over a lot of mistrust, characterizing conservation groups as cahoots with groups we are not in cahoots with. We have not fostered super open communication. Op-eds ran back to back. She did not know Bruce Hayse and Jesse Combs had private conversations, but was happy to learn they had. She thought the lawsuit might facilitate a greater sense of urgency, as the status quo is a bit unknown.
Abby shared she thought a lawsuit was inevitable, and that it is a rallying cry for the committee to do their work. She said the work of the committee trumps the lawsuit. The USFS has shared that if the committee is not successful l through the legislative process, the work still matters. She mentioned that these collaborative efforts are new. She said that our job as a committee is to get the community behind what we come up with.
Bill added that the committee is involved in a long public process. It is messy, and may or may not resolve in a decision. The world goes on outside. The committee’s job is to, where it is helpful, listen, and then reach consensus. If we do, an outcome may be reached, which may be used legislatively, or by the USFS.
Mike Mielke shared his belief that the lawsuit has undermined his hopes for the committee: community, collaboration, and local-based interests. He sees connections between parties at the table, and groups funding the lawsuit. He brought up a lack of trust this lawsuit has triggered, and his previous belief in transparency. He thinks there have been hidden agendas, and that knowledge of the lawsuit was withheld. He thinks that positive things can come from WPLI, but he can’t say that he now trusts everyone on this board.He mentioned feeling like an underdog in the committee, and that at times he feels he is not being listened to, due to the interests he represents.
Greg Buchkoalso felt the lawsuit undermined the process. It has had a negative effect on his confidence in this process working. He felt like the timing of the lawsuit was poor, and that there was a lack of transparency in the room. He also brought up a concern about conflicts of interest in regard to how the moderator is getting paid.
Jim Woodmency agreed that the timing (of the lawsuit) was poor. He wanted to clarify if anyone in the room was affiliated with the lawsuit, and asked if anyone in the room was tied to the lawsuit by their employer.
Mike Brennen reiterated that it is Winter Wildlands Alliance and WildEarth Guardians bringing the suit. Jim Woodmency also brought up the agreement from members of the committee to not make statements representing WPLI so as not to associate WPLI with one side or the other.
Mike Brennen followed up on the conversation about trust as the cornerstone of the committee’s ability to do something or not. He wondered how proportional representation was in the room, and mentioned that neither side is a monolith.
Don Saner said his constituency, backcountry horsemen, are not conservationists, but that a lot of what they do revolves around conservation. He said he hopes there is a little bit of conservation in everyone. He was expecting a lawsuit. He said trust is necessary, and that he hopes the committee can come together and make a decision.
Dave Sollitt said the committee needs to fix the level of trust.