This is an email i received from Stan Spencer please read and leave constructive comments on the webpage provided.
There could be decisions made by the FS this week re:the Travel Plan that our comments could impact. Also the comment website will only handle about 140 words so comments need to be concise and brief.
I need everyone to comment - not just Great Burn riders. The outcome impacts Forest and Travel Plans everywhere.
TALKING POINTS FOR COMMENTS ON CLEARWATER NF
Adjacent to the proposed Clearwater Great Burn RWA are 3,873 million acres of Congressionally approved wilderness. Selway-Bitterroot, Frank Church and Gospel Hump. This is the largest almost contiguous wilderness area in the lower 48 States. Population centers within the region are not placing any additional demand for additional wilderness acreage.
The Clearwater Forest Service presented the participants in the Collaborative process the results of a study that showed documented access into the backcountry by foot power has remained static over the past five years yet motorized use has doubled. This study conflicts with the desire to reduce historic motorized access and increase pedestrian only access.
There are no similar areas in the Clearwater NF to duplicate or even come close to offer the experience snowmobilers enjoy in the Great Burn Area. The closest area to similarly duplicate this experience would be 400 miles north in the Revelstoke, BC area, which has several primitive snowmobile access areas.
There is no documented evidence of any species that need protection in the Great Burn Area. Snowmobile tracks are gone when the snow melts which negates any impact on other social or ecological values. Snowmobiling causes no depreciation of the wilderness resource.
Region one guidelines allow for boundary adjustments to a proposed RWA to accommodate historic motorized use. The proposed boundary adjustments within the Great Burn RWA presented to the Clearwater NF Collaborative participants on March 8/2014 accurately reflect the acreage historically used by snowmobilers. There are no user conflicts in the winter months.
The 2012 Travel Plan did not present any documented evidence that would substantiate a need to close the historic snowmobile areas to snowmobiling. It is very doubtful that the Record of Decision will stand up to a legal test.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The information outlined above is a guideline that examines a minimum of factors the Forest Service must consider when determining a need for more wilderness. While I personally do not feel we need any more wilderness, I can support a wilderness designation for the Great Burn that includes boundary adjustments to permanently keep our historic snowmobile areas open.
Take a look at the above material and frame your comments around them. This particular comment session is to show continued support for snowmobile boundary adjustments. We out commented the wilderness advocates substantially last year which was a determining factor for getting our proposed boundary adjustments to the table. The wilderness people will have this figured out and will likely be taking counter measures. Your comments will make a difference. There will be two more formal comment opportunities (I'll advise dates) as the Collaborative Forest Plan progresses.
The Judge handling the ISSA lawsuit recently ruled that the three senior Forest Service officials including Tom Tidwell that are involved with the 2012 Clearwater Travel Plan can now be deposed to a discovery. This means our lawyer can ask them questions pre-trial and ask for specific information. Of particular interest is the guidance Region One has for managing a RWA as DEFACTO WILDERNESS.
It is critical that you emphasize in your comments that the Collaborative Forest Plan must adhere to the proposed boundary adjustments for snowmobiles because it is very probable the 2012 Travel Plan will be partially or fully overturned in a legal action.
TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. THESE COMMENTS MUST BE SENT THIS WEEK. My gut instinct tells me there could be an OPPORTUNITY for real meaningful negotiation on the Travel Plan now that the deposition ruling has been made. The more comments, the more leverage we have. DON'T BLOW THIS OPPORTUNITY!!!
The website to comment on is: Http://my.usgs.gov/ppgis/studio/launch/4290
If any questions call me at 406 544 0144 or stanspencer@montana.com
There could be decisions made by the FS this week re:the Travel Plan that our comments could impact. Also the comment website will only handle about 140 words so comments need to be concise and brief.
I need everyone to comment - not just Great Burn riders. The outcome impacts Forest and Travel Plans everywhere.
TALKING POINTS FOR COMMENTS ON CLEARWATER NF
Adjacent to the proposed Clearwater Great Burn RWA are 3,873 million acres of Congressionally approved wilderness. Selway-Bitterroot, Frank Church and Gospel Hump. This is the largest almost contiguous wilderness area in the lower 48 States. Population centers within the region are not placing any additional demand for additional wilderness acreage.
The Clearwater Forest Service presented the participants in the Collaborative process the results of a study that showed documented access into the backcountry by foot power has remained static over the past five years yet motorized use has doubled. This study conflicts with the desire to reduce historic motorized access and increase pedestrian only access.
There are no similar areas in the Clearwater NF to duplicate or even come close to offer the experience snowmobilers enjoy in the Great Burn Area. The closest area to similarly duplicate this experience would be 400 miles north in the Revelstoke, BC area, which has several primitive snowmobile access areas.
There is no documented evidence of any species that need protection in the Great Burn Area. Snowmobile tracks are gone when the snow melts which negates any impact on other social or ecological values. Snowmobiling causes no depreciation of the wilderness resource.
Region one guidelines allow for boundary adjustments to a proposed RWA to accommodate historic motorized use. The proposed boundary adjustments within the Great Burn RWA presented to the Clearwater NF Collaborative participants on March 8/2014 accurately reflect the acreage historically used by snowmobilers. There are no user conflicts in the winter months.
The 2012 Travel Plan did not present any documented evidence that would substantiate a need to close the historic snowmobile areas to snowmobiling. It is very doubtful that the Record of Decision will stand up to a legal test.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The information outlined above is a guideline that examines a minimum of factors the Forest Service must consider when determining a need for more wilderness. While I personally do not feel we need any more wilderness, I can support a wilderness designation for the Great Burn that includes boundary adjustments to permanently keep our historic snowmobile areas open.
Take a look at the above material and frame your comments around them. This particular comment session is to show continued support for snowmobile boundary adjustments. We out commented the wilderness advocates substantially last year which was a determining factor for getting our proposed boundary adjustments to the table. The wilderness people will have this figured out and will likely be taking counter measures. Your comments will make a difference. There will be two more formal comment opportunities (I'll advise dates) as the Collaborative Forest Plan progresses.
The Judge handling the ISSA lawsuit recently ruled that the three senior Forest Service officials including Tom Tidwell that are involved with the 2012 Clearwater Travel Plan can now be deposed to a discovery. This means our lawyer can ask them questions pre-trial and ask for specific information. Of particular interest is the guidance Region One has for managing a RWA as DEFACTO WILDERNESS.
It is critical that you emphasize in your comments that the Collaborative Forest Plan must adhere to the proposed boundary adjustments for snowmobiles because it is very probable the 2012 Travel Plan will be partially or fully overturned in a legal action.
TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. THESE COMMENTS MUST BE SENT THIS WEEK. My gut instinct tells me there could be an OPPORTUNITY for real meaningful negotiation on the Travel Plan now that the deposition ruling has been made. The more comments, the more leverage we have. DON'T BLOW THIS OPPORTUNITY!!!
The website to comment on is: Http://my.usgs.gov/ppgis/studio/launch/4290
If any questions call me at 406 544 0144 or stanspencer@montana.com
maybe something like that could be done for this.
ffice
