Thanks but no thanks PG Forest office

[snengineer]

Dear Forest User:

This letter is in response to the many inquiries for over-snow motorized access on the Pleasant Grove Ranger District. Specifically, the area north of Silver Lake Flat and east of Lone Peak Wilderness. This area was closed to over-snow motorized access in 2003, with the revision of the 2003 Uinta National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (2003 Forest Plan). This revision process was documented in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD) dated May 2003. Through this process, allocations among motorized and non-motorized recreation across the Uinta National Forest were determined for both winter and summer use.
As summarized in the Executive Summary for the FEIS (pg. 25 and 30), a majority of the Uinta National Forest (~660,350 or about 73%) is open to over-snow motorized vehicle use. However, some areas, not previously closed to over-snow motorized access (snowmobiles), were closed by the direction in the 2003 Forest Plan. The 2003 Forest Plan FEIS did not identify a reason for each individual area’s management; however, the intent was to maintain opportunities for different types of recreation settings across the Forest.
The 2003 Forest Plan sets the direction for our management of the Uinta National Forest. In the 2003 Forest Plan, this area was assigned Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) Class Semi-Primitive-Non-Motorized which is closed to motorized over-snow recreation. Only for emergency or administrative purposes is over-snow motorized travel permitted in this ROS. The forest will continue to follow the management direction in the 2003 Forest Plan. This area will remain closed to over-snow motorized access.

Please contact Larry R. Velarde, Pleasant Grove District Recreation Staff Officer, at (801) 785-3563 with any additional questions.


Sincerely,



/s/ Sylvia G. Clark
SYLVIA G. CLARK
District Ranger




They forgot to mention that out of the 73% of the area that is open to sleds, 40% of it can be accessed by a sled and of that 40% only 15% of it is worth a darn for sledding as far as snow quality and favorable sledding terrain...so that leaves us with 4.38% of quality riding areas in the Unitah National Forest, thanks but no thanks F.S!!!
.
.
.
.

 

[BossRev]

Read this

United States
Department of
Forest
Service
Uinta National Forest 88 West 100 North
P.O. Box 1428
Agriculture Provo, Utah 84603
801 342-5100
File Code:
1920
Date:
November 12, 2004
CORRECTION NO. 1
2003 UINTA NATIONAL FOREST LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Dear Uinta National Forest User:
On September 1, 2004, the Chief affirmed the Regional Forester’s decision to approve the Uinta National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan), except that he directed rewriting Forest Plan standard ROS-2 so that closures of existing motorized uses would not be implied. The Chief’s decision affirmed the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) designations, and ruled that no travel management decisions can be made without additional site-specific analysis.
On October 7, 2004, the Regional Forester issued a letter to the Forest correcting Forest Plan standard ROS-2 (p. 3-35) to read, “Decisions on future management actions or activities must be consistent with the assigned ROS classification.” The enclosed page of the Forest Plan (p. 3-35) contains the rewritten standard. Please replace this page in your copy of the 2003 Uinta National Forest Plan.
The Chief’s appeal decision and Regional Forester’s October 7, 2004 letter are posted on the Forest’s webpage at http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/uinta/projects. If you have any questions regarding this correction, please contact Reese Pope at the address and phone number listed above. Thank you for your interest in the Uinta National Forest.
Sincerely,
/s/ Peter W. Karp
PETER W. KARP
Forest Supervisor
Enclosures
cc: Regional Forester R-4, Stephen Solem, Joy Berg, Glen Stein
Caring for the Land and Serving People Printed on Recycled Paper
2003 Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines
Correction #1
RECREATION OPPORTUNITY SPECTRUM (ROS) CLASSES
ROS-1 Guideline: Forest resource uses and activities should meet the objectives for the assigned Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) classes as displayed on the map for each management area located in Chapter 5.
ROS-2 Standard: The Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) class is closed to motorized use including over-the-snow vehicles. Decisions on future management actions or activities must be consistent with the assigned ROS classification. (Correction #1)
ROS-3 Guideline: Motorized use in the Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) class is limited to heli-skiing activities, emergency situations to protect human life, and limited administrative purposes, which include, but are not limited to, the use of:
• Chainsaws, rock drills, and other motorized tools,
• Motorized equipment and vehicles for initial attack fire suppression,
• Motorized equipment and vehicles for hazard fuels reductions,
• Motorized equipment and vehicles for fire suppression only when a Wildland Fire Situation Analysis shows such action is necessary,
• Motorized equipment and vehicles where required to maintain or reconstruct permitted facilities such as dams, and
• Motorized equipment and vehicles to conduct permitted activities such as snow measurement and seismic exploration.
ROS-4 Standard: Motorized recreation use, with the exception of over-the-snow vehicles, is limited to the classified road system and those parts of the inventoried trail system designated for motorized use in all Semi-Primitive Motorized, Roaded Natural, Roaded Modified, and Rural Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) classes. Any other use of motorized equipment off of classified roads or inventoried trails is allowed only for approved administrative activities or as authorized in a permit.
ROS-5 Guideline: Over-the-snow vehicle use is allowed off trails and roads in all Semi-Primitive Motorized, Roaded Natural, Roaded Modified, and Rural Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) classes, except where otherwise seasonally closed to motorized use. The map “Over-the-snow Vehicle Use Opportunities” located in Appendix E illustrates the areas where these uses are allowed.
(Correction #1, 7 October 2004) 3 - 35

 

[BossRev]

If you haven't already done so, contact Dave Wallentine
dave_wallentine@yahoo.com

He is really taking the fight to the forest service. He has weekly updates and info to help fight this illegal closer.

 

[BossRev]

This was one of Daves last emails to the forest service.....


Mr. Ferebee,

It has now been 18 days since I first addressed the "Correction Notice No. 1" letter with Ranger Clark. I understand you need to buy time to decide how to deal with a potentially toxic issue. You are dealing with an illegal closure and you need help deciding what to do about it. Sylvia Clark's predecessor wanted to spite snowmobilers because some of them were riding in the wilderness and her enforcement people were not equipped to prevent it. So, she dealt with it by closing it. There's just one problem. It was an illegal closure because the 2003 Forest Plan did not allow changes to existing motorized uses. Here's that document again for your review:

http://fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5076969.pdf

The very first sentence reads, "On September 1, 2004, the Chief affirmed the Regional Forester’s decision to approve the Uinta National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan), except that he directed rewriting Forest Plan standard ROS-2 so that closures of existing motorized uses would not be implied."

Oh yeah, and the part of the 2003 Forest Plan about being "closed to motorized use including over-the-snow vehicles" was CROSSED OUT! (Read it on page 2. It's in blue so you can't miss it.)

This was an illegal closure! You are right to be concerned about how it makes you look to be supervising an illegal closure, especially with the publicity you are beginning to get on the issue. You were likely not aware when the closure was first enforced two seasons ago. It's not really your problem. Except that now you are getting the spotlight shined on you and it is quickly becoming your problem! Don't you hate it when somebody else's screw-up becomes your problem?

Read the letters and emails received by Melissa Dunlevy and Sylvia Clark. Look carefully at the people I have copied on this email. These are riders who want this ILLEGAL CLOSURE stopped. Email one of them and ask them.

The best thing you could do is to distance yourself from this problem. It wasn't your mistake. It wasn't Sylvia Clark's mistake. Stop enforcing the closure and the problem goes away. Keep enforcing the closure and you look complicit.

Dave Wallentine
Pleasant Grove

 

[sled_guy]

Well... until we (the motorized user) are willing to cough up the money and sue over these sorts of things nothing will change. The career FS employee can talk and meet for ever, it's there job, and string it out for ever without having to do anything.

If there is ever going to be a lesson learned from our environmental extreme friends it is that these decisions are made and influenced in the COURTS and no where else.

sled_guy

 

[Sunridge Sledhead]

Well... until we (the motorized user) are willing to cough up the money and sue over these sorts of things nothing will change. The career FS employee can talk and meet for ever, it's there job, and string it out for ever without having to do anything.

If there is ever going to be a lesson learned from our environmental extreme friends it is that these decisions are made and influenced in the COURTS and no where else.

sled_guy

I understand and agree with you Dan. If we are to fight them in the courts we need good attorneys, correct information, and people willing to fight a likely long, and potentially costly battle. I for one am willing to stand and fight! I am tired of unnecessary, and especially incorrect or illegal closures! If we say and do nothing they win!!! We are too divided, with too many different groups trying to put out fires! We need one, big voice, not several smaller can rattlers....IMHO!

 

[mtnpull]

You could always just ride it then once ticketed take it to court and show the judge the appropriate documents. I am not saying this is the smartest thing to do, but an option.

I know it works when it comes to hunting private property (not from personal experience) in utah that is not posted.

 

[hatchers]

Once again, this hot topic solidifies my approach to “keeping out riding areas open

- yes donating to the groups and clubs helps, but that’s far from enough
- pick up trash in the parking lot and trails…it’s a simple task that will go along way
- talk to the FS when you get a chance, be diplomatic and win em over….don’t be a prick
- seek out folks who have positions of power that matter, make em understand most of us respect the land
- preach “respect for the riding areas” to all you know and met
- treat skiers with respect, one good deed will spread among that dudes buddies
- don’t get heated when attacked with anti-machine talk….be smart, it will help us in the long run
- don’t ride with people who disrespect the land and others who share our areas

 

[hatchers]

We need one, big voice, not several smaller can rattlers....IMHO!

so very true

 

[Sunridge Sledhead]

Once again, this hot topic solidifies my approach to “keeping out riding areas open

- yes donating to the groups and clubs helps, but that’s far from enough
- pick up trash in the parking lot and trails…it’s a simple task that will go along way
- talk to the FS when you get a chance, be diplomatic and win em over….don’t be a prick
- seek out folks who have positions of power that matter, make em understand most of us respect the land
- preach “respect for the riding areas” to all you know and met
- treat skiers with respect, one good deed will spread among that dudes buddies
- don’t get heated when attacked with anti-machine talk….be smart, it will help us in the long run
- don’t ride with people who disrespect the land and others who share our areas

Right on Ray! We need a united, coordinated, intelligent, and level headed approach. If we then find no listening ears we may just have to ride and get the tickets and fight them in court. I am done and fed up with some of these enviro-nuts getting their way all the time! It is NOT just their land! It is OUR land!!!

 

[SWEETXPBEATCH]

DO I hear the makings of a organized "ride in"??

Right on Ray! We need a united, coordinated, intelligent, and level headed approach. If we then find no listening ears we may just have to ride and get the tickets and fight them in court. I am done and fed up with some of these enviro-nuts getting their way all the time! It is NOT just their land! It is OUR land!!!

"Ride in" Homies!!

 

[sled_guy]

Once again, this hot topic solidifies my approach to “keeping out riding areas open

- yes donating to the groups and clubs helps, but that’s far from enough
- pick up trash in the parking lot and trails…it’s a simple task that will go along way
- talk to the FS when you get a chance, be diplomatic and win em over….don’t be a prick
- seek out folks who have positions of power that matter, make em understand most of us respect the land
- preach “respect for the riding areas” to all you know and met
- treat skiers with respect, one good deed will spread among that dudes buddies
- don’t get heated when attacked with anti-machine talk….be smart, it will help us in the long run
- don’t ride with people who disrespect the land and others who share our areas

How's that worked for you so far?

I know, that's a snotty thing to say, but this is exactly my point. There is hardly a more "friendly towards shared use" state than Utah in the nation. But the closures continue to happen. I've worked way more hours than I ever want to count with the land managers just to have them get their agency sued by an environmental group and the courts tell them to do it the way the enviro's want.

Sorry, I'm a bit tired of being a nice guy about it all. Our foes are not nice guys about it... they use every means possible, throwing time/money/passion at it until they win. We, on the shared/multi-use side, do not do that on even a small scale compared to the other side.

sled_guy

 

[BossRev]

The latest,

Mr. Ferebee and Ms. Clark,

Neither this letter nor the one sent to me by Mr. Ferebee addresses the sentence in the Nov 12, 2004 Correction Letter which says very specifically that "he (the Forest Chief) directed rewriting Forest Plan standard ROS-2 so that closures of existing motorized uses would not be implied." And "...no travel management decisions can be made without additional site-specific analysis." These statements are clear. This was an illegal closure. I can only assume that is the reason it was not enforced until 2007. Please reconsider your position.

Dave Wallentine


From: Sylvia G Clark <sgclark@fs.fed.us>
Cc: Sylvia G Clark <sgclark@fs.fed.us>
Sent: Fri, December 11, 2009 1:40:04 PM
Subject: Over-Snow Motorized Access


Attached is a letter to follow up on your inquires for over-snow access north of Silver Lake Flat. This letter is being sent to you through email only because that was the primary contact information provided.



Sylvia Clark
Pleasant Grove District Ranger
Uinta Wasatch Cache National Forest
(801) 342-5241 Office

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Then Daves Last email.




As you can see from the attached letter, the Forest Service's position is that the 2003 Forest Service Plan closed the area. I got a similar letter from the Uinta Supervisor, Brian Ferebee. He mentioned specifically the correction letter that prevented the FS from closing the area, but he spins it as follows:

"The appeal decision upheld the Forest Plan, except that the Regional Forester was remanded to clarify direction in the Forest Plan pertaining to implementation
of site-specific travel management decisions for roads and trails. Correction Letter #1 dated November 12, 2004, signed by Pete Karp and the attachment corrected the 2003 Forest Plan to clarify that site specific manangement changes, such as closing roads and trails, requires additional environmental analysis."

Clarify direction? No! The correction letter is very clear. It required the Forest Service to rewrite Forest Plan standard ROS-2 so that it did not imply closure of the area to existing motorized vehicle use (including snowmobiles):

"On September 1, 2004, the Chief affirmed the Regional Forester’s decision to approve the Uinta National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan), except that he directed rewriting Forest Plan standard ROS-2 so that closures of existing motorized uses would not be implied. The Chief’s decision affirmed the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) designations, and ruled that no travel management decisions can be made without additional site-specific analysis." http://fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5076969.pdf

They are completely ignoring the intent of the correction letter which was to overturn the decision to close the area to snowmobiles.

How many roads are open to every type of motorized vehicles, but closed to snowmobiles? (I only know of one, the road north of Silver Lake Flat.)

The Forest Service doesn't follow the rules. They make their own rules. They illegally close areas and hope nobody challenges the closures. That is exactly what has happened here. It was an illegal closure. They think they got away with it. Let's prove them wrong!

 

[hatchers]

How's that worked for you so far?

I know, that's a snotty thing to say, but this is exactly my point. There is hardly a more "friendly towards shared use" state than Utah in the nation. But the closures continue to happen. I've worked way more hours than I ever want to count with the land managers just to have them get their agency sued by an environmental group and the courts tell them to do it the way the enviro's want.

Sorry, I'm a bit tired of being a nice guy about it all. Our foes are not nice guys about it... they use every means possible, throwing time/money/passion at it until they win. We, on the shared/multi-use side, do not do that on even a small scale compared to the other side.

sled_guy

i totally understand your position and many many others who battle share your same stance....ive spoke with the George schooled guy bnefore

 

[Sunridge Sledhead]

I agree that we cannot win with kindness, however, that doesn't mean we should stop those efforts! Trust me, if I am in court and/or arguing important issues with these enviro-zealot bastages I would not give an inch! I think an important point I'm trying to make is that we need to focus our efforts and support. I believe we are splintered with the many groups all trying to fight against land closure. As much as I appreciate the efforts of the
BRC, SAWS, and the myriad of other groups....I think we would be better served and a greater force to be heard if it was one bigger group!

 

[BossRev]

Latest....

Game Plan.....

A lot of you have asked what you can do to help with the Silver Lake Flat closure. Those of you who have sent emails probably got a letter this week from Sylvia Clark who is the District Ranger at the PG office. The letter is a blatant misinterpretation of the Correction Letter issued on November 12, 2004 which overturned the Forest Service's intent to close access to snowmobiles. Print a copy of that letter (see link below) and take it into the office and protest the closure with Clark. Don't go in big groups, only a few at a time. If you can't do that much, at least email her. We can't let them think we are going to just accept their bogus interpretation of the Correction Letter. Read page two of the letter. Notice where the following sentence is crossed out: The Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) class is closed to motorized use including over-the-snow vehicles. The Forest Chief is the boss of the whole Forest Service and he specifically denied them their plan to close the area to snowmobiles.

You can also email or write Brian Ferebee who is the Forest Supervisor over the Uinta National Forest (now Uinta-Wasatch-Cache). He is the one behind the letter coming from Sylvia Clark. His contact info:

bferebee@fs.fed.us

Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest Service
125 South State Street
Salt Lake City, UT 84138

If any of you live in Congressman Matheson's District, bring up this issue with his office. The area is part of his district. I have met with representatives of Congressman Chaffetz and they are helping, but we need more political involvement.

We can't let them think we are going to just quietly go away. They have to know that we don't buy their lies.

Here is the link:

http://fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5076969.pdf