bbbom
~SPONSOR~
- Aug 13, 1999
- 2,094
- 0
Like many of the National Forests, the Colville NF (combined with the Okanogan & Wenatchee NF's) here in NE Washington State is undergoing a Forest Plan Revision. For more info click here (comments and timelines are available from this link too):
http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/colville/cow/
We have been involved in the local meetings and sent comments to the Revision Team but I just received the following email with a letter from one of the local environazi groups and, as the person who sent the email states - we need to get more comments in.
Even though you may never plan on visiting this area, be aware that if they get their way in one NF, they will continue to the next NF and on and on.
So, read on then write, call, email, whatever with your comments. I'm working on a rebuttal comment for the issues the following letter raises and I'll post it when I finish it up if you need some food for thought. As always, handwritten letters are great, typed letters are almost as good (and easier to write), email, phonecalls, etc. are all helpful too.
Just think, if we can get even 1/4 of the DRNer's to comment! :aj: Feel free to copy & paste this post on any forums you frequent!
=====================================================
Subject: Last Call for Letters from Motorized Users on COW Forest Plan Revisions
Subject: Washington Wilderness Coalition comments on COW Forest Plan Revisions
Well folks, I have sent most of you the information regarding commenting on the Colville, Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forest plan revision. Did you submit a comment? Below is the comment submitted by WWC. If you do not submit a comment, this is the type of BS that the forest service is going to think the public supports. Here is the contact info again. Please submit a comment soon, or live with the results that the people from WWC want implemented.
Colville, Okanogan, and Wenatchee National Forests Plan Revision Team
1240 Second Avenue South
Okanogan, WA 98840
r6_ewzplanrevision@fs.fed.us
WWC comment letter follows below:
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Dear Mr. Boynton,
On behalf of our 12,000 members throughout Washington State, the Washington Wilderness Coalition (WWC) feels strongly that management changes are required in the upcoming forest plan revision for the Colville, Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forests. WWC is a 501 (c)(3) non profit organization, which has been dedicated to preserving Washington's unique natural heritage for the last 25 years.
The Forest Service must address the numerous and significant changes that have taken place in the Colville, Wenatchee and Okanogan National Forests, since the Forest Plans were first published in 1988, including a significant increase in ORV use and damage, a continuing loss of roadless areas and excessive loss of wildlife habitat from an oversized road system. WWC also expects the Forest Plan to recommend substantial additions to the existing Wilderness System to permanently protect lands exhibiting wilderness character for current and future generations.
During the upcoming public process (and in particular the scoping stage) WWC feels that a number of key issues require attention. Our concerns on each are listed below:
1. Roadless Area Conservation
The current Forest Service inventory of roadless lands contains numerous errors and inaccuracies. Too many acres were never captured in the initial inventories and subsequent updates. In order to produce an accurate inventory of all roadless areas on the forest, the Forest Service must: (1) develop and consistently implement a roadless area definition; (2) examine lands that were recently acquired, were logged at some time in the past and have since recovered or were left out of the current inventory for any reason; (3) inventory all roadless land 1000 acres and greater in area.
From a management perspective, many roadless areas identified should be recommended for wilderness designation. Those that are not should be protected by being allocated to non-development management allocations.
2. Wilderness
WWC strongly supports the Forest Service study of roadless lands to determine their suitability for Wilderness and expect the Forest Service to recommend to Congress the maximum amount of roadless land for designation as Wilderness. The Forest Service has an obligation to the American People to ensure our wild lands heritage is passed on to future generations.
As discussed above, the Forest Service must complete thorough, detailed reviews of all roadless areas, similar to that recently completed by the Wenatchee National Forest for the 15,000-acre wilderness study area on the south side of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness. This study has set the standard for completeness, care, and lack of anti-Wilderness bias.
WWC feels strongly that any areas recommended for Wilderness will be managed the same as designated Wilderness until Congress has the opportunity to act. Wilderness incompatible activities such as new road construction, logging and other development must be administratively prohibited on lands within recommended Wilderness areas.
3. Fire
The forest plan update must reflect the long-term objective that fire management treat fire as an integral part of the landscape. As a natural process, fire should be allowed to occur when and where feasible. The plan update should reflect the benefits of prescribed burning in order to reduce the kinds of extensive, costly, and ecologically damaging fire suppression efforts that have become commonplace in recent decades. Prescribed burning has already proven to be a valuable tool in order to return fire to the landscape and thus reduce the need for intensive fire fighting.
The updated plan should address: the effects of fire suppression and burnout areas; cooperation between adjacent landowners both in Washington State and Canada; public education so that "let burn" policies are better understood outside the Forest Service; needed research to support the analysis of fire recovery in the different fire regimes. It is not expected that the Forest Service will use fire risk reduction mandates to enter roadless areas or expand the existing road system.
4. Off-Road Vehicles (summer and winter)
Off-road vehicles are having tremendous impacts on wildlife, watershed health, and other types of recreation in ways not imagined when the original forest plans were prepared in the 1980s. Snowmobiles are now far more powerful and able to penetrate deeply into wild backcountry areas, disturbing wildlife and creating other unforeseen impacts. Dirt bike access to many hiking trails has been facilitated with the use of State gas tax money. In addition, an explosion of ATVs (four-wheel-drive all-terrain vehicles) is just starting to cause major damage to fragile backcountry vegetation, soils, and trails.
The Forest Service must re-examine off-road vehicle use across all three national forests. The agency needs to: (1) close significant areas to ORV use, restrict this use on certain trails, and then relocate off-road vehicle use to only those portions of the national forests that can withstand ORV use without resource damage; (2) close all areas of the forest to motorized use unless specifically designated open; (3) close motorized areas where Wilderness trespass is documented, either on an occasional or habitual basis; and (4) prohibit motorized use on trails that dead end on Wilderness, non-motorized management area land allocations, or other non-motorized trails.
The updated plan must direct that no expansion of snowmobile, dirt bike or ATV use shall be considered without completing formal NEPA studies. Such studies must address soils, vegetation, wildlife, watersheds, recreation opportunities and other forest resources. The Forest Service must also study in some detail the effectiveness of 'trail hardening' methodologies and disclose the results in the forest plan update.
5. Road System/Access
The existing road system was largely developed to support a huge timber harvest program. The timber harvest program is now much reduced over the cutting levels experienced in the 1980's. The remaining road system produces unacceptable damage to soils, wildlife and fisheries. The forest plan revision must direct the closure and elimination of unneeded roads. While many roads have been closed in recent years, many more miles of road are falling apart and should be closed. Closures and decommissionings will benefit wildlife and recreation.
The Forest Service must develop a complete road system analysis that will: (1) include the rationale for each road that is to remain open, be closed or be decommissioned; (2) encompass all roads including non-system roads and user built roads; (3) integrate the requirements of wildlife and fisheries, including threatened and endangered (T&E) species; (4) include environmental risks (including, but not limited to mass wasting, stream siltation, poaching, etc); and (4) include a fiscal analysis for roads that are left open and/or only closed, based on maintenance history and other pertinent factors.
6. Old Growth Forest Protection
Eastern Washington old growth forest ecosystems have become rare and merit full protection. Protect all old growth on the parts of the Wenatchee and Okanogan that are addressed by the Northwest Forest Plan amendment. Please protect old growth in the Okanogan east of the Chewuch River and all of the Colville. The updated plan must revise the Okanogan's old growth guidelines to reflect the latest scientific understanding of old growth characteristics. The unfinished old growth inventory should be completed and the old growth/late successional forest definitions for all ecosystems in all of the forests under review should be updated.
7. Wild and Scenic Rivers
WWC strongly supports the retention of the current Wild and Scenic River recommendations. I expect the Forest Service to re-study rivers that were excluded in the initial round of forest plans to determine if additional recommendations are appropriate.
8. Wildlife and Fish
Wildlife corridors need evaluation at the landscape level and also across political boundaries. If adjacent land ownerships are managed with a conservation focus, the USFS must account for this management (for example the Loomis Natural Resources Conservation Area). Ensure that lynx studies continue and are addressed in the updated plan for the Okanogan. The updated plan must address all salmon recovery efforts associated with all forests including the management direction associated with all fish species that have been listed as Threatened or Endangered since the current plans were developed.
Grizzly bear and wolf recovery must be recognized and dealt with thru provisions of the forest plan, including dedicating and protecting critical habitat, as well as establishing strict limits on new development in grizzly and wolf habitat. These issues were not addressed in the initial forest plans. Roadless area protection and road decommissioning will help Threatened and Endangered (T&E) species recover. The updated plan must address and be coordinated with Canada's Grizzly Bear Reintroduction plan.
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this planning process. Please add our names to your mailing list because we want to be informed about the progress of forest planning. Please feel free to contact either of us if there are any questions about the comments provided above.
Please ensure that the natural values of these forests are passed on to future generations unimpaired thru this process.
Sincerely,
Nalani M. Askov, Executive Director
Tom Uniack, Conservation Director
http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/colville/cow/
We have been involved in the local meetings and sent comments to the Revision Team but I just received the following email with a letter from one of the local environazi groups and, as the person who sent the email states - we need to get more comments in.
Even though you may never plan on visiting this area, be aware that if they get their way in one NF, they will continue to the next NF and on and on.
So, read on then write, call, email, whatever with your comments. I'm working on a rebuttal comment for the issues the following letter raises and I'll post it when I finish it up if you need some food for thought. As always, handwritten letters are great, typed letters are almost as good (and easier to write), email, phonecalls, etc. are all helpful too.
Just think, if we can get even 1/4 of the DRNer's to comment! :aj: Feel free to copy & paste this post on any forums you frequent!
=====================================================
Subject: Last Call for Letters from Motorized Users on COW Forest Plan Revisions
Subject: Washington Wilderness Coalition comments on COW Forest Plan Revisions
Well folks, I have sent most of you the information regarding commenting on the Colville, Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forest plan revision. Did you submit a comment? Below is the comment submitted by WWC. If you do not submit a comment, this is the type of BS that the forest service is going to think the public supports. Here is the contact info again. Please submit a comment soon, or live with the results that the people from WWC want implemented.
Colville, Okanogan, and Wenatchee National Forests Plan Revision Team
1240 Second Avenue South
Okanogan, WA 98840
r6_ewzplanrevision@fs.fed.us
WWC comment letter follows below:
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Dear Mr. Boynton,
On behalf of our 12,000 members throughout Washington State, the Washington Wilderness Coalition (WWC) feels strongly that management changes are required in the upcoming forest plan revision for the Colville, Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forests. WWC is a 501 (c)(3) non profit organization, which has been dedicated to preserving Washington's unique natural heritage for the last 25 years.
The Forest Service must address the numerous and significant changes that have taken place in the Colville, Wenatchee and Okanogan National Forests, since the Forest Plans were first published in 1988, including a significant increase in ORV use and damage, a continuing loss of roadless areas and excessive loss of wildlife habitat from an oversized road system. WWC also expects the Forest Plan to recommend substantial additions to the existing Wilderness System to permanently protect lands exhibiting wilderness character for current and future generations.
During the upcoming public process (and in particular the scoping stage) WWC feels that a number of key issues require attention. Our concerns on each are listed below:
1. Roadless Area Conservation
The current Forest Service inventory of roadless lands contains numerous errors and inaccuracies. Too many acres were never captured in the initial inventories and subsequent updates. In order to produce an accurate inventory of all roadless areas on the forest, the Forest Service must: (1) develop and consistently implement a roadless area definition; (2) examine lands that were recently acquired, were logged at some time in the past and have since recovered or were left out of the current inventory for any reason; (3) inventory all roadless land 1000 acres and greater in area.
From a management perspective, many roadless areas identified should be recommended for wilderness designation. Those that are not should be protected by being allocated to non-development management allocations.
2. Wilderness
WWC strongly supports the Forest Service study of roadless lands to determine their suitability for Wilderness and expect the Forest Service to recommend to Congress the maximum amount of roadless land for designation as Wilderness. The Forest Service has an obligation to the American People to ensure our wild lands heritage is passed on to future generations.
As discussed above, the Forest Service must complete thorough, detailed reviews of all roadless areas, similar to that recently completed by the Wenatchee National Forest for the 15,000-acre wilderness study area on the south side of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness. This study has set the standard for completeness, care, and lack of anti-Wilderness bias.
WWC feels strongly that any areas recommended for Wilderness will be managed the same as designated Wilderness until Congress has the opportunity to act. Wilderness incompatible activities such as new road construction, logging and other development must be administratively prohibited on lands within recommended Wilderness areas.
3. Fire
The forest plan update must reflect the long-term objective that fire management treat fire as an integral part of the landscape. As a natural process, fire should be allowed to occur when and where feasible. The plan update should reflect the benefits of prescribed burning in order to reduce the kinds of extensive, costly, and ecologically damaging fire suppression efforts that have become commonplace in recent decades. Prescribed burning has already proven to be a valuable tool in order to return fire to the landscape and thus reduce the need for intensive fire fighting.
The updated plan should address: the effects of fire suppression and burnout areas; cooperation between adjacent landowners both in Washington State and Canada; public education so that "let burn" policies are better understood outside the Forest Service; needed research to support the analysis of fire recovery in the different fire regimes. It is not expected that the Forest Service will use fire risk reduction mandates to enter roadless areas or expand the existing road system.
4. Off-Road Vehicles (summer and winter)
Off-road vehicles are having tremendous impacts on wildlife, watershed health, and other types of recreation in ways not imagined when the original forest plans were prepared in the 1980s. Snowmobiles are now far more powerful and able to penetrate deeply into wild backcountry areas, disturbing wildlife and creating other unforeseen impacts. Dirt bike access to many hiking trails has been facilitated with the use of State gas tax money. In addition, an explosion of ATVs (four-wheel-drive all-terrain vehicles) is just starting to cause major damage to fragile backcountry vegetation, soils, and trails.
The Forest Service must re-examine off-road vehicle use across all three national forests. The agency needs to: (1) close significant areas to ORV use, restrict this use on certain trails, and then relocate off-road vehicle use to only those portions of the national forests that can withstand ORV use without resource damage; (2) close all areas of the forest to motorized use unless specifically designated open; (3) close motorized areas where Wilderness trespass is documented, either on an occasional or habitual basis; and (4) prohibit motorized use on trails that dead end on Wilderness, non-motorized management area land allocations, or other non-motorized trails.
The updated plan must direct that no expansion of snowmobile, dirt bike or ATV use shall be considered without completing formal NEPA studies. Such studies must address soils, vegetation, wildlife, watersheds, recreation opportunities and other forest resources. The Forest Service must also study in some detail the effectiveness of 'trail hardening' methodologies and disclose the results in the forest plan update.
5. Road System/Access
The existing road system was largely developed to support a huge timber harvest program. The timber harvest program is now much reduced over the cutting levels experienced in the 1980's. The remaining road system produces unacceptable damage to soils, wildlife and fisheries. The forest plan revision must direct the closure and elimination of unneeded roads. While many roads have been closed in recent years, many more miles of road are falling apart and should be closed. Closures and decommissionings will benefit wildlife and recreation.
The Forest Service must develop a complete road system analysis that will: (1) include the rationale for each road that is to remain open, be closed or be decommissioned; (2) encompass all roads including non-system roads and user built roads; (3) integrate the requirements of wildlife and fisheries, including threatened and endangered (T&E) species; (4) include environmental risks (including, but not limited to mass wasting, stream siltation, poaching, etc); and (4) include a fiscal analysis for roads that are left open and/or only closed, based on maintenance history and other pertinent factors.
6. Old Growth Forest Protection
Eastern Washington old growth forest ecosystems have become rare and merit full protection. Protect all old growth on the parts of the Wenatchee and Okanogan that are addressed by the Northwest Forest Plan amendment. Please protect old growth in the Okanogan east of the Chewuch River and all of the Colville. The updated plan must revise the Okanogan's old growth guidelines to reflect the latest scientific understanding of old growth characteristics. The unfinished old growth inventory should be completed and the old growth/late successional forest definitions for all ecosystems in all of the forests under review should be updated.
7. Wild and Scenic Rivers
WWC strongly supports the retention of the current Wild and Scenic River recommendations. I expect the Forest Service to re-study rivers that were excluded in the initial round of forest plans to determine if additional recommendations are appropriate.
8. Wildlife and Fish
Wildlife corridors need evaluation at the landscape level and also across political boundaries. If adjacent land ownerships are managed with a conservation focus, the USFS must account for this management (for example the Loomis Natural Resources Conservation Area). Ensure that lynx studies continue and are addressed in the updated plan for the Okanogan. The updated plan must address all salmon recovery efforts associated with all forests including the management direction associated with all fish species that have been listed as Threatened or Endangered since the current plans were developed.
Grizzly bear and wolf recovery must be recognized and dealt with thru provisions of the forest plan, including dedicating and protecting critical habitat, as well as establishing strict limits on new development in grizzly and wolf habitat. These issues were not addressed in the initial forest plans. Roadless area protection and road decommissioning will help Threatened and Endangered (T&E) species recover. The updated plan must address and be coordinated with Canada's Grizzly Bear Reintroduction plan.
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this planning process. Please add our names to your mailing list because we want to be informed about the progress of forest planning. Please feel free to contact either of us if there are any questions about the comments provided above.
Please ensure that the natural values of these forests are passed on to future generations unimpaired thru this process.
Sincerely,
Nalani M. Askov, Executive Director
Tom Uniack, Conservation Director
