Ashley National Forest Comments Needed

[Don B]

The public comment period for the DEIS for a new travel management plan has been extended 45 days to July 16th

I haven't looked at the proposals for this, but I'm hearing that they plan on closing a lot of roads in the Vernal area.

We need to have everyone possible get their comments in on this. If you are familar with the area, please look at the maps and see what roads they are planning to close. I'm trying to gather information on specific roads that we need to fight for. When I have more information I will post up some suggestions for comments.

The proposed Alternates are on the website;
www.fs.fed.us/r4/ashley/projects/travel_management/index.shtml


Comments must be postmarked no later than July 16th

 

[Don B]

I'll have some more comment suggestions and a sample letter up later today



Ashley National Forest

Draft EIS for a revised Travel Plan is available for public comment
Comments Needed by July 16th, 2009

The purpose for this revision is to bring the Travel Plan in compliance with the 2005 Travel Rule which states that any road or trail not designated as a motorized route will be off limits to motor vehicles. It also limits dispersed camping to 150 ft off of a designated route.

The Draft EIS became available to the public for the 45 day comment period on April 10th, 2009. The public comment period was extended 45 days and comments will be accepted to July 16th, 2009

The DEIS has five (5) Alternate Proposals
Alternate A; No action- current condition
Alternate B; Preferred Alternate. This, probably with modifications is what they will use.
Alternate C; More motorized opportunities
Alternate D; More non-motorized opportunities
Alternate E; Blend of Alternates C and D

Effects common to all Alternates;
Travel on designated routes only
Seasonal closure of roads
Motorized dispersed camping limited to 150 ft. from designated routes
Closed areas to dispersed camping

Possible problems with this action;
One of the issues with this proposed action is that 111,805 acres in the Vernal Ranger District has been open to motorized travel on undesignated routes. This revision of the Travel Plan would change that to designated routes only. The question is how does this DEIS affect the previously legal undesignated routes? The Forest Service admits that this DEIS “will not fully represent the current condition.” The Forest Service estimate is that there are approx. 583 miles of “unauthorized roads in the Vernal District. Of these, 368 miles are considered “undesignated” or open to motorized travel at present. How well does the DEIS Maps represent the existing roads?

The Forest Service states “The exact mileage of unauthorized route is unknown. The Travel Rule does not require such an inventory.” Under Project Scope it states; “This project does not include a complete inventory of non-system routes. Thus it is entirely possible that additional routes exist that could be considered for inclusion in the Forest Service Transportation System. The Travel Rule requires the Motor Vehicle Use Map to be published annually with changes made as needed. The fact that some routes may not be included in the system being designated this year does not foreclose the opportunity to consider these routes in subsequent decisions.” Then we have under the Management Actions; “Non-system routes that are not displayed on the motor vehicle use map would be closed and stabilized, reclaimed or obliterated as funds allow. Further, site-specific environmental analysis is not needed to close the route, but may be conducted to determine the appropriate method of closure.”

So what is the Forest Service saying with all this? Could it be, We know that there are a lot of roads out there that are not on the Alternates but we don’t care. We will reassure you that if we don’t consider them in this decision that we can look at them again next year? At the same time they are saying that as soon as this Travel Plan is implemented that they will destroy the roads that are not designated so that they will not be there to take another look at next year?

How to comment;
Be as specific as possible i.e. refer to the proposal number if there is one. Comment forms are available on the Forest Service website if desired.

Comments can be made to Kris Rutledge by;
Phone (435) 781-5196
Email; comments-intermtn-ashley@fs.fed.us
Fax; (435) 781-5142
In person or mail at;
Ashley National Forest
Supervisors Office
355 N. Vernal Ave.
Vernal, UT 84078

Comments must be postmarked by July 16th, 2009

 

[Don B]

Here is my personal comment. Please post up your comments to give others ideas on what to comment on. If you have any information on any specific trails that will be closed under this action, please pm me the info and I'll add it to the U4WDA comment.

Thanks,


July 13th, 2009

Ashley National Forest
Supervisor’s Office
355 N. Vernal Ave.
Vernal UT, 84078

Dear Mr. Rutledge,

Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the revised Forest Travel Plan.

My family and I are avid four-wheel drive enthusiasts and we use our vehicles to access many areas around the region for camping, sightseeing, hunting and other legitimate uses. We believe in protecting our public lands and engage in many clean-up and trail repair projects during the year. We strongly advocate always adhering to tread lightly principles.

I am strongly opposed to Alternate “D” in its entirety. It is biased against the majority of the public that uses motorized methods to access the Forest and unfairly favors a minority that desires to have the Forest managed for their interest above that of the general public. Alternate “D” also appears to extremely restrict dispersed camping opportunities throughout the Forest. This is not only unfair to the public, but it would be counter productive in that it would force the people using the Forest to be concentrated into smaller areas and cause greater resource damage than would occur if dispersed camping was addressed in a reasonable method and the increased demand for camping opportunities given proper consideration.

Alternate “B” appears to be a reasonable on the surface, but I have concerns with the adequacy of the statement that would cause me to not endorse any of the Alternates at this time. The Project Scope says that this project does not include a complete inventory of non-system routes. That makes it difficult for me, not being local to the area, as I do not know what roads and trails are now existing in the Vernal Hatched Area that may be affected by this action. Although the DEIS says that additional routes exist that could be considered for inclusion in the Forest Service Transportation System., under the Management Actions, non-system routes that are not displayed on the Motor Vehicle Use Map would be closed and stabilized, reclaimed or obliterated as funds allow. How are routes to be considered in subsequent decisions if they have been obliterated?

Hopefully, my questions on the incomplete inventory can be answered before a Final EIS and Record of Decision are completed.

Please enter our comments into the record and keep us updated on this Travel Plan

Most sincerely,

 

[Don B]

Last chance to get your comments in.

Deadline is today.