Pike and San Isabel National Forests Public Motor Vehicle Use Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Don't cry CJ, I just sent in my letter.
Come on people, anything is better than just doing nothing.

Glad I checked this Forum tonight. Got my comments in!

Reposting links for anyone who still wants to comment:

Comment:
https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public/CommentInput?Project=48214

Everyone else's comments:
https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public//ReadingRoom?Project=48214



.

done! last minute of course but I got mine in. thanks for all the info fellas.

Thank YOU!

Yep....I'd guess 250 came in just yesterday from 4x4 community. They are almost all about Red Cone....eg the one you quoted. I saw yours, but buried amongst 4x4 comments.

I've reviewed hundreds of letters, over 500 prolly. My rough breakdown, so far would be 50% 4x4, 40% uninformed greenie, 5% motorcycles....and that 5% might be waay high.

The greenie comments, from citizens, seem to be mostly from people far away. They have no clue as evidenced by my previous posts of their content. Saw another last night...natl forest/natl park...dunno difference. They've apparently been told the object is to expand motorized use. Some just cut and pasted the form letter, with the instructions!

Their advocate's comments will be most interesting to read. We just got one a little while ago.

I just read through some more. God these wilder-nuts are dumb.


.

On the hit list from first greenie advocacy group: (all or parts of)

Cisneros, Squirrel Creek, Silver Circle, Left Hand, Second Mace (all in San Carlos RD); Hackett, Longwater, Crossover, Widow Maker, Corral Creek

Naturally, they're against a bunch of the new ST.

I've no way digested it all, and don't know all of what they're talking about, but they're definitely cherry picking stuff, either it was only proposed open in D (thus they support C treatment = not open) or they support E (decommission or change to non-moto).

CORE and Predator 4WD were represented by counsel and specifically commented in favor of keeping open/re-opening Hackett, Longwater, etc. Their letter has a bunch of legal justification for this, but has a footnote which reads:

"CORE has received information that the South Park and South Platte District Rangers are already taking steps to prepare for the closure of these roads by requesting Teller County to close certain sections of roads in that county given the impending closure of the Forest Service Roads in Park County. CORE urges the agency not to take any such actions at this time and prior to a final decision, as such actions suggest the proposed decision is a fait accompli and the agency is merely going through the motions of seeking public comments."

In the interest of full disclosure, here is a general theme I'm seeing with some frequency. One guy said he and his neighbors hafta 'shelter in place' on holiday weekends cuz of the parties on the spur roads near their properties and they've had bullets go over their houses...and no response from law enforcement. Another has spoken about trees being shot down (I've seen pics of that, so its not BS).

"I believe Alternative B is the best choice for this issue. The illegal fires, illegal shooting, and constantly expanding numbers of campers endanger the National Forest and the residents of Cascade, Green Mountain Falls, Crystola, and Woodland Park. If we don't have the NFS and law enforcement personnel to eliminate the illegal and dangerous activity, then we should close those spurs off altogether."

Sent mine in at lunchtime. Alt. C. Thanks for keeping us informed.

LMAO!!! See this one!!! She wrote the first line, the rest are the instructions! Nice reasoning huh???

As a frequent forest user, I urge you to not revise your Travel Management Plan that will designate where off-road vehicles (ORVs) can drive on the 2.3 million-acre Pike San Isabel National Forest. My reasons are as follows:

Make it clear that you oppose expanding motorized use on the Forest and that you support the protection and restoration of water quality, fish and wildlife and their habitats by reducing motorized use and decommissioning roads and motorized trails.

The Forest Service Proposed Action (Alternative C) fails to protect fish and wildlife from off-road vehicle damage, and specifically allows motorized use in critical habitat for Threatened and Endangered species, including Mexican spotted owl and Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse.

The Proposed Action fails to protect impaired streams and watersheds, and the Forest Service did not provide sufficient stream buffers (buffers should be at least 300 feet, not the 100 foot buffers proposed).

The Forest Service ignored illegal ORV use its analysis, and is rewarding this illegal use by expanding motorized use to include these ill-gotten roads/trails.

The Proposed Action fails to comply with applicable laws and regulations to protect water quality, fish and wildlife and their habitats.

I got it in!!! Not seeing it yet. Hopefully it means something.

Bullittman

Edit: It posted!!

I'm glad those opposed are doing the cut and paste.

according to the video I watched on leaving comments, all letters that use the cut and paste method are counted as one comment, so the more cut and paste they use, the better for us.

It is why they instruct you (Again in the video I watched) to make your own comments. You can mention and/or support other comments, but don't cut and paste.
I also got my comments in yesterday.

I think we've done all we can with this deal. It's in the Forest Service's hands now. Not sure when we can expect a decision. I'll update here if/when I hear something.

Until then, we have several other irons in the fire.

The CBD notice of intent to sue is ongoing. The forest service feels they did their due diligence in where they routed the trail, and says they have the documentation to prove it. We'll see what happens with that. There's no more opportunity for public action that I'm aware of with that.

The "Re-imagine Waldo" process is continuing to move forward. There was a field trip for the stakeholders a couple weeks ago to get a lay of the land, and there's a round-table meeting on the 13th of this month. At this time, we're still in the mix, and could see as much as ten miles of new motorcycle accessible single-track up there.

The Jones Park plan is also continuing to churn forward, and we may see some additional motorcycle legal trail in there, but the CBD lawsuit and/or the psi lawsuit could have an impact.


.

I guess all we can have is hope .... And keep up the pressure.

Well ... There is hope. Maybe we need to be a bit more aggressive in our analysis of the travel management plans?

Society labeled this guy crazy? I think the opposite is true!

The Settlement Agreement requires that the forest service have this completed by 11/16/2020.

That's good and bad I guess. At least one more year to enjoy it.


.