1. eNewsletter Sign Up

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

Discussion in 'The Rockies – It's all downhill from here...' started by Lord Dogmeat, Sep 20, 2019.

  1. dmac1

    dmac1 Long timer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Oddometer:
    1,702
    Location:
    Elizabeth, CO
    So....did a little poking around to try to get a grip on the potential impact of all this and have offered to setup a PM or email group on ThumperTalk to discuss our potential comments in private (i.e. away from prying eyes of the environmentalists). If there is desire, we could do the same here, or we could switch to doing them in one group email that I could setup so we could pool our thoughts/comments across both forums. PM me if interested in participating.

    In case someone isn't aware of the scope of this issue, consider the following:

    It covers everything from southern Rampart, south to and including Lake Isabel, west almost to Monarch Pass and north to Leadville. This includes:

    the entire 717 area, The Rainbow Trail, China Wall, Rainbow Falls, Greens Creek, Fourmile, Chinamans Gulch/Carnage Canyon, and more!

    I've heard that the 4x4 community is digging in...are we also gonna?
    #21
  2. Assfault

    Assfault Exposed Member Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    Oddometer:
    5,157
    Location:
    RockyMountains
    Thx for the info on the meeting times and places.
    I'll try and make the Denver meeting tonight, definitely in for the Springs tomorrow.
    I'm open to what works best for a combined think tank session.
    #22
    dmac1 likes this.
  3. dmac1

    dmac1 Long timer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Oddometer:
    1,702
    Location:
    Elizabeth, CO
    Denver meeting for tonight CANCELLED due to conditions. I saw on a site where 96 crashes in 3 hour period. Ugh!
    #23
  4. dmac1

    dmac1 Long timer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Oddometer:
    1,702
    Location:
    Elizabeth, CO
    Discovered something this morning...ALL of Rampart is also included in this issue! Thats right...all of it. Even the stuff up behind Sprucewood.

    When this all started southern end of Rampart was as far as this issue went and I was assuming things hadn't changed. WRONG! Even Dakan Road is proposed closed in Alt E. And yes, I know, Alt E isn't the preferred alt, but likely the greenies will want E, so I think we need to support what we want to remain open.
    #24
  5. dmac1

    dmac1 Long timer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Oddometer:
    1,702
    Location:
    Elizabeth, CO
    Here is an AWESOME resource for finding your favorite trail and seeing what its proposed treatment is.

    https://psi-route-viewer.firebaseapp.com/routes

    Thank CORE for doing the legwork on this!

    Remember, the forest service is proposing C. But just cuz your fav trail/road is listed as 'Keep as is' in C doesn't mean its safe. If ya don't comment, and it ends up closed, well, you get the picture!
    #25
    Assfault and _CJ like this.
  6. trailwerks

    trailwerks Missing Two Wheels Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Oddometer:
    648
    Location:
    Santa Fe, NM
    Another thing to remember is that the FS is not limited to choosing one of the alternatives verbatim....they can mix and match components in the final decision as long as the components were analyzed in one of the alternatives. This makes it highly important to comment on all the alternatives rather than just supporting one or not supporting another. If there is a bunch of unacceptable bullsh*t in the greens alternative, tell the FS about it and, most importantly, WHY it is unacceptable BS. On the flip side, if there are several pieces you like (new riding opportunities, key connectors added, etc.) in that appear in spearate alternatives, let them know what you like about each one and WHY.
    #26
    dmac1 and _CJ like this.
  7. cidi

    cidi cidi Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2011
    Oddometer:
    790
    Location:
    Fairplay, CO
    UPDATE on the PSI DSIE stuff... courtesy of the Cenrtral Colorado Mountain Riders Club (CCMR)

    From: Chad Hixon <centralcoloradomountainriders@gmail.com>
    Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 4:12:28 PM
    Subject: PSI Observations and Resources

    Hello CCMR,
    It was AWESOME to see a number of motorcycle enthusiasts and public land lovers at the PSI DEIS meeting last week! Thanks for being a part of the process.
    I spoke with a number of you at the meeting and as promised am giving you some more resources.
    1. The first link below will allow you to view the route list and accompanying outcomes of those routes under each alternative. This was created and shared by a member of CORE, a jeep club out of Buena Vista. It makes it much easier, in my opinion, to view than the Excel or PDF documents provided from the FS contractor.
    https://psi-route-viewer.firebaseapp.com/routes
    Next is the direct link to the FS Excel document with more detailed information. Open the link and follow the instructions to download the Excel files.
    https://links.govdelivery.com/track...esanywhere.com/fs/v.aspx?v=8e69678e586574aba8
    2. Below are the direct links to the maps for Alt C and Alt D. You will need to scroll down to the Salida Ranger District and then zoom in to view details. I took a screen shot of the Map Key for reference when zooming in on the details of the routes. Hope this helps.
    Alt C Maps
    https://www.fs.usda.gov/nfs/11558/www/nepa/102995_FSPLT3_4862407.pdf
    Alt D Maps
    https://www.fs.usda.gov/nfs/11558/www/nepa/102995_FSPLT3_4862408.pdf
    3. Below are CCMR's (or my personal) observations so far- In red are what I view as most important.
    Observations Alt C


    1. 1434, 185.DA & 185.DB have a remove seasonal closure status while 185.D has a current seasonal closure. 185.DA/DB are inaccessible with a seasonal closure on 185.D and 1434 would become a long out and back. Seasonal closure should be lifted on 185.D OR 1434, 185.DA/DB’s seasonal closure should remain as in Alt. D (Note 185.DA and DB are not on any route list only on the maps.)

    2. Additional suggested motorcycle route 225.F will provide vast looping opportunities with the Crest Trail, 1412, 1336, 228 and more routes in the GNF.

    3. FR 108 seasonal closure remains but the 1336 closure from 108 to HWY 285 is suggested to be removed. 108 is an important access point for this section trail therefore the seasonal closure should be removed along with 1336.

    4. Adding a seasonal closure to 201 between the Shirley Site and Silver Creek Lake Estates would inhibit access for the Silver Creek Lake homeowners.

    5. Adding seasonal closure to 212 would inhibit access to 1411 which has no seasonal restrictions

    6. Additional suggested motorcycle route PA2 is currently marked as a motorcycle trail with a USFS sign and provides access to 1336 from 102 & the Bushnell Lakes TH.

    7. 298.A should not be decommissioned in the Salida District (East of CD) when it is an open route in the Gunnison Ranger District (West CD.)

    Observations Alt D

    1. The addition of a 101 seasonal closure and the existing 108 seasonal closure inhibit access to 1336 which has no seasonal closure in the area or is suggested to have the existing seasonal closure removed.

    2. Suggested motorcycle route, PA6, between 204 & 210 is a critical route to provide loops in the area with the Crest Trail, 1412, and 1336.

    3. Seasonal closure of 200, Marshall pass, in the Salida District will be confusing with users from the west in the Gunnison Ranger District unless they coexist.

    4. Many additional seasonal closures- In the Salida RD they are all from December 1st - April 15th.

    5. Trails 1424 & 1423 in Alternative D are not on the map but remain on the list.

    Within both C & D is the addition of suggested motorcycle routes 225.F (N. Fooses) and PA2, between 1336 & 102. Route 225.F is a critical route to provide loops and if accompanied with PA6 from Alt D becomes extremely ideal for loops with the Crest Trail, 1412 (Greens Creek) and 1336 (Rainbow Trail.) I would specify this point in our comments. Further 225.F has been a sensitive point of contention among the local motorized community when it was gated in 2015 and marked as "Administrative Use Only." Converting 225.F to a motorcycle trail will show good faith on the USFS's part in maintaining good relations with the motorcycle community. In addition PA2 is currently marked as a motorcycle trail with a USFS sign and provides access to 1336 from 102 & the Bushnell Lakes TH.


    4. This statement below from the Trails Preservation Alliance sums it up nicely and should also be useful in submitting your personal comments. I have also attached the latest TPA talking points document from which the statement below is from. Please review this before submitting your personal comments.

    From the TPA- "Generally we can recommend supporting Alternative C (as long as there are no additional closures, decommissioning, restrictions or conversion of the routes to Admin Use Only or Maintenance Level 1 in Alternative C) as the best option and compromise that will both provide adequate access to manage the Forest and provide the widest spectrum of opportunities for access to the Forest and recreational opportunities for OHV recreation. "



    Remember the deadline for making comments is Monday, November 4th. Comments can be made electronically from this link https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public/CommentInput?Project=48214 OR mailed to John Dow, PSICC Forest Planner, Travel Management, 2840 Kachina Drive, Pueblo, CO, 81008.

    That's all I have for now. Please let me know if you have any questions and I will try to answer them.

    Chad
    #27
    Lord Dogmeat and _CJ like this.
  8. dmac1

    dmac1 Long timer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Oddometer:
    1,702
    Location:
    Elizabeth, CO
    Glad to see others are working on this, but I don't think its wise to post all that stuff on here. The greenies will be able to see it ALL and attack the things we want. This is why I offered to create a private group to discuss things like this. I too have the info from CCMR, was vetting it before sharing. Perhaps you/Chad feel differently. I know TPA feels same as me.
    #28
  9. dmac1

    dmac1 Long timer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Oddometer:
    1,702
    Location:
    Elizabeth, CO
    Got an email from USFS, the Denver meeting has been rescheduled. Good chance to go look at the maps in large format.

    --------

    The PSICC rescheduled the PSI Travel Management Denver public meeting for Thursday October 24, 2019 from 6 pm to 7:30 pm.

    The meeting will be held in the MT. Zirkel room on the main level at the USFS Regional Office in Lakewood. The office is located at the following address:

    1617 Cole Blvd, Building 17

    Lakewood, CO 80401
    #29
  10. Lord Dogmeat

    Lord Dogmeat Long timer

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Oddometer:
    1,018
    Location:
    Parker, CO
    I'll definable
    Good deal, I'll plan on attending. I guess maybe I jumped the gun in posting comments to support "Alternative D" but I guess there's nothing stopping me from adding an addenum to my comments? lol
    #30
    dmac1 likes this.
  11. dmac1

    dmac1 Long timer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Oddometer:
    1,702
    Location:
    Elizabeth, CO
    In case it helps, I'll send you a PM with some TPA thoughts/comments and my thoughts too. If you have some specifics, send em my way too.
    #31
  12. Lord Dogmeat

    Lord Dogmeat Long timer

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Oddometer:
    1,018
    Location:
    Parker, CO
    I went to the meeting this evening. I asked the USFS folks there some questions about the seasonal closures, etc. The sense I got of all this is that Alt A and E are non-starters (they would both open avenues to new lawsuits from either side so to speak), so its something of a moot point with those two alternatives. With the USFS proposing Alt C, that seems to be the most likely course of action that will be adopted. However, depending on what the comment period plays out like, something somewhere between C and D will likely be what winds up getting adopted, and additional lawsuits are likely to follow.

    To be honest, I am not familiar enough with the 717 / Divide area, so I really didn't have too many questions about that, other than there are generally a lot more seasonal closures planned with any of these alternatives.

    I did specifically ask questions about the newer sections of 770 not being on the new map, and really I didn't get much of an answer other than at some point they had submit maps as part of the process and at the time these maps were submitted, the newest sections of 770 were not officially opened yet .... At least that was roughly what I got out of the conversations. I did ask what that meant to the process as a whole, meaning if those trails weren't on this map, could they come into question later, and as I understood it those trails had followed the NEPA process and wouldn't be really be effected.

    In addition, I asked about some of the map nomenclature and how all of the trails at Rampart "appeared" to be listed as new seasonal closures as opposed to the status quo. I was told, essentially, nothing at rampart really changes as far as seasonal closures go.

    IDK, I thought I'd post up, not sure if anyone else went tonight .... I got there early and left around a quarter after six after looking at all the posterboards, etc.

    *shrug*

    I guess we'll have to see what plays out.
    #32
    dmac1, Assfault and _CJ like this.
  13. dmac1

    dmac1 Long timer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Oddometer:
    1,702
    Location:
    Elizabeth, CO
    Good job going and thanks for the write up of what you learned!

    I'd agree that C is most likely as the 'core' of what is adopted (almost always the preferred alternative is the basis of the 'result'). Whether things get added from D (additional things opened) or from E (additional things closed) remains the uncertainty in my mind. If none of us moto guys comment about what we want, and the greenies do what I expect them to and, at a minimum, cherry pick stuff from E and demand closure, then I think its more likely that closures from E will be implemented before anything from D is opened. Thats just my gut feel.

    My gut feel also is, that alot of moto guys aren't getting involved. I guess we'll see in the comments. I've not bothered to look yet cuz most of us will hopefully comment right at the end.
    #33
  14. dmac1

    dmac1 Long timer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Oddometer:
    1,702
    Location:
    Elizabeth, CO
    Oops...forgot to post what I came here to do. Got the following today from the forest service:
    -------------------
    Good Afternoon,

    Please follow the link below to an excel spreadsheet that contains our proposed seasonal closure dates. Be mindful that there are still a few dates missing. We were expecting DEIS comments on these and will make final closure date determinations following the DEIS comment period.

    https://personal.filesanywhere.com/fs/v.aspx?v=8e69678e586574aba8

    Please call John Dow if you have questions!
    thanks
    719-250-5311
    #34
  15. dmac1

    dmac1 Long timer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Oddometer:
    1,702
    Location:
    Elizabeth, CO
    Part of the Forest Service's initial announcement of the draft document and associated maps that we are (hopefully) analyzing:

    Feedback on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement will help strengthen our analysis....Hearing the voices of various forest users is extremely important to us. Our goal is to designate a motorized system that works for the public while caring for natural and cultural resources.”

    To me, this means they need us each to comment in support of our preferred alternative, including any adjustments, so that the FS will have evidence of what we (the moto public) wants when they are again sued by the greenies and end up in court.

    Link to comment portal:

    https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public/CommentInput?Project=48214
    #35
  16. dmac1

    dmac1 Long timer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Oddometer:
    1,702
    Location:
    Elizabeth, CO
    Sent in my comments. My son's will go in tomorrow. So far, 2,130 comments have been submitted.

    It took a spin through the comments on a recent page. Each page has 25 comments. Heres the tally from one random page:

    15 Close moto trails/roads. 9 keep em open (2 of which mentioned motorcycles). Of the 'keep em open' most were 4x4 oriented. (yeah, I know, that totals 24. I couldn't tell if one comment was pro open or close...she said something like 'maintain current rules applicable to motorized vehicles' so I didnt count it.

    Heres part of one of the 'close' ones:

    "...If people are so selfish and immature and barbaric that their thrill seeking is more important then our wildlife and lands, then our nation of laws, civility and morality is sunk! There are places like action parks for such people, not our wild parks and lands where animals live. Our nation is allowing fracking, sadistic, selfish immature people to over run it with arms killing animals for 'thrills' and vehicles doing the same...."

    Obviously one greenie entity sent out a form letter. Saw a handful with the same basic content.

    I see a few names I recognize in the comments....thanks for doing your part for our sport and for future generations!!!
    #36
    Lord Dogmeat likes this.
  17. _CJ

    _CJ Rugged Individualist

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2010
    Oddometer:
    3,312
    Location:
    The 719
    The crazy is strong with the anti-motorized crowd. Hopefully that's taken into consideration by those managing this process.



    .
    #37
  18. Lord Dogmeat

    Lord Dogmeat Long timer

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Oddometer:
    1,018
    Location:
    Parker, CO
    I do have hope .... I don't think the Pike/San Isabel folks are nearly as nutzoid as the Arapahoe folks out of Boulder are.
    #38
    dmac1 likes this.
  19. dmac1

    dmac1 Long timer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Oddometer:
    1,702
    Location:
    Elizabeth, CO
    I've looked through a bunch of the responses, and here is one who's theme I've seen a few times (i.e. a respondent not understanding the difference between the National Forest and a National Park):

    "IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT NATIONAL FOREST WE ARE SPEAKING OF; THE ISSUE OF ANY MOTORIZED VEHICLE ALLOWED INTO NATIONAL PARKS IS JUST OBSCENE. THESE NATIONAL PARKS CONTAIN BEAUTY, HISTORY AND NUMEROUS ANIMAL AND FLORAL OPPORTUNITY TO BECOME EDUCATED ABOUT. ONCE VEHICLES ARE ALLOWED, THE TERRAIN, SAFETY OF THE ANIMAL POPULATION AND FLORAL WILL NEVER BE THE SAME AGAIN"

    I'd love to ask her.... FIRST, have you ever actually been to a national park? And SECOND, if so, exactly how did you get there? And THIRD, did ya just stand at the edge and peer in or did Scotty beam ya in??

    Friggin idiots.

    I must say, it seems that the vast majority of the citizens' objections to moto are copies of a form letter, with zero details, so its totally clear they've NEVER been to the PSI. Of course, it'll be their advocates who's comments will be most material. Only CPW has commented publicly so far. They want Red Cone closed! but generally favor C, with a bunch of modifications.
    #39
    _CJ likes this.
  20. _CJ

    _CJ Rugged Individualist

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2010
    Oddometer:
    3,312
    Location:
    The 719
    It's go time!!! Comments will only be accepted through tomorrow 11/4.

    10 pages of comments so far today. Most seem to be from the 4x4 crowd, and I'm a little concerned that many seem to be very short, saying only "don't close this trail" without any commentary on which trail they're talking about.

    I didn't see a single letter from the moto community. :cry



    .
    #40
    dmac1 likes this.