July 10, 2007
Ms. Suzanne Rainville,
RE: Payette Travel Plan FEIS
Dear Ms. Rainville:
You asked that I mention in my
opening paragraph that you are allowing comments until July 10th, 10
business days from June 25th. A business day is defined as Monday
through Friday, 8 AM to 5 PM in the local time zone. A business day shall not
include any Saturday or Sunday, nor shall a business day include any legal
holiday recognized by the state of
We were very disappointed when we received our copies of the Payette Travel Plan FEIS. The maps for summer travel do not show enough detail and landmarks and roads are poorly identified. The numbering system used on the maps does not match the numbers on the roads or on the old travel maps. The Winter Travel maps in Chapter 2 are beyond inadequate and the maps that were made available on line after publication, if you knew when and where to look for them weren’t a big improvement. The written document is not much help for a number of the areas. The document itself describes some of the winter boundaries as “will be difficult to find on the ground and are too large to sign effectively.” How will the FS enforce such a boundary? There must be clear boundaries and good signage that will be maintained by the Forest Service. I do appreciate the extension you granted us, but we do need more time to comment as so many of our scoping comments were ignored and this document is so poorly prepared. This plan is so poorly crafted that it should be completely scraped and started over again. There is plenty of time to do this process correctly. At a minimum all roads that have been asserted by the counties should be included in the map until the FS can document abandonment of those roads.
Table 2-29 page 2-59 describes
boundaries under Alternative E as Poor- Moderate. “The multiple wildlife
closure areas will be difficult to find on the ground and are too large to sign
effectively.” This is legally non-defensible. How will people honestly trying
to honor the boundaries have any change at knowing where they are in relation
to the boundaries? Even people very experienced in map reading will have difficulty
identifying boundaries using the maps provided. There need to be clearly
defined boundaries that are adequately signed. Perhaps you should review the
hunting area boundaries described by Idaho Department of Fish and Game. They
name streams, etc. so they name streams, etc. so that an area is well described
if you can find a map that is adequately detailed. What documentation does the
Forest Service have that documents that motorized use in these areas
constitutes a problem for the wildlife in the
Some of my friends were send copies of the FEIS with no maps. It was several weeks before they received maps.
Trail loop alternative should
continue to be addressed and improvements to the system should be considered
especially where loops can be created. Alternative E seems to completely ignore
the loop trail system suggested by
There is no alternative that considers looking at increasing the number of road and trail miles open to the public although public use is increasing both in the summer and winter. Snowmobile registration fees are increasing $10 per registration this year. This will give us significantly more funds with which to groom trails in the area. An increase in groomed trails should be considered. The Backcounty Recreation Club would like to have a representative on the Winter Recreation Forum. At present we have no representation and they are making decisions about the area we know best. The FS should allow us to name a representative to the Forum.
There have been no visitor
studies conducted in the preparation of this Travel Plan. The Forest Service
must conduct visitor studies before implementing the Travel Plan. We have asked repeatedly for traffic counters
on
The cooperating agencies working with the Forest Service were not in agreement with Alternative E as presented in the FEIS.
Most of the IRA’s recommended as wilderness have many historic uses that diminish their value as wilderness and make them inappropriate for wilderness designation. Snowmobiles do not diminish any wilderness values. The historic uses in this area are well documented and the Forest Services must consider all the information currently available.
The
The Forest Plan needs to be amended to show the changes in mileages and maps. The mileages and maps are incorrect in the current Forest Plan.
Exclusive use areas for skiers
are increased in Alternative E. Snowmobile use is well documented as increasing
with your parking lot counts. They are not getting a corresponding increase in
areas open for their use. With two thirds of the
The Forest Service needs to define “collision.” Is collision being used to describe accidents such as the two incidents that occurred within the boundaries of Brundage Ski Resort, an area closed to snowmobiles or skiers running across snowmobile tracks? I believe the two accidents at the ski area occurred between ski area employees. Is running through snowmobile tracks being described as a “collision”?
The Forest Service must identify all historic roads. This is a part of the National Directive. The Forest Service should have to demonstrate proof that any of the roads that may fall under county jurisdiction under RS-2477 have been abandoned before declaring them closed.
Native American trails identified in the PNF fit the definition of “road” under RS-2477. They should be labeled as such and considered under county jurisdiction. None should be closed unless the county abandons their right-of-way.
The Northern Rockies Lynx
Management Direction FEIS states the following: Nationally, snowmobile use grew
34 percent from 1988 to 1995. The data indicates an upward trend in all states
of the planning area (pg 281). This policy directs the FS to maintain a safe,
environmentally sound road network that responds to the public needs. In
December 2000, the FS proposed designating most of its arterial and collector
roads as public roads, which would be open and available to the public on a
regular and consistent basis, as defined in 23 U.S. C. 101 (USDA FS 2000b)
(page 297). Lynx may tolerate some level of human disturbance. Toad density
does not appear to affect lynx habitat selection (LCAS, p.12) (page 297). Many
FS roads have heavy public use, and meet the use-and-needs criteria for county
or state jurisdiction (page 298). As the population grows and more people look
to the outdoors for recreation, traffic may well increase even if roads are not
improved, which could increase the potential for accidents (pate 299). The FS
may not deny proposed operations or make them impossible by imposing
unreasonably restrictive management requirements or conditions (page 305).
These reserved and outstanding rights represent the property interests in the
land. Although the federal government owns and administers the surface, the
mineral owner has certain rights as well. The most important of these is the
right to access and develop the minerals. Other rights may be spelled out in
individual deeds. The FS must consider these property interests during planning
and implementation (page 312). Some private tracts are inholdings, privately
owned lands surrounded by federal lands. Inholdings are guaranteed access under
ANILCA which says landowners shall be authorized access “adequate to secure
them the reasonable use and enjoyment of their land” (26-CFR 251.110(c)) (page
316). By 2015, the population of
It is interesting to note that
the Outdoor Industry Foundation announced that backpacking decreased 23 percent
between 1998 and 2005. National Parks, which do not allow motorized recreation,
have also seen decreases in visitors. Visitation at
We have tried repeatedly to work
with the
Winter Travel
The Winter Recreation Committee
is a closed (possibly illegal) committee that includes no representative from the
For those users, myself included, who desire a more solitary experience, the changes lessen the quality of our recreational experience. Increasing numbers of people will be using a decreasing area and number of miles of groomed trail. Increased use safety issues associated with using the same trail and areas will arise with the current plan. This should be addressed.
The comment was made in the FEIS
that no additional snowmobile parking areas are needed. I don’t know what this
years counts on Francis Wallace Snowmobile Parking Lot indicate, but I know it
is at least full most days of the week and vehicles line the road for several
miles on most weekends. There were over 400 people in
Page 2-4. You are closing all
groomed snowmobile routes to standard wheel vehicles designed for snow-free-
travel-ways.
If road are being used as boundaries those roads should be clearly indicated on the map. There should be a written description of the closed area similar to the descriptions used by Idaho Department of Fish and Game when they are describing hunting units. It is not adequate to describe an area as difficult to identify on the ground. Snow covered streams can be difficult to identify in the winter. The FS must improve the maps it will make available to the public. They were certainly no adequate during the comment period. I consider my self an above average map reader. Both winter boundaries were impossible to identify with the maps provided.
Alternative C is not the Alternative proposed by the ISSA. The PNF made a number of changes to what was proposed by the ISSA without consulting with them. It is misrepresenting this Alternative to the public.
The Forest Service continues to grant permits for yurts in areas that are closed to most snowmobilers but allow the permit holders to supply and access their yurts by snowmobiles. Snowmobile tracks leading into an area lead others to believe the area is open to snowmobiles (especially with the poor quality of the maps regarding closures). The areas should either be open to all motorized use or be entirely closed to motorized use of any kind including snow cats.
The definition you are using for over-snow vehicle includes snowcats as well as snowmobiles. Snowcats are as dangerous to snowmobiles are vehicles are on the trails. They are larger than pickups but do have more control of their movements most of the time. All snowcats should be required to have flashing lights, etc. to warn others on the trail of their approach. I belonged to a ski club that had their own snowcat. It is not unthinkable that a club or individual could bring snowcats into this area. This safety concern needs to be addressed. Snowmobile trail grooming occurs mainly at night. The groomers are much more visible at night with their flashing lights. They light up the snow so you are able to tell that something big is coming even around corners. The Brundage cats are not as easy to spot during the day. They are also causing damage and unsafe conditions on the groomed snowmobile trails when they come on and off the trail system. They should be required to have the same flashing lights and should be assessed a fine when they damage to trail to compensate the grooming program for the extra times they have to groom to keep the trails safe. Idaho Statute allows for compensation for damage caused to the groomed snowmobile trail system. The USFS is well aware of the problems caused by the Brundage snowcats to the snowmobile trail system. This has been an ongoing problem and doesn’t seem to show any improvement.
The snowcats traveling on
If the snowcat skiing areas are closed to motorized travel, it should be closed to all motorized travel including snowcats.
Table 2-29 page 2-58 is very
misleading. You are stating in Alternative C that 27% of the area open to
snowmobilers is open to non-motorized over snow use. Areas open to snowmobiles
are not closed to non-motorized over snow users. Those areas are open to all
users, motorized and non-motorized. 100% of the
The Forest Service has been asked to document the collisions they reference in the Travel plan between motorized and non-motorized over snow users of the forest. Please do so in an appendix. This should be easy to accomplish as any collision should be reported to the Sheriff’s Department in the area of the collision by law.
According to table 2-33 page 2-63 Alternative C poses no measurable effect to potential wilderness. Open the areas currently closed to snowmobilers that the ISSA suggested be open in the Secesh and Needles IRA’s.
The Winter Travel maps must be at least as detailed as the Summer Travel maps. It is impossible to identify the closure boundaries on the maps. If roads or trails are a part of the boundaries, those roads need to be clearly marked on the map. Most of us try to follow the rules whether or not we agree with them. The Forest Service needs to make it possible for people to identify the boundaries of a closed area. There is no adequate written description of the boundaries of the closed areas to assist people who are trying to determine the boundaries. The Forest Service should include clear written descriptions of any closed areas with easily identifiable boundaries.
Snowmobilers enjoy untracked powder snow and the feeling of solitude every bit as much as cross county skiers. Having been a registered downhill ski instructor and a cross county ski instructor I feel I am not overstating that snowmobilers as well as ATV and 2-wheel riders are all looking for that feeling of solitude and being able to enjoy nature away from other people. Our experience is deteriorating as more and more people take up snowmobiling and ATV riding and the number of acres and miles of trails available to us is decreasing. You are citing one person’s observations (page S-9) to justify that there is no need in the foreseeable future for additional motorized over-snow areas above and beyond those proposed in the five alternatives. Alternative C includes additional acres not included in Alternative E. The Forest Service should open the areas suggested by ISSA in Alternative C. You analysis shows that there will be no reduction of potential wilderness value in any of the areas that may be considered for their wilderness potential at some time in the future. There is no reason not to open those areas to motorized over-snow travel. I think snowmobilers need more open space that we can ride in so that we can get away from other people. In general these areas are far away from skiers. Many skiers use our tracks to get into an area. Opening more areas to snowmobilers actually increases the accessibility to skiers.
Cross country skiers who ski on groomed snowmobile trails are condemning themselves to frustration if they want an experience away from snowmobiles. They need to work to build and maintain their own parking areas in areas separate from the snowmobilers. CIRC’s contention that there wasn’t a ridge around McCall that you could go to without snowmobilers made sense after they admitted that they were skiing out of snowmobile parking lots. We snowmobilers are more than happy to share. We don’t have a conflict with most cross country skiers. We do have a problem with the ones who throw ski poles at us and yell threats and insults while we travel the trails we paid to have groomed from parking lots we rent and maintain. Legislation has finally been passed to raise snowmobile registration fees $10 per snowmobile. We are more than happy to pay our way and to share what we have paid for with civil skiers, snowshoers and dog sledders who pay no fees of any kind to enjoy the same recreational areas. We share the parking lots we pay to plow and the restrooms we maintain in addition to the trails we pay to have groomed. Part of our registration fees go toward funding search and rescue operations throughout the state.
If the conflict with some of the cross country skiers continues and/or escalates, the USFS may want to consider requiring cross country skiers to develop their own parking facilities and staying off of groomed snowmobile trails so they are not so emotionally conflicted. Perhaps they should be required to sign a release that acknowledges that they are using trails and parking areas that are maintained at the expense of the snowmobilers and that they should consider themselves non-paying guests. Perhaps we should require everyone on the groomed trail system to have a registration sticker displayed.
The Winter Travel maps at the end of Chapter 2 do not show snowmobile grooming at all. There is no way to tell what is open or closed based on the maps and the information provided in the FEIS. The link on your web page from the Map Cover to detail versions of the map does not lead to any maps (as of 5/26/2006). “Page not found” comes up.
The Forest Plan needs to be amended to incorporate the more recent findings regarding potential lynx habitat. Other forests and BLM have updated their plans. It is ridiculous to continue with outdated information. The Travel Plan should be prepared with the best available science.
Summer
A number of the regulations are contradictory to the Travel Management, Proposed Forest Service Directive, Forest Service Manual 2350, 7700, and 7710 and Forest Service Handbook 7709.55 RIN 0596-AC39 including the change from the DEIS to limit game retrieval and other Forest uses to be achieved on foot only from a designated motorized route. The same limits to off road travel should apply for game retrieval as for dispersed camping. The PNF Travel Plan should be consistent with the National Directive.
While the National Directive
prohibits indiscriminant off-road/trail travel, it does allow specific areas to
be designated for off-road/trail travel. This plan fails to consider this
possibility although I did make a suggestion during scoping to keep the area
just north of the Secesh Meadows Subdivision #4 open so that kids could safely
ride their motorcycles and ATV’s off the roads. This should be considered by
the Forest Service and not dismissed without comment. This area is away from
the
The large population of wolves in
the
Not everyone can afford to or wants to keep a horse to retrieve downed game. Wolves and horses are natural enemies. When you walk or ride up to a dead elk with a horse and find wolves at the site, you will have a very spooked horse. This is a safety concern. Wolves have been documented to kill horses. Horses are livestock. Not allowing hunters to retrieve big game with ATV’s may increase the number of wolves killed to protect livestock. It will definitely increase the number of hunters and horses injured while retrieving game.
Handicapped individuals are allowed to hunt from the road with special permits from Idaho Department of Fish and Game. They may need motorized access to retrieve their game. They are not supposed to shoot their game on the road but they can shoot from the road. The Forest Service should allow hunters motorized access to retrieve game as outlined in the National Travel Planning Directive. Special accommodations may need to be made for handicapped hunters. A growing number of our members fall into this category. This travel plan forces handicapped hunters, hunting with a valid permit that allows them to hunt from the road two alternatives: they can illegally shoot game in the road or they will not be able to retrieve game they have shot off the road. The FS must take this into consideration and should allow all hunters access to retrieve game with the necessary means. You are encouraging hunting near the road and the number of accidents will increase it more people are hunting in a more concentrated area. The FS should encourage more a more dispersed hunting experience which means the FS must consider keeping more roads open and allowing for motorized retrieval of game. Is there a directive on the use of motorized winches to retrieve game?
We would like to invite you to
attend our meetings. You might be surprised at our membership. Many of us are
over 50. We are not looking for “extreme” riding experiences. We are looking
for trails we can ride out ATV’s on during the summer months, sometimes
clearing them so we can come back and ride them on our snowmobiles in the
winter. We have some members who are looking for more challenging rides, but at
this time, they are looking for other areas that will offer them the type of
riding experience that will no longer be available in the
The National Travel Planning Directive came out for comment with wording that indicated that retrieval of game and dispersed camping would be allowed 300 feet from roads and 100 feet from trails on FS system roads. What happens with the county roads within the PNF? Will they be treated differently? This needs to be addressed in the Travel Plan.
Roads and motorized trails that were not included in the DEIS that were proposed for consideration in this Travel Plan were not addressed. You did not address reevaluating 2-wheel trails for their suitability as ATV trails. Many of the existing trails were designated as 2-wheel motorized trails because, at the time of their designation, there were almost no ATV’s being used for recreational purposes. Many of the 2-wheel trails are very suitable for ATV travel.
You have not adequately defined OHV’s. There is a new class of OHV that is larger than an ATV and seats two passengers, side-by-side, but that is not as large as a jeep.
There are 360 miles of roads that
have recently been transferred to
There are now estimated to be
100,000 registered ATV’s in
The Forest Service needs to rethink its policy regarding handicapped access. Many of us are not so handicapped as to require wheel chairs at this time, but our ability to travel on foot has been decreasing as we age. Some of us, me included, have been told by our doctors that we will be restricted to a wheelchair at some time in the future because of chronic injuries. After spending most of my life hiking trails, skiing, backpacking and snowmobiling that is worse than a death sentence with the attitude of the Forest Service regarding motorized access.
No roads or trails should be
reclaimed unless RS-2477 assertions have been resolved. The
Regarding RS-2477 county road
assertions: The Payette National Forest is in possession of road record dating
back to
The Backcountry Recreation Club
would like to extend our offer to work with the
The FS should upgrade as many
trails as is possible to ATV travel. We are an aging and growing population.
While backpacker numbers have been going down, ATV riding has been increasing.
This area is especially meaningful to many of us because of its historic value.
We are not only able to enjoy riding in the forest but we are able to see sites
that played a part in
The FS must reevaluate all 2-wheel motorized trails for their suitability for use by ATV’s. If specific changes need to be made in specific sections of trails to accommodate this upgrade those should be documented and the local clubs should be approached to help prioritize and work together to improve those sections so that ATV’s can ride on those trails. Our funds are limited as are yours, but we can obtain equipment and funds from Parks and Recreation and our members to make necessary improvements in cooperation with the Forest Service.
MA – 1-6
We support
Keep the Rankin Mill road open as
agreed to with and in cooperation with
MA-3
We support the opening of the Old Hitt Mountain Ski Area to motorized use. This will also benefit non-motorized users of the area by making it more easily accessible.
The trail to Fall Creek Parking
lot is a part of the groomed snowmobile trail route under MOU. It passes
through an area that is labeled as closed to motorized over snow access. This
trail should be clearly indicated on the Winter Travel Plan map and in the FEIS
and open to motorized over snow travel. This route is under
MA-6
IF we follow the logic in
preparing this Travel Plan Brundage Resort and the Brundage Mountain Cat Skiing
program should be shut down to avoid possible conflicts with wolverines. They
are operating in the main corridor of wolverine travel and their snowcats are
much larger and louder than the snowmobiles. They are less dispersed than
snowmobilers and constitute a larger threat if there are indeed any dens in the
area. It is my understanding that the most recent wolverine sighting in the
There is no biological
justification for closing Patrick Butte, Hazard Creek,
MA-6 and 7
Slab Butte/76 is immediately
adjacent to the Brundage Ski area, one of the most heavily used areas within
the
MA-7
The Crestline South closure is
poorly defined on the maps. Are there roads that define some of the boundaries?
If so, those should be clearly indicated on the maps. There is steady
snowmobile activity in this area. This small closure will make it much more
difficult for some riders to travel their customary routes to the lakes along
the Crestline Trail and to get to the Yellow Pine area. This area should remain
open to motorized over snow travel. This is an essential route to
Is this area being closed to accommodate a yurt skiing operation? Won’t this operation be using snowmobiles to maintain and supply their operation. Allowing them to establish snowmobile trails into an area will draw additional snowmobilers into the area. Most can’t read maps well. It is more difficult to identify some landmarks and signs in the snow as they are covered over and make precise map reading more of a challenge.
Some of us purchased our homes in
this area so that we could have access to snowmobiling areas without having to
trailer our sleds to already overcrowded parking areas. This is not a small
matter to us. You have no idea of how many people are looking for the
snowmobiling experience that used to be available in
Take one look at the area above
Squaw Point should be open to snowmobilers. I have yet to see a skier in that area although I have often seen snowmobiles crossing through the area, usually at night. Getting to that area generally involves using a snowmobile to get that far from the trailhead. Those individuals aren’t that averse to the use of snowmobiles. It is difficult to maintain signs in that area. There are no signs from the back side of the area letting snowmobilers know that they area crossing into a closed area. I have not seen snowmobilers crossing into the area from the road, but snowmobilers coming through the area from the back. These small closures of especially desirable areas of powder snow create opportunities for conflicts. This area is ideally suited to off trail snowmobiling.
The FS should keep 7-5 and 7-6 open to ATV travel. The FS should also keep 11-22 open to ATV travel as it continues on from 7-6.
MA-8
The Jughandle closure area should
be amended to allow access from
MA-10
10-3
The
The Chimney Rock area north of Secesh Meadows Subdivision should remain open to snowmobile travel.
The Marshall Meadows area should
not be closed to over snow travel. The FS should keep this area open. This
closure was not included in the DEIS. The Marshal Meadows area is regularly
used by snowmobilers. My friends and I travel frequently to War Eagle Lookout
and
Access to the area around War
Eagle Lookout can be critical during the winter months. It is one of the few
areas where cell phones work. The land phone system in Secesh/Warren doesn’t
work many days at a time and it can be critical to be able to go to War Eagle
to make phone calls. This is a public
health/safety concern. The Burgdorf Fire of 2000 burned through this area. It
will not be suitable lynx habitat for at least 20 years. The Forest Plan must
be updated regarding potential lynx habitat. 30% of the
Where is your documentation regarding wolverine denning in the PNF? Page 3-234 “The Payette does not know of any actual wolverine denning sites, but if any were found they would be specifically protected.” People do not disrupt wolverine travel corridors.
According to Jeff Copeland at the
Forest Service Experiment station in
This area has been used by people
since the 1860’s and there is much evidence of Native American use of the area
prior to that.
33% of the potential wolverine
denning habitat in the
Leland and Betty Cavner, owners of the Backcounty Bed and Breakfast in Warren reports that almost all of their guests who stay more than one night ride their snowmobiles to War Eagle Lookout and California Lake. Closing this area will create an economic hardship for them. You have not documented the economic effect of this proposal. It will not be non-significant.
Trail grooming in the
The FS should keep the road open
to ATV’s that leaves the road to California Lake in T23N R5E Sec 14 and travels
north to Union Lake open so that people can continue to fish, pick berries and
mushrooms, etc. in that area.
Rachael Applegate, daughter of
Reverend and Mrs. Samuel Applegate, was buried along the road above
The road through the dredge ponds
NW of Warren that starts in T23N R6E should be shown on the map. It is a part
of the public right of way that extends to the
The FS should leave the road open to vehicles that leaves Warren at the Put & Take building and travels north to Bemis Point, Brown’s Mountain, where there is cell phone signal availability, and ties into Burgdorf Summit. There are a number of old mining cabins along this road, a pioneer woman’s grave from the 1800’s, etc. in this area. This is an important route to the people who frequent this area. It has been important to access this area during several search and rescue operations. There are good lines of sight so that people can be spotter, radio and cell phone communication can be maintained. The presence of the grave is good documentation that this route has been in use prior to the FS reservation of the land. We love this area not just because of its natural beauty, but because of the history that is here. The FS should work to keep these historic sites available to the public, not close our roads.
When you put small backcounty
businesses out of business with closures you are compromising public safety. We
in Secesh feel the closure of the Stage Stop acutely. With no business open in
the area people don’t know where to go when there is a fire or an accident in
the Secesh Meadow area. The Winter Inn and Backcounty Bed and Breakfast provide
known places to go if a fire starts in
10-10 This road was the route to
the post office in the Marshall Mining area. It has not been abandoned by the
County. It gives us access to the
The FS must put the road that
begins in T22N R6E Sec 14 on the map and keep it open to the public. I’ve
driven that road in a car. It goes past the Bear Track Mine and several other
mining claims including Big Swede, Beaver Tail, Eager Beaver, Calumont, Little
Sottie and the Golden Star. It was
asserted by
The FS should keep the entire
Historic Tailholt Trail open to motorized travel. This historic trail starts in
The FS should keep the Knot Hole road 50370 open to all motorized travel.
The FS should keep the
The FS should keep the road open to the Warren Transfer Site. It is not shown on the map. This oversight should not be used to close the garbage collection site.
The FS should keep the road that starts across from the Warren Transfer Site south to Charlie Blunt’s old mine and ties into Warren Wagon Road 2 miles west in Sec 2 and 3 open to all motorized transportation.
The road that continues south from Pony Meadows Road FS 359 to Deer should be left open to ATV travel. It was upgraded to a vehicle road when it was used to fight a fire some years ago. The FS should restore this road to a trail and allow it to tie into the road that runs down the South Fork. One culvert needs to be replaced and some dirt work done to keep this road open.
The road that goes north from
The road that leaves FS30 in T22N
R 6E Sec 9 should remain open to ATV’s it is an access road to the Luck Ben Mine
and also accesses another currently active mine at the head of Halls Gulch and
another mine in Section 15. The road could be continued up Smith Creek from
The road that leaves FS355 in
T22N R7E Sec4 and travels to the west should remain open. I believe
The trail that leaves
The FS should leave all the roads open in the Historic Mining District. These routes are a part of our history and the FS should not close or destroy these roads.
The FS should keep the road open that runs from the road that starts in the dredge ponds NW of Warren. This road starts at the first dredge pond and travels SW to the head of Stratton Creek. It is suitable for some cars. It runs roughly from T22N R6E Sec 3 to T23 N R6E Sec 28.
The road that leaves
10-2 Steamboat Ridge – Idaho
County Asserted the northern portion of this road,
10-3 This road was asserted by
10-4 This road provides access to
Republican Flats. It was asserted by
The FS should keep 130 open to ATV travel.
The road to the historic Humbolt mine should be included on the map and open to the public as a public right-of-way. That road can be driven in a vehicle.
MA-11
11-1 In the Burgdorf Road Management and Abandoned Mine Reclamation Environmental Assessment this trail was slated for conversion to an ATV trail. This trail should remain open to ATV travel.
11-2 This road should remain open to ATV travel. There is heavy motorized recreational use thoughout MA 11. The FS should work to keep all roads in this MA open and improve roads where necessary.
11-3 This road should remain open to ATV’s. It provides a potential dispersed campsite or picnic spot.
11-4 This road should be open to all vehicles. It provides access to dispersed camping and picnic areas as well as a loop trail.
11-5 This road should be open to all vehicles. It provides access to dispersed camping and picnic areas as well as a loop trail.
11-6 This road should be open to all vehicles. It provides access to dispersed camping and picnic areas as well as a loop trail.
11-7 This road should be open to all vehicles. It provides access to the Ruby Meadows trail head and provides parking area for vehicles unloading bicycles, ATV’s, etc.
11-8a and b These roads should
remain open to ATV travel. It provides a year around trail and allows for side
trips on off the trail to
11-10a and b These are a heavily used trails. Relocate the wet sections but keep the trail open to ATV’s. This is an area with a great deal of Chinese mining history and is valuable to rockhounds. It’s a great area to bring kids to as it is easy to find semi precious stones on the surface or with little disturbance of the soil in the old mined areas.
11-11 Keep this road open to ATV’s. Reroute it around the wet area.
11-18 Keep this stub open to all vehicles. It allows access to a dispersed campsite and picnic area.
11-19 Keep this stub open to all vehicles. It allows access to a dispersed campsite and picnic area.
11-20 Keep this stub open to all vehicles. It allows access to a dispersed campsite and picnic area.
11-23 Keep this stub open to all vehicles. It allows access to a dispersed campsite and picnic area.
Bear Pete should not be closed to snowmobiles. There is a lookout in that area that is frequently visited by snowmobilers. This area is used by a few snowmobilers on a regular basis. It is an area that is far from the crowds and is a nice place to go when you are looking for a more solitary experience. There are a number of trails that can be followed to pass through the area. Leaving this area open will allow a better experience for the snowmobilers that do ride in the area. It will not see a lot of use. It will be almost impossible to patrol, identify or enforce closure of this area. Do not close this area. There are no wolverine dens or lynx in this area. There is a radio repeater up there that may need to be accessed.
Keep the
The FS should keep the road that leaves Grouse Creek Road (FS325) in T3N R5E in Sec 34 or 33 and travels west into Sec 33. It leads to an old mine site. It provides easy access to some firewood cutting not on the main road.
The FS should keep the road that leaves Grouse Creek Road in T23N R5E Sec 27 and travels north to an old mine site in Sec 22. This provides easy access to this historic site and to easy firewood cutting.
The FS should keep the road that
leaves the road to
The FS should upgrade the road
from Chinook Campground to
The FS should upgrade the trail
from Ruby Meadows Trailhead to
The FS should keep all roads and trails in this historic mining area open. Riders are increasing in this area every year and it is getting harder to find areas to ride where you don’t see other people all the time. The FS must take into consideration that use is increasing and the least expensive way to accommodate the users is by keeping existing roads and trails open while working to find other suitable routes that can also be added to the existing road and trail system. Overuse will increase the amount of maintenance on existing roads and trails. Spend more money on road and trail maintenance and none on road and trail obliteration.
MA-12
While not all of the acreage in
Alternative C is usable to snowmobilers, the amount that is usable is
substantial. Snowmobilers are allowed road access on
The FS should repair and update the display at Hayes Station. This is a popular area for people to ride to and hike around through the terraced areas and visit the “house” dug in the ground.
12-2 This road has been in place
since the 1860’s. It is a part of the route used in 1879 during the Sheepeater
Campaign. The property owner is willing to work with you to improve/repair the
road where necessary. Work with him. Don’t create more barriers to someone who
wants to work to keep the road open.
12-3 This route ties into a trail system in a popular riding area. The FS should keep this trail open to ATV travel. There are clubs in the area that would work with the FS to improve this trail.
12-4 The FS should keep this trail open to ATV travel. It does see frequent use.
12-5 The FS should keep this trail open to ATV travel. It does see frequent use. The trails in this area offer great riding opportunities with loop potential and should be improved to provide loop riding opportunities and access to Blackmare Lake. There are a number of lakes in the area that offer solitude to the ATV rider and fisherman.
12-6 The FS should keep this trail open to ATV use.
The FS should improve the trail
to
There are many contradictions in this EIS. Page 2-45, the written portion states that Proposal 12-7, Alternative E will, “retain this trail as a two-wheel motorized trail,” as do Proposals 12-8 and 12-12. The grid shows that all three of these will be non-motorized.
We are assuming that the written portion is correct and it was put into the grid incorrectly. The FS should keep trails addressed in Proposals 12-7, 12-8 and 12-12 open to 2-wheel motorized travel at a minimum along with trails 12-9, 12-10, 12-11 and 12-21. There was good rational presented in the FEIS to support keeping these trails open to motorized travel.
12-13, 12-15, 12-16, and 12-22 The FS should keep this group of trails open to ATV travel. These are popular routes.
12-17a and b should remain open to all vehicles. You map does not indicate which section is a or b. This road is a part of the historic route through the area.
See Comments in MA 10 regarding
the historic Tailholt Trail from
The Forest Service should review all of the trails to determine their suitability as ATV trails. Road 50673 should remain open as a road.
You really ought to reevaluate the road that leads to Smith Knob. It is great for ATV travel, can accommodate a full sized pickup or car, but it is not suitable for 4 horse trailers. The FS should develop a category that suggests some roads are not suitable for travel with trailers. Perhaps at least some people will scout the road before they bring a large trailer in and have problems.
This area is no more suitable for
Wilderness designation than the
MA-13
Do not increase the closures in the Big Creek area. This will be devastating to the local economy and economic impact must be taken into consideration. The Counties agreed to the option in Alternative C. If you increase the closure area you must complete an economic analysis of the impact before you can consider the closure in Alternative E. This is not closing 1% more in this area. This is closing 99% more. Closing the Big Creek area will also have a serious economic impact on Yellow Pine. This area must remain open. It is not always possible to stay within a road bed in the winter. Snow slides from above and is blown by the wind and it becomes difficult to determine exactly where the road bed is. Sometimes the road bed is less safe to travel than other routes across snow.
Sincerely,
Becky Johnstone
President
Backcounty Recreation Club
CC:
Idaho State Snowmobile Association (SAWS member)Sandra MitchellEmail: smitchel@alscott.comPhone: 1.888.342.6976 or 424.3870http://www.idahosnowbiz.com/
Contact: Todd Wernex
Email: twernex@idpr.state.id.us
Phone: 208-514-2413
Contact: Commissioner Mike Paradis
Email: mjpara@ctcweb.net
Contact: Gordon Cruickshank
Email: glc55@cwomc.com
Phone: 208-634-2490
Senator Lee Heinrich
Legislative District 8(District includes Valley &
Contact: Lee Heinrich
Email: brelee@frontiernet.net
Phone: 208-382-3244 or 208-271-6243
Blue Ribbon Coalitionhttp://www.sharetrails.org/
Senator
Larry Craig, dustin_miller@craig.senate.gov
Senator Mike Crapo, Layne_Bangerter@crapo.senate.gov
Congressman Bill Sali, lisa.tanner@mail.house.gov & Vince.Moreno@mail.house.gov
Governor Butch Otter, jmalmen@gov.idaho.gov
Adams
County Board of
Washington
County Board of
Idaho
County Board of
SBA/Office of Advocacy - advocacy@sba.gov
CEQ/NEPA - Horst_Greczmiel@ceq.eop.gov
Mountain States Legal, Steve Lechner, lechner@mountainstateslegal.com