DONT LET IRENE DAVIDSON CLOSE THE FOREST

[Special T]

I stole this off the Hammer Outdoors FB page because i talked with one of the employees, I think his name was Cliff.

Mail Original to: Wenatchee National Forest
Attn: 1570 Appeals
215 Melody Lane
Wenatchee, WA 98801

Mail Copy to: Tim Kovis
Doc Hastings Office
1324 Longworth Building
Washington, DC 20515

With this document, I am appealing the “1700 System Flood Repair Project” decision that was outlined in the July 3, 2013 Decision Memorandum by the USFS Naches District Ranger, Irene Davidson. I am opposed to the decommissioning of any roads in the 1700 system.

Unfortunately, I was not able to file an opinion during the comment period because I was not aware of the issue or the fact that comments were being taken. The Forest Service Decision Memorandum states that over 1000 notices were sent to local citizens. I received no such notice. Had the Forest Service posted notices in the local paper of record, the Yakima Herald-Republic, I would have had a chance to comment. However, the Forest Service opted to post notices in the Wenatchee World, a publication not widely read in the affected area. For this reason, I respectfully ask that you consider my appeal despite the fact that I did not make a comment during the official comment period.

It is my opinion that the FONSI decision is completely unsupportable by the facts as detailed in the Decision Memorandum, and it unnecessarily limits the public’s access to the forest. When very reasonable, cost effective and environmentally friendly options for repair exist, there is no way to support a decision to decommission the roads. Additionally, I do not believe it is legal to utilize ERFO funds to decommission roads. Those funds are earmarked by Congress to repair and reconstruct roads.

Regarding the 1704 road it makes no sense to remove a passable road and destroy the road bed. Doing so will be more expensive, more disruptive to fish habitat, and create a more dangerous snowmobile passing than either 1) leaving the road as is, or 2) repairing the road to meet Forest Service requirements. Blocking this road will also limit access of emergency medical and fire services to many people and cabins along the 1704 road. The road should either have warning signs about the road’s width, weight and height restrictions installed at each end where a turn-around currently exists or be repaired. The Decision Memorandum does not adequately address these options.

Additionally, the decommissioning of 1703 would limit fire fighting access to large areas of forest that would cause significant wildfire danger to hundreds of people and structures. Re-opening the 1707 road would be very inexpensive and would also increase fire fighting access to the forest which would improve safety to hundreds of people and structures. The 1707 road was closed due to safety concerns about the potential of harm to a very few people without concern for the much larger harm that could come to many more people from wildfire. The change proposed to 1708 makes no sense either. Repairing the existing roadway would be more cost effective, have less environmental impact and create a safer roadway. Additionally, the decision to decommission 1700-416 puts more lives at risk than reopening 1707 would. Having so many vehicles entering Hwy 410 on a 55 MPH curve is a reckless and dangerous decision. I support the proposed repairs in Wayne Bell’s appeal over the ones in the Decision Memorandum. The proposals for all these repairs in Wayne Bell’s appeal are far superior, more sensible and supportable by the facts than the ones taken by Irene Davidson in the Decision Memorandum.

_______________________ ________________________________
Name Phone Number

________________________ _________________________________
Address Signature

[logger]

I was just at some meetings and it sounds like the f.s. is going to get some heat for not doing what their job is and manage forest's for multiple use! county's are in on this also because of no timber payments, I'm sure it will be a long drawn out proccess but hopefully they get their crap atleast half together. There is also talk of requiring any leaflicker group who wants to sue or otherwise halt any project to post a sizable bond, That in my opinion would help the f.s be able to put forth a project without the fear of friviolus lawsuits.

[Knocker of rocks]

There is also talk of requiring any leaflicker group who wants to sue or otherwise halt any project to post a sizable bond, That in my opinion would help the f.s be able to put forth a project without the fear of friviolus lawsuits.

That's probably just talk, and legally impossible

[norsepeak]

She needs to go!  She is just pushing her personal agenda and treating the national forest like her private property.  Wish we had more oversight on the Forest Circus employees.

[Special T]

  I belive that is what Cliff heard her say... that she wasn't going to let people into HER Forrest.

[logger]

There is also talk of requiring any leaflicker group who wants to sue or otherwise halt any project to post a sizable bond, That in my opinion would help the f.s be able to put forth a project without the fear of friviolus lawsuits.

That's probably just talk, and legally impossible

Your right most likely just talk at this point, but sounds like there are some big changes coming. The whole system needs a serious overhaul and it starts with their rule making system! they are a managment agency not judge and jury, And the stewardship of a public resource is at a all time low, roads, grazing,recreation of all kinds needs to be taken serious and not just lock up everything with a hands off attitude. multiple use needs to be re instated.

[logger]

I just repaired a washout that is joint owned by the f.s. and a timber co. f.s estimate to fix was 220,000 plus a 3 year study, timber co. said piss on that called me 18,000 grand and 2.5 days later road was fixed and complete!

[Humptulips]

$80,000 won't do much road repair.

[Special T]

I just repaired a washout that is joint owned by the f.s. and a timber co. f.s estimate to fix was 220,000 plus a 3 year study, timber co. said piss on that called me 18,000 grand and 2.5 days later road was fixed and complete!

And there it is... Multiple use is just that. IMO they hide behind the costs to do 2 things. Protect the Forrest from us, and to keep doing busy work in the office. I know i keep pushing this book, but this is a great example of how the Forrest service has degraded and why.
 The Tinder Box: How Politically Correct Ideology Destroyed the U.S. Forest Service by Burchfield, Christopher (Jul 22, 2012)
I know Logger has said he has read the book, and his example is PROOF of the change in the agency.

[logger]

I did read that book after you recomended it, proof right there that they are people managers instead of resource managers. It was literally 1,500 bucks for pipe and base rock and some crushed over the top and done. biggest cost was moving the hoe in and hauling the crushed rock in.goood as new!

[Elkaholic daWg]

I did read that book after you recomended it, proof right there that they are people managers instead of resource managers. It was literally 1,500 bucks for pipe and base rock and some crushed over the top and done. biggest cost was moving the hoe in and hauling the crushed rock in.goood as new!

 

And this Davidson woman is not alone in her agenda........

 
U.S. Forest Service Continues Unlawful "De Facto Wilderness" Policy in Two More National Forests!

MILLIONS OF ACRES OF PREMIER RECREATION AT RISK
IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUESTED!

Greetings BRC Action Alert Subscribers,

The Forest Service has just released the final drafts and draft Record of Decisions (RODs) for the Kootenai National Forest and the Idaho Panhandle National Forests.

Normally, these Forest Plans are akin to a master zoning plan, outlining general management guidance for large geographic areas, leaving site specific decisions for a later time or for a local Ranger District. This makes sense, because in today's world the agency simply does not have the resources to render defensible site specific decisions at the Forest Plan stage.

Specifically, the USFS is creating "De Facto Wilderness."

While the revised Plan decisions are generally programmatic, this Record of Decision also incorporates the following decisions:
Restrict motorized (85,800 acres) and mechanized (176,827 acres) use in management areas allocated to recommended wilderness and research natural areas. This decision authorizes an accompanying closure order as per 36 CFR 261 Subpart B and aligns the allowed uses within the management area direction established in the revised Plan.
Restrict the use of hand-held motorized equipment in management areas allocated to recommended wilderness or primitive areas, except for administrative use. This decision authorizes an accompanying order as per 36 CFR 261 Subpart B and aligns the allowed uses within the management area direction established in the revised Plan.
You're probably saying, "That's not legal! Only Congress can create Wilderness!!"

Well, just like Emperor Palpatine in George Lucas "Star Wars" films, the USFS wants to make it legal!



But like the plucky hero rebels in Star Wars, BRC and the Idaho State Snowmobile Association are fighting back!

Last year, BRC and ISSA joined forces in the courtroom to challenge the 2011 Clearwater National Forest Travel Plan and its rollout of the Northern Region Recommended Wilderness Area ("RWA") Policy.  Under the Policy, RWAs will effectively be managed as formally designated Wilderness.

Like a slow moving virus, this unlawful policy has now spread to the Idaho Panhandle and the Kootenai National Forests. The documents are now available on the Idaho Panhandle National Forests planning web page and the Kootenai-Idaho Panhandle Zone forest plan revision website. Additional information, including maps, supporting documents, and how to participate in the objection process, can also be found on their website. The FS responses to your comments on the draft EIS and draft Forest Plan are in Appendix G of the FEIS.

These draft decisions are subject to a pre-decisional administrative review process (objection process),
pursuant to the 2012 Planning Rule (Subpart B of36 CFR 219). That "objection process" provides us an opportunity to challenge this flagrant disregard of the law.

Now, we don't want to be "Pollyannaish" here. The "objection process" is like appealing to the King for something the Prince did wrong. The USFS has "gone rogue" as they say. The fact is, they really are intent on "making this legal."

In other words, we'll file a formal objection, but we aren't optimistic the USFS will change their mind.

That means we're going to need your help fighting this in the courts and also on the political playing field. Toward that end, we have a important 3-STEP ACTION ITEM below.

Please forward this to your friends and family, and please take action NOW!

Thanks in advance and, as always, if you have any questions or concerns, please contact BRC.

Brian Hawthorne                                                 Ric Foster
Public Lands Policy Director                            Public Lands Department Manager
BlueRibbon Coalition                                        BlueRibbon Coalition
208-237-1008 ext 102                                       208-237-1008 ext 107


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUESTED
HELP US STOP THIS UNLAWFUL POLICY

Below is one of BRC's famous  INSANELY EASY 3-Step Action Items.

Please take action today!

ACTION ITEM 1: - Forward this Alert, Like or Share this on Facebook.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Tweet this action alert   (I will place link later on)
https://www.sharetrails.org/node/15787


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ACTION ITEM 2: - Please support our lawsuit against this outrageous "de-facto Wilderness" policy.



Click Here    (I will place link later on)
http://www.sharetrails.org/legal/clearwater-national-forest-idaho


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ACTION ITEM 3: - Contact Congress Immediately.

Our National partners, Americans for Responsible Recreational Access (ARRA) have created one of their excellent "click and send" action items. This is the quickest and easiest way to send a message to Congress about what the USFS is doing.

https://www.sharetrails.org/public_lands/images/ARRA-2013-sm.jpg

CLICK HERE