Post by: Jfm on October 10, 2011, 11:54:57 AM
The Forest Service is in the process of implementing a plan to decommission nearly 15 miles of road in the Illabot Creek Drainage. The given reason is to reduce road maintenance needs and the risk of road failure and sediment delivery to Illabot Creek.
Many locals believe this is a political move spearheaded by groups that want to reclassify an enormous area of National Forest as National Park, including the area around Baker Lake, Glacier Peak Wilderness and Ross Lake. A quick Web search for North Cascades Park Expansion will provide official confirmation. For example http://www.npca.org/northwest/north-cascades.html (http://www.npca.org/northwest/north-cascades.html)
Whether intended as an assault on hunting and gun culture or not, these initiatives will be devastating to hunting, fishing and even hiking.
Illabot Creek Road is now up for decommissioning. This involves the complete removal of access to several fishing lakes - Marten, Slide, Enjar, King etc. It will also completely prevent hunting for grouse, deer and bear.
The period for public comment is currently open. Hiker forums are up in arms but the hunting world is strangely silent. Please help save our hunting and fishing from this devastating proposal.
http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=29892 (http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=29892)
Here's what you can do: Contact the following Forest Service officials. Talk to each one of them even if you are repeating yourself. Please ask plenty of questions about why this is happening. Politely state your opposition as a hiker, hunter and fisherman. Remember, these guys are decision makers but not politicians. They are just doing their jobs. Follow up with a written email. Call your state representative also.
Mount Baker Forest Service: 360 856 5700
Rob Iwamoto, MBS Forest Supervisor, riwamoto@fs.fed.us
Jon Vanderheyden, Mt Baker District Ranger, jvanderheyden@fs.fed.us ** (Spelling corrected 10/11/11)
Don Gay, NEPA, dgay@fs.fed.us - ** (Not a decision maker - now retired).
Carol Gladsjo, Recreation, cgladsjo@fs.fed.us
Fellow hunters, we are all going to have to become great at activism in coming years if we wish to see our kids have the right to use our National Forests as they were intended. Supporters of the park expansion have a strong cause - they rightly point out development encroachment as a key concern. However, one cannot hunt or fish in National Parks.
http://www.thenewstribune.com/2011/10/09/1856155/coalition-proposes-to-expand-north.html (http://www.thenewstribune.com/2011/10/09/1856155/coalition-proposes-to-expand-north.html)
Please, please take the time to get informed and start emailing and calling. Thank you for reading.
See for example: http://www.npca.org/northwest/north-cascades.html (http://www.npca.org/northwest/north-cascades.html)
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on October 10, 2011, 01:20:51 PM
Post by: huntrights on October 10, 2011, 01:34:32 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on October 10, 2011, 01:36:34 PM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on October 10, 2011, 01:49:02 PM
Post by: Jfm on October 10, 2011, 03:07:23 PM
Post by: DBHAWTHORNE on October 10, 2011, 03:16:10 PM
Post by: bigtex on October 10, 2011, 03:47:39 PM
Post by: Mark Brenckle on October 10, 2011, 05:01:55 PM
It should be noted that the area around Ross Lake is already owned and operated by the National Park Service as the Ross Lake National Recreation area. The proposal to expand North Cascades Natl Park would simply put all of those lands within the recreation area into the park and essentially eliminate the Ross Lake NRA.The area in question is on the west side of the park, north of Darrington. The park expansion plan includes Ross Lake NRA on the east, but there's a whole lot of acreage on the west side that is currently open to hunting (or armed hiking in my case :chuckle:), horse back riding and hiking with dogs.
Post by: CAMPMEAT on October 10, 2011, 05:30:52 PM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on October 11, 2011, 08:25:14 AM
It should be noted that the area around Ross Lake is already owned and operated by the National Park Service as the Ross Lake National Recreation area. The proposal to expand North Cascades Natl Park would simply put all of those lands within the recreation area into the park and essentially eliminate the Ross Lake NRA.
True, But the area of road closure seems to be west and north of Rockport. That NP proposal extends all the way to Baker Lake
Post by: Jfm on October 11, 2011, 02:53:01 PM
Rob Iwamoto can be reached at 425 783 6010
Don Gay is listed as the official contact on the FS site. He has retired so if you have emailed him, please resend your email to Jon Vanderheyden. Jon is apparently the main decision maker. I misspelled Jon's email address in my earlier post, it is jvanderheyden and not jvanderheyded as I wrote. jvanderheyden@fs.fed.us
I am also asking that the comment period be extended because of the incorrect contacts on the FS site. I also asked that they do more publicity as word has not gotten to all interested parties yet. According to the FS, all comment should be in writing to be considered. There must be a good reason given by each commenter to influence the decision. The FS has used the sign in sheet at Slide Lake trail to estimate usage. I have never used the sign in and regret that now. If like me, you have also neglected the sign in, please state that in your communication also. Lastly it is important to refer to the EA document.
Thanks to the 297 viewers of this post, it is my strongest hope that 297 of you have written or are writing an email to Jon Vanderheyden urging the Forest Service to continue to invest in this corner of paradise.
PS to Campmeat, damn right I'm a greenie...a heavily armed and well trained greenie. Come talk smack to me when I'm packing out my buck on Saturday before 8am :chuckle:
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 11, 2011, 03:01:50 PM
Post by: Jfm on October 11, 2011, 03:42:42 PM
1. As measured by sign-ins at the Slide Lake trailhead, there are very few users, i.e. this does not impact many people. Unfortunately for us, almost nobody bothers to sign in.
2. There are strong cost and environmental reasons to support the decommissioning.
3. Only 100 comments have been made from the public since the publication of this proposal.
Get fed up all you want. Then, please write the coolest email you have ever come up with. Here's the outline of mine:
- I have hunted, hiked and fished the lakes up Illabot Creek for many years.
- I take my children to Slide Lake to fish
- I have never signed in at the trail head - sorry, I didn't realize the importance.
- Closing the road will remove access to several fishing lakes which are kid and senior friendly.
-Closing the road will remove grouse, deer and bear hunting opportunity which will force increased hunting pressure in remaining areas and create potential conflict with hikers in heavily trafficked areas such as Sauk Mountain
- The high lakes - Slide, Enjar, Marten, Upper and Lower Jordan, Falls and King are a critical resource for American family activities such as hunting, hiking and fishing. Taking these beautiful areas away prevents people in urban areas from developing any appreciation for wilderness, hunting, fishing and outdoorsmanship.
We must speak their language. We must stand up as a coherent hunting community that can constructively jump on local issues like this and negotiate good compromises. I will still be hunting in 30 years time, and I hope you will too. Write the million dollar email today and enjoy it for the next 30 years!
Post by: CAMPMEAT on October 11, 2011, 09:11:05 PM
Post by: sebek556 on October 11, 2011, 09:17:54 PM
Post by: fireweed on October 12, 2011, 09:08:17 AM
Post by: huntrights on October 13, 2011, 11:14:48 AM
This is the Forest Service web site regarding this topic ( http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=29892 (http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=29892) ); please take the time to read the documents so you can write your letter or make your phone call from a position of being informed.
The Environmental Assessment (EA) is the primary document you may want to review, but there are several available:
Project Documents
Scoping
Public Scoping eLetter (PDF 81kb)
Project Information (PDF 287kb)
Location map (PDF 92kb)
Project Map (PDF 817kb)
alternative project detail map 1 (PDF 791kb)
alternative project detail map 2 (PDF 798kb)
alternative project detail map 3 (PDF 766kb)
Analysis
Invitation to comment on EA (PDF 140kb)
EA (PDF 2223kb)
Appendix A (PDF 280kb)
Appendix B (PDF 1038kb)
Of the alternatives they have listed, Alternative M (Marten Lake Upgrade) appears to be the best choice to keep access open (in my opinion). I believe they should pursue this alternative or some similar alternative and NOT decommission the road. However, the upgrade comes at a very real cost for the Forest Service. Please read their material and look at the associated maps on their web site.
You can also get a very nice satellite image of the area using GOOGLE Maps:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=el (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=el)
Type in: Illabot Creek Road, Marblemount, WA
Post by: huntrights on October 17, 2011, 09:31:49 AM
This appears to be a tough one for the Forest Service as they have to work within their budget, and comply with safety and environmental standards. I do hope others are taking the time to look into the Illabot Creek Road Project and sending their comments to the Forest Service representative (contact information below):
Jon Vanderheyden, District Ranger
Mt. Baker Ranger District
810 SR 20
Sedro-Woolley WA 98237
jvanderheyden@fs.fed.us
Post by: huntrights on December 04, 2011, 04:59:48 PM
Post by: huntrights on December 29, 2011, 07:34:56 AM
On December 27, 2011, District Ranger Jon Vanderheyden signed the Decision Notice for the Illabot Project. The project will decommission approximately 16.07 miles of road and upgrade approximately five miles of road.
http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=29892
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on December 29, 2011, 07:53:37 AM
Post by: Bob33 on December 29, 2011, 08:19:39 AM
Please clarify.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 29, 2011, 08:29:03 AM
I am missing the link between how decommissioned roads will "also completely prevent hunting for grouse, deer and bear."It doesn't if you hunt on foot. But if you can't get away from the vehicle you lose your hunting ability. Just moves the road hunters to a different area--making it even more crowded (for them).
Please clarify.
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on December 29, 2011, 08:30:16 AM
Post by: Bob33 on December 29, 2011, 08:31:35 AM
They are going to remove all culverts, and remove road bed with a excavater broad casting it to match the slope of the land. In a short few years you will have no way to travel down the path.You can't walk through the woods even?
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on December 29, 2011, 08:32:38 AM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on December 29, 2011, 08:32:50 AM
Just blocking the road would be better than what they are doing, it would let bicycles and hikers access the many lakes at the end of road.I am missing the link between how decommissioned roads will "also completely prevent hunting for grouse, deer and bear."It doesn't if you hunt on foot. But if you can't get away from the vehicle you lose your hunting ability. Just moves the road hunters to a different area--making it even more crowded (for them).
Please clarify.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on December 29, 2011, 08:35:21 AM
They are going to remove all culverts, and remove road bed with a excavater broad casting it to match the slope of the land. In a short few years you will have no way to travel down the path.
I see a budget cut that could save a million or two!
Post by: SWHUNTER on December 29, 2011, 08:36:44 AM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on December 29, 2011, 08:38:13 AM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 29, 2011, 08:40:29 AM
Agree. They have done this in a few areas I hunt. One left the culverts and bikes/horses are easily capable of still using. The other area the walk is fine on remaining road....it's the culvert removal and dirt mounds they left that make it a pain. They left quite a few 'dangerous' crossings. It's not like crossing a creek--it is climbing down an eroding side into a wannabe creek that hasn't figured itself out yet.Just blocking the road would be better than what they are doing, it would let bicycles and hikers access the many lakes at the end of road.I am missing the link between how decommissioned roads will "also completely prevent hunting for grouse, deer and bear."It doesn't if you hunt on foot. But if you can't get away from the vehicle you lose your hunting ability. Just moves the road hunters to a different area--making it even more crowded (for them).
Please clarify.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on December 29, 2011, 08:52:16 AM
They plan on implamenting it in 7-2013. This is our last year to fish those great lakes. :yike:
That was going to be my next question. Thanks!
It will make these (Wolf Lovers,leaf lickers) types happy, just like DOW..... soliciting donations at the end of the year......
Dear Jim,
You and I are truly the guardians of some of nature’s most pristine treasures. I’m pleased to report that our shared efforts to protect our wildlife and wild places have paid off. While the world as a whole continues to lose three species per hour to extinction, no species in our region has gone extinct during the 12 years our team has been working to preserve biodiversity in the Rockies.
Please give to Rocky Mountain Wild today.
Despite our success, conservation groups like Rocky Mountain Wild receive only 2% of charitable donations in the United States. Your gifts are vital to our continued efforts, and this holiday season they are more important than ever because the Earth Friends Conservation Fund has pledged a challenge grant to add to all donations received by Rocky Mountain Wild.
Yes, I want to help Rocky Mountain Wild take advantage of the Earth Friends Conservation Fund challenge grant by giving today!
Together, we have kept Wolf Creek Pass wild for over a decade. We protected 1.7 million acres of core wildlife habitat across Colorado, Utah and Wyoming. Your gifts played a huge role in reaching these outcomes.
But there remains much to accomplish. With your continued support we can:
* Continue to protect wildlife corridors that enable native species to roam throughout their natural territory.
* Advocate for the sustainable management of ski areas within our National Forests.
* Conserve the wetlands, rivers, lakes and streams that provide habitat for our native fish and wildlife while protecting the sources of water we rely on each day.
* Protect the wildlife corridors and habitat that will help species adapt to a changing climate.
We can't do it without you. Please invest in a healthy future for the Rockies. Give to Rocky Mountain Wild today.
Post by: huntrights on December 29, 2011, 08:05:53 PM
Post by: Skyvalhunter on December 29, 2011, 08:55:54 PM
Post by: huntrights on January 08, 2012, 01:23:56 PM
This is the Notice of Decision that describes the appeal opportunity:
http://a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic.download.akamai.com/11558/www/nepa/61747_FSPLT2_069935.pdf
“An appeal must be filed with the Appeal Deciding Officer, Forest Supervisor, Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, Attn: 1570 Appeals, 2930 Wetmore Avenue, Suite 3A, Everett, Washington, 98201. Appeals may be faxed to (425) 783-0214, sent electronically to appeals-pacificnorthwest-mtbaker-snoqualmie@fs.fed.us, or hand delivered to the above address 8:00 am to 4:30 pm, Mon-Fri except holidays. Appeals, including attachments, must be postmarked or delivered within 45 days after the publication date of this notice.” The Notice of Decision was published on December 27, 2011, so you must submit your appeal within the 45 day limit.
Jon Vanderheyden, the District Ranger, sent me the following message that should help guide your appeals to keep the road open:
“Appeal process can be nothing more than a letter to the address indicated in the decision notice (Which sounds like you have) stating your reasons why you think the decision should be changed. It's a good idea to have read the environmental assessment and decision notice carefully and base your appeal on what is contained therein - Where did the analysis go wrong for example.
Full copy of the Appeal regulations can be found at: http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/applit/36cfr215.htm”
Main link to the Illabot Road decommissioning project:
http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=29892
Link to the Environmental Assessment for the Illabot road Project:
http://a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic.download.akamai.com/11558/www/nepa/61747_FSPLT2_069984.pdf
Post by: huntrights on April 03, 2012, 04:05:26 PM
Good news! The Forest Service not closing Illabot Road: decision withdrawn.
Beware though; it appears the reversal of their decision may be more of a temporary reprieve. However, now there is time for those that want this road to remain open to work with the Forest Service to find out how the public and affected Tribes can help to keep it open. I am very serious when I say this. It looks like five individuals and one tribe appealed. It would be helpful if those people and the Tribe formed a coalition of sorts to ensure the road will remain open. There are obviously needs for road and drainage upgrades, and repairs. It can be a worthy project if this type of coalition can be formed; the influence of a coalition can grow when people believe in what they are doing. The Forest Service is planning on revising the analysis and documentation and will issue a new decision next year. Take advantage of this opportunity of time and work together with the Forest Service to ensure closure is not threatened again. Find out what you can do.
http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/mbs/news-events/?cid=STELPRDB5361686
"Forest Service not closing Illabot Road: decision withdrawn
Release Date: Apr 2, 2012
US Forest Service
Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest
Contact:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forest Service not closing Illabot Road
Decision withdrawn
Everett, Wash., April 2, 2012—Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest won’t be closing the Illabot Road anytime soon. A decision to dismantle the road and remove culverts and bridges was withdrawn March 27 in response to public appeals. Illabot Road is two miles south of Rockport, Wash., off of State Route 530.
Mt. Baker District Ranger Jon Vanderheyden proposed last December to close about 14.5 miles of the crumbling road to reduce road maintenance costs and save fish habitat. The Illabot is an old timber access road built in the 1960s at slope breaks with an aging road drainage system. “Slop failures, erosion and sediment are reducing water quality, affecting spawning gravels and fish habitat for endangered Puget Sound Chinook, Steelhead and bull trout,” Vanderheyden said. He also hoped to reduce the ecological impact from concentrated recreation use going to high mountain lakes in designated Wilderness.
Five individuals appealed the decision, saying they wanted the road open so they could get to trails leading to a series of high lakes in northern Glacier Peak Wilderness. One tribe appealed, saying the closure would block access to areas important for the exercise of their treaty rights.
The decision was withdrawn based on the recommendations of a Forest Service appeal review team that studied the appeals, environmental analysis and project record.
Vanderheyden said the forest will revise the analysis and documentation and issue a new decision next year if funds can be obtained to complete the work. "Road maintenance funds fall far short of maintaining or current road system. Without cuts in the road network, environmental damage is inevitable," he said."
Post by: Dave Workman on April 03, 2012, 04:29:36 PM
http://www.nwhikers.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7997118&highlight=suiattle+road+repair
http://www.nwhikers.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7997354
http://www.nwhikers.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7997059
This is all about the USFS plan for the Suiattle River Road...and the nutball push to close it
Here's a note I got from a friend on the Northwest Hiker's forum and it's serious:
Seriously thanks. That road is recognized as high use but the extremists have it targeted for closure. All kinds of recreational users use it including hikers, backpackers, climbers, kayakers, family's looking to car camp, hunters, and I could go on and on...
Post by: pianoman9701 on April 03, 2012, 04:40:56 PM
The road has not yet been removed. I cannot imagine hunting organizations supporting its removal, DBHawthorne, can you please elaborate? If there is a benefit to hunters, I cannot imagine it.
The Backcountry Hunters and Fisherman, for one would probably support the decommissioning. I sent an email opposing it. :tup:
Post by: teanawayslayer on April 03, 2012, 04:43:45 PM
Post by: huntrights on April 03, 2012, 05:07:51 PM
Those that don't want these roads to close must take a stand to oppose the closures and get many others to oppose the closures as well. The task isn't easy; it takes some research, dedication, and time. Remember, many hands make light work; if you can get enough people and organizations working toward a worthy cause, you might be able to change the outcome to what you desire. Those that are not willing to stand up for what they believe in, are destined to have others dictate how they will live their lives.
Stand up for what you believe in!
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on May 09, 2012, 08:23:36 AM
Dear Washington Wild Supporter,
We are writing to share with you the latest update on the Wild Olympics Campaign. As a member of the Wild Olympics Campaign, Washington Wild has been working for the past 3 years building support among the general public and local stakeholders for long term protections for the Peninsula’s watersheds while preserving recreational access.
As you may know, Congressman Norm Dicks and Senator Patty Murray introduced a draft proposal back in November to establish new Wilderness, Wild and Scenic River designations on Olympic National Forest (ONF) and willing-seller National Preserve additions to the Olympic National Park (ONP).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last week, Congressman Dicks and Senator Murray announced that they are dropping the willing-seller National Preserve additions to Olympic National Park from the proposal.
The Preserve proposal was developed to be consistent with the National Park Service’s own General Management Plan (2008) that would create an option for these lands, if and when they come up for sale, to be bid on by the park and managed for fish and wildlife habitat. When we reached out to the timber landowners, we were able to have substantive conversations and worked in good faith together to try and resolve our differences over the draft proposal. We made many revisions to try and get to an agreement.
Unfortunately, despite significant good faith efforts on both sides to try and find common ground, the politics and the policy differences around the park proposal proved to be challenging. Senator Murray and Congressman Dicks opted for a pathway forward that did not include the potential additions to the Park.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although disappointed in the decision to drop the willing seller proposal, we remain 100% supportive of the Wilderness and Wild and Scenic River protections that remain in Congressman Dicks’ and Senator Murray's current proposal and are grateful for their leadership. Their plan provides durable and permanent safeguards for the Peninsula's most priceless natural treasures: our towering ancient forests, free-flowing rivers, critical fish and wildlife habitat and our clean water.
However, other important parts of this proposal are still intact including:
Wilderness Designations – The proposal would still protect the first new Wilderness designations on the Olympic Peninsula in three decades within the Olympic National Forest. Approximately 130,000 acres of new Wilderness designations would permanently protect intact upper watersheds and low elevation wildlife habitat.
River Protections – The proposal will still include new Wild and Scenic river designations for 19 rivers including selected tributaries. Unbelievably, the Olympic Peninsula currently has no rivers designated as wild and scenic and this proposal would help permanently protect vital river systems that provide clean water, fish habitat and many benefits for humans and wildlife.
Continued Support for Wild Olympics - The Wild Olympics proposal has garnered diverse local support from more than 200 local elected officials, Peninsula businesses and farms and conservation and recreation groups. That support continues to grow. After the announcement that the willing-seller additions proposal was dropped, Merrill & Ring Inc. Vice President, Norm Schaaf, announced his support for the Wild Olympic proposal and expressed his appreciation for the inclusive process initiated by the Coalition. Click here, to see a list of organizations that support the proposal.
We still have much work to do and will continue to work with our coalition to move the Wild Olympics proposal forward. If you have not done so already, click here to sign the petition in support of the Wild Olympics proposal.
We thank you for your continued support to help bring about permanent protections to the wild lands and waters of the Olympic Peninsula.
Regards,
Nancy Osborn-Nicholas
Interim Executive Director
Washington Wild