COMMENT PROCESS FOR THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS) FOR THE CLEARWATER NATIONAL FOREST (GREAT BURN).
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Clearwater National Forest Plan Revision has a total of (5) proposed activities for the Great Burn Recommended Wilderness Area (RWA)
Suggested comment framework: Support the "NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE" with the following changes: Hoodoo area will be designated as 'semi-primitive motorized' instead of a RWA. Access would be limited to snowmobiles, snow bikes and Mtn bikes. North Fork Spruce-White Sands and Sneakfoot Meadows RWA's will be eliminated. The reason for going with the NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE WITH CHANGES instead of going with alternative X is many snowmobile groups feel this is a fair designation for both motorized and non-motorized users that allows uses that will not diminish the wildness character of the area. The reason for eliminating the three RWA’s mentioned is they are “bolt on” areas to existing wilderness but do not have the characteristics to qualify for a future wilderness designation.
Depending upon the FS map you look at, North Fork Spruce-white Sands includes what we call "Beaver Ridge" area (includes Beaver Lake). Remember The FS designates all the Gt. Burn area as 'Hoodoo', not just the area north of Fish Lake. In the 'no action' alternative the Gt. Burn RWA stays the same size as it is today with none of the additional proposed RWA's that show up in Alt 'W' and 'Z'.
It might be helpful to add to your comments something along the line: we don't support a RWA designation, but do support protection of the Great Burn from any activity(s) that could impair the character of the area. Areas noted for RWA expansion in alternatives 'W' and 'Z' do not meet the criteria for Recommended Wilderness.
When I submit my presentation to the FS I'll go into the reasoning why we don't support a RWA designation. The above comment proposal is a combination of parts of (4) alternatives: No action, Alt X, Y and Z. The FS has encouraged a "mix and match" approach to build a final preferred alternative.
Several large organizations in both Mt. and Id. are aligned with BSP position which puts us in a strong unified position. I am not a spokesperson for those groups so I can't name them.
I would strongly suggest you go to the Clearwater NF Forest Plan Revision website and look at the DEIS maps of the alternatives to follow the rationale for the above comment proposal.
One thing I need to make clear. We are not supporting any RWA designation in our comment/proposal. However, there are some RWA's that are in the "NO ACTION" Alternative that are outside of our interest. You can see them on the maps in the DEIS. DO NOT COMMENT ON THOSE AREAS . Stay silent on them. Doing any comment along the line that states "we can't get there, or don't ride there so it's not an issue", could inadvertently be construed to show support for a future wilderness designation, regardless of location.
I have been thinking that people may not bother to comment on the Clearwater NF plan revision (Gt. Burn) due to the sheer enormity of the DEIS publication. I received a call last night that confirmed my suspicions. There is a means to get a thumbnail sketch of the DEIS. If you read the Executive Summary of the DEIS you can get a feel for the overall content. Keep in mind, alternative Z on page 11 does not mention snowmobiling and mtn bikes are allowed. This was confirmed to me by the forest planner. Hopefully they will publish an amendment.
Adding Comments To The DEIS
The email to comment is: fpr_npclw@fs.us This email lets you add your comment to an ‘e-collaborative’ where you can see and respond to other comments. When using this link you need to complete the subject line with the following : Collaborative information. Hoodoo (Great Burn area) .
The comment period has been extended to April 20. Keep your calendar open for the FS meetings in both Id. and Mt.
Feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns.
You can get to the Forest Plan revision website using the following link: http://bit.ly/NezClearFPR . You can easily access the DEIS Index. If you click onto the 16 page Executive Summary you can get a thumbnail sketch of the alternatives offered and an oversight of the 2000 page DEIS. You can also scroll down the index and click onto the maps specific to the alternatives and see the areas I have suggested to comment on. The comment period closes April 20,2020.
If you don’t comment during this comment period, you are not eligible to comment on the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) when it is released in about one year. The FEIS will be the preferred alternative the FS plans on going with.
Next issue: where do you find this information?
Google Nez Perce Clearwater National Forest Plan Revision Click on the header that highlights reviewing the forest plan using the 2012 forest planning rules scroll down to the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT and click onto it scroll down the index to EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. (it is 16 pages and you can probably get through it in about 15 min)
The Index will also allow you to look a certain aspects of the DEIS without reading all 2000 pages.
Getting engaged in the planning process is the only way we are going to regain access to the Great Burn riding area. That means EVERYONE needs to spend a bit of time and energy to make it happen.
The Forest Service public meeting dates are also noted in the above information. Showing up for these meetings in your respective areas is critical. The first Meeting was in Moscow, Id last Sat. The "Friends of the Clearwater", a wilderness advocate group, organized a turnout rally to oppose any potential motorized/mechanized uses in the Gt. Burn. Fortunately we got wind of it and Luke Bledsoe from Team Lochsa and a BSP member, rallied the local snowmobile clubs to show up. I understand they did show up and conducted themselves very professionally.
The same scenario is likely to repeat in all of the Montana meetings. We have to show up and be heard.
These dates and times are set to allow most working folks to attend without missing work. No excuse not to show up. I will post more specific info on the meetings as we get closer to the actual date.
Here is detailed info on the upcoming Forest Service meetings re: Gt Burn:
Feb 21. St. Regis
5:00-7:00
St. Regis Community Center
230 Lobo Loop
Feb 22 Missoula
10:00-12:00
Northern Rockies Training Center
5765 W. Broadway
Feb 22, Hamilton
3:00-5:00
Bitterroot Forest Supervisors Office
1801 N. 1st St.
I can't stress enough, the value of attending these meetings. A small sacrifice of time could pay large long term benefits to the snowmobile community as a whole.
Please share this information with your fellow snowmobilers....only if they are interested in supporting a potential re-opening of the Great Burn, Beaver Ridge, and adjacent areas to snowmobiling.
Stan Spencer
- NO ACTION: This means the areas would remain a RWA that is closed to snowmobiling and Mtn biking.
- ALTERNATIVE W : Expands the RWA acreage in the Gt Burn and keeps it closed to snowmobiling and Mtn bikes. Allows chainsaws.
- ALTERNATIVE X : Eliminates all RWA designation which would allow snowmobiling and Mtn bikes.
- ALTERNATIVE Y: Would shrink the current size of the current RWA to cover only the area we know as Surveyor. The North and South portions would not be RWA and would be open to snowmobiling and Mtn bikes. The Surveyor portion would remain closed to snowmobiles and Mtn bikes.
- ALTERNATIVE Z: Would expand the size of the current Gt. Burn RWA but would allow snowmobiles and Mtn bikes.
Suggested comment framework: Support the "NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE" with the following changes: Hoodoo area will be designated as 'semi-primitive motorized' instead of a RWA. Access would be limited to snowmobiles, snow bikes and Mtn bikes. North Fork Spruce-White Sands and Sneakfoot Meadows RWA's will be eliminated. The reason for going with the NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE WITH CHANGES instead of going with alternative X is many snowmobile groups feel this is a fair designation for both motorized and non-motorized users that allows uses that will not diminish the wildness character of the area. The reason for eliminating the three RWA’s mentioned is they are “bolt on” areas to existing wilderness but do not have the characteristics to qualify for a future wilderness designation.
Depending upon the FS map you look at, North Fork Spruce-white Sands includes what we call "Beaver Ridge" area (includes Beaver Lake). Remember The FS designates all the Gt. Burn area as 'Hoodoo', not just the area north of Fish Lake. In the 'no action' alternative the Gt. Burn RWA stays the same size as it is today with none of the additional proposed RWA's that show up in Alt 'W' and 'Z'.
It might be helpful to add to your comments something along the line: we don't support a RWA designation, but do support protection of the Great Burn from any activity(s) that could impair the character of the area. Areas noted for RWA expansion in alternatives 'W' and 'Z' do not meet the criteria for Recommended Wilderness.
When I submit my presentation to the FS I'll go into the reasoning why we don't support a RWA designation. The above comment proposal is a combination of parts of (4) alternatives: No action, Alt X, Y and Z. The FS has encouraged a "mix and match" approach to build a final preferred alternative.
Several large organizations in both Mt. and Id. are aligned with BSP position which puts us in a strong unified position. I am not a spokesperson for those groups so I can't name them.
I would strongly suggest you go to the Clearwater NF Forest Plan Revision website and look at the DEIS maps of the alternatives to follow the rationale for the above comment proposal.
One thing I need to make clear. We are not supporting any RWA designation in our comment/proposal. However, there are some RWA's that are in the "NO ACTION" Alternative that are outside of our interest. You can see them on the maps in the DEIS. DO NOT COMMENT ON THOSE AREAS . Stay silent on them. Doing any comment along the line that states "we can't get there, or don't ride there so it's not an issue", could inadvertently be construed to show support for a future wilderness designation, regardless of location.
I have been thinking that people may not bother to comment on the Clearwater NF plan revision (Gt. Burn) due to the sheer enormity of the DEIS publication. I received a call last night that confirmed my suspicions. There is a means to get a thumbnail sketch of the DEIS. If you read the Executive Summary of the DEIS you can get a feel for the overall content. Keep in mind, alternative Z on page 11 does not mention snowmobiling and mtn bikes are allowed. This was confirmed to me by the forest planner. Hopefully they will publish an amendment.
Adding Comments To The DEIS
The email to comment is: fpr_npclw@fs.us This email lets you add your comment to an ‘e-collaborative’ where you can see and respond to other comments. When using this link you need to complete the subject line with the following : Collaborative information. Hoodoo (Great Burn area) .
The comment period has been extended to April 20. Keep your calendar open for the FS meetings in both Id. and Mt.
Feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns.
You can get to the Forest Plan revision website using the following link: http://bit.ly/NezClearFPR . You can easily access the DEIS Index. If you click onto the 16 page Executive Summary you can get a thumbnail sketch of the alternatives offered and an oversight of the 2000 page DEIS. You can also scroll down the index and click onto the maps specific to the alternatives and see the areas I have suggested to comment on. The comment period closes April 20,2020.
If you don’t comment during this comment period, you are not eligible to comment on the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) when it is released in about one year. The FEIS will be the preferred alternative the FS plans on going with.
Next issue: where do you find this information?
Google Nez Perce Clearwater National Forest Plan Revision Click on the header that highlights reviewing the forest plan using the 2012 forest planning rules scroll down to the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT and click onto it scroll down the index to EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. (it is 16 pages and you can probably get through it in about 15 min)
The Index will also allow you to look a certain aspects of the DEIS without reading all 2000 pages.
Getting engaged in the planning process is the only way we are going to regain access to the Great Burn riding area. That means EVERYONE needs to spend a bit of time and energy to make it happen.
The Forest Service public meeting dates are also noted in the above information. Showing up for these meetings in your respective areas is critical. The first Meeting was in Moscow, Id last Sat. The "Friends of the Clearwater", a wilderness advocate group, organized a turnout rally to oppose any potential motorized/mechanized uses in the Gt. Burn. Fortunately we got wind of it and Luke Bledsoe from Team Lochsa and a BSP member, rallied the local snowmobile clubs to show up. I understand they did show up and conducted themselves very professionally.
The same scenario is likely to repeat in all of the Montana meetings. We have to show up and be heard.
These dates and times are set to allow most working folks to attend without missing work. No excuse not to show up. I will post more specific info on the meetings as we get closer to the actual date.
Here is detailed info on the upcoming Forest Service meetings re: Gt Burn:
Feb 21. St. Regis
5:00-7:00
St. Regis Community Center
230 Lobo Loop
Feb 22 Missoula
10:00-12:00
Northern Rockies Training Center
5765 W. Broadway
Feb 22, Hamilton
3:00-5:00
Bitterroot Forest Supervisors Office
1801 N. 1st St.
I can't stress enough, the value of attending these meetings. A small sacrifice of time could pay large long term benefits to the snowmobile community as a whole.
Please share this information with your fellow snowmobilers....only if they are interested in supporting a potential re-opening of the Great Burn, Beaver Ridge, and adjacent areas to snowmobiling.
Stan Spencer
Should Snowmobiling be Stopped?
A recent Guest Column by Dale Harris (Feb 3, 2020) has prompted me to respond. The headline MAINTAIN WILDNESS OF MT-ID FORESTS (reference to the Great Burn area in the Clearwater National Forest) is absolutely aligned with my thinking. Couldn’t agree more. However, if you read the column carefully you would have no doubt that the unspoken or veiled part of his comments conveyed a message. “Maintain the Wildness only for one specific category of user”. The “wildness” character can be maintained and still support various users that do not diminish the character of the area. Snowmobiling is a good example of what I’m referring to. Virtually zero impact on the land. Once the snow melts all trace is removed. There is no user conflict in the high alpine areas in the winter because the only way to get to the areas is via snowmobile. I have snowmobiled the Great Burn since 1988 and have only seen back country skiers twice. In both cases they accessed the area via snowmobile.
Let’s talk about wildlife impact from snowmobiling. Mr. Harris suggests Goats and Wolverines are vulnerable to motorized disturbance (no factual evidence is provided). Goats need to eat in the winter. Their principal winter diet is grasses and liken. That limits their preference to winter in areas that have less than two feet of snow (the average length of a Goats leg is 22”). Snowmobiles can’t access the Great Burn unless there is about five feet of snow to cover rocks and deadfall. Snowmobiles just are not in Goat winter habitat areas. When the Great Burn was open for snowmobiling I had observed Wolverines, from a fairly long distance, in a couple of places. I do understand they need snow to make a ‘home’ for raising their young. The thing is they don’t do this out in open areas. They generally do this on steep cliff areas that are not accessible by man or machine. They can maneuver up or down on a rock face faster than any Mt. Goat. A snowmobile can’t get anywhere near a Wolverine den.
The Forest Service did a study of Wolverine disturbance in the Payette National Forest and the short version of the findings were: Wolverines are more disturbed by a skier than a snowmobile. The recently released Draft Environmental Statement (DEIS) for the Clearwater National Forest Plan Revision compared Goat mortality rates in the Bitterroot-Selway Wilderness (no motorized allowed) with the Great Burn when it was open to snowmobiling and found the mortality rate was much higher in the non-motorized area.
Past Montana studies have arrived at the same results. There is just no correlation between Goat mortality rates and snowmobile activity. I, and most of the snowmobile community, agree that Great Burn area should be protected. Protected from any activity that would diminish the “wildness” character of the area. Not protected from uses that certain groups simply don’t like.
Let’s talk about wildlife impact from snowmobiling. Mr. Harris suggests Goats and Wolverines are vulnerable to motorized disturbance (no factual evidence is provided). Goats need to eat in the winter. Their principal winter diet is grasses and liken. That limits their preference to winter in areas that have less than two feet of snow (the average length of a Goats leg is 22”). Snowmobiles can’t access the Great Burn unless there is about five feet of snow to cover rocks and deadfall. Snowmobiles just are not in Goat winter habitat areas. When the Great Burn was open for snowmobiling I had observed Wolverines, from a fairly long distance, in a couple of places. I do understand they need snow to make a ‘home’ for raising their young. The thing is they don’t do this out in open areas. They generally do this on steep cliff areas that are not accessible by man or machine. They can maneuver up or down on a rock face faster than any Mt. Goat. A snowmobile can’t get anywhere near a Wolverine den.
The Forest Service did a study of Wolverine disturbance in the Payette National Forest and the short version of the findings were: Wolverines are more disturbed by a skier than a snowmobile. The recently released Draft Environmental Statement (DEIS) for the Clearwater National Forest Plan Revision compared Goat mortality rates in the Bitterroot-Selway Wilderness (no motorized allowed) with the Great Burn when it was open to snowmobiling and found the mortality rate was much higher in the non-motorized area.
Past Montana studies have arrived at the same results. There is just no correlation between Goat mortality rates and snowmobile activity. I, and most of the snowmobile community, agree that Great Burn area should be protected. Protected from any activity that would diminish the “wildness” character of the area. Not protected from uses that certain groups simply don’t like.