Public Meeting-Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:00 PM Inyo National Forest Route Designation Process Public Meeting-Inyo Forest Supervisors Office, 351 Pacu Lane, Bishop Calif. Further info contact:Marty Hornick at 760-873-2461 or Nancy Erhardt at 760-873 2490.
Forest Service Meeting
- Thread starter Crruisercharlie
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Tahoe Update
Hi all - please see the following information for the Tahoe National Forest including the public meetings coming up in April. Also find a timeline at the end of this information.
Tahoe National Forest
Route Designation Process – Update 6
Spring, 2007
This update includes the following:
Overview of the meetings held in the Tahoe National Forest – Fall
2006
Proposed Action and Public Meeting Schedule
Draft Environmental Impact Statement Schedule
Mixed Use Question – National Direction – Safety Issue
Roadless Area Discussion
Temporary Forest Order (Step 2)
Overview of Fall Public Meetings – Grass Valley/Nevada City, Truckee, Foresthill Thanks to everyone who participated in the six meetings last fall to share ideas on possible trails to include in the designated motorized route system or concerns for adding these or any trails. We greatly appreciate the suggestions you made, your cooperative approach, and the thoughtful ideas expressed. Thanks especially go to each of the group leaders:
Yuba River – Rick Krause, Karen Cox, and John Timmer
Truckee and Sierraville – Stan Van Velsor and Pam Rocca/Don Virgo
American River – Kevin Greene, Ron Gould/Jim Johnson, and Stan Van Velsor
Roughly, over 300 people attended. There were over 100 routes discussed with over 100 miles suggested. These routes are shown on the TNF website via power point presentations, along with the notes from each of the groups explaining why these should or shouldn’t be added. (see www.fs.fed.us/r5/tahoe).
IDT Reviewing Routes Suggested by Public Using the comments, suggestions, and concerns identified at the public meetings, as well as letters sent in, the Forest Service Interdisciplinary Team has been reviewing each of the suggested routes; looking at the recreation opportunity each provides as well as any environmental concerns.
Resource maps and GIS layers are being used to review routes along with any potential opportunities or concerns based on the criteria suggested by the public and National guidelines. Examples include:
· Proximity to streams, spotted owl protected activity centers, goshawk
protected activity centers, historic or prehistoric archeological sites, special soil and erosion considerations, critical deer habitat, carnivore/furbearer network, known threatened, endangered, or sensitive plant or animal species sites, noxious weed locations, older forest habitat types, etc.
· Locations within or near Wilderness, Wild and Scenic River corridors,
Research Natural Areas, semi-primitive motorized or non-motorized areas, or Roadless Areas
· Impacts to private land
· Current recreation use on/near route
· Opportunities to improve designated trail experience or trail system
· User conflicts
· Dispersed recreation opportunities
· Direction in the Tahoe Land and Resource Management Plan and Sierra
Nevada Forest Plan Amendment
Proposed Action – Followed by 30-day Comment Period – This Spring Based on this ongoing review, the Forest Service will provide a proposed action map which will identify proposed roads, trails, and areas to be analyzed for inclusion in the existing motorized trail/route system as well as the long term prohibition of wheeled motor vehicles off designated routes. There will be a 30-day public comment period on the proposed action. This is expected to be available for comment later this spring.
Maps and the Notice of Intent will be available on the web for review.
Public Meetings to Introduce Proposed Action Three public meetings will be held in April to share the Forest Service proposal. The purpose of these public meetings will be to explain how the Forest Service developed this proposal and provide suggestions for reviewing and commenting on the proposal. This is not a hearing – oral comments will not be taken or recorded at this meeting.
Truckee – April 18 from 6:30 – 9:00 pm at the Hampton Inn, 11951 Hwy 267, between Joerger and Airport Roads.
Foresthill – April 24 from 6:30 – 9:00 pm at the Foresthill High School Gymnasium, Foresthill Road.
Grass Valley – April 26 from 6:30 – 9:00 pm. at the Banner Grange, 12629 McCourtney Road, past the Nevada County Fair Grounds.
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) To Be Developed – Additional Comment Period This Fall The Forest Service will then develop an Environmental Impact Statement to analyze various alternatives – based in part on the comments received in the spring. The Draft EIS is expected to be completed in the fall and available for comment for 45 days. The Final EIS is expected to be completed in early 2008.
Safety Concerns – Mixing Highway-Legal and Non-Highway-Legal Vehicles on the Same Routes In 2005, the Forest Service issued a National Travel Management Rule which will result in the designation of all roads, trails and areas open to motor vehicle use by vehicle class and time of year. The Rule further states that traffic on roads is subject to state traffic laws, except in cases where the Forest Service decides to allow both highway-legal and non-highway-legal motor vehicles. Such a decision is a “pre-emption” of state law which will be advised by engineering judgment or an engineering study and must be approved by the state. Under Federal policy, an engineering analysis must be completed by a qualified engineer assessing road conditions and the probability and severity of a crash before a decision can be made allowing mixed-use.
Engineering analyses will be completed for a variety of the roads that motorcycles and ATV’s are currently using on the TNF. It is expected that for roughly graded, high clearance roads, mixed use will be approved in most cases. On smoother surface, higher standard roads, mixed use will probably not be approved, as it is unlikely that the Forest Service will pre-empt state law in most situations. The full impact of this has not been fully analyzed, but Forest Service engineers and recreation specialists are currently assessing road and recreation safety features.
For the routes that are currently of high value to OHV users but don’t comply with state law, we can consider mitigations that would make them
available for use by non-highway legal vehicles. This will be one area
where we need to hear from OHV users during the comment periods.
Inventoried Roadless Areas
In a nutshell, the Forest Service identified potential roadless areas in the 1970’s for possible wilderness designation. Those areas that were not designated as wilderness are still considered as inventoried roadless areas, even though most include some roads or motorized trails. Many National initiatives, environmental reviews, and lawsuits have occurred in the last 30 years interpreting roadless policy. Based on the most recent legal decision, the Forest Service is currently operating under the January
2001 Roadless Area rule which prohibits building any road in a roadless area. Designating an existing route which has been used by motorized vehicles as part of the designated system is not prohibited, however, the Forest Service does need to consider impacts of the route on the roadless character of the area. The ID Team is currently reviewing the trails proposed by the public for impacts on roadless character if they are within a roadless area.
Temporary Forest Order (Step 2) Map - To Be Issued this Spring The Temporary Forest Order requiring motorized vehicles to stay on existing trails or routes is expected to be out this spring. The purpose of this step is to stop the proliferation of new motorized trails and will close the Forest to cross country travel in the short term while the Environmental Impact Statement and long-range Final Forest Order are being completed.
For questions, contact: Phil Horning, Project Coordinator (530) 478-6210, David Michael, Trails Coordinator (530) 478-6183 or Dave Arrasmith, IDT Leader (530) 478-6143. If you would know of someone that would like to be added to the mailing list, please have them email me their address or call me at the number listed below.
Thanks for your ongoing interest and involvement.
(See attached file: 07_winter_update_timeline.doc)
Ann Westling
Tahoe National Forest
Public Affairs Officer
(530) 478-6205
Hi all - please see the following information for the Tahoe National Forest including the public meetings coming up in April. Also find a timeline at the end of this information.
Tahoe National Forest
Route Designation Process – Update 6
Spring, 2007
This update includes the following:
Overview of the meetings held in the Tahoe National Forest – Fall
2006
Proposed Action and Public Meeting Schedule
Draft Environmental Impact Statement Schedule
Mixed Use Question – National Direction – Safety Issue
Roadless Area Discussion
Temporary Forest Order (Step 2)
Overview of Fall Public Meetings – Grass Valley/Nevada City, Truckee, Foresthill Thanks to everyone who participated in the six meetings last fall to share ideas on possible trails to include in the designated motorized route system or concerns for adding these or any trails. We greatly appreciate the suggestions you made, your cooperative approach, and the thoughtful ideas expressed. Thanks especially go to each of the group leaders:
Yuba River – Rick Krause, Karen Cox, and John Timmer
Truckee and Sierraville – Stan Van Velsor and Pam Rocca/Don Virgo
American River – Kevin Greene, Ron Gould/Jim Johnson, and Stan Van Velsor
Roughly, over 300 people attended. There were over 100 routes discussed with over 100 miles suggested. These routes are shown on the TNF website via power point presentations, along with the notes from each of the groups explaining why these should or shouldn’t be added. (see www.fs.fed.us/r5/tahoe).
IDT Reviewing Routes Suggested by Public Using the comments, suggestions, and concerns identified at the public meetings, as well as letters sent in, the Forest Service Interdisciplinary Team has been reviewing each of the suggested routes; looking at the recreation opportunity each provides as well as any environmental concerns.
Resource maps and GIS layers are being used to review routes along with any potential opportunities or concerns based on the criteria suggested by the public and National guidelines. Examples include:
· Proximity to streams, spotted owl protected activity centers, goshawk
protected activity centers, historic or prehistoric archeological sites, special soil and erosion considerations, critical deer habitat, carnivore/furbearer network, known threatened, endangered, or sensitive plant or animal species sites, noxious weed locations, older forest habitat types, etc.
· Locations within or near Wilderness, Wild and Scenic River corridors,
Research Natural Areas, semi-primitive motorized or non-motorized areas, or Roadless Areas
· Impacts to private land
· Current recreation use on/near route
· Opportunities to improve designated trail experience or trail system
· User conflicts
· Dispersed recreation opportunities
· Direction in the Tahoe Land and Resource Management Plan and Sierra
Nevada Forest Plan Amendment
Proposed Action – Followed by 30-day Comment Period – This Spring Based on this ongoing review, the Forest Service will provide a proposed action map which will identify proposed roads, trails, and areas to be analyzed for inclusion in the existing motorized trail/route system as well as the long term prohibition of wheeled motor vehicles off designated routes. There will be a 30-day public comment period on the proposed action. This is expected to be available for comment later this spring.
Maps and the Notice of Intent will be available on the web for review.
Public Meetings to Introduce Proposed Action Three public meetings will be held in April to share the Forest Service proposal. The purpose of these public meetings will be to explain how the Forest Service developed this proposal and provide suggestions for reviewing and commenting on the proposal. This is not a hearing – oral comments will not be taken or recorded at this meeting.
Truckee – April 18 from 6:30 – 9:00 pm at the Hampton Inn, 11951 Hwy 267, between Joerger and Airport Roads.
Foresthill – April 24 from 6:30 – 9:00 pm at the Foresthill High School Gymnasium, Foresthill Road.
Grass Valley – April 26 from 6:30 – 9:00 pm. at the Banner Grange, 12629 McCourtney Road, past the Nevada County Fair Grounds.
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) To Be Developed – Additional Comment Period This Fall The Forest Service will then develop an Environmental Impact Statement to analyze various alternatives – based in part on the comments received in the spring. The Draft EIS is expected to be completed in the fall and available for comment for 45 days. The Final EIS is expected to be completed in early 2008.
Safety Concerns – Mixing Highway-Legal and Non-Highway-Legal Vehicles on the Same Routes In 2005, the Forest Service issued a National Travel Management Rule which will result in the designation of all roads, trails and areas open to motor vehicle use by vehicle class and time of year. The Rule further states that traffic on roads is subject to state traffic laws, except in cases where the Forest Service decides to allow both highway-legal and non-highway-legal motor vehicles. Such a decision is a “pre-emption” of state law which will be advised by engineering judgment or an engineering study and must be approved by the state. Under Federal policy, an engineering analysis must be completed by a qualified engineer assessing road conditions and the probability and severity of a crash before a decision can be made allowing mixed-use.
Engineering analyses will be completed for a variety of the roads that motorcycles and ATV’s are currently using on the TNF. It is expected that for roughly graded, high clearance roads, mixed use will be approved in most cases. On smoother surface, higher standard roads, mixed use will probably not be approved, as it is unlikely that the Forest Service will pre-empt state law in most situations. The full impact of this has not been fully analyzed, but Forest Service engineers and recreation specialists are currently assessing road and recreation safety features.
For the routes that are currently of high value to OHV users but don’t comply with state law, we can consider mitigations that would make them
available for use by non-highway legal vehicles. This will be one area
where we need to hear from OHV users during the comment periods.
Inventoried Roadless Areas
In a nutshell, the Forest Service identified potential roadless areas in the 1970’s for possible wilderness designation. Those areas that were not designated as wilderness are still considered as inventoried roadless areas, even though most include some roads or motorized trails. Many National initiatives, environmental reviews, and lawsuits have occurred in the last 30 years interpreting roadless policy. Based on the most recent legal decision, the Forest Service is currently operating under the January
2001 Roadless Area rule which prohibits building any road in a roadless area. Designating an existing route which has been used by motorized vehicles as part of the designated system is not prohibited, however, the Forest Service does need to consider impacts of the route on the roadless character of the area. The ID Team is currently reviewing the trails proposed by the public for impacts on roadless character if they are within a roadless area.
Temporary Forest Order (Step 2) Map - To Be Issued this Spring The Temporary Forest Order requiring motorized vehicles to stay on existing trails or routes is expected to be out this spring. The purpose of this step is to stop the proliferation of new motorized trails and will close the Forest to cross country travel in the short term while the Environmental Impact Statement and long-range Final Forest Order are being completed.
For questions, contact: Phil Horning, Project Coordinator (530) 478-6210, David Michael, Trails Coordinator (530) 478-6183 or Dave Arrasmith, IDT Leader (530) 478-6143. If you would know of someone that would like to be added to the mailing list, please have them email me their address or call me at the number listed below.
Thanks for your ongoing interest and involvement.
(See attached file: 07_winter_update_timeline.doc)
Ann Westling
Tahoe National Forest
Public Affairs Officer
(530) 478-6205