|
|
|
|
Appalachian Mountain Club's "Call to Action: The White Mountain National Forest" - - another example of the anti-OHV groups "not getting it."
UPDATE 5/17:
COMMENT PERIOD EXTENDED TO 5/23/00.A comment period runs into May 2000 in which we have the opportunity to make ATV and trail motorcyclists' values known to USFS planners. Your reasonable input will help offset the emotional anti-OHV groups' comments that may keep OHV access from even being considered for the 800,000-acre WMNF.
Many OHV riders and non-riders alike know that it is reasonable to share the outdoors with all users, that the public lands are not the domain of a few special user classes, and also understand that the user-conflict that inspire the complaints of the anti-OHV crowd would be reduced if trails were designated in areas that non-motorized users would not be disturbed by OHV activity.
The White Mountain National Forest authorities are proposing only to investigate the possibility of wheeled-OHV access to the forest, where none exists today, and to evaluate the potential for access and make an appropriate response to the many requests for access. We contend that the professionals in the USFS are well-equipped to determine the feasibility of access and that opposition by anti-OHV groups is counterproductive to the health of the forest. Further counterpoint to AMC's "Call to Action" continues below.
"The Crown Jewel of the Northeast"
"What's at Risk in the Whites?" Here's what the AMC thinks will be ruined:
Again we say, with 800,000 acres available how can all these valid values not be protected at the same time as providing for OHV recreation? The USFS would not allow OHV access without careful consideration of potential conflicts with other user groups' values.
"The Whites in the Crossfire!" (A pattern of overreaction is appearing, yes?)
"Such a proposal should be discouraged because ORVs displace and compact soil, damage vegetation, disturb and kill wildlife, destroy habitat, and create noise and air pollution."
The usual hyperbole (overstatement). . .
"Given how rare it is to find old-growth and remote forest habitat in the Northeast, the Forest Service should place a high priority on protecting forest areas that cannot be reached by existing roads."
And we respond same as above. The USFS would not be so dumb as to put trails through unique and old growth areas but would probably designate trails in areas where timber harvest is historically in active rotation.
What You Can Do
The official 60-day comment period, running from March 9 to May 8, poses your best opportunity for your pro-OHV comments to be heard.
Find Out More...
Read AMC's full document on this matter, from their perspective... "Full text of this Call to Action".
Copy and Paste this text into an e-mail message to forestplan/r9_whitemtn@fs.fed.us or use your own creativity. Use a subject like "Pro-OHV comment" and keep it positive. The USFS planners are sticking their necks out in considering OHV-access to WMNF and need to be supported and encouraged for doing so.
TO:
Forest Planning
White Mountain National Forest
719 N. Main St.
Laconia, NH 03236
forestplan/r9_whitemtn@fs.fed.us
FROM:
[your name]
[your address]
[your phone number]
[your e-mail address]
----------------------------------
Dear Forest Service Planners,
I am writing to you to express my support of proposals to investigate and create ATV and off-highway motorcycle access opportunities within the White Mountain National Forest.
I am aware of organized efforts by OHV-access opponents to strike down any and all OHV access to WMNF. We believe that they are working counterproductively to what you as professional forest managers know to be true about managing access, ensuring safety, and keeping the forest healthy:
* Managing OHV recreation, rather that denying the activity, will result in displacing unauthorized OHV use and the channeling of riders to areas that can sustain such use.
* In a forest with the area of Rhode Island owned by all people of the Nation, it is simply selfish for any one group to claim it has the singular right of access over any other kind. In such a large tract, there certainly must be at least a few areas which can sustain intensive use, such as forestry zones, which would be appropriate for designating ATV/OHM trails. Consider that a ten-mile ATV trail at 4 feet wide covers only 5 acres of land. If only a 200-mile trail system was developed, only 100 acres or 0.013% of the total area of the WMNF would be utilized for this purpose.
* Designating ATV/OHM trails set apart from, and with the fewest intersection with non-motorized trails, will minimize inter-user group conflicts and complaints, such which could be the main reason behind anti-OHV sentiments directed toward your staff.
Thank you for your understanding in this matter.
This is the text from the USFS regarding OHV access.
You will see that it does not say we are getting trails, only that they are investigating the possibility. AMC's reaction is very strong indeed as they just plain don't think we deserve even a chance to talk about the potential of access to "their" public lands.
Following excerpt are from: http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/white/3_WM_fpr_Web/forest_plan/revision/other_documents/nfc_final_02142000.htm#_Toc475332368
Motorized Use
Off Road Vehicles (summer use)
ORV (Off Road Vehicles) use is commonly referenced as summer use or off-snow use. ORVs represent a range of vehicles including motorcycles, "dirt bikes", 3 and 4-wheeled ATV's, and jeep type vehicles. Each of these types has different impacts on the environment. The Forest Plan revision would evaluate areas where the different types of ORV uses are compatible with ecological concerns. The Forest would work with the ORV and other user groups to develop alternatives that would address a range of ORV opportunities. Within these alternatives any use would be restricted to designated trails and cross county use would be prohibited. The analysis would consider both ecological and social impacts of providing and not providing various ORV opportunities.
Here's what AMA has to say about this matter:
From: Terry Cook
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2000 2:49 PM
Subject: AMA Community Council Notice - New England
SITUATION
The US Forest Service is preparing a Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the White Mountain National Forest.
The Forest Plan guides the overall management of the Forest. Primary decisions are made in the Forest Plan including Forest wide multiple-use goals and objectives, management area direction and recommendations to Congress concerning OHV usage in this particular forest.
HISTORY
The need to revise the Forest Plan is based on changed public expectations, changing agency direction, monitoring and evaluations, and the availability of new information. Specific indicators of the need are:
(1) There is growing demand for all recreation uses on the Forest. There is demand for types of recreation uses (OHV) on the Forest that are not currently being provided;
(2) Agency goals and objectives, along with other national guidance (President Clinton's Roadless Initiative & Heritage Forest Campaign) for strategic plans and programs, have changed since 1986;
(3) Results of monitoring and evaluation suggest the need for revision; and
(4) A vast amount of new scientific information has been published since 1986, including technical reports published from research by the Forest Service, as well as universities and organizations that study forest ecosystems and forest management.
The process of revising the Forest Plan will focus on those items that have been identified as most in need of revision. To provide guidance for developing Forest Plan goals and direction the Forest developed a statement describing the role of the Forest in New England, which is basically to manage the White Mountain National Forest under the concept of ecosystem, social and economic sustainability. The issues identified through initial public outreach have been used to identify 23 Revision Topics. The 23 topics which are of interest to OHV access include Recreation Opportunities and Use, Roadless Areas, Roads and Special Uses.
Additional detail on the Revision Topics is available on request, in the from of the document titled "Need for Change, Description of Proposal for Revising the White Mountain National Forest''. You are encouraged to review this additional document prior to commenting on the Notice of Intent. You may request the additional information by calling the phone number listed below, by writing or e-mailing to the addresses listed in this notice, or by accessing the Forest Service web page.
A range of alternatives will be considered when revising the Forest Plan. The alternatives will address different options to resolve concerns raised as revision topics listed above and to fulfill the purpose and need. A "no-action alternative'' is required, meaning the management would continue under the existing Forest Plan. Alternatives will provide different ways to address and respond to public issues, management concerns, and resource opportunities identified during the scoping process.
The alternatives will display different mixes of recreation opportunities and experiences. Management of roadless areas will vary by the objectives of any particular alternatives, physical criteria for evaluating each individual roadless area, and public input. In addition, the alternatives will incorporate a range of Wilderness recommendations.
The environmental analysis and decision-making process will include many opportunities for public participation and comment so that people interested in this proposal may contribute to the final decision. The draft environmental impact statement is tentatively scheduled for release in September 2001. The final environmental impact statement and decision are scheduled for August 2002.
WHAT TO DO
The Forest Service is now soliciting comments and suggestions from individuals, state and local governments, American Indians, federal agencies, and organizations on the scope of the analysis to be included in the draft environmental impact statement for the revised Forest Plan. To be most useful, your comments should focus on (1) the proposed revision topics, (2) issues that you are concerned about that are not addressed in this notice, and (3) possible alternatives for addressing the 23 revision topics.
They will provide the public with general notices on opportunities to participate through mailings, news releases, and public meetings. In addition formal opportunities for public comment will be considered received at any time throughout the revision process.
This is the opportunity for all OHV enthusiasts and concerned AMA members to make a proactive impact on the process. If we do not provide sufficient comment the Forest Service must rely on the comment they receive from the preservationist community.
WHERE TO GO
The Forest Service will host a series of meetings to (1) Present and clarify proposed changes to the forest plan; (2) describe ways that individuals can respond to this notice of intent; and (3) accept comments from the public on the proposal for revising the Forest Plan. Forest personnel will be available at the following times and locations to answer questions and accept input about this Notice of Intent.
Please keep the AMA Government Relations Department aprised of any of these meetings you might attend. You can contact Royce Wood at 614-856-1900 or via e-mail at rwood@ama-cycle.org.
SEND WRITTEN COMMENTS TO:
Forest Planning, White Mountain National Forest, 719 N. Main St., Laconia, NH 03236. Or direct electronic mail to: forestplan/r9_whitemtn@fs.fed.us
Comments on this Notice of Intent should be received in writing by May 9, 2000.
Forward a copy of your comment to Royce Wood, Legislative Affairs Specialist, American Motorcyclist Association, 13515 Yarmouth Drive, Pickerington, OH 43147 or at the e-mail address above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Bryan Armel, Forest Planner, at (603) 528-8788. TDD (603) 528-8722. E-mail address: forestplan/r9_whitemtn@fs.fed.us or access the Forest web page at www.fs.fed.us/r9/white.
And an updated release says…
SITUATION
The US Forest Service published a White Mountain National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000 and the AMA sent out an AMA Community Council Notice concerning this and the informational meetings that were held for this.
The Forest Service is extending the public comment period on that notice of Intent. A 14 day extension of the public comment period was given in response to comments from the public requesting additional time to fully analyze the issues and prepare comprehensive comments. The fourteen (14) day extensions starts immediately after the initial public comment period that ends May 9, 2000. The fourteen (14) day extension of the public comment period starts May 10, 2000 and ends May 23, 2000.
WHAT TO DO
The Forest Service is now soliciting comments and suggestions from individuals, state and local governments, American Indians, federal agencies, and organizations on the scope of the analysis to be included in the draft environmental impact statement for the revised Forest Plan. To be most useful, your comments should focus on (1) the proposed revision topics, (2) issues that you are concerned about that are not addressed in this notice, and (3) possible alternatives for addressing the 23 revision topics.
This is the opportunity for all OHV enthusiasts and concerned AMA members to make a proactive impact on the process. If we do not provide sufficient comment the Forest Service must rely on the comment they receive from the preservationist community.
Forward a copy of your comment to Royce Wood, Legislative Affairs Specialist, American Motorcyclist Association, 13515 Yarmouth Drive, Pickerington, OH 43147 or at rwood@ama-cycle.org.
DATES
Comments on the Notice of Intent should be received in writing by May 23, 2000.
ADDRESSES
Send written comments to: Forest Planning
White Mountain National Forest
719 N. Main St.
Laconia, NH 03246.
Or direct electronic mail to: mwoodbury@fs.fed.us.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Bryan Armel, Forest Planner, at (603) 528-8788. TDD (603) 528-8722. E-mail address: barmel@fs.fed.us.
******************************************
Terry Lee Cook
Government Relations Specialist
American Motorcyclist Association
13515 Yarmouth Drive
Pickerington, Ohio 43147
http://www.AMADirectlink.com
Update 5/17/00
Copyright 2000, NYSORVA, Inc. All rights reserved.
