Several folks from Colorado Four Wheelers and Big Horn 4×4 were at the Forest Service meeting on Thursday evening. The meeting did not have a formal presentation but did provide full size maps to review the various proposed trail/road closures and/or change designations. This is the beginning of the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) study effort that typically takes five years. The Forest Service will take all of the comments and use them to develop recommendations or decisions as part of the NEPA process to ultimately determine what roads/trails will be closed or their use designations be changed. The use designation affects our group as some roads/trails could be changed to allow only smaller ATVs etc. to use them and not full size, off road vehicle use—devils is in the details…
INTIAL COMMENTS ARE DUE 8 SEP 2016!!!
As some others that have posted information as to what we can do: Go the web site and review the various pages and associated data http://www.psitravelmanagement.org/ Review the options shown on the Pike and San Isabell Forests, Motor Vehicle Use Maps and the proposed options A, B, C, and D and provide specific comments for a given road or trail using the numerical identification for the trial such as 212A or 204.
From the PSI website:
If submitting attachments, acceptable file types include PDF, Microsoft Word, and rich text format.
Write comments to:
Pike & San Isabel National Forests
2840 Kachina Dr. Pueblo, CO 81008
Fax comments to 719-553-1440 with PSI Travel Management in the subject line.
BEST PRACTICES FOR SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS
Get involved early and throughout the process so the agency will incorporate your concerns into the final decision
State your case—explain who you are, what your relationship is to the undertaking or proposed action, and how it might affect your use of federal lands or resources
Start on a good note by identifying the positive elements of the proposed action
Clearly identify problems with the proposed action and offer potential solutions
Identify the beneficial components in each alternative, particularly those that are common to, or should be common to, all alternatives
Suggest reasonable alternatives that have yet to be identified or elements that could incorporated into existing alternatives
Support your arguments with verifiable information or data from reputable sources
If available, provide the latest scientific research relevant to the undertaking
Identify gaps in the proposed analyses, methodology, or assumptions put forward in the NEPA documents
Link your specific comments to maps or other location information that explains where and how you use the relevant routes or land under consideration