View Single Post
Old 08-18-2011, 11:58 PM
paulp575 paulp575 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 69
Default Re: Okanogan-Wenatchee and Colville NFs Forest Plan Revision

Originally Posted by WAYCRAZY View Post
Well I did attend the Yakima meeting . The place was packed. The USFS did there usual Job at skirting and squirming around what they were up to. Most of the room was interested how many roads and trails that would be closed . The USFS answered this question with ...And in some factual way that is a true answer. But this Forest plan revision is the frame work on which land closures will be made in the travel management. They also said that the Forest plan revision wouldn't be finished by the time the Travel management was finished .
Interesting comments. It appears the OK-WEN NF is being managened quite differently than the Colville. Although the Colville has officially completed thier "forest-wide" TMP, they have stated and proven (at least via their first EIS released since completing the forest-wide TMP) they are not finished. They are now looking at individual areas of the forest where they can create a "good rider experience." Basically they want to create loops and connecting trails rather than many of the current "out and back" trails.

Originally Posted by WAYCRAZY View Post
So there shouldn't be any worries. But they are working closely together to make sure all the Travel management would coincide with the forest plan revision. So that tells me that the USFS has a end game plan and they are being patient enough to get all the nails properly pounded in the coffin so they don't come loose. And as said earlier in the discussion about what areas are getting zoned as what. Such as most of the Little Naches is going to be active restoration 2. Which will give the USFS the right to make a Wheeling season like they do a hunting season. Unlike the way it is managed now were they can only do emergency forest order closures.
That's a really different interpretation of the Active restoration 2 that I'm reading in the Colville Proposed Action. In there, they state the 2 means roads would be limited to an average of 2 miles per square mile (same with the Active Restoration 2, but 3 miles per square mile). In the "Background to the Proposed Actions" sections (both AR 2 and AR 3), they state "...this management area will be defined by roaded landscapes in areas...". I don't know if you are a 4x4er, an ATVer, or a dirt biker, but as a 4x4er I am interested in trails, not roads so your definition of potentially open or closed areas may be different. Trails and roads are not the same - according to the USFS personnel at the Spokane meeting.

Have you sat down and read through the ENTIRE Proposed Action and downloaded any of the GIS files? If not, I'd encourage you to do this. They have GIS files that are compatible with Google Eearth. Although those files are incompelete - as far as delineating the specific areas by textual reference, you can at least physically see the areas and how they intend to classify them.

If you need some help with the GIS data files, please e-mail me and I'll do what I can.
Spokane WA
07 Jeep Rubicon AT Soft top

Member of:
Washington Off Highway Vehicle Alliance (WOHVA
North Idaho Trail Blazers (NITB;
Reply With Quote