Hayman Burn Area Environmental Assessment released

[TJay]

I didn't see a thread elsewhere, so I'll throw this up. Sorry if it's a repost, but I think it deserves it.

The Hayman Burn Area Environment Assessment and the FS is accepting a new round of comments.

Link to the EA : http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/psicc/hayres/travel/roadsEA/RoadEADocument.pdf

I briefly skimmed the 112page doc tonight and they did include an alternative that certainly caters to us. I recommend everybody put comments in to strongly suggest that Alternative C is implemented. "Cuz Bill said so." :D

From the website:


The public is encouraged to submit their comments during the 30-day comment period, which begins on the July 15 release date. Comments received during the comment period will be considered in the final decision of the preferred Alternative.

You can fax, email, snail mail, or even submit comments on the website. Just do it after the 15th and before August 14th.

Link to the Hayman Burn Area site too.
http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/psicc/hayres/travel

[MountainJeep]

This is, in my opinion, the single most important document for all of us to read, and take action upon.

We must fight to keep this area open (alternative B is great but don't count on it, Alternative C is our best compromise) in order to lessen the strain on the other front range accessible forest serevice roads.

Please take action.

Bill

[MountainJeep]

OK I have read the EA, and I must say that the USFS has listened to us. We made our voices heard, they also acknowledged our continued value to stewardship of the area. I seriously see this as a job well done. Thanks to all 1,500 people who gave their input.


We have won the war, while losing as few battles.


Page 4-60 Part of the conclusion....This is the bottom line.

"Alternative C will reopen 79 percent of the total 269 classified road miles in the area. Areas that will be open to motorized use include the upper part of Corral Creek, Longwater Gulch, and Hackett Gulch. Areas that will remian closed to motorized use to address resource concerns incluse Metberry Gulch, Northrup, Helen's Rock, and Turkey Creek."

I would encourage everyone to submit comments in support of Aternative C. Do not allow your wishes for alternative B to dilute our input. If we do not put forth a united front then another alternative could gain more support that would further reduce our access to this site. Alternative C is an excellent comprimise in what could have been a full loss for us.

Again...The USFS is proposing Alternative C for implimentation and I believe, in my professional opinion, that this is a sound balance for use and conservation.

Please read it for yourselves!!!!!

Bill Gilmore
Environmental Manager
Raytheon Polar Services
United States Antarctic Program

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid101/p711bbacf1d489543c3572b79b103786e/f9d2cd36.jpg

[TJay]

I'll edit my post to recommend Alternative C. B is by far the choice for us from a 4x4 community perspective, but I can certainly understand why we need to get behind the most feasible choice and make comments on it.

[Murfman]

link for the Hayman EA is broken

[TJay]

I don't know what to say. It works for me. It's a rather large PDF file so it may take a few minutes for acrobat to initialize and load the file.

Ahh.. the other link. Fixed in the original post.

[jumpinNrollin]

Done and "C" it is. Thanks for keeping us updated on this issue.

[Big Dave]

I'm printing the whole thing out, all 121 pages!! :eek:

I should be done reading it sometime next week, lol.

[Hippie]

I would encourage everyone to submit comments in support of Aternative C. Do not allow your wishes for alternative B to dilute our input. If we do not put forth a united front then another alternative could gain more support that would further reduce our access to this site. Alternative C is an excellent comprimise in what could have been a full loss for us.

Again...The USFS is proposing Alternative C for implimentation and I believe, in my professional opinion, that this is a sound balance for use and conservation.

Please read it for yourselves!!!!!

Bill Gilmore
Environmental Manager
Raytheon Polar Services
United States Antarctic Program

Just submitted my .02 for C - your right while b is appealling C is a very fair compromise.

Bill - Thank you for your time & effort:beer:

[karstman]

This needs a bump TTT.
Get your comments in!

[TJay]

Bumping again. Deadline is near. Please put in your comments!

[tx4wheeler]

I posted my comments voting for alternative "C". I don't live in the Springs anymore, but I enjoyed wheeling in the area. Hopefully the AF will decide to send me back to Colorado. I have had enough of Louisiana in the past 10 months to last a lifetime.

Rob

Robert Hutson (TX4Wheeler)
1978 Ford Bronco
460, C-6, D60 Front with ARB and 35 spline outers, D70 rear, disk brakes, welded diff, 7" lift, 38.5X14.50 TSL/SX's, Warn 8274 winch, Hydro Assist steering. http://www.geocities.com/tx4wheeler1

[Red_Chili]

I am very sorry that I commented in favor of Alternative C. There were a number of factors of which I was unaware, specifically (from Gene King, CoAo4WDClubs):

*The per mile cost of maintenance on the level 2 roads (4x4) in Alternative B are considerable less than the other alternatives.
*If the cost per mile for maintenance of level 2 roads (4x4) is $409, why is the maintenance cost of a level 1 road (closed) more at $463 per mile????
*Alternative B is not likely to affect the Preble?s Meadow Jumping Mouse.
*The implementation costs of Alternative B are half the cost of alternatives C and D.
*Alternative B will increase opportunities for specialized (non-stock) 4x4?s.
*Alternative B will provide faster response times to any fire incident due to more road access.
*It is estimated that the cost to implement Alternative B will be $669,010, but Alternative C will cost $1.7 MILLION and Alternative D will cost $1.4 MILLION!
*The reduction of the amount of roads available for recreational use in Alternatives C and D may cause overcrowding and increased wear and tear to the roads.
*Alternative B will reopen the majority of classified roads that were open before the fire. By choosing Alternative B this will help prevent overcrowding that may occur if alternative C or D is implemented
*Alternative B will not affect any Heritage sites.
*Alternative B could potentially speed up fire suppression response time as fire personnel would not have to deal with locked gates.
*No proposed activities in Alternative B would have an adverse effect on wildlife.

I intend to rectify the situation in new comments.