Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

California Piutes & Kennedy Mdws Going

Recommended Posts

This map is part of the Sequoia Travel Analysis Project (TAP) process and is worth review and public comment but.....


The map directly relates to the Road Analysis Project (RAP) and as such it's scope it limited to the roads (maintenance level 1-5 FS inventoried roads) and does not include trails.


This is part of the FS's response to lower future budgets by reducing the road system miles. This is still a large concern for the motorized users and comments to the forest supporting what roads should remain open and why are very helpful. The comment period ends Sept. 20.


Some general thoughts;


Instead of closing/decommission roads outright consider reducing the maintenance level (where appropriate) to reduce maintenance costs


If it is determined a road should be closed consider retaining the route as a trail be it 4X4, ATV or MC.


More info here; http://stewardsofthesequoia.org/Alert_RoadPlanSubpartA.html


and maps and comment form here; http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/sequoia/landmanagement/planning/?cid=stelprdb5435007


I know it's a major pile of crap and headache but it is how the system works, a little time now could change the future.



  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that clarification BDM.  I saw these earlier today after the email from Chris over at SOS. 


I am concerned that the jeep trails that go to to Sherman Peak are not included in that map.  I understand that motorcycle trails are not considered roads in the context of a roadless area, but what about those jeep trails.


The maps are rather poor.  I found several roads that are not in the proper place.


The thing that really irks me is I thought that we just went through this a few years back with the original travel management plan.  It sure looks like they want to close a ton of roads.  Hunters are sure to be impacted big time with these proposals. 


It's also the incrementalism that we have all seen too many times.  Give them enough time and all USFS and BLM land will be wilderness or managed as if it were wilderness. 


I got real pissed off when I first looked at those maps.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am fairly sure this material is for the road network only and that 4X4 routes are not part of this (Subpart A) which is why they are not depicted on the linked maps.

For example in addition to the routes you pointed out you will notice that the western portion of the Keysville Rd. (the Freeway Ridge area) are not show for the same reason.


This is still important for many types of forest recreation like driving for pleasure, hunting/fishing, camping and on and on. It is also relevant for the off-road and dual sport users as we all utilize forest roads for access to trails and for loop opportunities.


The anti-access folks love this because they would like the budget cuts to equate directly into decommissioning miles of roads and we (SOS) think their are other options which should be considered as cost cutting measures while still preserving access. Once a route is identified for decommissioning the likelihood of it every being reopened or converted to a trail are near zero.


Both Chris and I have objected to the incredibly short 10 day (Sept. 10-20) comment period for a road network which totals over 1,600 miles. One hope is that the anti-access folks will also have difficulty generating meaningful comments in such a shore time frame.


If you see something on the map data which you think is inaccurate or has been omitted please submit a comment to that effect, the form is on the Sequoia TAP page and I think it is a PDF Form which is easy to fill out and submit electronically. And support Stewards of the Sequoia, they have far and away the best record of keeping routes open. Or better yet ride the Chaparrals DS ride (Piutes & Greenhorns) next weekend and go for a fantastic ride and support SOS at the same time (they are a strong supporter of SOS).


Unfortunately the travel management process is a marathon not a sprint.



Edited by BDM

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I received the same info from SOS.  Am I looking at it wrong or is Sherman Pass Rd. in red/a high risk road?


The whole deal/process/map is confusing as hell, whether intentional or not.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it can be hard to understand the process and documents but this one is not so bad, stick with me here.


On the Sequoia TAP page I linked (and is linked from the Sequoia homepage) you will see 3 types of maps listed for each of 3 areas;


Road Benefits map

Road Risks map

Road Opportunities map


and the areas are;


Northern Sequoia

Southern Sequoia

Lake Isabella


Each map uses 3 colors to show the FS's analysis  of the roads and they are fairly intuitive;


Green is good

Yellow is fair

Red is bad


In the case bobc1 has pointed out, the Sherman Pass Rd (22S05, access to KM) is;


Shown in red on the "Risk" map

Shown in yellow on the "Opportunities" map

Shown in green on the "Benefits" map


The same is true for Rancharia Rd (25S15) in the Greenhorn area. Now you have the information needed to write a comment however if you want to look a little deeper it gets just a tick harder. In order to see what contributed to a road's scoring you need to look at the PDF of the analysis spreadsheet (http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5435223.pdf) found on the same FS TAP page, which lists all the component scores for each road. You might need a better PDF viewer then Adobe Reader 10 or 11 (see P.S. below).


This is not as hard as it sounds, open 1 or more of the maps and the spreadsheet and do a PDF document search for the road number in the spreadsheet and you can review what scores contributed to the roads color. For both Sherman and Rancharia the "Aquatic Composite" (think runoff & erosion) number is quite high. A lot goes into this and never say never but I highly doubt either Sherman (44 miles) or Rancharia (15 miles) are going anywhere. I think green roads on the "Benefits" map are pretty safe, the yellow less so and the red will likely be a problem (unless said road is green on both the "Risk" & "Opportunities" map).


So open the "Benefits" map and if you see a road you care about or think is important that is red or yellow fill out a the comment form and email it.




P.S. Adobe Reader 9+ sucks nickles - inflexible, bloated (480mb!) and flat chokes on bigger files, I am very happy with "PDFXCHANGE VIEWER" downloaded directly from the Tracker Software homepage. Yes it's free!

Edited by BDM

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was part of the Colorado roadless rule 36CFR294.46

(f) Motorized access. Nothing in this subpart shall be construed as limiting the authority of the responsible official to approve existing and future motorized access not requiring road construction or reconstruction in Colorado Roadless Areas associated with grazing permits, special use authorizations, and other authorizations

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this