Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Tahoe Forest Plan Letter Deadline 12/26/08

Recommended Posts

The Deadline to Submit your letters to protest the proposed Tahoe Forest DEIS Plan is 12/26/08.

Please try to get at least a couple letters off by email that -

- Object to the plan to follow a "Calendar Based Winter Closure" and recommend that the Tahoe Forest follow a "Rainfall Based Wet Weather Closure" as already currently being used successfully in Rock Creek (GeorgeTown), Cow Mountain and Stonyford.

All Comment Letters must be received no later that December 26th 2008 can be sent by Email To: tnf_rte_desig@fs.fed.us and fotfa@fotfa.com

Related TT Links -



with comments from BRC:


  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sample Copy of actual letter just emailed that took about 5 to 10 minutes:


Tahoe National Forest – DEIS Proposed Plan

c/o Travel Management Team

631 Coyote Street

Nevada City, CA. 95959

We are not in agreement with the plan to implement the “Wet weather seasonal closures of approximately 2,400 miles of native surface (dirt) roads and trails would be imposed. These additional wet weather seasonal restrictions are imposed to minimize erosion and protect water quality” as proposed in the Tahoe Forest DEIS.

There are indications that this is a shorthand easy solution for the Forest Service instead of the managing of the Forest for which our tax and registration dollars are supposed to be funding.

The Forest needs to be managed Not Closed for 4 months out of the year regardless of actual rainfall.

There are several working examples of “Rainfall Based Wet Weather” closures for a 48 hour “Dry Out Period” to protect the Trail Systems. Georgetown, Rock Creek, Stonyford, Mendocino National Forest are just a few areas that have a successful temporary wet weather closure policy. This type of plan allows the Managed use of the Forests with community of cooperation with the Forest Management and the OHV enthusiasts. Implementing a similar plan in the Foresthill (Sugar Pine - Parker Flat – China Wall) OHV Area would enhance the shared responsibility of both the Forest Service and the OHV Community. There are also many other OHV recreation areas that are historically useable during the proposed closure period and this needs to be reconsidered.

In simple words, OHV Recreationists currently care about and volunteer to assist in maintaining the Forest Trail Systems that we use. The Forest Service benefits from this shared sense of “community” with greater care and responsibility among the OHV trail users.

Let’s do this through a managed plan; not a calendar closure.

Do Not Pass the “wet weather seasonal closure” because it will create more problems and expenses if it passes and it will alienate the good people within the OHV community.

Name & Address

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I finally got my comments sent in today, might as well wait until the last minute. Five pages that I'm pretty sure will be ignored, sets me up to file an appeal when they release the FEIS, which will probably be very similar to the final decision on the Eldorado .......... massive trail closures, seasonal closure for at least a few months each year regardless of conditions, etc. :busted:

Thanks Kevin L for the help on the route specific comments, YOU DA MAN! :moon:

  • Like 2

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep sending in comments. I have been told because of the date being so close to Christmas, they are going to accept comments through Monday.

Remember, late comments are better than no comments at all.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent mine last night...

In response to the proposed Travel Management Plan for the Tahoe National Forest I, have many concerns.

As an avid outdoors enthusiast I have enjoyed the Tahoe National Forest during each of the four seasons, be it for running, cross country skiing, roadside camping, or motorized recreation. The proposed plan concerns me on many levels.

My first concern is that the proposed Route Management Plan (RMP) will impose a seasonal closure from January 1st to April 31st each year. This seasonal closure will be implemented regardless of current conditions and releases the Forest Service from managing the Public Lands for access, and therefore from the community. The area of concern for my family is the established OHV area of Foresthill. Foresthill has been my family’s favorite recreation area for the past 15 years. We enjoy the camping, trail access, and supporting the local economy during our visits (which is ~30 miles from our home in El Dorado Hills, CA). The mandatory four months closure of Foresthill (trails 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6) that you are supporting is regardless of the ground conditions. In the past decade we have seen record precipitation levels, as well as record low precipitations levels. As is nature, we need to base our actions on the current terrain conditions. As such, I advocate that the Tahoe National Forrest Service adopt a Wet Weather Management Plan such as those at Georgetown (located in the El Dorado National Forest), Stonyford (located in the Mendocino National Forest), Penny Pines (in the Grindstone, Mendocino National Forest), and Cow Mountain, Mammoth Bar, Hollister, Oceano Dunes recreational areas in California.

These areas impose closures based upon precipitation events that accumulate during a weather event. If the weather event is in accumulation of .5in. (first precipitation event after a dry weather pattern), or 1.5 in. of precipitation (during an event of +32 degrees Fahrenheit), or during an event of 2 in. of precipitation (during an event of less then 32 degrees Fahrenheit) within 24 hours, these public lands are closed. These lands are closed for a +32 Fahrenheit event for 48 hours of non-precipitation. If any precipitation occurs during this time period, then the time clock is reset for 48 hours, and so forth, until the mandate is met. For the 2 inches of precipitation that occurred less than a 32 degrees Fahrenheit event, the mandate is that the accumulation shall have passed and that the trails can support the travel.

It is my opinion that the Tahoe National Forest Route Management Plan shall adopt the established OHV management plans of the El Dorado, Mendocino, and of California for the sustainable OHV area in your management area. In the principal of land management, it is of utmost of importance that stewardship is not in closure but of one of responsibility and management.

With regards,

John Starbuck

CTA iPLM Application Administrator

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