Threat of closures in the Sierras

[FishPOET]

The Fish and Game Dept is trying to designate critical habitat in the Sierras.

https://www.federalregister.gov/arti...vada#addresses

If this action passes OHV trails will be closed and lost forever. Rumor has it that if this critical habitat gets designated the Dusy will be among the closures.

Unfortunately you need to comment now as the comment period closes tomorrow. Not sure how this stuff goes undetected by our so called state OHV organizations.

With zero time to prepare I honestly don't have any idea what comments need to be made that will actually make a difference.

Tom McClintock's Floor Speech:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0imd...fIzKoXh2Xws_pw

Link for attachment
http://www.defendruralamerica.com/DRA/FrogsToads.html

[RAT]

Well,
I sent a comment but I don't think it got there in time. Which sucks because I commented about how this was not made public in this area in a time frame that allowed for us to comment. I'm pissed. If we loose these areas then everything we fought for up to now is in jeopardy. I'm researching websites to see who if anyone has been on top of this in the Sierra Forest. I'm sure the club that adopted Dusy is freaking out.

[RAT]

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Designation of Critical Habitat for the Sierra Nevada Yellow-legged Frog, the Northern Distinct Population Segment of the Mountain Yellow-legged Frog, and the Yosemite Toad


Here is what I sent. It's difficult to express what I want to say when they hold the character count to 2000. Let's hope others in the affected area are taking action. I'm sure they are.

Agency: FWS
Document ID: FWS-R8-ES-2012-0074-0001

To whom it concerns,
I am a member of the San Bernardino National Forest Adopt A Trail program. I have seen many proposals such as this, attempting to close off thousands of acres of wild, wonderful country to public use. I have challenged decisions (resolution to appeal number 13-05-00-0011-A215 by Kurt Kauffman on the Habitat Restoration in the Big Bear Watershed project) and seen it through the entire process of comments, follow up, Appeals and resolution. Throughout my time volunteering the one thing that has been a constant is the US Forest Service's lack of responsibility in making these decisions available to the public for comment. The only way I found out about this is from a friend that works on the Dusy Ershim trail in the Sierra National Forest. It seems the Forest Service does not realize that decisions they make affect not only the local economies, hobbyists and others who enjoy these areas locally, but nationally and world wide as well. We the People are the true owners of PUBLIC lands. The Forest Service is supposed to be the stewards of the land, protecting it for those who want to recreate in and on it.
Now I understand, as do all responsible off roaders, motor cycle riders and hikers that we need to protect the environment; we also understand that there are creatures out there that need to be protected. But the extreme measures that the Forest Service takes in these matters is overkill of the worst kind. In the SBNF, our AAT group brought a back country trail back from the brink of a devastating wild fire. The reasoning at the time was that this area would never be opened to the public again due to unsafe hazard trees, hydrology/biology issues. We found a way to work together to keep the area open while protecting the wildlife and water quality. I know the Sierra NF can do the same. I vehemently oppose this proposal and ask that I have the opportunity to comment further on this in the future. There IS a better way.

Thanks,
Kurt Kauffman
MJR AAT

[RAT]

Here is the Cliff Notes view of the ruling:
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, propose to designate critical habitat for the Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog, the northern distinct population segment (DPS) (populations that occur north of the Tehachapi Mountains) of the mountain yellow-legged frog, and the Yosemite toad under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). In total, we propose to designate as critical habitat approximately 447,341 hectares (1,105,400 acres) for the Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog in Butte, Plumas, Lassen, Sierra, Nevada, Placer, El Dorado, Amador, Calaveras, Alpine, Mariposa, Mono, Madera, Tuolumne, Fresno, and Inyo Counties, California; approximately 89,637 hectares (221,498 acres) for the northern DPS of the mountain yellow-legged frog in Fresno and Tulare Counties, California; and approximately 303,889 hectares (750,926 acres) for the Yosemite toad in Alpine, Tuolumne, Mono, Mariposa, Madera, Fresno, and Inyo Counties, California.

Right at 2,000,000 acres are proposed to be closed to off road access of any kind (except official). Hiking and horseback seem to have dodged this bullet. I'm still reading though.

[inVERt'D]

No one with any sense of measure or proportionality could fail to see how ludicrous it would be to close off 2 million acres for the sake of a stupid frog and toad. The frog and toad are mere pretexts for their agenda, and they are also a good indicator is how asinine the situation has become here.

[curtis]

I know some think I'm a little extreme in my views. But The government is going to keep doing this Land and power grab until you people say enough is enough. Some day it will be to late if not already. I have watched this decline for almost 50 years and it has not changed.

[inVERt'D]

It is part of a larger pattern, Curtis, a pattern that covers most of the world and human history. This pattern is of a relative few elitists conniving, scheming, lying, cheating, and killing until their dominion is made up of only their property (damned near everything), their soldiers, servants, and unlanded serfs. Really, their methods haven't even changed very much except to be updated with the times. This crap has almost always been done with some pretense of the public good. Maybe my view is extreme, but iwhen extreme means not ignorant or brainwashed, I'll wear that label gladly.

I commented:

This proposed rule would close off about 2 million acres of public land to vehicular traffic and to many uses and forms of recreational enjoyment. Essentially, it closes most of these public lands to most of the public, except those who have the time and ability to traverse them on foot or on horseback. This very significant, if not radical set of closures is being proposed for the sake of a couple of frogs and a toad. How and if these obscure amphibians would even benefit from said closures is a dubious matter at best, and as such, will be difficult to measure.

What this proposal reveals is that the Fish and Wildlife Service has lost all sense of measure and proportionality, and has in fact adopted a stance which is inimical to the public it was created to serve.

Bet I'll win a few B.S. agency friends with that

[FishPOET]

I guess there are two that we need to comment on. Damn this is confusing.

Go to www.regulations.gov, in search box type in:

FWS-R8-ES-2012-0100-0001

FWS-R8-ES-2012-0074-0196

[RAT]

I guess there are two that we need to comment on. Damn this is confusing.

Go to www.regulations.gov, in search box type in:

FWS-R8-ES-2012-0100-0001

FWS-R8-ES-2012-0074-0196

This one FWS-R8-ES-2012-0074-0196 is a general portal comment area. You can make a comment here and also at the other portal which is the actual Ruling comment section. There you can read the ruling in it's entirety. Please read it before commenting. Please make informed comments and use any documented experience or other information that will be seen as a positive response, not an attack.

Thanks,
Kurt

[curtis]

Looks like the Dusy needs to be a must do next year. Not very many comments.

[RAT]

Looks like the Dusy needs to be a must do next year. Not very many comments.

Did you comment?

[curtis]

I don't believe in this Comment deal. I send E-mails to the people I think are mostly in charge of the process.
(Douglas Krofta, Jan Knight). This thing is under the EPA. Which I see as very corrupt.

[inVERt'D]

You play good cop, I'll play bad cop.

[curtis]

You play good cop, I'll play bad cop.

Sounds Good.

With a comment, they control what happens to it. With an E-mail I control what was said and that they received it.

[RAT]

I'm afraid your off the mark a little Curtis. While I agree that sending emails is at the top of the list as far as communication, making these public comments is a neccesary part of it. Each comment is documented and issued a number to align it with the document the comment is about. The public comment portion is part of the process and needs to be done. When used along with the email system it is an effective way for us to get our position heard.
Remember too that if you email or use the public comments and your response has merit ( stating facts, siting prevoius rulings etc) then the forest service by law has to respond to you and allow for an appeal process. They have to notify you by e.ail. if decide to appeal there is another process that takes over. It is possible in theory to tie this up for years with one appeal. So don't think there is nothing you can do or that the forest service doesn't follow rules or whatever. Hold them accountable by using the process they created.