Public Comment: Medicine Bow National Forest Plan Revision

Recreational Access and Conservation - Conservation and Public Service Activities

Dedicated to conservation and multiple use of public lands for recreation opportunities.

The following letter was perpared from information provided by Recreationists of the Bow. Please provide your name and address and e-mail this letter to the Medicine Bow Plan Revision Team.

Enter your E-mail address, name and address and send this comment letter. (All fields required)

Your E-mail:
Name:
Address:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
Medicine Bow-Routt National Forests Plan Revision 2468 Jackson St. Laramie, WY, 82070 RE: Public Comment: Medicine Bow National Forest Plan Revision I am submitting these comments for myself. I range throughout the western states in pursuit of the variety of recreational opportunities offered on public lands. Reviewing your alternative themes I am disappointed in that none of the themes favor sustainable multiple-use recreation and the Forest Service has stated in their Recreation Agenda that "...the Forest Service must meet the Nation's growing need for outdoor recreation in a manner that protects the health, diversity, and productivity of the land...". As such, I support the following Proposed Alternative. Alternative C (formerly Proposed Alternative 7): This Alternative would modify the current Land and Resource Management Plan by increasing emphasis on recreation. The Management Plan would address sustainable multiple-use recreation and apply management tools to address the needs for each recreational activity. Vegetation, wildlife habitat and watersheds would be actively managed for forest health. Inventoried Roadless Areas would be managed as semi-primitive, multiple-use, Backcountry Recreation Areas. All current recreational opportunities on the forest would be maintained with winter and summer uses being managed as separate entities. No new Research Natural Areas (RNAs) or Special Interest Areas (SIAs) would be proposed. No new Wilderness Areas would be recommended for designation. No new wilderness areas! These limit public use and restrict or eliminate multiple-use. The "Value" that people enjoy can often be destroyed or marred by "letting the area go". There are other ways to protect scenic value. Wilderness areas also restrict management options in event of fire or disease within the forest. No new Research Natural Areas. These are little "de facto" wilderness areas that do not have to be approved by congress but are more restrictive in some cases than wilderness areas. Again, access for public recreation and forest management are severely restricted. Roadless area management. The roadless area conservation rule does not say that a roadless area is a "wilderness area" or a "non-motorized area" and they should not all be managed as such. Many of the greens here are trying to convince people that motorized use is prohibited in roadless areas and that they are supposed to be wilderness. The RACR specifically states this is not true. Managing for forest health in backcountry areas will insure this character for generations to come. Multiple-Use! The economies of many small towns are rooted in the opportunities that the recreation provides. In the winter, if it were not for snowmobiling, many towns would suffer severe economic stress. Sincerely,