Routt National Forest Draft Plan
5/02/96
*******************************
RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:
Topic: HELP! Save a Rocky Mtn Forest !
Written 9:48 PM May 2, 1996 by landwater in cdp:biodiversity
YOUR COMMENTS NEEDED TO PROTECT NORTHERN ROCKIES NATIONAL FOREST
-- ROUTT NATIONAL FOREST DRAFT PLAN.
WHEN NEEDED: By MAY 16.
WHO NEEDS TO HERE FROM YOU: Routt National Forest; Forest Plan
Comments; 29587 West US 40, Suite 20; Steamboat Springs, CO
80487; 970-879-1722
FOR MORE INFO CONTACT: Biodiversity Associates (Jkessler@igc.org)
307-742-7978 -- Colorado Environmental Colaition - 303-837-8704 --
LAW Fund (landwater@igc.apc.org) 303-444-1188.
Ted Zukoski - LAW Fund - landwater@igc.apc.org - 303-444-1188.
The US Forest Service recently released the proposed 10-year Revised
Land and Resource Management Plan or Draft Plan for the Routt
National Forest in north-central Colorado. It specifies where and how
much disturbance like logging, roads, and grazing the Forest Service
will allow on public lands, and how they intend to protect the forest
and wildlife. The plan will affect the Forest for hundreds of years
to come.
Unfortunately, the Draft Plan SEVERELY WEAKENS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION STANDARDS AND ALLOWS FURTHER INTENSIVE CUTTING IN THE
ALREADY HAMMERED NORTHERN PORTION OF THE FOREST. This is bad news for
biodiversity-the wildlife, rare plants, and mid- to low-elevation
roadless areas. YOUR LETTERS, FAXES, AND PHONE CALLS NOW CAN STOP
THE FOREST SERVICE FROM TURNING THE NORTHERN ROUTT INTO EVEN MORE OF
A SACRIFICE ZONE THAN IT ALREADY IS.
THE ROUTT NATIONAL FOREST
The Routt National Forest consists of almost 1.4 million acres in
several distinct sections spread out through north-central Colorado.
It includes the northern portion of the Flat Tops, the Rabbit Ears
Range, the Gore Range, the Park Range/Mt. Zirkel Wilderness, the
Elkhead Mountains, and finally, Pinkham Mountain at the north end
of the Rawahs on the Wyoming border.
The three designated Wilderness areas on the Routt--Flattops, Sarvice
Creek in the Gore Range, and Mt. Zirkel--are mostly rock and ice
country and include very little of the ecologically important mid-
and low-elevation forests and riparian areas. Currently no reserve
network protects ecological communities or wildlife habitat.
COLORADO-WYOMING BORDER SACRIFICE ZONE SEVERING ECOLOGICAL
CONNECTIONS TO THE MEDICINE BOW NF
Two particular sections of the Routt which connect to the Medicine
Bow over the state line need special protection. The first stretches
from the north slope of Mt. Zirkel Wilderness across the state line
and into the Sierra Madre Mtns. of southern Wyoming. Much of this
region is not protected by wilderness and consists of biologically
rich forest habitat targeted for logging. The other section lies
just south of the Pelton Creek area of the Medicine Bow. Known as
Pinkham Mountain, it is flanked to the west by the North Platte
River.
Although the Routt NF was recently administratively combined with the
Medicine Bow NF in Wyoming, the Forest Service is nonetheless
preparing 2 separate forest plans. Coordinating management across
state lines is needed; these forests are connected ecologically. The
biological health and long-term survival of wildlife depends on
maintaining and restoring forested links between the two.
Unfortunately, the border region has already been heavily cut and
roaded. Many of the forested connections have already been severed.
Only a few links remain, and these must be protected if wildlife is
going to be able to migrate and disperse between forests.
THE DRAFT FOREST PLAN
Of the several different alternatives for managing the Routt which
the Forest Service has looked at, Alternative C is the one they are
likely to choose. However, alternative F would go much further to
protect biodiversity and roadless areas.
TELL THE USFS TO CHOOSE ALTERNATIVE F BECAUSE IT:
- better protects wildlife with habitat core areas and migration corridors
- recommends more wilderness areas and wild and scenic rivers for preservation
- offers a better balance of environmental protection with logging, grazing, and
oil & gas development
- limits snowmobiles in the backcountry
- protects roadless areas from logging and road building
- alternative F should be modified so no sacrifice logging is done along Colo-
Wyo border.
TELL THE USFS NOT TO CHOOSE ALTERNATIVE C because:
- environmental protection standards are much too weak
- logs the Colo-Wyo border areas such as Elkhorn Mtn.,Big
Creek Lakes, and Pinkham Mtn.
- fails to protect all 54,000 acres recommended by the Colo. Natural Heritage
Program; all are critical to
vulnerable plant and wildlife species threatened by logging, grazing and ORV's
- allows only leave strips between existing clearcuts, but does not provide
ecologically-based dispersal and
migration corridors
- does not protect 341,000 acres of roadless land from logging and road
development--particularly the
mid-elevation areas east and west of Mt. Zirkel which should be reserved for
wildlife and backcountry recreation
- permits too high a level of livestock grazing
- opens up 80% of the Forest to snowmobiles, robbing wildlife of habitat and
backcountry recreationists of
solitude.
PLAN FAILS TO PROTECT BIODIVERSITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
In the Draft Plan and associated environmental impact statement there
is virtually NO DATA on biodiversity such as populations and trends
of sensitive species, old growth forest, and impacts from proposed
cutting and roads.
To make matters worse, strict mandatory, standards for environmental
protection are completely absent. There are many wishy-washy
statements calling for protection which contain easy outs like
"should" or "may" instead of 'shall' or 'will.'
Taken together, these two major flaws call into question the entire
draft Plan. If the USFS doesn't know what's 'there,' and they don't
have mandatory, measurable, and verifiable standards for protection,
the Plan cannot serve its main purpose--to protect the public's
forest.
STANDARDS MUST BE ADDED TO THE FINAL PLAN TO:
- Protect actual old-growth forest, in all tree types. Mature forest is not the
same as old growth, and the Plan
must distinguish between the two.
- Protect/restore ecological connections to adjacent forests on both sides of
the state line. In particular,
the Big Creek Lake, Encampment River, and Pinkham Mountain Geographic Areas must
be manage d (1) for limited use (no
timber sales) and low road densities, and (2) to restore their functioning as
ecological links.
- Protect all sensitive species, including the Boreal Toad, Northern Goshawk,
and Wolverine. Provide written
conservation strategies for sensitive species.
- Protect all sensitive plants, especially from grazing, roads, and ORV's.
- Protect riparian areas. Particularly needed are 100 foot
no-activity buffers around streams, ponds and wet areas.
WHAT YOU CAN DO
Write or call the Forest Service before the **MAY 16** deadline,
and get your friends and family who care about the Routt to do the
same. The address is provided below. In your letter, you may want
to tell the USFS to:
* choose Alternative F, not Alternative C or any other
alternative (for the reasons mentioned in bullets above)
* add strict, mandatory environmental protection
'standards' to replace optional 'guidelines' (see sidebar)
* protect all remaining roadless areas, and all forested
connections in the Colo-Wyo border region
* coordinate wildlife and rare plant protection with
adjacent State and BLM managers
* prohibit motorized recreation east of Mt. Zirkel
Wilderness
* recommend all eligible rivers for Wild and Scenic
designation, including the N. Platte, Encampment, and Elk
rivers and Roaring Fork and Rock creeks.
FOREST SERVICE: Routt National Forest; Forest Plan Comments; 29587
West US 40, Suite 20; Steamboat Springs, CO 80487; 970-879-1722