blondejoncherokee
NAXJA Member
- Location
- sacramento
Who we are fighting, and how they do it.
- Thread starter DaveNJeep
- Start date
Logans91XJ
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- everywhere
XXXXing HATE ANTI GROUPS THAT JUST GO AROUND AND CLOSE EVERYTHING THEY CAN! THEY DID THE SAME THING TO A BUNCH OF PLACES IN REDDING. FOR SOME STUPID ASS FAIRY FISH! UGHHH.....
Logans91XJ
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- everywhere
.Rich Platt, Monte Hendrix and Karen Schambach and the Center for Bio Diversity
THESE ARE THE ASSHOLES WHO WANT TO CLOSE THE ENTIRE WORLD DOWN!:soapbox:
THESE ARE THE ASSHOLES WHO WANT TO CLOSE THE ENTIRE WORLD DOWN!:soapbox:
blondejoncherokee
NAXJA Member
- Location
- sacramento
they are the same types that are closing down dylan beach as well...
Dillon beach is getting closed down too? I love that place!
connor0770
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Cameron Park, CA/ Reno, NV
I do too! Screw these people... Why can't they allow all of us to enjoy it?
blondejoncherokee
NAXJA Member
- Location
- sacramento
not quite yet, but it will closed in like 5 years. my buddy has a trailer there that we sometimes stay at. totally screwed up. gov takes it all, then sells it to private investors for more money, watch, that'll happen...
email from ron briggs staff:
Your email message to Supervisor Briggs was printed for his review and consideration.
In response, he asked that I share with you that the County of El Dorado agrees with you and is working diligently to see that these roads are reopened permanently.
Thank you,
Brenda Bailey
from john knights staff :
Jon,
Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns regarding the road closures with Supervisor Knight. The El Dorado County Supervisors, at their regular board meeting of April 17, 2012, voted to approve a formal public statement urging that the roads be kept open while the remaining environment analysis is being performed.
Thank you.
Loretta Featherston
Assistant to Supervisor John R. Knight
District 1
Board of Supervisors, County of El Dorado
Phone: (530)621-5650
Assistant to Supervisor Briggs
(530) 621-6513
from tim roffe:
Hello Jon,
I want to thank you for taking the time to write to me. I want to assure you I am doing everything I can to re-open these roads (one of them is within 1/2 mile of my home and I use it often, I completely understand the "quality of life" that public lands add to our lives)... As chairperson of the coordination committee, I am also working to change the county attitude to acquiescing to groups that would just assume we (the public) be kept out of our lands. Of course this concerns your thoughts on the OHV community, but all embraces proper forest management through Timber operations, Grazing allotments and Equestrian use along with other recreational activities.
I am "ruffling" a few political feathers, however be that as it may. You indicate a willingness to help, and this is where you can. I would forward your message, however it is better to come straight from you. I have put the five county Supervisors email addresses below. As mentioned, coordination is the term for the process that can... and will... work in addressing these issues. Please take a moment to send a message to our supervisors and encourage anyone else to do so as well. As mentioned, there is a question of political will on their part... seeing as many letters from the public as possible will help. Even though you are not in our county, tourism (who mostly desire access to our public lands) is the leader in our economic impacts... and that comes from folks like yourself.
Please do not hesitate to forward this to anyone who is concerned with the continued agenda of eliminating public access to public lands... and also do not hesitate to contact me with any additional thoughts regarding this issue...
Thank you again, Tim
Tim Roffe
EDCCCC
[email protected]
El Dorado County Supervisors
District 1- John Knight 621-5650 [email protected]
District 2- Ray Nutting 621-5651 [email protected]
District 3- Jack Sweeney 621-5652 [email protected]
District 4- Ron Briggs 621-6513 [email protected]
District 5- Norma Santiago 621-6577 [email protected]
- Location
- Reno, Nevada
Great job Jon!
I plan on typing up some emails to those county supervisors. Hopefully others will too and follow your lead!
aperwork
I plan on typing up some emails to those county supervisors. Hopefully others will too and follow your lead!
aperwork
- Location
- Reno, Nevada
Letters sent.
blondejoncherokee
NAXJA Member
- Location
- sacramento
a message from one of the 5 county sups:
On April 17 at the recommendation of Supervisors Nutting and Briggs,
the El Dorado County Board of Supervisors adopted the following public
statement regarding the case of Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation
v. U.S. Forest Service (E.D. Cal No. S-09-2523). If you would like
more information please contact Supervisor Nutting's office at (530)
621-5651, or Supervisor Briggs' office at (530) 621-6513.
El Dorado County is dismayed to learn that the plaintiffs in the U.S.
District Court in the case of Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation v.
U.S. Forest Service (E.D. Cal. No. S-09-2523) have asked the court to
consider the blanket closure of 42 roads in the Eldorado National
Forest because those roads happen to pass through very small meadow
areas. The court has ordered those roads closed until a final order
has been issued, which may cause the loss of a number of the most
popular recreation trails in Eldorado County for this summer season.
These roads have been in use for recreation for decades (some for a
century), and provide a unique and irreplaceable opportunity for
citizens to enjoy the land which they own. The court's decision on
the merits of the litigation found that the U.S. Forest Service must
supplement its analysis of whether the roads crossing meadows affects
the hydrology of the meadow, a process that the Forest Service
estimates will take a full year, mostly because of the various
procedural time limits applicable to supplemental environmental impact
statements under NEPA. The 42 roads total about 120 miles in length,
of which less than 5 miles involve meadow areas, and 23 out of the 42
roads involve meadow crossings of less than 300 feet.
The court has extended the normal winter closure of all 42 roads into
the summer recreation season, while it considers various alternative
orders it might issue to be in effect during the period while the
supplemental analysis is being done. The closure of all42 roads for
an entire summer recreation season just because they happen to pass
through a meadow area for a short distance would be an unnecessarily
blunt remedy that fails to maintain the status quo of many years of
public use on those roads, and that fails to distinguish between
different roads with different circumstances. For
example, the Barrett Lake Trail has been in use for decades, and over
the years has been upgraded and maintained by users so it is in a
better condition to sustain its popularity without degradation of the
environment than many other
trails in the forest. It is considered a model of user-maintained
road. It has several short sections involving meadows, but in many
instances it has been re-routed around the meadow and in other
sections it has been improved so that any hydrological problem has
been eliminated. The Barrett Lake Trail ends at Barrett Lake, so that
closing it at a short meadow section anywhere along its length
effectively closes it entirely. The closure of this road for an
entire recreation season is simply not justified by its particular
circumstances. Furthermore, the closure of some of the most popular
recreational roads in the Eldorado National Forest will divert users
to other trails (such as the Rubicon Trail, a public road under R.S.
2477 and thus not involved in the current litigation), potentially
overburdening these other trails which are not involved in the
litigation.
Most importantly, a blanket closure of all 42 roads fails to take into
account the enormous negative economic impact this will have on El
Dorado County (and the other counties affected by the closure- Amador
and Alpine Counties). Closure of 42 roads will discourage citizens
from coming here to recreate this summer, and the resulting confusion
and uncertainty will no doubt discourage recreational use of the
Eldorado National Forest for subsequent seasons also. It has been
estimated that vehicular recreation in the Eldorado National Forest
produces a net positive economic effect estimated to exceed $2 million
per year to El Dorado County. An order carefully tailored to
recognize the decades of prior use of the 42 routes, which recognizes
the different circumstances of particular roads among the 42 at issue,
can help alleviate unnecessary damage to the local economy.
The environmental and planning laws must be honored, but in a way that
is both rational and realistic, without causing unnecessary damage to
a fragile economy, and without unjustified restrictions on a citizen's
right to use federal land. El Dorado County believes that the roads
should be kept open for this season while the remaining environmental
analysis is being performed.
Sincerely,
Mike Applegarth
Principal Analyst
Chief Administrative Office
El Dorado County
(530) 621-5123
On April 17 at the recommendation of Supervisors Nutting and Briggs,
the El Dorado County Board of Supervisors adopted the following public
statement regarding the case of Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation
v. U.S. Forest Service (E.D. Cal No. S-09-2523). If you would like
more information please contact Supervisor Nutting's office at (530)
621-5651, or Supervisor Briggs' office at (530) 621-6513.
El Dorado County is dismayed to learn that the plaintiffs in the U.S.
District Court in the case of Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation v.
U.S. Forest Service (E.D. Cal. No. S-09-2523) have asked the court to
consider the blanket closure of 42 roads in the Eldorado National
Forest because those roads happen to pass through very small meadow
areas. The court has ordered those roads closed until a final order
has been issued, which may cause the loss of a number of the most
popular recreation trails in Eldorado County for this summer season.
These roads have been in use for recreation for decades (some for a
century), and provide a unique and irreplaceable opportunity for
citizens to enjoy the land which they own. The court's decision on
the merits of the litigation found that the U.S. Forest Service must
supplement its analysis of whether the roads crossing meadows affects
the hydrology of the meadow, a process that the Forest Service
estimates will take a full year, mostly because of the various
procedural time limits applicable to supplemental environmental impact
statements under NEPA. The 42 roads total about 120 miles in length,
of which less than 5 miles involve meadow areas, and 23 out of the 42
roads involve meadow crossings of less than 300 feet.
The court has extended the normal winter closure of all 42 roads into
the summer recreation season, while it considers various alternative
orders it might issue to be in effect during the period while the
supplemental analysis is being done. The closure of all42 roads for
an entire summer recreation season just because they happen to pass
through a meadow area for a short distance would be an unnecessarily
blunt remedy that fails to maintain the status quo of many years of
public use on those roads, and that fails to distinguish between
different roads with different circumstances. For
example, the Barrett Lake Trail has been in use for decades, and over
the years has been upgraded and maintained by users so it is in a
better condition to sustain its popularity without degradation of the
environment than many other
trails in the forest. It is considered a model of user-maintained
road. It has several short sections involving meadows, but in many
instances it has been re-routed around the meadow and in other
sections it has been improved so that any hydrological problem has
been eliminated. The Barrett Lake Trail ends at Barrett Lake, so that
closing it at a short meadow section anywhere along its length
effectively closes it entirely. The closure of this road for an
entire recreation season is simply not justified by its particular
circumstances. Furthermore, the closure of some of the most popular
recreational roads in the Eldorado National Forest will divert users
to other trails (such as the Rubicon Trail, a public road under R.S.
2477 and thus not involved in the current litigation), potentially
overburdening these other trails which are not involved in the
litigation.
Most importantly, a blanket closure of all 42 roads fails to take into
account the enormous negative economic impact this will have on El
Dorado County (and the other counties affected by the closure- Amador
and Alpine Counties). Closure of 42 roads will discourage citizens
from coming here to recreate this summer, and the resulting confusion
and uncertainty will no doubt discourage recreational use of the
Eldorado National Forest for subsequent seasons also. It has been
estimated that vehicular recreation in the Eldorado National Forest
produces a net positive economic effect estimated to exceed $2 million
per year to El Dorado County. An order carefully tailored to
recognize the decades of prior use of the 42 routes, which recognizes
the different circumstances of particular roads among the 42 at issue,
can help alleviate unnecessary damage to the local economy.
The environmental and planning laws must be honored, but in a way that
is both rational and realistic, without causing unnecessary damage to
a fragile economy, and without unjustified restrictions on a citizen's
right to use federal land. El Dorado County believes that the roads
should be kept open for this season while the remaining environmental
analysis is being performed.
Sincerely,
Mike Applegarth
Principal Analyst
Chief Administrative Office
El Dorado County
(530) 621-5123
CAJJ93XJ
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Roseville, CA
so the trails are all closing, but el dorado county is going to fight back? or just agree that this is stupid and let it slide
blondejoncherokee
NAXJA Member
- Location
- sacramento
i dunno. it seems like everyone I've talked to it against it, but who knows how that will actually pan out...
- Location
- Reno, Nevada
Eldorado County still has to abide by the judges ruling. They put out that response to show that they disagree and feel that there is no reason the trails cannot remain open during the study. It's good that they also realize the economic consequenses of the judges ruling.
Hopefully the judge will reverse or modify his ruling.
Props to Eldorado County...
Hopefully the judge will reverse or modify his ruling.
Props to Eldorado County...
Mike1331
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Folsom, CA
blondejoncherokee
NAXJA Member
- Location
- sacramento
Hi Jon,
This is Tim Roffe.... As chairman for the El Dorado County coordination committee, I am spearheading the efforts to deal with the 42 forest service road closures. Rest assured, we are on it.... however it will be a battle.
Judi, from Supervisor Santiagos office, forwarded your email to me in which you ask whom in the forest service should you contact regarding this issue. First, I do want to thank you for touching base with the Supervisor, as it is important for them (all 5) to hear from citizens who have concerns.
The contact over at the forest service office would be Frank Mosbacher. His number is 530-622-5061.
Further, keep my email address.... as mentioned, I am working on this issue for the county. The supervisors have sent a letter to the presiding Judge in an effort to keep the roads open during the pending SEIS, I am currently working on getting more of the same support from Senator Gaines, who indicated he would help in anyway he could...
Thank you for your involvement... it does mean something.... Tim
This is Tim Roffe.... As chairman for the El Dorado County coordination committee, I am spearheading the efforts to deal with the 42 forest service road closures. Rest assured, we are on it.... however it will be a battle.
Judi, from Supervisor Santiagos office, forwarded your email to me in which you ask whom in the forest service should you contact regarding this issue. First, I do want to thank you for touching base with the Supervisor, as it is important for them (all 5) to hear from citizens who have concerns.
The contact over at the forest service office would be Frank Mosbacher. His number is 530-622-5061.
Further, keep my email address.... as mentioned, I am working on this issue for the county. The supervisors have sent a letter to the presiding Judge in an effort to keep the roads open during the pending SEIS, I am currently working on getting more of the same support from Senator Gaines, who indicated he would help in anyway he could...
Thank you for your involvement... it does mean something.... Tim
- Location
- Reno, Nevada
Good article.
I love this part (emphasis added by me):
"Red-legged frogs (endangered species) were reportedly threatened in some sections of some roads over some meadows. According to Knapp, however, investigations turned up no evidence of the amphibians in the targeted areas."
And to top it off, it was actually non-native bull frogs introduced to the area that threatened the species, not human activity.
The whole thing is completely BS to begin with.
Similar threads
