Web-comments-401-500

# SenderID Ref.# Comment Tool Date Comment
WC-401 WID-595 W-4ad262f2-a34c-4781-837d-9f121328c39e Draft EIS 11/8/2007 1:45:00 PM Map #11 makes it look like the whole Illinois Valley will be turned into an off-highway vehicle use area. Many people in the Illinois Valley are upset and frightened by the impresssion given by this map. It would be constructive and facilitate constructive conversation to make a map that does not give this impression.
WC-402 WID-596 W-4961d75e-f4aa-4636-be5c-b6b7d64743a2 Draft EIS 11/8/2007 2:11:00 PM Hi my name is Brent Moffet. Thanks for listening on Puplic Comments. I have been a resident of Jackson County for 41yrs & have been rideing ohvs since I was 5yrs old.Started at Johns peak rec.I Hope BLM can keep there land open to ohv use in the Johns peak area & existing areas.Ohv use is a vital rec. use for families & people to vent there stresses of everyday life in the city.I now have a 4yr old daughter,I hope that I will be able to show her the wilderness use & experence the great outdoors as my father did all my life. As I spend time in the wilderness I do see the impact on it from the puplic use & wish I knew the magic fix,but I can tell you that there are alot of ohv people that are trying to make a difference,because they all understand what a tragidy it will be to lose this privilage.THANKS AGAIN BRENT MOFFET.
WC-403 WID-597 W-313dc566-c7de-4750-a890-53e0b60f3082 Draft EIS 11/8/2007 2:27:00 PM Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration would place half of the public land that the BLM manages - and most of our best old-growth BLM forests - in "Timber Management Areas" to be clearcut every 80 years. The Bush Administration´s preferred alternative proposes to clearcut 110,000 acres of Oregon´s old-growth (120+ years) and build 1,000 mile of new logging roads every decade while creating over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas - all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Shockingly, the proposal ignores the role that these forests play in regulating the climate. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation´s ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. . In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clearcutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at risk and would destroy some of Oregon´s most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clearcut these natural treasures. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clearcut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into tree plantations most susceptible to severe wildfire. Creating tree-farms out of clear-cuts and reducing the riperian buffers around streams degrades the soil, ecology, and habitat of the forest essentially sabotaging the long-term health of the entire region. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and create job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. I urge you to keep the Adaptive Management Areas of the Northwest Forest Plan created in 1994 intact as they are. None of the alternatives you proposed are acceptable for long term sustainability of these areas. Sincerely, Lisa Gorlin
WC-404 WID-597 W-dca1e80f-f91a-4817-92d0-7e010538d718 Draft EIS 11/8/2007 2:28:00 PM Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation´s ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. . In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clearcutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at risk and would destroy some of Oregon´s most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clearcut these natural treasures. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clearcut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into tree plantations most susceptible to severe wildfire. Creating tree-farms out of clear-cuts and reducing the riperian buffers around streams degrades the soil, ecology, and habitat of the forest essentially sabotaging the long-term health of the entire region. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and create job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. I urge you to keep the Adaptive Management Areas of the Northwest Forest Plan created in 1994 intact as they are. None of the alternatives you proposed are acceptable for long term sustainability of these areas. Sincerely, Lisa Gorlin
WC-405 WID-597 W-1db5901c-bd46-44f9-9fd4-61182dcc7551 Draft EIS 11/8/2007 2:29:00 PM Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clearcutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at risk and would destroy some of Oregon´s most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clearcut these natural treasures. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clearcut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into tree plantations most susceptible to severe wildfire. Creating tree-farms out of clear-cuts and reducing the riperian buffers around streams degrades the soil, ecology, and habitat of the forest essentially sabotaging the long-term health of the entire region. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and create job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. I urge you to keep the Adaptive Management Areas of the Northwest Forest Plan created in 1994 intact as they are. None of the alternatives you proposed are acceptable for long term sustainability of these areas. Sincerely, Lisa Gorlin
WC-406 WID-601 W-f3e61949-8ef0-4369-9cda-87c558996c0f Draft EIS 11/8/2007 4:22:00 PM I am absolutely opposed to the BLM action considerations in recommending Alternative 2 in the Draft report. WOPR calling for clearcutting of old growth forests is not acceptable because of the environmental, wildlife impacts and the outrageous tripling of allowable timber harvests. WOPR recommendations seem based on political bias, not on what is in Oregon's best interests today AND into the future. I have not participated before. But, I am so concerned about what this BLM is recommending that I intend on making my concerns known to my Senators and Representatives. This BLM needs much more oversight, many more boundaries between narrow timber interests and the influence in the decision process. The least timber harvest alternative is the most preferred. Economic and social impacts need to be addressed by developing new alternative energy sources as an example, not by clearcutting irreplaceable old growth forests.
WC-407 WID-604 W-38b34d30-c25d-48d2-ad21-aa5ce30d15c2 Draft EIS 11/8/2007 6:44:00 PM Please DON'T cut anything in our BLM lands here in Western Oregon, they are some of our last remaining old growth forests and need to remain as such, cleaning the air and water, and housing our last dying species, please leave these trees alone, forever! thankyou, DON'T cut any trees on our public BLM lands here in Western Oregon, leave these lands alone! Thankyou, use common sense, cut younger than 40 year old trees to bring in your greedy money, not older than that please, these older trees are too valuable, preventing fire and offering valuable habitat for our dying species, thankyou, leave the trees alone! thankyou. Stu Phillips, Eugene
WC-408 WID-602 None Web Forum Exit 11/8/2007 6:49:00 PM It's a nice tool, BUT the map doesn't allow me to switch between plans for a location without switching locations. I'd also like to be able to control the speed at which it traverses the land, and do away with the repetitive naration.
WC-409 WID-605 W-aefd3a04-d0ef-4311-8c0c-9e9df37cfbe6 Draft EIS 11/8/2007 7:47:00 PM As an native Oregonian I have experienced the loss of our Pacific Northwest rain forest first hand. With less than 5% of the original old-growth forest remaining, I believe that it is time to call a halt to all old-growth clear-cuts. The only proposal of the draft EIS that comes close to meeting this objective is Alternative 3. Therefore, I ask that Alternative 3 be selected as the course that the BLM takes for the future management of its forest lands in Western Oregon.
WC-410 WID-607 None Interactive Map 11/9/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_photo|tb_2_other: Running|cb_hiking|cb_birdwatching|cb_importantspecies|cb_scenicbeauty|cb_relax|cb_onceamonth|tb_gen_ans: This corridor already has threatened species in and around it. Opening this area for logging will result in loss of species and loss of revenue for eco-tourism in the future. Logging is short term revenue.
WC-411 WID-607 None Interactive Map 11/9/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_photo|tb_2_other: Running|cb_hiking|cb_birdwatching|cb_importantspecies|cb_scenicbeauty|cb_relax|cb_onceamonth|tb_gen_ans: This is a great running trail and the running community in the Rogue Valley has exploded to include many world class ultra runners who enjoy running the trails around Talent and Ashland. To no longer have these trails or old fire roads to run uninterupted by logging will decrease the value of the valley. And, potentially keep people from moving here.
WC-412 WID-607 None Interactive Map 11/9/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_photo|tb_2_other: Running|cb_mtnbiking|cb_hiking|cb_birdwatching|cb_importantspecies|cb_scenicbeauty|cb_relax|cb_onceamonth|tb_gen_ans: This is critical habitat for species of plant and amphibians that open to logging will threaten and create quick money. Keeping the area and managing it for eco-tourism will briing more money over the long run which is more beneficial for the Jackson County public.
WC-413 WID-609 W-7fa9dc75-82b8-403c-a43f-230c8015026f File Upload 11/9/2007 1:45:00 PM

Uploaded File:  SORA...COMMENTARY ON WOPR 11-09-07.doc
WC-414 WID-612 W-2bd907ee-9842-4866-a8e1-567f15a5f26b Draft EIS 11/9/2007 3:50:00 PM My Gosh, if we only have 5% of our native forests standing, why would we cut or even thin them? They have evolved with fire for thousands of years. Native forests will also help protect us from some global warming.
WC-415 WID-613 W-88744ade-269b-46de-b906-31193f57b8a9 Draft EIS 11/9/2007 4:23:00 PM I oppose the BLMs effort to open our forests to more logging, especially clear cut logging. The only thing that benifits from this practice is the logging companies.The Forest Service has stopped clear cutting the lands it manages. The BLM should follow this policy. Please craft this new policy in a way that will protect our remaining old growth forests and manage them as forests not fiber farms for the timber industry. I value the forests surrounding me for all the benifits that they provide my community, not as a resource for timber companies to extract timber. Concentrate your timber cutting on those areas that you have already transformed from a forest to a fiber farm. Please stay out of our old growth forests. I also would like to limit the areas you have designated for off road users, not expand them. Off roading has a very negative impact on our lands. Thank you Kiernan Hodge
WC-416 WID-616 W-e80e3db4-b6e9-47db-b5e0-835d6c65764f File Upload 11/9/2007 8:56:00 PM

Uploaded File:  BLM Comment Letter.txt
WC-417 WID-621 None Interactive Map 11/10/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_mtnbiking|cb_hiking|cb_camping|cb_spiritual|cb_importantspecies|cb_scenicbeauty|cb_relax|cb_onceamonth|tb_gen_ans:
WC-418 WID-621 None Interactive Map 11/10/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_photo|cb_dirtbiking|cb_mtnbiking|cb_fishing|cb_camping|cb_birdwatching|cb_spiritual|cb_importantspecies|cb_scenicbeauty|cb_relax|cb_onceamonth|tb_gen_ans:
WC-419 WID-621 None Interactive Map 11/10/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_photo|cb_hunting|cb_mtnbiking|cb_hiking|cb_fishing|cb_camping|cb_boating|cb_birdwatching|cb_ohv|tb_gen_ans:
WC-420 WID-621 None Interactive Map 11/10/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_spiritual|cb_importantspecies|cb_scenicbeauty|cb_relax|cb_onceamonth|tb_gen_ans:
WC-421 WID-624 None Interactive Map 11/10/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_mtnbiking|tb_gen_ans:
WC-422 WID-625 None Interactive Map 11/10/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_fulltime|tb_gen_ans:
WC-423 WID-626 W-e3444101-e29e-4f80-ba7f-34246d5dea0c Draft EIS 11/10/2007 8:27:00 PM To Whom It May Concern: I, Sara Van Orsdell, do hereby denounce and call for the repeal of the extension of the draft of the environmental statement plan brought forth by the Bureau of Land Managements Western Oregon Plan Revisions. As a resident of the state of Oregon, a US citizen and a registered voter of the United States of America, I call for and demand that all trees that are growing on federal land, ie, The Bureau of Land Management is revising the six western Oregon Resource Management Plans tiered to the Northwest Forest Plan. The revised plans (to be completed in 2008) will address public lands and resources managed by the Salem, Eugene, Roseburg, Medford, and Coos Bay Districts and the Klamath Falls Resource Area of the Lakeview District. The planning area includes approximately 2,550,000 acres of public lands. About 2,100,000 of those acres are land revested from the Oregon and California Railroad and are managed under the O&C Lands Act of 1937 be preserved and remain untouched for the prosperity and absolute necessity for a sustainable future for the people of America and, indeed, the world. Sara Van Orsdell 51194 Blue River Drive Vida, OR 97488 541-822-1083
WC-424 WID-626 None Web Forum Exit 11/10/2007 8:30:00 PM I think you should listen to what citizens want and need and not what corportations want and need.
WC-425 WID-627 W-3a7d68df-02de-48ae-a370-b93c12e2f82f Draft EIS 11/10/2007 8:37:00 PM To Whom It May Concern: I, Samuel F. Flint, do hereby denounce and call for the repeal of the extension of the draft of the environmental statement plan brought forth by the Bureau of Land Managements Western Oregon Plan Revisions. As a resident of the state of Oregon, a US citizen and a registered voter of the United States of America, I call for and demand that all trees that are growing on federal land, ie, The Bureau of Land Management is revising the six western Oregon Resource Management Plans tiered to the Northwest Forest Plan. The revised plans (to be completed in 2008) will address public lands and resources managed by the Salem, Eugene, Roseburg, Medford, and Coos Bay Districts and the Klamath Falls Resource Area of the Lakeview District. The planning area includes approximately 2,550,000 acres of public lands. About 2,100,000 of those acres are land revested from the Oregon and California Railroad and are managed under the O&C Lands Act of 1937, be preserved and remain untouched for the prosperity and absolute necessity for a sustainable future for the people of America an indeed, the world. Samuel F. Flint 51194 Blue River Drive Vida, OR 97488 541-822-1083
WC-426 WID-629 None Interactive Map 11/11/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_fulltime|cb_spiritual|cb_importantspecies|cb_scenicbeauty|cb_relax|cb_daily|tb_gen_ans:
WC-427 WID-628 None Web Forum Exit 11/11/2007 10:44:00 AM let people use the maps without having to log in.
WC-428 WID-104 W-95f8df24-3219-4a78-ab9e-3bd37e51417e Draft EIS 11/11/2007 9:01:00 PM To: Bureau of Land Management From: Robin Bergman Re: Western Oregon Plan Revision Date: November 11. 2007 The WOPR seems to be product of the AFRC and southern Oregon timber operators as well as a way for the BLM to retain medical/dental/vision benefits for its employees by driving various species to extinction. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize the WOPR will destroy the spotted owl, the marbled murellet, and the species they depend on, not to mention the growing effects of global warming and the result of deforestation on increasing global temperatures. It would be so short-sighted to destroy our forests, our planet, and ourselves for a few dollars.
WC-429 WID-637 None Interactive Map 11/12/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_tourism|cb_ranching|cb_fulltime|cb_importantspecies|cb_scenicbeauty|cb_relax|tb_gen_ans:
WC-430 WID-640 None Interactive Map 11/12/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_farming|tb_gen_ans: i like this map%0D
WC-431 WID-535 None Interactive Map 11/12/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from No Action: save all late succession
WC-432 WID-636 W-5a377120-8c2a-4acf-b5cd-f86ac2030fff Draft EIS 11/12/2007 7:29:00 AM I oppose strongly the idea of logging any of the limited amount of old growth forests remaining. As with any of our links to the past these trees should be considered a sacred tie to the past. Decimation and desecration of these "sacred" areas should be considered unlawfull. We should instead be protecting and preserving them to pass along to future generations. WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO TAKE AWAY FROM FUTURE GENERATIONS WHAT WE ARE PRIVILEGED TO ENJOY TODAY.
WC-433 WID-274 W-256892fc-3431-4f17-b8fa-932be9cc4899 File Upload 11/12/2007 12:14:00 PM Comment by Giustina Resources 541-485-1500 (Peter Sikora)

Uploaded File:  BLM PLAN COMMENT_GR071112.doc
WC-434 WID-638 W-af88fbbc-1f4f-4d62-82a9-9f26f3b00949 Draft EIS 11/12/2007 12:20:00 PM I do not favor a forest plan that allows for an increase in the cutting of old growth timber. We do need to thin and manage our forest for the long term not just for short term economical gains. Protection of our watersheds should be a top priority. Not only for our fisheries and wildlife habitat but for the future water needs of our communities. Please be a good steward of this precious resource that belongs to all Americans, not just the timber industry. The timber industry must change if it is to survive in the long run. Don't create policies that only provide short term fixes for an industry but create long term problems for the rest of our communities.
WC-435 WID-535 None Interactive Map 11/13/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_photo|cb_hiking|cb_camping|cb_birdwatching|cb_importantspecies|cb_scenicbeauty|cb_relax|tb_4_other: One of a small percentage of mature forest stands left in the coastal range|cb_1-4timesyear|tb_gen_ans: Due to the small amount of mature stands of forest left, all of it must be set aside and allowed to remain intact. Additionally, other forests nearby must be allowed to mature in order to maintain the diversity for years to come in the event that mature forests burn and fall.
WC-436 WID-535 None Interactive Map 11/13/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_photo|tb_2_other: backpacking|cb_hiking|cb_camping|cb_birdwatching|cb_spiritual|cb_importantspecies|cb_scenicbeauty|cb_relax|tb_4_other: a mature diverse forest - healthy and gorgeous|cb_1-4timesyear|tb_gen_ans:
WC-437 WID-643 W-6bde438a-1a8f-44a6-b76f-281256cc220f Draft EIS 11/13/2007 8:55:00 AM We Oregonians love that fact that Oregon is still wild. It is wonderful to know that the ancient forest on Wassen Creek still thrives, as it is home to otters, owls, salmon, and steelhead. It is wonderful to know that the Devil's Staircase really exists. Once wilderness is gone, it's gone. Don't destroy the BLM part of the Wassen Creek Forest.
WC-438 WID-645 W-af2319ca-be30-444a-9247-b5fc19f33867 File Upload 11/13/2007 1:47:00 PM

Uploaded File:  WOPR Comments 2.0 FINAL SUBMITTED.doc
WC-439 WID-646 W-56757abe-af50-44c9-8284-fe5b1ea5be78 Draft EIS 11/13/2007 3:21:00 PM The main purpose of the O & C act was to provide both a stable flow of products and money into the local economies as well as protecting resources (water, air, habitat, etc.). I believe that the current set of alternatives does not fully address the issue of returns to the counties. Alternative 2 is the closest to reaching that mark, but by only considering 48% of the lands managed in trust by BLM, it appears to me that the maximum potential for producing revenue on a sustained yield basis has not been addressed. The approach of each of the alternatives starts by setting aside areas that will be used for other resources and then using the remaining area to produce timber and revenue. There needs to be an alternative that starts with the maximum sustained yield growth potential and then addresses each of the required protective measures to sustain habitat and air/water resources at the minimum level needed for sustainability. This approach would point out the trade offs and the compounded conservative approach used in the other alternatives and provide a decision making tool which will define the costs of each of the other alternatives. If an approach like this is not considered it seems to me that the BLM would not have met the requirements of the 9th Circuit Court when the NW Forest Plan was determined not to be consistant with the O & C Act.
WC-440 WID-648 W-0d1ba115-096c-45cb-813e-4a46f7c5b9ea Draft EIS 11/13/2007 11:10:00 PM To achieve a 100 year old tree rotation, a minimum for forest recovery, total acreage harvested each year needs to be limited to roughly 1 percent of the land base available for harvest, not based on board footage - base it on acreage. Any harvest should be sent to local mills only, not exported like what happened in the 80's when most of the logs were exported. If the timber grows in Douglas County it should be turned into lumber in Douglas County, not single cut and exported. That is the reason for the harvest, to sustain the local community. Herbicides should be forbidden to allow wildlife to recover, chemicals are decimating the fish and wildlife from the private timber operations.
WC-441 WID-543 None Interactive Map 11/14/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_photo|cb_hiking|cb_camping|cb_birdwatching|cb_1-4timesyear|tb_gen_ans:
WC-442 WID-543 None Interactive Map 11/14/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from undefined: Last time I visited the area there was an apparent mining claim on Brice Creek just west of the campground bridge. I am very concerned about both habitat degradation and public access.
WC-443 WID-32 None Interactive Map 11/14/2007 12:00:00 AM tb_1_other: ride my trail machine|cb_dirtbiking|cb_relax|cb_onceamonth|tb_gen_ans: Keep the left fork of Foot's Creek road open to public for escape from the pressure of living in the valley, work, etc.and riding my quiet trail machine. %0DAlso, by keeping this open to public access, it will take some of the pressure off of the Jacksonville residents, who have a lot of people come thru 'Reservoir Road' as a main entry point to enjoy family outings as well as O.H.V. recreation.
WC-444 WID-32 None Interactive Map 11/14/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_dirtbiking|cb_onceamonth|tb_gen_ans: Keep the left fork of Foot's Creek road open to public for escape from the pressure of living in the valley, work, etc.and riding my quiet trail machine. %0DAlso, by keeping this open to public access, it will take some of the pressure off of the Jacksonville residents, who have a lot of people come thru 'Reservoir Road' as a main entry point to enjoy family outings as well as O.H.V. recreation.
WC-445 WID-651 None Interactive Map 11/14/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_photo|tb_2_other: Paragliding|cb_mtnbiking|cb_scenicbeauty|cb_daily|tb_gen_ans:
WC-446 WID-649 W-ce9d8f1f-77fa-471f-b545-6f4b125f466c Draft EIS 11/14/2007 1:48:00 PM As a concerned citizen of Oregon, I oppose the draft Western Oregon Plan Revision in its present form on the grounds that it is too extreme, and poses serious threats to the wildlife, watersheds, and quality of life in Oregon. The unsustainable increase in logging allowed in the plan would create a severe fire risk, decimate the precious few remaining old growth stands, potentially contribute more to global warming, and negatively impact fishing, hunting and recreational activities in the state. Unfortunately, none of the alternative plans provided address these crucial issues in a meaningful way; rather, each seems to be balanced in favor of boosting timber revenues. Please reshape the Oregon Plan to better reflect the values that Oregonians like myself hold dear. Thank you for considering my comments. Respectfully, Christopher Johnson Portland, Oregon
WC-447 WID-653 W-8d06765b-8058-45f0-b3ec-78e25b09fead File Upload 11/14/2007 5:49:00 PM

Uploaded File:  blm.txt
WC-448 WID-129 W-5b574fb9-721a-46a3-a76f-1c4ad255d252 Draft EIS 11/15/2007 2:43:00 PM While invasive species and "special status" species are mentioned, there does not appear to be any real management plan for either. For example, in the case of T&E species, where extirpation is imminent, a call for plant salvagers in advance of the proposed management could occur. Where invasives are of concern, which ought to be everywhere on BLM lands, plans for prevention, containment and control should be in place.
WC-449 WID-129 W-e5b90d23-962a-4e6b-9e09-eba3d97a18d6 Draft EIS 11/15/2007 2:58:00 PM "Meadow Knapweed" is the correct spelling. In the EIS, it is spelled, "medow knapweed".
WC-450 WID-129 W-b97b6b3b-4388-4a56-b47f-2928331d4da4 Draft EIS 11/15/2007 3:23:00 PM (Botany section) Despite the mention that "no damage or loss of ocupied habitat..." would occur for listed plant species, this says nothing of the fact that habitat would be limited and lack connectivity as a direct result of the actions described in all three action plans.
WC-451 WID-129 W-4742c63d-1f6b-4dad-9f22-87807a712388 Draft EIS 11/15/2007 3:34:00 PM Regarding the mitigation measures for invasive species, it would be helpful to mention not just the retention of native vegetation, but also the replacement. Restoration is often part of BLM projects, and forest activities should not be an exception. Despite the mentioned mitigation measures, open, disturbed soil is very likely to attract invasive species. Their establishment then puts the remainder of the adjacent BLM lands at risk, as well as all neighboring properties. Revegetation in advance of infestion could prevent new invasions, and would also support other mandates such as erosion control and water quality standards.
WC-452 WID-129 W-d7ea4c1e-d8c4-4314-8b49-0e5f2df77bad Draft EIS 11/15/2007 3:38:00 PM Generally speaking, it appears that the action alternatives provided are based on fiscal gain rather than biological, ecological, water/air quality impacts. While economic support for the BLM and for counties is important, long-term thinking should lead most readers to the conclusion that fiscal gain now may lead to reduced environmental quality and quality of life in the future.
WC-453 WID-656 W-6ce2f53c-e122-480d-8c24-e188c616754e Draft EIS 11/16/2007 6:52:00 AM My family my friends and I ride in mainly in the Chiloquin and Keno areas and if we lose them the closest place for us to ride is in Jacksonville OR 2 hours away. Chiloquin and Keno have the potential to be sustainable and active areas with very little land management. The riders I've met there and the groups I ride with are sensitive to the local environment and even clean up litter left by "non-riders". Off-roaders want to be able to ride and for the most part will do anything to keep our riding areas open. I ride in these two areas but there's a lot of Oregon that I haven't explored and I would like to be able to do so. Whether it be in a Jeep on a horse an ATV or a dirt bike I'd like to be afforded the opportunity to explore them one day. It's important for me to retain the right to utilize public land but if there must be regulation then please consider the designation of certain areas as OHV. I don't hunt but if I did I would like to be able to drive my ATV into ANY forest and pick up my downed game. It's public land and off-roaders are mostly an honorable group and we respect the environment. If you close these public lands then the honest people will no longer ride on them but those who do not respect the laws and certainly do not respect the land will still be there tearing it up and dumping their garbage. Before regulating become involved in the areas that we love to ride and take some time to connect with the off-road community. See how we use the land and then make a determination.
WC-454 WID-666 W-75267c2d-0025-4805-9167-8be1539f4dcb Draft EIS 11/16/2007 6:37:00 PM I'm overwhelmed with information, and I don't have the hours to spare to closely read all of the proposed alternatives! And this statement intimidates me somewhat: Numerous comments that repeat the same basic message of support or opposition will typically be responded to collectively. General comments that simply state that an action will have significant environmental consequences may not help the agency make a better decision unless the relevant causes and environmental consequences of concern are explained. Nevertheless, I feel I must comment. Please, please, leave remaining old growth forests intact as your first priority. Please maximize protection of riparian areas. Please do everything you can to protect the integrity of forest systems. Although comments like mine may be of no use to you, I hope at least that there will be a strong public record of opposition to increased negative impacts on our forests.
WC-455 WID-671 None Interactive Map 11/17/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_fulltime|cb_importantspecies|cb_daily|tb_gen_ans: This area has been wild for at least ten years that I know of. Developers are incroaching on the East near the forest road in the forest and animals that we have never seen are now roaming the area as they have their homes destroyed by total forest uprooting and clearing with bulldozing to clear land that was previously thought unbuildable. Animals recently spotted by residents include bears, cougar and coyote. Smaller animals such as chipmunks, raccoons, porcupines and rats are now becoming visitors to our neighborhood.Already, last year developers cleared the forest NW of our home and we saw an influx of wildlife from that mess too. That devolper remarked that the homes he plans to erect will cost over %24400,000. One wonders in a city such as Newport with a population of about 10,000 with little or no high income jobs where owners for these homes will come from%3F
WC-456 WID-681 None Interactive Map 11/17/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_fulltime|tb_gen_ans:
WC-457 WID-681 None Interactive Map 11/17/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_fulltime|tb_gen_ans:
WC-458 WID-681 None Interactive Map 11/17/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_daily|tb_gen_ans:
WC-459 WID-681 None Interactive Map 11/17/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_daily|tb_gen_ans:
WC-460 WID-670 None Web Forum Exit 11/17/2007 10:55:00 AM Can be hard to find info when looking at the interactive maps -- such as age of forest in specific sections. Unsure if comment thru this site is as good as commenting by mail or on the BLM website. I do like the ability to focus on local sections for information.
WC-461 WID-672 W-af60ce1c-5780-4b65-831c-835574d0aaa2 Draft EIS 11/17/2007 11:45:00 AM We have an retail orchard and wholesale nursery on our 7+ acres, situated below the area for off the road use. We have lived at this address and an address on Old Military Road for over 20 years. We are opposed to any expansion of any off the road vehicle use on the drainages above and in the immediate area of Jacksonville. We have seen the degradation of the area caused by the off the road vehicles and their owners. They throw trash, drive excessively fast (on our road, where we have customers entering and leaving the road), cause excessive noise, and cause excessive traffic in the area of the use now. In addition to the damage to the woodland area, most of the engines are two stroke, which are terrible for air quality. My wife is an asthmatic and the air quality is bad enough in the valley, without expanding the use area. If people want to use their off the road vehicles, there are other areas in the valley that can be used. Sincerely, Gary and Chris Pellett Old Stage Orchards Newflora LLC Nursery
WC-462 WID-678 W-de266a6a-1c5f-4de6-891d-32e9b811b20b Draft EIS 11/17/2007 5:37:00 PM My wife and I have lived in the Jacksonville/Ruch area for 20 years and we both grew up in the area. As a kid I used to ride in the hills above Jacksonville in fact I would say that people have been riding around John's Peak for close to 40 years. We currently have and ride two four wheelers all around Southern Oregon. One of the great things about living in this area is the ability to get out into the woods by riding trails or old logging roads. Please don't shut down our public lands because a vocal miniorty wants to ban all use of our public lands. It's bad enough that they have shut down the timber industry. Don't let them shut down a good recreational activity. Working together riders and the BLM can maintain and expand the trail system which can be good for proper forest management by creating fire breaks andby providing animal trails. Thank You Gary McAlister
WC-463 WID-684 W-c698ffd2-650f-4f32-b61f-f6033a9fd40b Draft EIS 11/17/2007 10:41:00 PM Please consider that old growth trees and forests have much more value to our global environment and our future generations of yet unborn children than any of your proposed short term dollars added to an unsustainable economy. The proposed destruction of these forests does not meet even our current needs for providing adequate quantities of lumber and the forestry practices used to harvest these trees will only serve to further destroy what little precious areas that remain in a somewhat natural state. Monoculture forests are not natural. Without more natural areas on our planet, the human race is doomed to the same destruction. Don't let this happen. THrow out this bushy plan and think it over. Take the courage of being fully human, enough to have real trees and forests with rivers and natural spaces. We don't need to generate more paper to burn. We need to hear the wild calling us to be truly human.
WC-464 WID-685 W-e0e9d309-8f63-48e7-8983-d27336c7fdfb Draft EIS 11/17/2007 11:44:00 PM www.ajsconnect.wordpress.com I have two degrees in Biology and Env. Sci. and will be completing my M.S. at OSU in Water Resources. Regarding the BLM DEIS: First, I find it difficult for any agency to effectively manage lands that are so fragmented and "checkerboarded" as the BLM and I commend those within BLM who strive for this goal: what I would hope is the true mission of the BLM employees at the "ground level". It's clear to me that BLM lands are primarily in a state of regrowth with diminished old growth reserves and are acting accordingly to ensure sustainable timber yields through time. my substantive comments on the current BLM DEIS WOPR Plan are as follows: 1.) It should be obvious that the driving force for the BLM endorsed Alternative two is socioeconomic (as shown on LII). The BLM alterantive 2 (ALT 2) shows the only positive "economic impact" as shown in table 2 on LIII. THIS IS OVERSTATED- there is no way to determine future earnings from past data in economics or BLMs focus on "sustained" supply of forest products. The error and uncertainty with using NPV to compute these figures with discount rates that cannot take into account economic cycles of extreme nature e.g. recession or environmental e.g. massive fires. FOR THIS REASON I find this data ERRONEOUS and VOIDS BLMs Alternative 2 endorsement based on the socioeconomics data reported. This means I ENDORSE NO CHANGE until new figures that compute uncertainty within some standard deviations are documented and made available to the public. 2.) There is too high of risk for increasing timber extraction near streams as called for under Alternative 2. 100 ft buffers are not able to adapt to the ecological,pulse and flood cycles of streams and will, as stated by the BLM negatively impact habitat through increased invasives and damaged riparian zones that fluctuate year to year. I support NO CHANGE TO RIPARIAN management zones unless natural variability on a watershed to watershed basis is taken into account by district managers. WITH INVASIVES as the #2 "threat to USFS forests" the BLMs cousin agency and co-forest land manager, the BLM should follow USFS with increased care to mitigate and prevent NOXIOUS AND INVASIVES plants to ensure sustained forest products bearing lands. 3.) AND FINALLY BLM needs to decrease reliance on PFC (Proper Functioning Condition) as a means to " maintain and restore" management and status of a riparian/stream/watershed as STATED IN CHAPTER 2 of WATER OVERVIEW of the BLM DEIS. THE PFC is rough and requires further data to determine the change in the quality of the surface water resource area through time. THE PFC should not be a stand alone "COMMON MANAGEMENT (Chapter 2) measure for Water/watershed Quality management in drainages under any alternatives and needs to be revised and incorporate basin to basin variability into the management structure prior to an ALTERNATIVE being chosen.
WC-465 WID-685 W-fba91f07-6cc8-4425-bc36-616aea62778b Draft EIS 11/17/2007 11:45:00 PM www.ajsconnect.wordpress.com I have two degrees in Biology and Env. Sci. and will be completing my M.S. at OSU in Water Resources. First, I find it difficult for any agency to effectively manage lands that are so fragmented and "checkerboarded" as the BLM and I commend those within BLM who strive for this goal: what I would hope is the true mission of the BLM employees at the "ground level". It's clear to me that BLM lands are primarily in a state of regrowth with diminished old growth reserves and are acting accordingly to ensure sustainable timber yields through time. my substantive comments on the BLM DEIS WOPR Plan are as follows: 1.) It should be obvious that the driving force for the BLM endorsed Alternative two is socioeconomic (as shown on LII). The BLM alterantive 2 (ALT 2) shows the only positive "economic impact" as shown in table 2 on LIII. THIS IS OVERSTATED- there is no way to determine future earnings from past data in economics or BLMs focus on "sustained" supply of forest products. The error and uncertainty with using NPV to compute these figures with discount rates that cannot take into account economic cycles of extreme nature e.g. recession or environmental e.g. massive fires. FOR THIS REASON I find this data ERRONEOUS and VOIDS BLMs Alternative 2 endorsement based on the socioeconomics data reported. This means I ENDORSE NO CHANGE until new figures that compute uncertainty within some standard deviations are documented and made available to the public. 2.) There is too high of risk for increasing timber extraction near streams as called for under Alternative 2. 100 ft buffers are not able to adapt to the ecological,pulse and flood cycles of streams and will, as stated by the BLM negatively impact habitat through increased invasives and damaged riparian zones that fluctuate year to year. I support NO CHANGE TO RIPARIAN management zones unless natural variability on a watershed to watershed basis is taken into account by district managers. WITH INVASIVES as the #2 "threat to USFS forests" the BLMs cousin agency and co-forest land manager, the BLM should follow USFS with increased care to mitigate and prevent NOXIOUS AND INVASIVES plants to ensure sustained forest products bearing lands. 3.) AND FINALLY BLM needs to decrease reliance on PFC (Proper Functioning Condition) as a means to " maintain and restore" management and status of a riparian/stream/watershed as STATED IN CHAPTER 2 of WATER OVERVIEW of the BLM DEIS. THE PFC is rough and requires further data to determine the change in the quality of the surface water resource area through time. THE PFC should not be a stand alone "COMMON MANAGEMENT (Chapter 2) measure for Water/watershed Quality management in drainages under any alternatives and needs to be revised and incorporate basin to basin variability into the management structure prior to an ALTERNATIVE being chosen.
WC-466 WID-685 W-7b683b3a-7ad1-44e9-8bec-6aace9cb896c Draft EIS 11/17/2007 11:55:00 PM I have two degrees in Biology and Env Sci. I'm currently a M.S. in water resources at OSU: www.Ajsconnect.wordpress.com My substantive comments on the BLM DEIS for WOPR are as follows: 1.) The socioeconomic drivers for the Alternative 2 endorsement (table 2 LIII) are erroneous and void- NPV and discount rates don't take into account economic downturns e.g. recessions, or environmental events e.g. massive stand replacing fires. Therefore I SUPPORT NO ALTERNATIVE until uncertainy within some standard deviation is created for these values that appear to be driving BLMs endorsement of ALT 2. 2.) Riparian areas are dynamic ecological and physical areas that pulse and flood at different levels in different watersheds. I ENDORSE NO CHANGE to riparian area management until BLM recognizes the threat from invasives (a #2 threat to lands on USFS property) and manages for the publics water resource areas on a locational, site by site basis. 3.) PFC or proper functioning condition is too coarse for CHAPTER 2 overview of management- the PFC will not and cannot tell BLM managers how water quality/riparian areas are changing through time to any degree of certainty. I endores NO CHANGE until PFC is supplemente with watershed analyses when timber/extraction/management effects will be occuring in a basin. lastly, I commend all those in BLM who try to manage a disconnected, "checkerboarded" land conglomerate as the BLM on-the-ground employees try to do on a daily basis. Good luck and God Bless.
WC-467 WID-685 W-1c85a9dd-2c3d-4f5d-90e6-c10d756d2df8 Draft EIS 11/17/2007 11:55:00 PM I have two degrees in Biology and Env Sci. I'm currently a M.S. in water resources at OSU: www.Ajsconnect.wordpress.com My substantive comments on the BLM DEIS for WOPR are as follows: 1.) The socioeconomic drivers for the Alternative 2 endorsement (table 2 LIII) are erroneous and void- NPV and discount rates don't take into account economic downturns e.g. recessions, or environmental events e.g. massive stand replacing fires. Therefore I SUPPORT NO ALTERNATIVE until uncertainy within some standard deviation is created for these values that appear to be driving BLMs endorsement of ALT 2. 2.) Riparian areas are dynamic ecological and physical areas that pulse and flood at different levels in different watersheds. I ENDORSE NO CHANGE to riparian area management until BLM recognizes the threat from invasives (a #2 threat to lands on USFS property) and manages for the publics water resource areas on a locational, site by site basis. 3.) PFC or proper functioning condition is too coarse for CHAPTER 2 overview of management- the PFC will not and cannot tell BLM managers how water quality/riparian areas are changing through time to any degree of certainty. I endores NO CHANGE until PFC is supplemente with watershed analyses when timber/extraction/management effects will be occuring in a basin. lastly, I commend all those in BLM who try to manage a disconnected, "checkerboarded" land conglomerate as the BLM on-the-ground employees try to do on a daily basis. Good luck and God Bless.
WC-468 WID-685 W-a01b8f6d-e0be-414f-93b3-704707bba5ad Draft EIS 11/17/2007 11:56:00 PM I have two degrees in Biology and Env Sci. I'm currently a M.S. in water resources at OSU: www.Ajsconnect.wordpress.com My substantive comments on the BLM DEIS for WOPR are as follows: 1.) The socioeconomic drivers for the Alternative 2 endorsement (table 2 LIII) are erroneous and void- NPV and discount rates don't take into account economic downturns e.g. recessions, or environmental events e.g. massive stand replacing fires. Therefore I SUPPORT NO ALTERNATIVE until uncertainy within some standard deviation is created for these values that appear to be driving BLMs endorsement of ALT 2. 2.) Riparian areas are dynamic ecological and physical areas that pulse and flood at different levels in different watersheds. I ENDORSE NO CHANGE to riparian area management until BLM recognizes the threat from invasives (a #2 threat to lands on USFS property) and manages for the publics water resource areas on a locational, site by site basis. 3.) PFC or proper functioning condition is too coarse for CHAPTER 2 overview of management- the PFC will not and cannot tell BLM managers how water quality/riparian areas are changing through time to any degree of certainty. I endores NO CHANGE until PFC is supplemente with watershed analyses when timber/extraction/management effects will be occuring in a basin. lastly, I commend all those in BLM who try to manage a disconnected, "checkerboarded" land conglomerate as the BLM on-the-ground employees try to do on a daily basis. Good luck and God Bless.
WC-469 WID-685 W-22519195-a047-4adb-9c4d-316e58c64ffc File Upload 11/17/2007 11:58:00 PM The user interface is substandard, in that it should be made clear that one can lose all written comments if web browser fails to upload properly.

Uploaded File:  NOTE TO WOPR WEB FORUM.doc
WC-470 WID-689 None Interactive Map 11/19/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from No Action: I am disabled and can't walk more than about 50 yards. I use an ATV to enjoy the outdoors and to hunt and fish with. By changing some of the rules you will efectivly ban me from the forests that I like to enjoy too. The forests shouldn't only be able to be used by able bodied people. They should be there for everyone to use even the people that can't walk.
WC-471 WID-695 None Interactive Map 11/19/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_fulltime|tb_gen_ans:
WC-472 WID-688 W-1b29a196-bba9-4a25-8b97-a37c477d272c Draft EIS 11/19/2007 8:45:00 AM My husband and I have lived on Old Military Rd in Central Point, OR, for 29 years. We have a beautiful home and we've put a lot of time, energy, and money into maintaining it. I'm writing regarding the ATV emphasis in the John's Peak area. On weekends over the last several years we increasingly have to listen to the relentless roar of motorcycles and ATVs coming from Johns Peak. The noise is irritating because of it's shrillness and a real intrusion in our lives. Because of the way sound travels off the hills we hear the motors as if they are right behind our house. Please don't allow any expansion of the ATV use in the John's Peake area. There are so many people whose lives and property values will be affected if this is allowed to happen. Thanks for listening. Trish Narus
WC-473 WID-677 W-4efec567-a82a-4578-a107-73220e0e4f40 Draft EIS 11/19/2007 9:33:00 AM I am absolutely outraged about the proposed WOPR. The BLM is chartered to be stewards of our public lands and is instead proposing destruction of the last remaining Western old growth forests. At a time when global warming threatens the very future of our planet, the WOPR alternatives would seriously reduce clean air and water, reduce carbon storage necessary to combat climate change, further threaten endangered species, and worst of all, destroy the entire old growth ecosystem itself. This WOPR is without question politically motivated; a blatant give-away of prime natural resources to the timber industry, a backroom sweetheart deal to reward the corporate sponsors of the Bush Administration prior to the next election. If the BLM cannot maintain its independence from this kind of political pressure, those responsible for this travesty can be absolutely certain that citizen groups will not rest until there is a thorough house-cleaning at the BLM after the next election. I demand that the WOPR be withdrawn immediately. Neal Miller
WC-474 WID-698 W-54805174-1d8f-43de-8fb5-7de40caaea1f Draft EIS 11/19/2007 9:11:00 PM I hgave not read the entire draft. My problems lie with common sence growing up in Seaside, Oregon. I hunt, fish, camp, and off-road where it is legal. What I'm seeing is redicules. The trees you leave for habitatand fish get blown over by the wind limiting Deer and Elk from getting to their water rights. When we make more wilderness, We make it tough to fight fires. And the more we cut OHV areas, the more condenced riding on other areas and the envi impact is worse. I also want to know what is so wrong with erosion if you control the runoff? Wasn't this landscape created by creeks and rivers erodeing. If we are so concerned about the envirment. Why are we letting the cities wipe out all fir trees to build homes. We used to build among the trees. Logging and replanting is the way to true envirmont. Let us have our lands for all users. Loggers, hunters, ohv, nature enthusiests, fisherman, campers, nountain bikers, equestrians, and hikers. That's all I have to say.
WC-475 WID-706 None Interactive Map 11/20/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_hunting|tb_gen_ans:
WC-476 WID-710 W-ba24ec0d-3780-4a95-8d21-be61ae149cfd Draft EIS 11/22/2007 8:28:00 AM No action alternative - keep your greedy hands off of our trees!
WC-477 WID-711 W-4b28c490-330c-42e8-a084-8667ecf762c6 Draft EIS 11/22/2007 8:30:00 AM No action alternative. We want to keep Oregon green, that's why we choose to live here. Don't destroy my state.
WC-478 WID-713 None Interactive Map 11/23/2007 12:00:00 AM tb_1_other: Conservation|cb_onceaweek|tb_gen_ans: This land adjoins our property. %0DWant to know what to expect in the future.
WC-479 WID-716 None Interactive Map 11/23/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_farming|cb_fulltime|cb_importantspecies|tb_gen_ans:
WC-480 WID-713 None Interactive Map 11/23/2007 12:00:00 AM tb_1_other: Conservation|cb_onceaweek|tb_gen_ans: We bought this property early in 2007. We love to visit. Plant grass for dear and other wildlife. Improve the property as a habitat for animals.
WC-481 WID-713 None Interactive Map 11/23/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from Land Ownership: 890 we have purchased this parcel and want to know what is going on around it particularly in the BLM areas
WC-482 WID-719 None Interactive Map 11/24/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_parttime|tb_gen_ans:
WC-483 WID-718 W-f899c252-6d3d-4aa1-99ee-1eb2a3b6a8ae Draft EIS 11/24/2007 12:11:00 PM I do not think that opening up our forests to more logging is the answer to the economic challenges we face in Oregon. I am frankly tired of our forest continually being sold off for next to nothing for supposed "economic" benefit. Who benefits here? The people of Oregon or corporations who convieniently line the pockets of our current administration in Washington. Let us see the value of our forest for watershed protection, wildlife habitat, clean air, and simple beauty. All of these things are priceless and may be unimportant for someone who only sees the value of a forest in board feet, but we the people are aware of the importance of forests that are an increasingly endangered thing here in the Northwest, for I cannot look in any direction in my state without seeing clearcut after clearcut, barren hills where once stood majestic forest.
WC-484 WID-722 W-aa3042f0-a588-49b8-83b9-893242f189c2 Draft EIS 11/25/2007 7:41:00 AM The proposed alternatives of your Western Oregon Plan Revisions are no different from every other "alternative" BLM has pursued on public land-rape, pillage of the public domain all for the benefit of the corporate oligarchy that's slowly destroying America.MY preferred alternative would be to abolish your corrupt-to-the-core agency so that our land can heal, but, alas!, you don't offer THAT alternative so, of all the proposed alternatives, i vote for NO ALTERNATIVE.
WC-485 WID-725 W-a4033e98-9b08-42cb-875b-38361e6acf6e Draft EIS 11/25/2007 3:33:00 PM I am totally against designating specific BLM lands for off road vehicle use. Environmentally off road vehicles damage all the things you say you are concerned with air water land noise. Let the off roaders use private land. On November 4th I read an article in the Mail Tribune written by Neal Anderson of the Applegate Valley. The article was titled, Off-Highway Vehicle proposals not fair or balanced. I agree with all that Neal Anderson said.....The article was well written and included facts and figures about environmental damage caused by off road vehicles,NO NO NO. Thank you for taking my comment.....
WC-486 WID-728 W-ca48a494-de17-44e0-a4db-785ec4e3bad9 Draft EIS 11/25/2007 10:31:00 PM I urge the Oregon office of BLM to adopt the 'No Action' alternative and continue to manage the public land under BLM as promulgated under the 1995 as amended.
WC-487 WID-730 None Interactive Map 11/26/2007 12:00:00 AM tb_gen_ans:
WC-488 WID-733 None Interactive Map 11/26/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_tourism|cb_hiking|tb_gen_ans:
WC-489 WID-739 None Interactive Map 11/26/2007 12:00:00 AM tb_gen_ans:
WC-490 WID-739 None Interactive Map 11/26/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from Land Ownership: test
WC-491 WID-738 None Interactive Map 11/26/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_hunting|cb_dirtbiking|cb_mtnbiking|cb_ohv|cb_scenicbeauty|cb_relax|cb_onceamonth|tb_gen_ans: I request the following specific areas to be %E2%80%9COHV emphasis areas%E2%80%9D and the entire Klamath BLM inventory with open public access be considered for OHV emphasis as well. Requested Areas%3A%0D- Chase%2FHamaker%2FKlamath River, Surveyor, and Gerber block BLM lands. known more specifically as%3B%0D-Township 40S, range 6&7 and part of 5%0D-Township 39S, range 5 %2B6%0D-Township 38S, range 5%2B6%0DGerber block.I also believe in these points presented by the MRA (Southern Oregon motorcycle riders association) need to be addressed. %0D1.%09The Department of Interior Resource Management Plans must be aligned for continuity with Department of Agriculture U.S.F.S. Resource Management Plans, especially concerning O.H.V. Recreation us in Riparian Areas and Late success ional reserves(L.S.R.), both which are sustainable, desirable OHV recreation use areas. Scientifically, the exclusion of OHV recreation from parts of these areas can be a situational decision, but OHV Recreation must not continue to be categorically excluded from these area by administrative doctrine. This is a major reason why higher quality OHV recreation facilities exist on U.S.F.S. managed lands, and not on B.L.M. managed lands in our area.%0D2.%09There are no proposed trails for OHV recreation, in spite of dozens of proposed trails for non-motorized uses. This is an embarrassing omission. Motorized use is increasing at a much faster rate than non-motorized, especially in this area. Motorized recreation also has a greater proven ability to pay for the mileage required for it. Proposed trails and trail mileage for motorized recreation should greatly exceed trail quantity for other uses.%0D3.%09I need specific information about the decision making process employed for final selection of the OHV emphasis areas. What specifically are the criteria for final selection of an area%3F Comment numbers%3F Complaint%3F Funding%3F %0D4. %09Socio Economic Considerations to human environments require more thorough analysis and greater sensitivity than in past document efforts. Financial and Social impacts to citizens, groups, cities and economies need to have greater standing in these decision documents, with a standing a
WC-492 WID-739 None Interactive Map 11/26/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_tourism|tb_gen_ans:
WC-493 WID-738 None Interactive Map 11/26/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_dirtbiking|cb_mtnbiking|cb_ohv|cb_relax|cb_onceamonth|tb_gen_ans: I support the 13 OHV emphasis areas on the WOPR for the medford area. I support the MRA's site specific trails that have been submitted.%0DAs two pharmacists in southern oregon, we enjoy the OHV areas in Medford and have considered relocating because of them. We have two children we would like to have enjoy the area on OHV's someday as well. I also support the 14 talking points provided by the MRA for this area. Thank You Thad Kohler and Family. %0DTalking points are. %0D1. The Department of Interior Resource Management Plans must be aligned for continuity with Department of Agriculture U.S.F.S. Resource Management Plans, especially concerning O.H.V. Recreation us in Riparian Areas and Late success ional reserves(L.S.R.), both which are sustainable, desirable OHV recreation use areas. Scientifically, the exclusion of OHV recreation from parts of these areas can be a situational decision, but OHV Recreation must not continue to be categorically excluded from these area by administrative doctrine. This is a major reason why higher quality OHV recreation facilities exist on U.S.F.S. managed lands, and not on B.L.M. managed lands in our area.%0D2. There are no proposed trails for OHV recreation, in spite of dozens of proposed trails for non-motorized uses.(page 134, volume 1) This is an embarrassing omission. Motorized use is increasing at a much faster rate than non-motorized, especially in this area. Motorized recreation also has a greater proven ability to pay for the mileage required for it. Proposed trails and trail mileage for motorized recreation should greatly exceed trail quantity for other uses.%0D3. Tallow Box Mountain area in Ruch%2FApplegate is a known use area proposed for OHV events by previous BLM District Manager, Richard Drehobl, yet is not included as an emphasis area. It is contiguous to the Anderson Butte, Johns Peak, and Ferris Gulch use areas and I require its inclusion as an OHV emphasis area.%0D4. BLM and O&C lands are designated by congress to provide a sustainable timber supply as well as developed recreation facilities. However, the public domain lands(PD) are not subject to this same timber standard yet are
WC-494 WID-740 None Interactive Map 11/26/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from No Action: I support the No Action alternative.Please stop all harvesting of old growth forests%21
WC-495 WID-737 W-3ce87c6c-cf52-4f63-ba79-04f663e1db27 Draft EIS 11/26/2007 6:25:00 PM Thank you for reading & offering public commentary. I vote for the No Action Alternative. Land increases for timber harvest proves the unsustainablilty of current logging practices. If more land is needed in order to create a sustainable logging practice that doesn't involve clear cutting, then I would be for it. I have witnessed the Oregon forests slowly disappearing over the last 40yrs & severely in the last 7 yrs. Obviously clear cuts do not recover any where near fast enough in order to reharvest and create a sustainable resource which is absolutely necessary. Eventhough I am a contractor, I cannot believe how many new lands have been devestated and left unplanted. I need lumber for my job, but current forest management doesn't sustain harvests with a set amount of land, THEN IT DOESN'T WORK! Listen to your new forest engineers graduating college for some new ideas, clear cutting has just left miles of dead land, just look at the Olympic National Forest. Thanks
WC-496 WID-741 W-968d989f-0eb4-4f7e-a86a-ff39bc363e36 Draft EIS 11/26/2007 9:29:00 PM LEAVE THE OLD GROWTH ALONE.BY THE TIME YOU LOG IT YOU NO LONGER HAVE A FOREST,JUST A TREE FARM
WC-497 WID-740 W-cc160895-c7dc-4026-a971-4cab56361b04 File Upload 11/26/2007 9:38:00 PM

Uploaded File:  WOPR.txt
WC-498 WID-742 W-b5e78d70-b0c1-4a36-92e9-087d63369942 File Upload 11/26/2007 9:46:00 PM

Uploaded File:  I am unhappy to see that so much of the Plan is an apology for its conclusions.doc
WC-499 WID-744 W-9ffbe025-67f4-4056-9542-7d3ff4ecb687 Draft EIS 11/26/2007 10:47:00 PM I have grown up in the Timber industry and realize the importance of logging for our state, but we have cut too much and our ecosystem is suffering. We cannot duplicate the old growth ecosystem in a timber managed forest, and we don't have enough of this habitat left to sustain this type of ecosystem. Therefore we are at a point where we have to rely on public lands to protect and recreate old growth habitat. In the long run this will be far more important to the success of our species on this planet than the funding of county budgets. Please do not sell off our states' resources/legacy to fix a temporary problem that can be resolved with other funding sources as it is in most other counties across the nation. Alan Ayres 11/26/2007 (sixth generation Oregonian)
WC-500 WID-745 None Interactive Map 11/27/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_fulltime|tb_gen_ans:
USA.GOV  |  No Fear Act  |  DOI  |  Disclaimer  |  About BLM  |  Notices  |  Get Adobe Reader