Home > Forum > Categories > Random Tracks > Crystal Mountain FEIS and Record of Decision

Crystal Mountain FEIS and Record of Decision

  • Matt
  • User
  • User
More
21 years 6 months ago #169678 by Matt
You guys/gals really should read through parts of the report, someone in government has allot of free time. I know I don't have the time to play this game. <br><br>The boundary closure results from the type of classification they give the area. This classification dictates the number of trips or type of impact allowed in the area. They have estimated the impact, poorly in my opinion, as they use the high estimation of 100-700 skiers per year ski to 410. From the expected growth they determined the skier trips will exceed the set amount for the area at some point. It seems and I don't do law stuff, we or someone will have to prove this area will not see the skier growth they expect or reclassify the area to allow more use. <br><br>Anyone?????? you have 44 days....

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Matt
  • User
  • User
More
21 years 5 months ago - 21 years 5 months ago #169688 by Matt
If you ski at crystal or anywhere else and enjoy the backcountry, please take the time to write something or copy a form letter and send it in.  <br><br>This is a good start from Teton Gravity forum (copied without permission), but it will need less hearsay and more facts of why the impact is minimal.  Just to say "I have done it for years why change now" might not cut it.  I would hope that you would give them some fruits of your research into this matter.   So please re-write as you see fit and send it in.  PLEASE DON'T GET NASTY it will not help our cause!!!  <br><br>The Forest Service and the government will/should give access to any information that you request.  The more people that look into the ruling the better chance we have to eliminate the sections we don't like.<br><br>What think I know (dangerous).......The boundary closure is written in the ruling in several places and references land classification The Forest Service and The National Park give areas to protect them from over use or maintain a specific level of use.  They expect the use of these areas to exceed this magical number at some point hence the boundary closure.  <br><br> tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14986 <br><br><br>OK, here's the deal with regard to the boundary closure: there's 45 days in which we have time to register an appeal. <br>You can do it electronically via: <br>appeals-pacificnorthwest-regional-office@fs.fed.us

or by US post at:
Appeals Deciding Officer
Attention: 1570 Appeals
333 S.W. First Avenue
Portland, OR
97208-3623
FAX:503-808-2255

(removed did not meet the rules)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • J.P.
  • User
  • User
More
21 years 5 months ago #169690 by J.P.
For those who want to make sure that their appeal is taken seriously (or even accepted as valid), you will want to take the time to carefully analyze Code of Federal Regulations 36 CFR 215.14 (Content of an Appeal).<br><br>This Federal code section, refereced in the official Record of Decision Section 9.0, provides detailed information required for an appeal to be considered valid.<br><br>I have not reviewed the above copied TGR letter to see if it meets all of these criteria, but those hoping for serious consideration of their appeal should read the CFR carefully.<br><br>I will attempt to post a link to a site where you can obtain this code section below:<br><br> frwebgate1.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisga...&WAISaction=retrieve


J.P.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Joedabaker
  • User
  • User
More
21 years 5 months ago - 21 years 5 months ago #169695 by Joedabaker
Replied by Joedabaker on topic Re: Crystal Mountain FEIS and Record of Decision
Thanks to all who have flooded me with Email on this subject. This is a very important subject not just because of the potential closures, but the precedence set by the Forest Service. <br><br>Silas, Lapaz25 and I had skied at Sunrise one June Sunday, a Park Ranger took a lazy stroll over to my truck to ask how our skiing was. I am in sales and I know a pitch a mile away. The Ranger verbally danced around asking where we had skied (since there was no noticable snow in sight). I told him where we skied. He then said that there were reports of some skiers hiking off trail out at Burroughs and that they were concerned over the damage to the area. I said it was not us. His pitch turned around and said that if people continue to hike off the trail they may (have) plan(s) to close Sunrise in the future to all skiers and boarders. Then I got on him about Ewe's plan to keep Crystal skiers off of 410 and said that plan just set up precedence so Ewe could close all of the MR White River Park area so no one could enjoy the terrain. I said," What about the public that gets out of their cars and walks right on these fragile meadows next to the signs that tell them not to?? Are we going to close Sunrise Park because of them?? He told me it was my right to tell that public to get off of the meadows. I said the sign is right there and they are 5 feet from the sign and I am supposed to police that ignorance. I went on to state, "Skiing won't be allowed here because of the non-skiing publics inability to stay on the trails???" Please!! Give me a break-Pal focus on the groups creating the most damage and work your way down to me when you get a solution!!<br><br>So once again it won't stop! What seems like a little here a little there adds up to a whole lot of stuff.<br>There is no solid ground to base their information of abuses, but lots of rights of American born, tax paying citizens getting violated! <br><br>I can appreciate taking a hard look enviromentally at what effect growth at Crystal can potentially do to the creeks, lakes, history and wildlife of the area. <br><br>Personally-It is hard to take Larry Donovan seriously when I see our Forest getting Raped daily by logging. Hundreds of displaced animals and muddy creeks bleed of good Forest Service decisions. <br>Joe

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Matt
  • User
  • User
More
21 years 5 months ago - 21 years 5 months ago #169697 by Matt

For those who want to make sure that their appeal is taken seriously (or even accepted as valid), you will want to take the time to carefully analyze Code of Federal Regulations 36 CFR 215.14 (Content of an Appeal).<br><br>This Federal code section, refereced in the official Record of Decision Section 9.0, provides detailed information required for an appeal to be considered valid.<br><br>I have not reviewed the above copied TGR letter to see if it meets all of these criteria, but those hoping for serious consideration of their appeal should read the CFR carefully.<br><br>I will attempt to post a link to a site where you can obtain this code section below:<br><br> frwebgate1.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisga...&WAISaction=retrieve


J.P.

<br><br>link no workie.<br><br>Found this on what needs to be in an appeal..<br><br>The DN or ROD is what you are actually appealing. Once the ROD is published, you have 45 days to submit an appeal. Appeals are usually based on the FS&#8217;s failure to follow the law or their own policies and procedures. An appeal must contain 7 things: A statement that the document is an appeal pursuant to 36 CFR Part 216, the Appellant's (that's you) name, address and phone number, the title and subject of the decision document (DN or ROD), the date of the decision, the name and title of the Deciding Officer, the specific change(s) in the decision you seek, and a statement of reasons that describes how you believe the decision violates laws, regulations or policy. After the DN or ROD is published, nothing happens for 45 days. If you submit an appeal then the project is put on hold until the Appeal Deciding Officer decides your appeal. Then the project is subject to a "stay" of fifteen days after the appeal is decided. The Appeal Deciding Officer is usually just the person higher up in the chain of command. If your appeal is denied than the project continues and your only recourse is the courts. If it is accepted than the project stops, is modified, or an EIS is performed, depending on what you asked for in the appeal and whatever side arrangements you decide to make with the agency.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • J.P.
  • User
  • User
More
21 years 5 months ago #169707 by J.P.
I would greatly appreciate it if anyone who has a copy of the original Draft EIS for this permit could point me toward the section(s) where the issue of this closure was discussed at that point in the process.<br><br>After only a brief review of the Final documents for the FEIS, there appears to be some inconsistency with regard to the "purpose" behind the closure. It is not even clear to me that the NPS requested a "closure", though it is clear they are concerned about the increase in use in this area. (The only letter I can find from MRNP is listed under "Jarvis".)<br><br>Since I have never actually skied from the ski area down to 410, I am curious if those of you who have done so on a regular basis find the experience consistent with a "wilderness experience"? In other words, do you typically see, hear or cross paths with others outside of your party making the trip down, or are you more likely to feel "alone" from top to bottom?<br><br>I just cannot imagine that the number of folks making the trip down would compromise a "wildnerness" experience, so I will be curious to hear from Joedabaker and others familiar with the run.<br><br>Also - is there one or two "runs" that everyone uses, or can you pick and choose your way through a variety of options?<br><br>Shifting gears just a bit, I would encourage those looking to understand the "whole" of conditions related to the approval check out Section 11 of the Document titled Record of Decision, which contains Table ROD-4.<br><br>Based upon observations at the resort over the past 20 years, my personal sense is that Crystal Mountain/ Boyne currently lacks the internal where-with-all to actually comply with the detailed and extensive list of "Management Requirements, Constraints and Mitigation Measures" associated with the selected alternative as listed in Table ROD-4. If the USFS, NPS, DOT, Tribes, or others actually manage to force strict compliance with these conditions, the actual cost of this expansion will far exceed any estimates that the resort has stated to date.<br><br>Based upon the almost unlimited costs of implementing this expansion, I fear that lift ticket costs will undoubtedly increase so much that the only way I will make it up there is if Condition TR-9 (Page 64 ROD) is implemented and they actually offer "...reduced ticket pricing for carpoolers." That'll be the day... :)<br><br>J.P.<br><br><br><br><br><br>

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.