URGENT! Your Comments Are Needed on the Payette Forest Travel Plan! The Payette National Forest Travel Plan, when finalized, will define motorized and non-motorized use on our national forest lands for the next 10 years. Please take time today to let the Forest Service know you support non-motorized winter recreation opportunities.

Let them know you want these opportunities protected and expanded, not reduced even more, as Alternative C calls for.

The Forest Service Proposals

Alternative B is the Forest Service Proposed Action and supposedly strikes a balance. Alternative B, however, reduces the amount of acreage for non-motorized use now on the Payette.

Alternative C calls for a large increase in motorized acreage and a reduction in non-motorized acreage and wildlife habitat area. Currently, there are over 878,000 acres including hundreds of miles of groomed trails for motorized use.

 Alternative D would increase non-motorized acreage and secure accessible areas for quiet, safe recreation and wildlife protection.

Suggestions for Effective Comments

• Identify yourself, where you live, any personal history in the area and the type of recreationist you are: skier snowshoer cat skier, etc. Explain the type of experience you seek on public lands: quiet, solitude, free from air pollution, untracked snowscapes, etc.

• Discuss issues you feel the Forest has neglected to address in the Travel Plan Revision:

• No economic analysis was done in regards to recreation and the benefits and impacts on the local economy. The Gallatin National Forest, in western Montana, is in the process of revising its Forest Travel Plan and recently conducted research and analysis on the economic benefits of motorized and non-motorized recreation. Results showed that non-motorized recreation offered more financial benefits to surrounding communities than motorized (http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/gallatin/projects/travel_planning/pdf/economic_social_report.pdf). These results also speak to the importance of offering and promoting a broad and varied base of recreation opportunities.

• No analysis was done of current monitoring and enforcement capabilities and practices; no planning has been done on future education, monitoring and enforcement for implementation of the Travel Plan.

• No analysis of environmental impacts from snowmobile usage has been conducted, in spite of the fact that over 70% of the forest is open to snowmobiling. Credible scientific studies show that snowmobile tracks do not “disappear with the snow.” Snowmobile 2-stroke engines, still the most popular type of sled, mix oil and fuel that are expelled through the exhaust, allowing up to one third of the fuel delivered to the engine to be dumped directly into the snow. Environmental impacts, especially on heavily used snowmobile trails and other Forest areas, for example Goose Lake Road, Goose Lake and Road Brundage Reservoir which are water sources for the community, should be disclosed and analyzed. Appropriate alternatives must meet the purpose and need for the project, as well as address the unresolved use conflicts that are significant issues. Alternative D responds best to the Forest Plan, the Purpose and Need for the project, and the identified Significant Issues: • Leaves open 878,498 acres of 100% usable terrain to winter motorized use, ensuring motorized recreationists have an extremely large area in which to recreate without much interaction with non-motorized users. The Forest is required to provide a diversity of recreational experiences and reduce user conflicts.

• 650,549 acres would be closed to motorized use, although only 35% are appropriate and accessible for skiing. Proposed closures provide multiple access points for skiers which are in reasonable proximity of parking. Alternative D will provide an array of winter recreation experiences, while mitigating conflicts between motorized and non-motorized use.

• Adequate separated areas for both non-motorized and motorized use will provide the highest degree of safety and welfare of the users, and also balances management considerations (such as maintenance costs and public safety) with recreation opportunities.

 • Is the only alternative which provides closures that are large enough to:  provide a desired semi-primitive non-motorized recreation opportunity  mitigate noise, odor and safety concerns  identifies definable and enforceable physical boundaries Other Points

• Natural appearance, natural integrity, opportunities for solitude, opportunities for primitive recreation and special features are maintained in Alternative D, thus the diversity of the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum is maintained, enhancing the experience of forest users and protecting wildlife habitat.

 • Alternative C, in calling for an increase in acreage open to snowmobiling, violates the Forest Plan and allows for significant negative effects to occur to wilderness attributes and potential in Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs).

• Meeting the current and future needs of all users is critical to a stable, broad-based recreation economy for Valley and Adams Counties. Wildlife

• Larger, more continuous closures ensure landscape connectivity for lynx and wolverine and will protect threatened and endangered species and their habitat.

• Elk winter range open to motorized use is minimized at 21% in Alternative D, mitigating conflicts between motorized use and wintering wildlife while protecting Forest resources, such as wildlife, soil, vegetation and water.

 For more on the specifics of each Alternative, please visit the Payette national Forest Web page: http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/payette/publications/trvl_mgmt/deis_trvl/trvl_deis.shtml. COMMENTS MUST BE POSTMARKED BY May 18 Send to: Forest Supervisor, Payette National Forest Email: comments-intermtn-payette@fs.fed.us U.S. Mail: P.O. Box 1026, McCall, ID 83638 FAX: 208-634-0744

Please send CIRC a copy of your comments: Email: circ@email.com U.S. Mail: PO Box 243, McCall, ID 83638