The Big Creek Four Strips

I have received several emails containing the following email thread. I believe that folks response to this needs to be seasoned and professional. The Recreational Pilots Association has done a great job negotiating similar issues in Montana. Maybe they can provide some direction in helping respond to this in the right way.


-----Original Message-----
From: larry d. taylor <larrydtaylor@fastmail.fm
Sent: Fri, Jun 19, 2009 6:49 pm
Subject: Fwd: RE: 1570-1; Frank-Church River of No Return Wilderness Management Plan Errata

On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 17:19:08 -0600, "Joe Harper" <jharper@fs.fed.us
said:
We intend to implement the Wilderness Plan consistently and not ignore
any issues that compromise the Plan and it's direction. I would hope the IAN
would assist in getting the message out to pilots that the Big Creek Four
are managed for emergencies only (per the Frank Church Management Plan)
and are classified by the IAN as "Hazardous" where use is discouraged. I
think this is where the IAN needs be consistent also in what we have
worked so hard to get.

Any non-emergency planes we stumble upon this year at either Dewey Moore,
Mile-High, Simonds and Vines, will have their tail numbers taken down
and the owners of the aircraft will be receiving a letter from us. I talked
with Suzanne about this and we agree, citations are not a good education
tool and something we don't want to pursue this first year of the Errata.
We are putting our money on the IAN and the Division of Aeronautics to
assist the FS in backcountry airstrip management, education and
enforcement.

====================
Joe Harper, District Ranger
Krassel Ranger District
Payette NF
800 West Lakeside Avenue
McCall, Idaho 83638
phone: (208) 634-0601
fax: (208) 634-0634
email: jharper@fs.fed.us
====================



"John Dethomas" <John.Dethomas@itd.idaho.gov
06/19/2009 02:21 PM

To
"Joe Harper" <jharper@fs.fed.us, "Gary McElheney"
<Gary.McElheney@itd.idaho.gov, <larrydtaylor@fastmail.fm, "Bob Martin"
<martin@ctcweb.net
cc

Subject
RE: 1570-1; Frank-Church River of No Return Wilderness Management Plan
Errata






Joe,

Ater much discussion and a lengthy review of the volumes of old
files in my office?..it looks like the errata to the Frank Church Plan
regarding the Big Creek four airports is pretty much in line with minutes
from meetings in Aug 2004.

The major question in our minds is still whether the USFS
intends to cite pilots who use these fields for non-emergency landings?
Can you run this question through your lords and masters please.
R
JV DeThomas

John ("JV") DeThomas
Administrator, Division of Aeronautics
Idaho Transportation Department
3483 Rickenbacker Street
Boise, Idaho 83705
john.dethomas@itd.idaho.gov
(208) 334-8788
From: Joe Harper [mailto:jharper@fs.fed.us]
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 1:38 PM
To: Gary McElheney; larrydtaylor@fastmail.fm; Bob Martin; John Dethomas
Subject: Fw: 1570-1; Frank-Church River of No Return Wilderness
Management
Plan Errata


Here is the Errata that came out last week on the Frank Church Plan.
Click on the "FS_correspondence doc.". Aviation is included in this Errata.
After talking with both Randy Welsh and Renee Snyder (salmon-Challis)
today, the wording in the Errata on the Big Creek Four is wording the
Division had agreed to under the Appeal Resolution for the Record of
Decision on the Plan. So maybe this wording won't be a surprise to you
as we had discussed last weekend.

Joe

====================
Joe Harper, District Ranger
Krassel Ranger District
Payette NF
800 West Lakeside Avenue
McCall, Idaho 83638
phone: (208) 634-0601
fax: (208) 634-0634
email: jharper@fs.fed.us
====================
----- Forwarded by Joe Harper/R4/USDAFS on 06/01/2009 01:27 PM -----

Renee Snyder/R4/USDAFS
05/29/2009 10:17 AM


To
Alexis T Martin/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Barry Ruklic/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Bill
Blount/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Bob Lippincott/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Carol J
Moore/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Corey Buhl/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Crystal
Loesch/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Dennis Crew/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Diane J
Rau/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Elizabeth W Lund/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Eric M
Hagen/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Erin Law/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Fritz
Cluff/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Gary L Phillips/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Gary R
Brown/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Guy W Pence/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Jacquie M
Parks/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Josh J Bransford/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Kenneth
Bell/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Larry Svalberg/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Laura J
Barrett/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Mark E Wilson/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Mark
Wisner/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Melissa A Sartor/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Mike
Goicoechea/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Paul Sever/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Rick
Floch/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Robert S Giles/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Ross W
Williams/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Sam Hescock/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Thomas C
Dzomba/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Timothy Sampson/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Willy
Acton/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Dave T Bull/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Liz
Close/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Ralph E Rau/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Suzanne C
Rainville/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Tom Reilly/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, William A
Wood/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Camille Sayer/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, John J
Rose/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Larry Kingsbury/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Mary H
Williams/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Steve W Lucas/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Tim
Canaday/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, William G Reed/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Anthony B
Botello/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Chris Grove/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Chris
Ryan/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Darcy Pederson/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Dave
Campbell/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Debra D Gale/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Gary R
Brown/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Howard W Lyman/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Jane
Cropp/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Joe B Hudson/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Joe
Harper/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, John Haugh/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Lisa
Klinger/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Maureen J McBrien/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Ralph E
Rau/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Randy Borniger/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Randy
Welsh/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Renee Snyder/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Russell M
Bacon/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Terry Nevius/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Trish
Callaghan/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Kent Fuellenbach/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Laura A
Smith/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Nan Christianson/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Clem
Pope/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Laurie Matthews/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, John
Haugh/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Debra D Gale/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Randy
Borniger/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, John Fantini/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES
cc

Subject
Fw: 1570-1; Frank-Church River of No Return Wilderness Management Plan
Errata








Here is a copy of the Errata letter. The documents are now on the
internet
on the Salmon-Challis webpage under the Frank Church link.


Renee Snyder
Salmon-Challis National Forest
Ecosystem Staff Officer
reneesnyder@fs.fed.us
208-756-5290
208-768-7029 cell

----- Forwarded by Renee Snyder/R4/USDAFS on 05/29/2009 10:11 AM -----

Mailroom R4 Salmon Challis
Sent by: Mardi J Rhodes/R4/USDAFS
05/27/2009 07:34 AM


To
Renee Snyder/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Randy Welsh/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Chris
Ryan/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES
cc
Suzanne C Rainville/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Tom Reilly/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Dave
T Bull/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Maureen J McBrien/R1/USDAFS@FSNOTES, Liz
Close/R4/USDAFS@FSNOTES
Subject
1570-1; Frank-Church River of No Return Wilderness Management Plan Errata








The following Correspondence is archived in the Records database. Any
enclosures will follow the letter in this message.



To open this document in the Records database, click on this link -Link

To access all documents in the National Records Database, click on this
link -Link
--
larry d. taylor
larrydtaylor@fastmail.fm

steve said:

Any non-emergency planes we stumble upon this year at either Dewey Moore, Mile-High, Simonds and Vines, will have their tail numbers taken down and the owners of the aircraft will be receiving a letter from us.

Click to expand...

Sounds like your gov't is trying to protect you from yourself.
Yet.... they still let hang-gliders hang, and terrorists terrorize...

Somebody (else) once said "Taxation WITH representation ain't so hot either."

Enforceable action resulting from policies and misinterpretations (not laws) made by unelected, federal-employee, bureaucrats. Kind of goes against the original intentions for forming a limited-power federal government, no? It was the state governments, not the feds, that were supposed to determine what happened within their own borders. If I were an Idaho resident, I'd go after my State and Federal congressional with a set of pit bull teeth in their ass.

In my humble opinion and experience neither ranting about bureaucrats taking over the world or calling local legislators will make any difference whatsoever..... this is a Federal action, read the plan (link below) and write in response to their mis-interpretation/violation of the original management plan and original actions to create the wildness. Not a bad ideal to also copy aviation friendly Senators and Congressmen (AOPA has a list, starting with Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma).


I did some quick research and found the methodology they are using for the change in plan documents which are in direct violation of the enabling legislation which is the

CENTRAL IDAHO WILDERNESS ACT
PUBLIC LAW 96th - 312 - JULY 23, 1980
Public Law 96-312 of the
96th Congress of the United States.

http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/sc/recreation/fcronr/fcronrindex.shtml#frank

Alternative "D" states (the one they chose)

"ALTERNATIVE D – THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
Alternative D reduces the potential for growth in float boat use while maintaining current use levels. It increases noncommercial jetboat use on the Salmon River. The Dewey Moore, Mile-Hi, Simonds and
Vines landing strips are maintained for emergency use only. Painter Bar Road is closed during the summer season.

It appears to me that the key point to challenge implementation of this plan modification comes in that it DIRECTLY violates the intent of the original act enabling the wildness area's creation which states:

"SEC. 7. (a) Within the River of No Return Wilderness and the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness additions designated by this Act¾

(1) the landing of aircraft, where this use has become established prior to the date of
enactment of this Act shall be permitted to continue subject to such restrictions as the
Secretary deems desirable: Provided, That the Secretary shall not permanently close or render
unserviceable any aircraft landing, strip in regular use on national forest lands on the date of
enactment of this Act for reasons other than extreme danger to (aircraft, and in any case not
without the express written concurrence of the agency of the State of Idaho charged with
evaluating the safety of backcountry airstrips;"

OKAY boys and girls attack the management plan change on this provision and do so by writing to members of the listed committees from the enabling legislation

"Within three years of the date of the date of enactment management this Act, the Secretary
of Agriculture (hereinafter referred to as "the plan, submitted Secretary") shall develop and submit to the: Committee on Energy and to congressional Natural Resources of the United States Senate and the
Committee on committees Interior and Insular Affairs of the House of Representatives a comprehensive wilderness management plan (hereinafter referred to as "the management plan") for the River of No
Return Wilderness which shall consider a broad range of land uses and recreation
opportunities.

Members of the applicable committee's are listed here http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=96&Itemid=27

Good Luck,

Oldcrowe, CBI (certified bureaucrat interpreter)

Ps. No matter which side of the election they are on, in my experience, NO politician likes to hear that a department is not strictly following direct legislative intent.

Actually, getting the State government involved in Federal issues within the State can have a huge advantage over going after the Feds at the constituent level alone. This is an often overlooked resource. You can get a State congressperson's attention easier than at federal level and they sometimes have some relationships built between the two levels.

Also, getting the State's DOT involved can help weigh in on the issue. They probably have some lawyers on the payroll that can interpret these laws and engage the bureaucrat that is wandering off the letter/intent of the law. A well written letter can rapidly stop this kind of threat/action.

We should all engage our federal congressionals, but you Idahoans should start pinging locally as well.

crazyivan said:

Actually, getting the State government involved in Federal issues within the State can have a huge advantage over going after the Feds at the constituent level alone. This is an often overlooked resource. You can get a State congressperson's attention easier than at federal level and they sometimes have some relationships built between the two levels.

Also, getting the State's DOT involved can help weigh in on the issue. They probably have some lawyers on the payroll that can interpret these laws and engage the bureaucrat that is wandering off the letter/intent of the law. A well written letter can rapidly stop this kind of threat/action.

We should all engage our federal congressionals, but you Idahoans should start pinging locally as well.

Click to expand...

Not to argue but I work with Federal agencies daily on local projects... they nod their head when the local politicians talk but they LISTEN and ACT when those who fund them talk and that is Congress. So getting local elected officials to also contact congress would be great.

Also, Reading the document I do not see where the State protested the revised management plan implementation.

Nope, no argument a'tall.

I'm watching a lot of interaction between all the Maine delegates and there are definitely lines of communication between the different levels on local issues. Maybe not on the staffs you are dealing with, but some states do have this type of cooperation. Maybe Idaho has these types of relationships and, not being an ID resident to do it myself, I'm encouraging the engagement of as many levels as possible.