SHAWNEE TRAIL CONSERVANCY
PO BOX 44
EDDYVILLE, IL
62928
May
2005 10 Packentuck Rd
Ozark, IL
618-777-0296
New
Forest Plan Out
From the Desk of Linda Granneman, President of STC
The STC
must direct its focus to the new forest plan and we ask each member to spend
some time reviewing the alternatives and making comments.
(Information on the Proposed Forest Plan and the DEIS can be found on
the Shawnee National Forest web site at: http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/forests/shawnee/projects/forest_plan_revision/
or by calling the Forest Supervisor’s Office at 618-253-7114 and requesting a
hard copy.) After speaking with
the Forest Service planner for verification, it was found that you do not have
to pick one alternative over the others. You
can choose parts of one alternative and state why you like that part and choose
part of another alternative and state why you prefer that part.
Individual letters with your own personal reasons why you prefer one part
rather than another mean more to the forest service than form letters.
One
thing is certain, Alternative 1 in all aspects will not be chosen by the forest
service. Things will not stay the same. There
has been a concerted effort to make some changes in the Shawnee Forest.
Some changes are needed. For
Equestrians and other users, having maintained and marked trails is one the most
important.
There is
one more thing to ask of our members, and that is to contact your legislators,
both state and federal. They need
to be aware that you recreate in the Shawnee and that more money needs to be
funded for trail maintenance in this forest.
The Shawnee has a very small budget.
Our legislature can back additional budget funding for the Shawnee.
Contacting your federal legislators is obvious, but the Illinois
Department of Natural Resources does give money to the Shawnee Forest for their
pet projects, none of which involve horses.
That needs to be changed and letting our state legislators know that we
want funding for trails that include horses is necessary.
In closing, I just want to say that very few of us
want to get involved politically. It is much easier to say, “Oh, so & so
is much better at that than I am. I’ll
just let them be the one to make the contact.”
It is not easy to send letters or get involved; it’s takes time out of
our already crowded schedules. But
we must get involved to keep our outstanding trails in the Shawnee.
Please take a few minutes, even if it is to send your comments in email
form. Remember the domino effect,
you may just be the one person that nudges that first domino and causes great
things to happen.
We
appreciate all the support we have received and want to remind all the members
that we are working daily to keep Shawnee Forest trails the best they can be for
all those who use it whether we reside close by or hundreds of miles away.
Linda
Granneman
********************
Editor’s Message:
I’m sorry there is so much to read in this
newsletter. Trying to convey as
much of the Forest Service material as possible for you to make some kind of
sense of what it is about, the impact from the plans, and how important it is
for you to respond takes a lot of information.
A lot of other important issues have been left out, as there is so much
on the Proposed Land Plan. Please
read what we have provided for you and write the Forest Service and your
Representatives your thoughts by June 15th.
Here are
a few thoughts on the Proposed Forest Plan:
·
When an area is closed to
cross-country equestrian use and riding is restricted to designated system
trails, riding from private property will also be restricted. That is unless the
private landowner is able to get a special-use permit for a segment of trail
from the private land, which they will have to maintain, to the Forest Service
trail system. The problem with this
scenario will probably be that it will be difficult to get a large number of
special-use permits and the associated required environmental analyses for all
of the private land parcels accomplished in a timely manner as the permits will
have to be issued yearly and will cost $90. Until a landowner is able to get a
special-use permit for a particular trail segment, they will most likely have to
ride on roadsides or trailer to a Forest Service trailhead.
·
The Shawnee National Forest area
is the most publicly owned, fragmentized national forest in the US. With such a fragmented surface area, many of the recreational
trails cross private ground. The
Forest Service seems to have developed a plan that would effectively eliminate
usage across those private grounds through intimidation of the owners.
What private ground owner would go through the trouble of trying to gain
a special-use permit (costing $90 annually) for the access trails, be told he
would have to maintain it to whatever standard the Forest Service required, and
would have to carry insurance on it? NONE!
Effectively shutting down any trails but what the Forest Service sets up.
·
With many of the forest’s scenic
areas being restricted to hikers only, equestrian trails leading into them are
fast disappearing from the ground. Many
of these beautiful areas are being lost to all recreationalists, as hikers will
find it difficult to access them without the horse trails.
·
Alternative 1 shows the highest
projected economical growth rate by number of jobs and labor income (55.4% by
2015) of all the alternatives. (Alternative
2 = 43.9%) (Alternative 3 = 6.4%) (Alternative 4 = 54.2%) In a depressed
economy, it is vital for southern Illinois to continue having the best tourism
possible. Alternatives 2, 3, and 4
would be less helpful to an improving economy in various degrees.
·
I agree that timber
harvesting, prescribed burning and other vegetation-management activities are
necessary to maintain and sustain a healthy ecosystem.
Allowing nature to take its course has proven disastrous by the wildfires
in the Western US in the past years. I
would like to see our Oak-Hickory forest managed so that it would continue being
a hardwood forest.
· The new federal forest-planning rule directs forest managers to put social and economical considerations on par with ecological sustainability.
To view a copy of the Proposed Land Plan, you may access the Shawnee National Forest web site
at: www.fs.fed.us/r9/forests/shawnee/projects/forest_plan_revision/
or call the Forest Supervisor's office at 618-253-7114 for a hard copy.
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement manual for the Proposed (Alternative 2) Land and
Resource Management Plan has a very nice Table (2-1) giving Management
prescriptions by Alternative, with descriptions. This table can be found in Chapter II, page II-11.
This, along with the Executive Summary on the DEIS and Proposed
Management Plan will give you more information on the different Alternatives.
Please take time to read this important newsletter
and send your comments and thoughts to the Forest
Service by June 15th and a copy to your representatives in
Washington. All your legislators
are listed at www.vote-smart.org.
********************
Shawnee Trail
Conservancy Officers and Board of Directors
2004 – 2005
-------------Officers----------------
President
– Linda Granneman
RR #1, Box 23A
Stonefort, IL 62987
618-672-4786
Vice
president –
Garry Jenkins
9009 Neber Rd, Marion, IL 62959
618-964-1564
Secretary
– Sue Perina
3855 Somerset Rd
Harrisburg, IL 62946
618-252-0077
Treasurer
– Nancy Perisho
1055 Gilead Rd
Vienna, IL 62995
618-658-2816
Past
President – Darrell Perisho
1055 Gilead Rd
Vienna, IL 62995
618-658-2816
----------Directors----------
Dorothy Arjes
10 Packentuck Rd
Ozark, IL 62972
618-777-0296
Roger Bailey
PO Box 2284
121 North 10th
Mt Vernon, IL 62864
618-266-7600
Lonnie Barger
RR #1, Box 245
Stonefort, IL 62987
618-672-4303
Bill Barnett
PO Box 186
Eddyville, IL 62928
618-672-4751
David Flanders
RR #2, Box 3020
High Knob Rd
Equality, IL 62934
618-275-4346
Michael Grubbe
2520 St Rd, 127 N.
Jonesboro, IL 62952
618-833-3445
Dick Manders
PO Box 40
Eddyville, IL 62928
618-672-4249
Fax: 618-672-4739
Denny Maxon
RR #1, Box 209
Stonefort, IL 62987
618-672-4748
Scarlett Miller
14618 Monitor Lane
Marion, IL 62959
Mike Scott
60 Hilltop Lane
Simpson, IL 62985
618-695-5157
Sue Simmons
270 Ozark Rd
Ozark, IL 62972
618-777-2775
Lucy Walker
RR #1, Box 219
Stonefort, IL 62987
618-672-5001
Association
Directors – None
All Officers’ and Directors’ terms expire 10/2005
All members are invited to our regular meetings held every 3rd
Thursday of the month at 7 PM.
These are usually held at Dolly’s Place in Vienna.
You may come a little early and join others for a delicious supper.
********************
Shawnee
National Forest Trails Designation Project
The Trails Designation Project (Phase I) involving Big Grand Pierre Creek, Eagle Creek, Lusk
Creek, and Upper Bay Creek Watersheds analysis is underway with a draft
document release date of July 2005.
The proposed actions in these subject watersheds is designation of system
trails, construction of trailheads, amend Forest Plan to increase trail density
in wilderness, and to restrict equestrian use to system trails in these
subject watersheds. Tim Pohlman at
(618) 253-7114 is the contact person for this project.
The forest supervisor, Allen Nicholas, is the deciding official on the
draft decision. You will have 45
days to respond to the Trails Designation Project draft.
If you don’t send in a response, you will have no legal recourse.
The forest service may eventually be able to close down all of the forest
except for the few miles of trails (which will include roadways and highways)
they decide are adequate, in effect making it all mainly a natural area.
Numbers and numbers of responses are needed.
And please send copies of your responses to your representatives.
I would imagine that the Regional Office in Milwaukee is getting very
tired of our representatives becoming involved in this.
So we really need to keep the pressure on them.
*********************
Thoughts for your
Comments and Letters
On the Proposed Land and Resource Management
Plan
Proposed Forest Plan Points
The Proposed Land and Resource Management Plan was
written using the Forest Service’s proposed Alternative 2 directive. Some of
their proposals such as hard wood management are very beneficial to the Shawnee
Forest. Remember, you do not have
to pick one complete alternative over the others.
You can choose parts of one alternative and state why you like that part
and choose parts of another alternative and state why you prefer that part.
Individual letters with your own personal reasons why you prefer one part
rather than another mean more to the forest service than form letters.
Remember, also, that commenting validates our right to appeal if that
should become necessary.
In the Proposed (Alternate 2) Land and Resource
Management Plan Manual -
Chapter 5, Recreation Management [FW23.4 (S)]:
“Equestrian or bicycle use is allowed only on system trails or in
designated areas and on roads open to public motorized use. ----- Travel
cross-country or on user-developed trails is prohibited except in an
emergency.” And
[FW23.5 (S)]: “System trails
designated for equestrian- or bicycle-use, but not constructed for all-season
standards, may be restricted seasonally or under certain weather conditions as
needed to prevent resource damage.”
Furthermore [FW23.6 (S)]: ATV
and unlicensed OHM-use is prohibited forest-wide except for administrative
use…or use authorized by permit or contract.”
Alternative 2 also allows limitations on group sizes in wilderness.
Also, as part of the
system trails design, local access to the
forest will be denied. This would in effect force all riders to trailer to
a trailhead or campground. You would no longer be able ride off your
property unto the forest or trailer to a friend's home and ride out.
We disagree with the above Alternative 2. Instead,
we prefer Alternative 1, which is no Action, but would like to see the
designation of hiker/equestrian trails and ATV/hiker/equestrian trails.
Designation would allow the FS to maintain the trails to a standard
necessary for resource protection. Continued
use at same levels as in the past would then not be detrimental with that
maintenance. Construction and maintenance of marked and mapped
equestrian/hiker trails would prove that 99% of the users of the forest would
stay on these trails making restrictions to trails a non-issue.
Maintained and mapped trails are essential to resource preservation, but
not all trails need to be maintained to the same level as those that have higher
usage. Group size limitations
would make for a lot of jockeying around trying to look like people weren’t
riding together even if they, in fact, were not. ATV/OHM usage should be
allowed on trails that are designed and maintained for that purpose.
Limiting their usage to certain areas away from the more frequented areas
of the forest would allow them the opportunity to use the forest also.
However,
Alternate 1 does include Management Area Trail Density standards and
trail-corridor maps, which the other three Alternates drop.
We agree that trail density standards and trail-corridor maps are not
relevant and should be dropped. Trail
density standards from out West are used and this area is not the wide-open
West. With tree foliage open, it is
impossible to see people across a creek. Trails
should be designated where the “scenic sites” are located and user-created
trails have accessed those. Its
vast unique archaeological features situated within such a small area make
multipurpose recreation the largest demand for Southern Illinois.
Alternate 2’s Timber Management [FW24] - We agree that timber harvesting, prescribed
burning and other vegetation-management activities are necessary to maintain and
sustain a healthy ecosystem. Allowing
nature to take its course has proven disastrous by the wildfires in the Western
US in the past years.
No scheduled timber harvest
near recreation areas makes sense to keep the recreation experience positive.
Select harvest by horses near those recreational areas would create the
least noticeable affects created by timber harvesting.
Increased prescribed burning is necessary for the maintenance of our
unique Oak-Hickory forest. Production
of timber products in this small forest doesn’t make as much sense as using
ecosystem health and sustainability as the goal.
Alternative 2’s Wildlife Habitat Management
difference for forest-interior habitat and open land habitat is a good idea.
This would allow for the wildlife and biological
diversity necessary in a forest. Use of pesticide to control invasive species is
necessary to protect the forest. In
the past 8 years, the Autumn Olive and Honeysuckle have spread throughout the
forest.
Watershed management seems to
need (Alternate 1) no change as water quality has been proven to be
excellent – no need for change. Lusk
Creek, which is the most recreated watershed, has the highest water quality
according to independent water testing procedures.
Equestrian Recreation Management in Alternates 2, 3, and 4 - restriction
to designated trails - will
create tremendous hardship on local landowners and increased trail impacts on
the limited number of trails that will be designated. Those obscure trails that are ridden by locals only or only
infrequently should be allowed to stay and be ridden whether they are designated
or not. Placing all horseback
riders of the Shawnee Forest on a few designated trails will impact those trails
and decrease the quality of recreation by concentrating large numbers of users
on a smaller area. With budget
constraints already evident, new trailheads and maintenance are not likely to
happen. There is no study to show
the number of people and their impact upon designated trails once they are
restricted to designated trails only. The
FS has not considered the cumulative effects this restriction to designated
trails will cause on the quality of recreation and resource damage.
Wilderness designation in the Lusk Creek has made maintenance of trails
almost all but impossible. Because
of this designation, rock must be brought in by small pockets on horse or mule
and dumped and construction is labor intensive.
To harden just the River-to-River trail will take truckloads of rock and
years of volunteer labor. How are
we to get a well maintained trail system with limitations of this nature.
We would like to see Randy Moore, Milwaukee Regional Director, make use
of a categorical exclusion to allow mechanical means of trail building and
maintenance in Wilderness areas.
Wild and Scenic Rivers will do the same things – restrict our access and ability to maintain what
is necessary to stay with the niche statement for the Shawnee Forest which is to
provide a premiere horseback riding experience - “Our niche is to
provide the finest riding opportunities East of the Mississippi River.
By far the greatest year round visitor is the horseback rider.”
Alternative 3 is designed to please the anti-access people who believe we should do nothing to the forest
except let it exist. This attitude
has proven to be a fallacy after all the forest fires that caused loss of life,
property and forest in the western states in the past few years.
This type of management is not management.
It does not provide for people to use the scientific knowledge to manage
for long-term protection and use of national forest land.
We disagree with this mind-set of forest management.
Alternative 4 has many good points, but it still prohibits cross-country equestrian travel.
The mapped and maintained trails are essential to resource preservation.
But not all trails need to be maintained to the same level as those that have
higher usage. ATV/OHM usage should
be allowed on trails that are designed and maintained for that purpose.
Limiting their usage to certain areas away from the more frequented areas
of the forest would allow them the opportunity to use the forest also.
Trails in Natural Areas would allow more users of the forest to visit
these unique areas. With proper signage and protection, trail use would not be
detrimental to the Natural Areas. Construction
and maintenance of marked and mapped equestrian/hiker trails would prove that
99% of the users of the forest would stay on these trails making restrictions to
trails a non-issue.
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed (Alternative 2) Land and Resource
Management Plan has a very nice Table (2-1) giving Management prescriptions by
alternative, with descriptions. This
table can be found in Chapter II, page II-11.
This with the Executive Summary on the DEIS and Proposed Management Plan
will give you more information on the different Alternatives.
One
thing of note that was partially at the end of the Executive Summary was the
expected changes in jobs and labor income growth due to the implementation of
the different alternatives. We say
partially because the summary didn’t list the “job change” for Alternative
1, or the “income change” for Alternative 4.
After digging for the information in the back of the DEIS manual, it was
found that the expected economical growth rate to the year 2015 was 6.4% for
Alternative 3 (imagine that!), 43.9% for Alternative 2, 54.2% for Alternative 4,
and Alternative 1 came in highest with 55.4%!!!!! That is almost 12% over Alternative 2! Can southern Illinois lose that kind of economical growth?
The problem with the goals and objectives of the
Forest Service national strategic plan is that it is one of restrictions.
When
discussing limiting the riding to designated trails only and how the many
beautiful areas would no longer be available to equestrians, Supervisor Alan
Nicholas stated that future generations would not know the difference as they
wouldn’t have that access that is now present and thus wouldn’t miss it.
As in, Let’s take the forest away from the people.
They won’t miss it if they don’t see it!
My children and grandchildren won’t be able to see the beauty that is
out there! How dare they!
Horses have been lumped with motorized vehicles,
which is wrong and totally biased. The
impact is different from each and they should not be analyzed together.
Horses are an old and traditional way of transportation.
Horses have carried Indians, explorers, homesteaders and school children
going to school on these trails.
Designations such as Wilderness, Wild and Scenic Rivers cause nothing but
restrictions to our access and rights as private citizens.
We do not have any Wild and Scenic Rivers in this area unless the forest
service changes their definition of such. And
our “Wilderness” is only second or third growth farm ground at best.
Changes in law, regulations or policy do not necessarily reflect anything
more than the latest whim or study that will later be proven invalid by another
study. However, that doesn’t mean
that we would ever get back that access to areas restricted by these whims or
erroneous studies.
Since the Shawnee Forest budget cannot meet the needs of the present
forest plan, how can it even consider all the changes that require more money to
be implemented? If you notice in
the summary of the Proposed Plan, the 1992 Forest Plan allowed the designation
of up to 286 miles of ATV/OHM travel ways and provided for ATV use during the
firearms deer season. Evidently,
the FS didn’t have the funds for building these ATV/OHM
travel ways. Now they will just
eliminate them. Do you suppose that
is the how the next forest plan will deal with the proposed 700 miles of
equestrian trails when the FS finds it lacks the funds for trail building and
maintenance?
We question the need for drastic changes in our forest plan since the
plan was never put into effect. There
should be some accounting for not following a forest plan to see if it was, in
fact, a proper way to protect our beautiful forest and allow the greatest number
of humans to experience as much of its scenic areas as possible.
********************
THOUGHTS ON THE PROPOSED FOREST PLANS
--------------Bill
and Cheryl Blackorby
The private property special use permit is a "killer" and will close most all of the trails to both individual land owner riders like myself and those people who camp at the campgrounds. Just think about it----if you can't ride across any private property where could you ride? Not many trails unfortunately. To require that we have to have insurance to protect the forest service if someone who rides across our property falls off his horse on a designated forest service trail is ridiculous. The road that goes down to Giuffre's home, also known as the Wilson road, is supposed to be a designated trail. It intersects with the trails that go through our ranch. Yet the FS says that we need a special use permit and we live on a designated trail! The FS may conveniently not approve of all us landowners in the area for a Special Use permit even if we apply. They may be too busy or too under funded to do the analysis. Will everyone else who rides down a road to a designated trail also have to get a permit and provide insurance? It's a horrible ruling that will put every campground in our area out of business and ruin the riding for the rest of us who live here. Not to mention the $90 annual permit fee the Forest Service requires. We need to keep this from happening. We all need to let county officials and elected congressional people know that this is VERY IMPORTANT. Please do your part. After the FS gets its Alternative 2 in effect, we are ALL sunk.
Blackorby’s
Letter to the Forest Service:
Shawnee National Forest
Forest Plan Revision Comments
50 Hwy, 145 South
Harrisburg, IL 62928
Apr 22, 2005
These are my comments regarding the Proposed Land and Resource Management Plan of the Shawnee National Forest.
Although most equestrians prefer to ride on maintained trails and we see a definite need to protect the forest’s natural resources, I cannot approve of the proposed Alternatives 2,3, and 4 for the following reasons:
1. Alternatives 2 & 4 propose a potential for 600 to 700 miles of designated, maintained, and marked equestrian trails, which sounds wonderful; however, since the Designated Trails Plan is not formulated yet and no one from the forest Service will tell us where these proposed trails will be, I cannot support a Plan that may or may not provide trials to scenic areas where horsemen want to ride. I’m sure there are several hundred miles of old forest service roads that could qualify as trails but these types of trails do not provide a quality riding opportunity to the scenic areas near the streams and rock formations, which people want to see. Past actions of the Forest Service, who has repeatedly failed to live up to its promises in previous Plans and has only closed riding areas, cases me a great deal of distrust and skepticism. The Designated trails must be identified BEFORE ANY ALTERNATIVES CAN BE SELECTED!
2.
Alternative 3, which is very restrictive and is not recreation friendly,
is totally unacceptable.
3. The MAJOR problem with Alternatives 2 & 4 is the restriction of equestrians to only designated trails and barring private property owners who own land bordering the forest from accessing the forest from their own property without a “Special Use Permit.” FS Supervisor Allen Nicholas told equestrian land owners at a meeting that only a few permits will be approved because of the amount of analysis required and that the vast majority of landowners would have to trailer their horses to a proposed trail head in order to ride. Since there are only 3 trailheads at present that will accommodate only a few trailers, where are people to park? When and where will these proposed trail heads be built? Not all horse people have a trailer or only want to ride a short time, so traveling to a trailhead is cumbersome. Those few approved Special Use Permits require a $90 annual fee and a $500,000 liability insurance policy that names the FS as insured. Insurance is very expensive and will cost landowners several hundreds of dollars annually. Landowners who allow others to ride across their property for free are not going to incur this extra cost so they will close the trails going across their property thus severing trails and large segments of the forest on the other side of this private property. Access across these private properties is essential because of the fragmentation of the Shawnee in order to ride near the Eddyville area. Perhaps the Forest Service is requiring these “Special Use Permits” to cause an unusual burden on the campgrounds that will cause their businesses to fail. Most riders who ride across these private properties in order to access forest service land on the other side are already provided liability insurance coverage paid for by the local horse campgrounds from which they ride so the Forest Service is already protected.
4. The FS promised that horse trails would be built in 6 of the Natural Areas and EIS comment was solicited 2 years ago. The project was dropped midstream and the FS does not “know” if any equestrian trails will be proposed in the Designated Trails Plan. Equestrian trails should be constructed in those 6 Natural Areas as proposed 2 years ago that includes 12 crossings of Lusk Creek.
5. I am opposed to restricting riding groups in wilderness areas to 10 riders. Guided trail rides should be allowed to have groups of 75 riders. There is less impact on wildlife to have one group of 75 riders go through an area than 7 groups of 10 riders over a longer period of time. Impact to the land is the same. Trail density standards in wilderness should be eliminated.
6. I am opposed to Wild and Scenic River Designation and the buffer riparian corridor management policies on the 6 creeks proposed by the FS.
7. Landowners who own land that borders the forest have paid a premium price for their properties because it borders the forest. Hundreds of retired equestrians have purchased land that borders the forest and have moved to southern Illinois, built homes and have increased the tax base of the local economy. If access to the forest from private property is denied, then property values will fall and fewer retirees will move to the area from all over the Midwest. The reduced property values will cause a reduction in real estate taxes received by local county government and will adversely affect the local school systems, law enforcement, road districts, and fire protection.
8. Since the Forest Service has reported that they have maintained approximately 25 – 30 miles of trail during each of the last few years, how can they hope to build and maintain 600 – 700 miles of trail on a continuing basis? Incidentally, volunteers from equestrian groups completed much of this maintenance. The FS lacks the manpower and the money for such a lofty enterprise.
If equestrians are restricted to only designated, marked, maintained trails, I fear that we will have very few trails that will qualify to the standards that the FS may require so riding opportunities will be extremely limited. It is for the reasons herein stated that I will support only Alternative 1 of the Proposed Plan, which allows for cross country riding and does not prohibit landowners from accessing the forest from off their property.
Thank you for considering my comments,
Cheryl Blackorby
*******************
MORE THOUGHTS ON THE PROPOSED FOREST PLAN
------------Darrell
and Nancy Perisho
Hurston A. Nicholas, Forest
Supervisor
Attn: Plan Revision Comments
Re:
Shawnee National Forest Draft Environmental Statement for the proposed Land and
Resource Management Plan
I have
reviewed this plan and offer the following comments:
The 1992
plan was approved by the equestrian community as a good plan, due to the
proposal that all user-created trails would remain open. No environmental impact
studies were ever completed to convert these user created trails into the
designated trail system.
Although,
a Federal Judge had vacated the 1992 amended plan, portions of this plan were to
be used by the Forest Service as guidelines.
The only
portion of the plan that was implemented was the closure of trails in the
natural areas. Although an environmental study was prepared by the Forest
Service, no designated trails were ever provided into any natural areas. We were
told at the open house there would be designated trails into seven natural
areas.
As I
read through the proposed plan, again, it is a program, not site-specific and
does not authorize any specific project decisions. It is apparent from the
adverbs used to identify the proposals, i.e., could be, up to, potential, etc.
the Forest Service does not intend to provide a “premier” equestrian
experience.
The
Trails Designation Study is due to be released in July 2005. This environmental
impact study covers proposed designated trails in the four watersheds. In order
to consider each alternative, this study should have preceded the new proposed
Forest Service Plan. The public should be aware of where the trails will be
located. This Trail Designation Plan will be open for public comments and also,
the appeal process. Trails may not be put on the ground for several years.
The
Forest Service proposed Alternative 2, suggests additional designated trails
will be provided. Throughout their material, references are made to poor
maintenance, due to lack of funding. If the Forest Service cannot provide
maintenance on the existing River-To-River trail (160 miles) – how do they
propose to create an adequate, well maintained trail system? The time frame for
this proposed new system of trails is over a ten-year time span (up to
700 miles of trails).
Forest
Service roads are in the state of disrepair. Approximately, 430 miles of forest
roads are currently not receiving annual maintenance. Several paragraphs in the
plan identified a need for trail and road closures to protect resources. This
would not be necessary had maintenance been completed annually.
The
documentation has some discrepancies, i.e., the Environmental Impact statement
does not mention that the equestrian/bicycle trails standards are only in the
four watersheds that have been studied.
The
Management Areas listed in the LRMP do not agree with the Executive Summary.
There are 15 Management Areas listed in the LRMP and 20 in the Executive
Summary.
I feel that due to budget limitations, this new plan
will not provide the adequate, well-maintained, designated trail system as
proposed. This adequate trail system will remain as the River-to-River Trail.
This trail does not provide the recreational visual qualities into the scenic
areas, as recommended in the Forest Service visual management system. This will
affect the social impact of the equestrians riding experience. An additional
economic impact will be felt by the campground owners as their campground
reservations decrease.
Restriction
of open riding, in the proposed Alternative 2, will affect many private
landowners who today have direct access into the forest. These equestrians will
have to obtain a Special Use Permit from the Forest Service. These permits may
be limited, and costly ($90.00 fee). Horses would be trailered either to a
campground, which has a fee for day riding, or to a trailhead. The existing
trailheads will not accommodate this additional traffic and budget constraints
will affect the building of new facilities.
Equestrians may ride down roads, possibly with their children, creating a
safety hazard, to get to a designated trail.
Until a
designated trail system is on the ground, the only viable alternative to be
considered is Alternative 1.
Alternative
1 should not have Ripple Hollow as a wilderness candidate. The Forest Service,
per the LRMP, completed this study and there were no areas considered for
eligibility as roadless areas, except the existing wilderness areas in this
forest.
Alternative
3 should not be considered at all. It is too restrictive and will not provide
the premier riding experiences that the Forest Service has proposed in their
“Niche for the Future”.
I have attached some of the
reasons for my decision.
Cc: U. S. Congressman, John
Shimkus
Existing roads and trails have not been maintained, how does
the forest service propose to handle any additional?
********************
You
may access the Shawnee National Forest web site at: www.fs.fed.us/r9/forests/shawnee/projects/forest_plan_revision/
or by calling the Forest Supervisor's office at 618-253-7114. You will be
able to read the proposed forest plan at that web site, I understand.
Your
comments must be mailed by June 15th to:
Shawnee
National Forest
Forest Plan
Revision comments
50 Hwy. 145
South
Harrisburg, IL
62946
Or
fax them to:
618-253-1060
Attn - Forest
Plan Revision Comments
Comments
may also be submitted electronically by mailing them to:
r9_shawnee_plan-revision@fs.fed.us
You should send your comments by both letter and email. And PLEASE send a copy of your comments by email to
your federal representatives. You may find them listed at www.vote-smart.org.
And get as many people as you can, involved.
Illinois Senators Durbin and Obama should be apprised of the loss in revenue for
southern Illinois if equine recreationalists are shut out of the Shawnee
National Forest. They should also
know that the Shawnee is not a wilderness forest, but old farm ground and has
plenty of old horse roads and trails.
******************
LANDOWNER HORSE TRIPS REQUEST BY FS
Some of
the landowners adjacent to the Shawnee National Forest have been receiving
requests from the local Forest Supervisor, Allen Nicholas, for information
regarding whether the landowners ride into the forest from their property,
whether they allow others to ride from their property onto the National Forest,
and what might be the total number of individual horse trips made annually from
their property onto the forest. He
stated that his “goal is to gain an understanding of how much and where
equestrian access is occurring from adjacent lands.” Further more, Mr. Nicholas said that “laws and regulations
require that (he) analyze the environmental effects to national forest land of
any ground disturbing activity; trail
development in this case.”
Neighbors have asked what they should do.
I’m an adjacent landowner with horses and mules, but received no
request for information. My first
response was that they should fill in the postcard enclosed and return it to the
Forest Service. But you know what?
The local people don’t trust the Shawnee Forest Service.
They are afraid to let the Forest Service know what they are doing.
Isn’t that a sight?! Is it
illegal to access the forest from our property? No, not yet; but
it’s scary to think that people are afraid to admit to riding off their
property, because later on the forest service might lay in wait for them on the
local trails to issue them a ticket for riding illegally. A lot of the locals are just tossing their letter in the
garbage. So much for Mr. Nicholas’ “accurate information.” I wonder if the National Forest Service is proud of its
Public Relations with the local people who go to work everyday and pay their
taxes. After talking with some of
the locals, I’m not sure I want the Forest Service to know that there are
probably somewhere in the neighbor hood of
XXX trips out of our place annually.
******************
STC
to Join an Equine Issues Roundtable
The Farm
Bureau organization has been hosting an Ag Roundtable for more than 10 years,
and it has proven to be a wonderful opportunity for many agricultural-based
interest groups to meet and discuss key issues in our industry.
We plan to take that same concept to build consensus on issues in the
equine industry as well.
If any statewide organization who hasn’t been contacted would be
interested in joining in on an Equine Issues Roundtable, please contact Jim
Fraley, Livestock Program Director, Illinois Farm Bureau, Bloomington, IL at
309-557-3109 or email him at fraley@ilfb.org.
We are asking you to offer as many as FIVE priority issues from your
organization and get them to us before the end of May.
We will compile them prior to the meeting, which will become a basis for
our discussion. These could be
legislative issues, regulatory issues, or any other issue you feel is impacting
your industry. There is no agenda, per se, but one will be developed to help facilitate discussion.
The first Equine Issues Roundtable meeting will be held at 10 AM on June 13, 2005, at the Illinois Farm Bureau Building in Bloomington, IL.
This will be a tremendous opportunity in which to bring members of the
industry together to work on issues as one voice for the state’s equine
industry.
-
Jim Fraley
Livestock Program Director
309-557-3109 or fraley@ilfb.org
*******************
Update
on the Right to Ride Legislation
Many
individuals who enjoy recreational riding on public lands have experienced
frustration over the reduction of trails and the closure of public lands to
horses. To prevent further
closures, recreational riders are working closely with their local land managers
and also looking for legislative solutions.
Representative
George Radanovich has reintroduced his “Right-to-Ride” bill H.R. 586
(alias H.R. 2966 from last
year’s congress). The bill would
preserve the use and access of pack and saddle stock animals on public lands,
wilderness areas, national monuments, and other designated areas that are
administered by the National Park Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, or the Forest Service where there is a
historical tradition of such use.
Specifically
the legislation mandates that the lands should be managed by the federal
agencies "to preserve and facilitate the continued use and access of pack
and saddle stock animals on such lands, including wilderness areas, national
monuments, and other specifically designated areas, where there is a historical
tradition of such use."
In
addition, the legislation requires that "as a general rule, all trails,
routes, and areas used by pack and saddle stock shall remain open and accessible
for such use."
This
bill passed the House of Representatives in the last Congress.
This
bill has been referred to both the House Resources Committee and the House
Agriculture Committee.
The AHC
supports this legislation. Passage
of this bill by the House of Representatives was an important victory for the
horse industry in the last Congress.
If you
have any questions about the Right-to-Ride bill please contact the AHC.
1616 H Street, NW, 7th
Floor, Washington, DC, 20006, phone 202-296-4031, fax 202-296-1970
Email AHC@horsecouncil.org.
Web Address www.horsecouncil.org
PLEASE
WRITE YOUR House and Senate
REPRESENTATIVES AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO VOTE “yes” FOR H.R. 586 - THE RIGHT TO
RIDE BILL.
PLEASE PASS THE WORD TO YOUR FRIENDS IN AND OUT OF YOUR STATE TO CONTACT
THEIR SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES TO VOTE FOR THIS BILL.
*******************
STC THANKS ITS SUPPORTERS!
STC
wishes to thank our great many generous supporters of STC
for their monetary donations in helping us deal with the problems in the Shawnee
National Forest. Even though we do
not look for court actions involving lawyers, someone has to be there when the
preservationalists bring suits against our recreational use of public lands.
We can only be there if we have the funding behind us.
Our thanks go to Dennis & Jessie Day of Sandoval, IL;
Bea Yeager of Avon, IL; Cherri
Block of Avon, IL; Tom Hanks
of Iuka, IL; High Cliff Ridge
Riders of Appleton, WI; JC Turner
of Marion, IL; Sue Kleinwachter of
Warrenville, IL; Bernard
Steffen of Effingham, IL; and
Marvin Lindsey of Bronson, MI for their donations.
********************
For Sale:
Betty Varnum has just let us know that she has 9 + acres with one smaller
home, one larger home, and a 30 X 100 ft barn with 18 stalls and 2 tack rooms by
Metropolis, IL for sale. This
beautiful bargain can be yours for $225,000!
Email varnumbetty@hotmail.com
for information and a video.
******************
Coyote
Creek Tack & Stable
"The
Best Selection of Saddles & Western Wear in Central Illinois!"
"Outfitting
You & Your Horse for 10 Years!"
217-844-2161
www.coyotecreektack.com
Look
for the big red boot on Rt 45 between Sigel & Neoga!
******************
McKinney’s
Western Store
Marion,
IL
McKinney’s
Western Store at Marion have an extremely nice, newly enlarged and remodeled western store
located just southeast of Wal-mart at 900Halfway Rd, (618) 997-6974, for your
shopping pleasure. In Mc Kinney’s
Western Store you will find a large assortment of men’s, women’s, and
children’s western wear; name
brand boots; hats;
Tucker, Circle-Y, Billy Cook, etc. saddles and tack;
bridles; bits;
saddle blankets; stable
sheets; horse health items; ropes;
horse shoes and shoeing equipment; western
gifts; jewelry;
horse feeds; etc.
Please consider supporting them with your equine needs.
******************
For Sale or Trade:
A beautiful 6 year old fox trotter
mare available for sale or would trade for a well broke gelding.
She has low mileage and has been old lady ridden.
Call Nancy Perisho at 618-658-2816.
******************
Welcome
to the Country Care Program!
When anyone purchases items on the www.CountrySupply.com
website using our code “SHAWNEE TRAILS,” our organization will be earning 5%
of their purchases (excluding dewormer or shipping).
So, help us raise funds by shopping at www.CountrySupply.com.
You can choose from thousands of great horse supply items at the best
prices, and by entering the COUNTRY-CARE Code “Shawnee Trails” during
checkout, Country Supply will donate 5% of your product's purchase price
(excluding dewormers and shipping) to the Shawnee Trail Conservancy.
Recently, I ordered some things from Country Supply.
Their prices are excellent with no shipping and handling on orders over
$50. The “Care Code” box
didn’t come up until the end of the transaction before the order is submitted,
so don’t miss typing in “Shawnee Trails” when you see the Care Code box.
********************
The Shawnee Trail Conservancy is a grassroots nonprofit corporation which
advocates multi-use of the Shawnee National Forest for recreational and sporting
interests; yet, is dedicated to preserving and protecting its natural resources
through proper trail maintenance, good trail signing, and education of trail,
camping and hunting users to achieve a low environmental impact and wise usage
management practices. Our mission
is to keep the Shawnee available, now and in the future, to the public for its
use and enjoyment in a responsible manner.
*******************
With the release of the Proposed Land and Resource Management Plan and
the upcoming release of the Proposed Trails Designation Project, it is very important that
we have your continued membership and financial support.
So far, we have had to pay over $20,000 in legal fees!
Radical preservationalists constantly try to get the forest grounds shut
down and they do it through legal maneuverings.
Legal processes are on going; we
continue to need your support in membership and monetary donations. STC is the
only local organization
fighting to keep our quality trails in the Shawnee National Forest.
Any necessary appeals are costly, so please send in your
renewal today if your newsletter has a date prior to 2005/05 above your name on
the Newsletter address and a donation if possible.
If you know of someone who should be getting the Newsletter and isn’t,
please give him or her the renewal form and have them resubmit the information.
Please stay informed through the STC Newsletters about the Shawnee.
Responses from all users are very important in the direction the FS takes
regarding trails, area closures and management policies.
And,
please, send comments to your representatives.
They won’t know what we want unless we let them know.
If you don’t have your representatives’ addresses, please contact one
of the STC directors and we will try to help with that information.
You may go to www.shawneetrailconservancy.com
for information on the Shawnee Trail Conservancy
and its directors.
PLEASE SEND IN YOUR RENEWAL TODAY!!
THANKS!! DONATIONS ARE TAX
DEDUCTIBLE!!
-----------------------------------------------------------cut
here--------------------------------------------------------------------------
SAVE OUR SHAWNEE TRAILS!
DATE
____/____/____ _____RENEWAL
_____NEW
NAME
_________________________________________________ PHONE _______________________
ADDRESS
_______________________________ CITY _________________ STATE ____ ZIP ________
E-MAIL
ADDRESS _____________________________________________________________________
INDIVIDUAL
$10 ____, FAMILY
$20 _____, ORGANIZATION
$30 ____, DONATION
$______________________.
DATE RECEIVED BY STC ____/____/____
Make
checks payable to: SHAWNEE
TRAIL CONSERVANCY.
Send
to: SHAWNEE TRAIL CONSERVANCY, PO BOX 44, EDDYVILLE, IL
62928
|
STC
Newsletter printed by Reppert Publications of Anna, IL.
800-833-5813 |