Category: News (Older posts)

On December 6, a crowd in Salida urged designation of Browns Canyon as a national monument. Here is a link to the column on December 7 by Denver Post’s Scott Willoughby, quoting CWF’s President Kent Ingram.

www.denverpost.com/outdoors/ci_27084970/browns-canyons-bid-national-monument-status-appears-be

Here is the fall 2014 Big Thompson update supplied by our Issues Co-Chair and founder of Friends of the Big Thompson, Walt Graul.

Larimer County Conservation & Recreation Assessment
In case you haven’t heard, Larimer County has hired Logan Simpson Design for $67,000 to do a Recreation and Conservation Assessment for the Big Thompson Canyon. The purpose of the Big Thompson Canyon Conservation and Recreation Assessment and Action Plan (BT-CRA) is to assess existing protected lands and recreation amenities and evaluate the feasibility for additional land protection and recreation opportunities. At the end of this process, this Action Plan will:

1. provide a description of the feasibility to protect priority lands for conservation within the Canyon;
2. assess the potential and locations for designated recreational access within the Canyon.

 

Overall this plan will analyze the possibilities, coordinate with other planning efforts and ultimately create a clear plan of action to implement a vision for land protection and recreational access in the Canyon. If you would like an electronic copy of the bid documents, email CWF at cwfed@coloradowildlife.org

It sounds like another way of saying “master plan.” But you can see why they want to avoid the confusion of having a river restoration plan and a separate river recreation plan. One of the reasons the county chose Logan Simpson was their experience working with the Big Thompson River Restoration Coalition (BTRRC) on the master plan for the watershed, which is in final draft stage. We all know that the recreation access issue along the Big Thompson is a sensitive one, so how the plan of action is presented via the outreach portion of the contract will be important. If you haven’ gotten a chance to review the draft river restoration master plan for the Big Thompson, it is available here: http://bigthompsonriver.org/

Here is the fall 2014 Big Thompson update supplied by our Issues Co-Chair and founder of Friends of the Big Thompson, Walt Graul.

Larimer County Conservation & Recreation Assessment
In case you haven’t heard, Larimer County has hired Logan Simpson Design for $67,000 to do a Recreation and Conservation Assessment for the Big Thompson Canyon. The purpose of the Big Thompson Canyon Conservation and Recreation Assessment and Action Plan (BT-CRA) is to assess existing protected lands and recreation amenities and evaluate the feasibility for additional land protection and recreation opportunities. At the end of this process, this Action Plan will:

1. provide a description of the feasibility to protect priority lands for conservation within the Canyon;
2. assess the potential and locations for designated recreational access within the Canyon.

 

Overall this plan will analyze the possibilities, coordinate with other planning efforts and ultimately create a clear plan of action to implement a vision for land protection and recreational access in the Canyon. If you would like an electronic copy of the bid documents, email CWF at cwfed@coloradowildlife.org

It sounds like another way of saying “master plan.” But you can see why they want to avoid the confusion of having a river restoration plan and a separate river recreation plan. One of the reasons the county chose Logan Simpson was their experience working with the Big Thompson River Restoration Coalition (BTRRC) on the master plan for the watershed, which is in final draft stage. We all know that the recreation access issue along the Big Thompson is a sensitive one, so how the plan of action is presented via the outreach portion of the contract will be important. If you haven’ gotten a chance to review the draft river restoration master plan for the Big Thompson, it is available here: http://bigthompsonriver.org/

Park County is hosting a series of public meetings to introduce the public to the Bureau of Land Management’s master leasing planning purpose and process — and how the public can participate- that will begin in late September or early October.  It will establish a guiding framework for any future oil and gas development on BLM lands, and resource protections. The plan will specify what areas are appropriate for such development and what areas are not appropriate.  The first public meeting was held in Fairplay on September 15, the next will be held in Hartsel on September 22, and the final one in Shawnee on September 29.

We will provide a link to the BLM website page as soon as the “Notice of Intent” is posted by BLM, beginning the process. CWF also will provide regular updates and our analysis.  We will urge the public to participate in this process to plan what we hope will be a balanced future for lands that BLM manages in South Park.

CWF had applied to BLM for master leasing planning in November of 2011.  Our reason was that the BLM’s Royal Gorge Field Office covers a huge geographical area.  If South Park were addressed within BLM’s next overall resource management planning process, South Park’s unique character would not be addressed in a focused manner.  Now, with master leasing planning for South Park, there is a real opportunity to develop a landscape level, balanced future for the lands BLM manages there.

Park County is hosting a series of public meetings to introduce the public to the Bureau of Land Management’s master leasing planning purpose and process — and how the public can participate- that will begin in late September or early October.  It will establish a guiding framework for any future oil and gas development on BLM lands, and resource protections. The plan will specify what areas are appropriate for such development and what areas are not appropriate.  The first public meeting was held in Fairplay on September 15, the next will be held in Hartsel on September 22, and the final one in Shawnee on September 29.

We will provide a link to the BLM website page as soon as the “Notice of Intent” is posted by BLM, beginning the process. CWF also will provide regular updates and our analysis.  We will urge the public to participate in this process to plan what we hope will be a balanced future for lands that BLM manages in South Park.

CWF had applied to BLM for master leasing planning in November of 2011.  Our reason was that the BLM’s Royal Gorge Field Office covers a huge geographical area.  If South Park were addressed within BLM’s next overall resource management planning process, South Park’s unique character would not be addressed in a focused manner.  Now, with master leasing planning for South Park, there is a real opportunity to develop a landscape level, balanced future for the lands BLM manages there.

The US Fish and Wildlife Service has announced a public comment period for its review of how permits are issued for “non-purposeful take” (wounding, mortality, etc.) of bald and golden eagles.  Under its current regs, the Service may issue programmatic permits authorizing “lethal take that is incidental to an otherwise lawful activity, such as mortalities caused by  collisions with rotating wind turbines.”  Last December the Service finalized its rule that extended the maximum permit period for nonpurposeful take from 5 years to 30 years.

Its explanation for such increase from 5 to 30 years was: “This change is intended to facilitate the responsible development of projects that will be in operation for may decades and bring them into compliance with statutory mandates protecting eagles. The longer term permits will incorporate conditions that provide for adaptive management….”

The Fish and Wildlife Service will host 5 public meetings on their proposal and will take public comment at that time.  The Denver meeting will be held on Thursday, July 31 from 5:00-8:00 pm at the Holiday Inn Denver Airport 6900 Tower Road.

In addition, please submit written comment to the Fish and Wildlife Service by September 22 (end of the public comment period).

Here is the link to our Take Action request.

Several western-based wildlfie federations have written a letter to Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chair July 28 re two bad forest bills: National Forest Jobs and Management Act (S.1966) and Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act (H.R.1526).

 

Here is the letter that 7 wildlife organizations sent to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chair on July 28. The organizations are CWF, Montana Wildlife Federation, New Mexico Wildlife Federation, Idaho Wildlife Federation, Wyoming Wildlife Federation, Arizona Wildlife Federation and South Dakota Wildlife Federation.

July 28, 2014

The Honorable Mary Landrieu
Chairwoman
Energy and Natural Resources Committee
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510

RE: National Forest Jobs and Management Act (S. 1966) and
Restoring Healthy Forests for Health Communities Act (H.R. 1526)

Dear Chairwoman Landrieu:

Our organizations collectively represent tens of thousands of hunters, anglers and other conservationists across seven Western states. We write to you today to express our opposition to two national forest policy bills under consideration in your committee. We are opposed to the National Forest Jobs and Management Act (S. 1966) and the Restoring Healthy Forests for Health Communities Act (H.R. 1526) because of the severe and negative impact these bills would have on
wildlife habitat and public access.

Hunting, angling, and outdoor recreation are an important part of the culture in the West. People who live here and visitors from all over the country enjoy spectacular hunting, fishing, and other wildlife-based recreation. These activities are also essential drivers for local economies. Across our seven states, hunting and fishing generate $10.3 billion a year in economic activity and support more than 104,000 jobs. This in turn generates almost $1.5 billion dollars in tax revenue: $784 million a year in federal taxes and $661 million in state and local taxes. Hunting and fishing in our region
depend on national forests and other public lands. According to the US Fish and Wildlife Service, 77 percent of hunters in the Mountain West region hunt on public lands, a higher rate than any other part of the country.

As residents of the West, we understand the need for better management of national forests. We live in communities that face the threat of catastrophic wildfire. We see the on-the-ground impact that poorly-managed forests have on wildlife habitat and water supplies. We also have members who work in the forest products industry and have experienced the impacts of declining timber harvests. In response, our organizations have worked to improve forest management by working with other stakeholders to reach collaborative solutions at the local level. We have invested years – in some
cases decades – working on the ground to develop practical solutions that protect wildlife habitat, improve forest health, and support local economies. These proposals are embodied in bills like Senator Jon Tester’s Forest Jobs and Recreation Act (S. 37) and Senator Ron Wyden’s Oregon and California Land Grant Act (S. 1784).

Rather than supporting practical solutions for forest management, S. 1966 and H.R. 1526 repudiate local collaboration and mandate an unrealistic, one-size-fits all approach. These bills disregard all of the lessons we have learned over the years about effective forest management. They would:

• Require logging on 500,000 acres of national forest land a year – more than tripling the 2013 harvest overnight – across every national forest west of the 100th Meridian in S. 1966 and nationwide in H.R. 1526, without regard for local circumstances.
• Provide no new funds for timber management, which will force the Forest Service to cut back on other program areas to meet timber harvesting mandates.
• Mandate logging and treatment on all land identified as suitable for timber production, including inventoried roadless areas, important wildlife habitat, and crucial water supplies, and prohibit the Forest Service from reducing lands available for logging through the normal forest plan process.
• Divert funds from multiple-use activities like recreation and wildlife management to fund timber harvesting.
• Waive important provisions of national environmental laws, including the scientific reviews required by the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act
• Curtail local community engagement and public participation in forest management and lock into place outdated management plans, cutting off years of work that local stakeholders have already invested in the plan revision process.

The timber harvesting approach envisioned in both S. 1966 and H.R. 1526 is unsustainable, unrealistic, and a threat to wildlife habitat and public access. On behalf of the hunters, anglers, and other conservationists represented by our organizations we urge you and the Committee to vote against this short-sighted, ideological proposal. Instead, we urge you to support practical, locallydeveloped forest management solutions.
Sincerely,
Dave Chadwick
Executive Director
Montana Wildlife Federation

Michael Gibson
Executive Director
Idaho Wildlife Federation

Suzanne O’Neill
Executive Director
Colorado Wildlife Federation

Tom Mackin
President
Arizona Wildlife Federation

Garrett VeneKlasen
Executive Director
New Mexico Wildlife Federation

Steve Kilpatrick
Executive Director
Wyoming Wildlife Federation

Chris Hesla
Executive Director
South Dakota Wildlife Federation

Several western-based wildlfie federations have written a letter to Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chair July 28 re two bad forest bills: National Forest Jobs and Management Act (S.1966) and Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act (H.R.1526).

 

Here is the letter that 7 wildlife organizations sent to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chair on July 28. The organizations are CWF, Montana Wildlife Federation, New Mexico Wildlife Federation, Idaho Wildlife Federation, Wyoming Wildlife Federation, Arizona Wildlife Federation and South Dakota Wildlife Federation.

July 28, 2014

The Honorable Mary Landrieu
Chairwoman
Energy and Natural Resources Committee
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510

RE: National Forest Jobs and Management Act (S. 1966) and
Restoring Healthy Forests for Health Communities Act (H.R. 1526)

Dear Chairwoman Landrieu:

Our organizations collectively represent tens of thousands of hunters, anglers and other conservationists across seven Western states. We write to you today to express our opposition to two national forest policy bills under consideration in your committee. We are opposed to the National Forest Jobs and Management Act (S. 1966) and the Restoring Healthy Forests for Health Communities Act (H.R. 1526) because of the severe and negative impact these bills would have on
wildlife habitat and public access.

Hunting, angling, and outdoor recreation are an important part of the culture in the West. People who live here and visitors from all over the country enjoy spectacular hunting, fishing, and other wildlife-based recreation. These activities are also essential drivers for local economies. Across our seven states, hunting and fishing generate $10.3 billion a year in economic activity and support more than 104,000 jobs. This in turn generates almost $1.5 billion dollars in tax revenue: $784 million a year in federal taxes and $661 million in state and local taxes. Hunting and fishing in our region
depend on national forests and other public lands. According to the US Fish and Wildlife Service, 77 percent of hunters in the Mountain West region hunt on public lands, a higher rate than any other part of the country.

As residents of the West, we understand the need for better management of national forests. We live in communities that face the threat of catastrophic wildfire. We see the on-the-ground impact that poorly-managed forests have on wildlife habitat and water supplies. We also have members who work in the forest products industry and have experienced the impacts of declining timber harvests. In response, our organizations have worked to improve forest management by working with other stakeholders to reach collaborative solutions at the local level. We have invested years – in some
cases decades – working on the ground to develop practical solutions that protect wildlife habitat, improve forest health, and support local economies. These proposals are embodied in bills like Senator Jon Tester’s Forest Jobs and Recreation Act (S. 37) and Senator Ron Wyden’s Oregon and California Land Grant Act (S. 1784).

Rather than supporting practical solutions for forest management, S. 1966 and H.R. 1526 repudiate local collaboration and mandate an unrealistic, one-size-fits all approach. These bills disregard all of the lessons we have learned over the years about effective forest management. They would:

• Require logging on 500,000 acres of national forest land a year – more than tripling the 2013 harvest overnight – across every national forest west of the 100th Meridian in S. 1966 and nationwide in H.R. 1526, without regard for local circumstances.
• Provide no new funds for timber management, which will force the Forest Service to cut back on other program areas to meet timber harvesting mandates.
• Mandate logging and treatment on all land identified as suitable for timber production, including inventoried roadless areas, important wildlife habitat, and crucial water supplies, and prohibit the Forest Service from reducing lands available for logging through the normal forest plan process.
• Divert funds from multiple-use activities like recreation and wildlife management to fund timber harvesting.
• Waive important provisions of national environmental laws, including the scientific reviews required by the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act
• Curtail local community engagement and public participation in forest management and lock into place outdated management plans, cutting off years of work that local stakeholders have already invested in the plan revision process.

The timber harvesting approach envisioned in both S. 1966 and H.R. 1526 is unsustainable, unrealistic, and a threat to wildlife habitat and public access. On behalf of the hunters, anglers, and other conservationists represented by our organizations we urge you and the Committee to vote against this short-sighted, ideological proposal. Instead, we urge you to support practical, locallydeveloped forest management solutions.
Sincerely,
Dave Chadwick
Executive Director
Montana Wildlife Federation

Michael Gibson
Executive Director
Idaho Wildlife Federation

Suzanne O’Neill
Executive Director
Colorado Wildlife Federation

Tom Mackin
President
Arizona Wildlife Federation

Garrett VeneKlasen
Executive Director
New Mexico Wildlife Federation

Steve Kilpatrick
Executive Director
Wyoming Wildlife Federation

Chris Hesla
Executive Director
South Dakota Wildlife Federation