My Official Public Comments, Jefferson Division Travel Plan, "Little Belt-Castle-Crazy Mountains Travel Plan," Lewis & Clark National Forest




Date: November 25, 2005


Emailed to: comments-northern-lewisclark@fs.fed.us; lwthompson@fs.fed.us; douglasdodge@fs.fed.us; dschwecke@fs.fed.us 

Subject Line: Jefferson Division Travel Plan

According to the directions here (Doug Dodge douglasdodge@fs.fed.us or 406-632-4391 and "Team Leader" Dick Schwecke dschwecke@fs.fed.us or 406-791-7747): http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/lewisclark/news/2005/10-13-0506_JeffDiv_tvlpln_extend_scoping.pdf the Subject Line should read: "Little Belt-Castle-Crazy Mountains Travel Plan" -- so I shall submit TWO Official Public Comments: the text will be the same, but the Subject Lines will be different.

To: Forest Supervisor Leslie "Spike" Thompson

1101 15th Street North, P.O. Box 869

Great Falls, MT 59403-0869

406-791-7700

Comment deadline for emailing comments: Midnight Great Falls local time, November 25, 2005.

I have thoroughly studied the information published at the following URLs: 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/lewisclark/projects/ 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/lewisclark/projects/pamap_090905.pdf 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/lewisclark/projects/pasnowmap.pdf 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/lewisclark/news/2005/10-13-0506_JeffDiv_tvlpln_extend_scoping.pdf  

My comments are not made lightly, nor are they to be taken lightly.

I expect to be immediately placed on the mailing list for Hard Copies of all current and future "Travel Plans" and other "Proposals" for these parts of the Lewis & Clark National Forest. Also note that I expect to be sent timely emails of all future actions that relate to these lands that I own, in part.

You say, Po-Tah-Toe, I say Po-TAY-Toe. Many say recreation -- I say Access, which is an integral form of Property Rights. Separate Americans from their Property Rights and you separate them from their Access. This holds true for all resource providers, for if Access is taken, so goeth Property Rights. If Americans have paid their taxpayer dollars to own federal -- some say "public" -- land, Americans have a RIGHT, as property owners, to Access that land.

Whether motorized or not, the issue is, has been and will continue to be Access. If the Forest Service professes to have the authority to make such sweeping Closures and Restrictions, it is past time to examine with a magnifying glass the authenticity of that alleged authority.

Today the issue is ostensibly those using motorized means such as All-terrain vehicles (ATVs) and being excluded on a daily basis from more and more "public" (i.e., federal) lands. Tomorrow it will be those who currently see no need to used motorized means of recreation, that are targeted. To that end, it is my hope that All recreationists will pay close -- and Needed -- attention, to this and other Access agendas as proposed by the Forest Service. Everyone that chooses horseback riding should be commenting on this "Travel Plan;" so should every hiker, snowshoer, and so on.

It is interesting, the way Trout Unlimited and other organizations are opposing motorized access -- especially since virtually ALL its members use motorized transportation to access the areas in which its members recreate. By one form or another, it would be difficult at best to find such members that don't use motorized transportation -- and yet, the organizations' 'leadership' expects their members to OPPOSE access by motorized vehicles. There is some serious Language Deception going on here. It is hoped that those who understand this, will turn out in great numbers with their comments. This is, after all, another in the implementation agenda of The Wildlands Project.

Look here http://roadless.fs.fed.us/maps/usmap2.shtml and here http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org/wildlndsprjctfrms.htm for a comparison study, keeping in mind that the USDA Forest Service map is almost five years old -- and that many more acres have been added to its Land Closed and Under Federal Control.

The USDA Forest Service "Travel Plan" for "travel management," in my studied and thoughtful opinion, does a dirty deed in its proposals to "restrict" and curtail motorized recreation by OTFSE ("other than Forest Service employees"). The same people that the Forest Service wants to forbid from access to these areas of the Lewis & Clark National Forest in west-central Montana are the very same people that PAID for these lands with their taxpayer dollars! To suggest that such lands be Closed to TWPFT ("Those who Paid for Them") is tantamount to a criminal action.

All such proposals Must be immediately stopped. All lands within this Jefferson Division "Travel Plan" and "Little Belt-Castle-Crazy Mountains Travel Plan" must be immediately made available to all those seeking to recreate there -- whether motorized or non-motorized.

I am in adamant opposition to all described and potential trail closures for OHVs (off-highway vehicles) in the Proposed Action for Summer and Fall Recreation in the Jefferson Division of the Lewis and Clark National Forest. The Jefferson Division, including the Little Belt and Castle Mountain ranges, currently provide outstanding trail experiences for thousands of OHV riders from the surrounding communities and beyond. These areas have been used by responsible recreationists for many decades. 

All OHV and non-OHV use must be considered a traditional use of all these areas.

It is readily apparent from the vast swaths of National Forest lands that have been shut off to off-limits recreationists -- both the motorized and non-motorized -- in the Highwood Mountains, Snowy Mountains, Crazy Mountains, and on the Rocky Mountain Front, that the Forest Service is partnering with those in the private sector who are implementing The Wildlands Project. This "TWP," while made to look like "protection," "restoration," etc., for "wildlife," is in reality nothing more than a Control Agenda for all resources in these areas. 

Suffice it to say, with certainty, that the Forest Service gloats over every acre of forest that it can Close to All Public Use

These lands have sustained people and other species -- whether it be the gathering of firewood, the grazing of livestock or the enjoyment of recreational pursuits, and usually all three -- since Time Immemorial. How is it that a federal agency -- spawned within the United States Department of Agriculture because Trees are a Renewable Resource -- can go so far awry? While this "Travel Plan" is about part of west-central Montana that is "administered by" the Forest Service, such things have happened -- and ARE HAPPENING -- in scores of states nationwide. This is anything BUT a "local" "Travel Plan."

The Original Stated Intent of the United States Forest Service is so far removed from the current "proposals" and "travel plans" as to be unrecognizable -- even by Theodore Roosevelt himself!

How can this federal agency expect the public to trust any of its actions to be what it says they are, when it has run so far amok? I am tempted to make a minor spelling change and liken such activity to 'GangGreen.' After all, the second definition of the other spelling -- gangrene -- is 'a pervasive moral evil,' and what could be more morally evil than to Close Lands that We Own?

Pending and imminent trail closures in the Helena, Gallatin, and Rocky Mountain Division of the Lewis and Clark National Forest serves to concentrate OHV use to the Little Belt and Castle Mountains. These areas Must provide access for the entire public, both motorized and non-motorized.

This proposal seeks/intends to create huge blocks of non-motorized 'winter recreation area.' 

Snowmobiling is an established and needful use -- as well as being a wonderful recreational use -- in many these areas targeted for Closure. 

Most riders using these areas were not represented in the negotiations that created the proposal -- ofttimes they were not even notified of the Intent.

The proposal excluded several snowmobile clubs, non-affiliated snowmobilers, cabin owners, and others -- considered condescendingly to be "minor stakeholders" by the Forest Service -- that MUST be represented in order for the proposal to have ANY semblance of legitimacy. What is a "minor stakeholder?" It is someone who stands to LOSE the most from a Proposal, Plan or Agenda.

Recreation is important to my family; I must strongly oppose this Proposed Action as it is currently written. The proposed action closes many roads -- which makes each year's Fire Season just that much more devastating and dangerous to area residents, vacationers and firefighters alike -- and utterly fails to welcome OHV use.

By closing the Little Belt and Castle Mountain ranges, this proposed action guts this huge area of its recreationists and effectively negates all the 'warm and fuzzy' arguments about how tourism will 'replace' logging, ranching, etc. 

The Deep Creek, Hoover Creek, or Lost Fork areas which have been used by trail bikes for over sixty years. Middle Fork and the South end of the Little belts Must stay open until October 15 each year.

You are well aware that there are already in place large blocks of non-motorized areas in the Highwoods, Crazies, and Snowies. Now the Forest Service lusts after Closure of the Little Belts, which effectively guts the communities of Great Falls, Stanford, Lewistown, Belt, Billings, Bozeman, Townsend, Helena, Livingston, White Sulphur Springs, etc., and puts them on the banana peel of planned extinction.

Does the Forest Service of 2005 care about the trail of once-healthy, thriving and robust communities that have been burned out, bought out (as "willing sellers" are created from private property owners with no one else to sell to but the government), and bribed out with such sleight of hand Language Deception tricks as the illusory maiden known as 'tourism dollars'? I think that it does not.

Eight Million, Three Hundred and Eighteen Thousand, Five Hundred and Twenty-seven Acres of Federal Lands BURNED this year alone! Does the Forest Service care about species (whether 'endangered' or not)? I think that it does not.

More and more lands and roads and recreational access are put on the block for CLOSURE. Does the Forest Service care about recreationists and tourism? I think the answer is crystal-clear!

With the arbitrary and capricious, malevolent Closure of huge parts of America -- including every square inch of this Proposed "Travel Plan" -- the impact on the shrinking land areas that remain Open, increases exponentially. 

The almost nonexistent 'public involvement' in the Winter Use proposal renders it a prime candidate for File Thirteen. All proposed new snowmobile closures are perceived by a growing number of savvy folks as being just what they are -- WRONG and UNnecessary.

The Deep Creek /Tenderfoot Area, the Hoover Creek trail complex, the Castles and Crazy Mountains MUST be left open.

Americans have the Right to recreate on the federal ("public") lands that they bought and paid for. The Forest 'Service' -- which has proven with the record fire year of 57,933 fires and more than 8,318,527 acres INCINERATED -- has proven that it is no good steward of the lands it was entrusted to oversee.

America's 26th president hoped to make abundant and AVAILABLE to Americans, both for resource use (think timber harvest for just one of several examples) and recreation. What would he say now? It's a safe bet he'd agree with every word of my Official Public Comment!


Adamantly,


Julie Kay Smithson (not a member of any organization)

213 Thorn Locust Lane

London, Ohio 43140

propertyrights@earthlink.net