Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Good news on the Middle Fork decision?
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
Steve
Phlogiston Purveyor



Joined: 29 Jan 2002
Posts: 769 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bothell
Steve
Phlogiston Purveyor
PostWed Dec 10, 2003 9:46 am 
I got this in the e-mail just now. Dear Forest User: I have withdrawn the September 26, 2003 Decision for the Middle Fork Snoqualmie River Access and Travel Management Plan. My reason for this action is the need to complete special use agreements to specifically address the access rights of private inholders within the upper reaches of the Middle Fork. The September 26th decision was appealed under the agency’s administrative appeal procedures. I feel that the original decision is a good decision. There is clearly a need, however, to address and resolve the issue of access for the inholders before we can implement the Decision Notice for this Plan. Given the agency’s appeal requirements, it is not possible to proceed to address the inholders’ access rights within the prescribed timeframe, unless I withdraw the decision. I believe necessary steps to complete this process within the scope of the original decision will be completed in the next few months. I look forward to your continued interest and involvement with this project and will keep you informed of our progress. Sincerely, /s/ Y. Robert Iwamoto Y. ROBERT IWAMOTO Acting Forest Supervisor

Despair is only for those who see the end beyond all doubt.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 16088 | TRs | Pics
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
Member
PostWed Dec 10, 2003 9:48 am 
Just got the same message, Merry Christmas biggrin.gif

"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Steve
Phlogiston Purveyor



Joined: 29 Jan 2002
Posts: 769 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bothell
Steve
Phlogiston Purveyor
PostWed Dec 10, 2003 10:05 am 
Reading the decision more carefully it still sounds like they intend to follow through with the plan they intended on implementing, however, they don't seem to have put much thought into how the inholders were going to get access. Seems like another proof that the FS had a plan and were going to force it on everyone weather they/we liked it or not to save a few $.

Despair is only for those who see the end beyond all doubt.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Stefan
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 5085 | TRs | Pics
Stefan
Member
PostWed Dec 10, 2003 10:08 am 
Thanks to Goldmyer Hot Springs!

Art is an adventure.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Steve
Phlogiston Purveyor



Joined: 29 Jan 2002
Posts: 769 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bothell
Steve
Phlogiston Purveyor
PostWed Dec 10, 2003 11:02 am 
I expect the most they can do is to forestall the FS action, but I have little doubt the gate will be up on the planned Nov 2004 date anyway.

Despair is only for those who see the end beyond all doubt.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostWed Dec 10, 2003 12:40 pm 
Now all we need to do is get *all* the owners of the property up the MFK designated as inholders so we can insure road access. After all, last time I looked the ALW was public property and I am a tax paying owner.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 23956 | TRs | Pics
Location: Cle Elum
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker
PostWed Dec 10, 2003 12:50 pm 
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAW! I'm buying a ROUND for everybody at the GTG tomarrow! This is wonderful news. Sure they may infact decide to do this again, but it puts it off for YEARS! TB

"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide." — Abraham Lincoln
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 17835 | TRs | Pics
Tom
Admin
PostWed Dec 10, 2003 12:52 pm 
Maybe there is hope. hockeygrin.gif BTW, I sent an email back asking them to monitor these public forums if they wanted to check actual pulse of the hiking community and get some authentic public comment instead of the mailbox stuffings they got during the "public comment period" from advocacy groups who put "the plan" together in the first place.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostWed Dec 10, 2003 12:54 pm 
I'm not so certain about that, BPJ. They're pretty determined to do the gate and I'd guess that if they can possibly wrap it up in time for the scheduled closure, it will proceed as planned.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 23956 | TRs | Pics
Location: Cle Elum
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker
PostWed Dec 10, 2003 12:58 pm 
Hey, stop being the GOAT that stole Christmas. As it was this plan was set back to November '04. Now at worst it'll be a year or two from that date. That gives up time to MAKE TROUBLE! By that I mean to write, call, and demonstrate if need be. The trouble is that they don't see the real issue. Not just what to do about the land holders and their need for access, but OUR need to access too. Merry Christmas. Hey Thomas, how about that Middlefork Ice Berg and Overcoat trip THIS summer? TB hockeygrin.gif hockeygrin.gif hockeygrin.gif hockeygrin.gif hockeygrin.gif

"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide." — Abraham Lincoln
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 16088 | TRs | Pics
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
Member
PostWed Dec 10, 2003 1:02 pm 
Does anyone know for sure who filed the appeal? When I checked the property records on on the parcels up by Hardscrable a couple were owned by groups which support the closure and others were held by "enviornmental" groups I had never heard of. I know the patented claims at LaBohn Gap are owned by a Winatchee Lawyer who is trying to get the FS to pay big bucks for them in a greenmail attempt. Someone mentioned goldmeyer HS, has that been confirmed?

"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
touron
Member
Member


Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Posts: 10293 | TRs | Pics
Location: Plymouth Rock
touron
Member
PostWed Dec 10, 2003 10:35 pm 
Crystals from the Stobokor Claim. See pages 24 and 25 for lists of mining claims. There are still quite a few. One as late as 11/15/2001?

Touron is a nougat of Arabic origin made with almonds and honey or sugar, without which it would just not be Christmas in Spain.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Oldtimer
Member
Member


Joined: 18 Dec 2001
Posts: 63 | TRs | Pics
Oldtimer
Member
PostFri Dec 12, 2003 11:13 pm 
Malachai Constant asks "Does anyone know for sure who filed the appeal?" [snip] ______________________________________ Owners of mining claims appealed the Forest Service's plan. The FS plan would close the upper Mid Fork Road to motorized vehicles at Dingford Creek Trailhead and convert the rest of the road to trail for use by hikers, horses, and mtn bikers. Mining claim owners, and I suppose Goldmeyer HS, could maintain motorized access, but would have to pay for any road work beyond Dingford Creek. The appellants want the road to remain open to them, AND MAINTAINED AT PUBLIC EXPENSE. The law requires access to the property, but doesn't require the public to pay for it. Someone acquired 20 acres of public land last year for a few dollars an acre by using the 1872 Mining Act. Now, if the mine claim owners have their way, the public--including you--will pay for access to the site. So, you're probably going to find the road gated at Dingford Creek, and pay to keep the rest of the road open for miners and Goldmeyer, unless you push for the alternative (E, I think) that gates the road at Dingford Creek and requires mine owners/Goldmeyer to pay for keeping the road open beyond the gate. In other words, unless the appeal is denied. Several organizations, including Sierra Club, ALPS, and WTA have formally intervened to oppose the appeal. Oldtimer (For my message, I "stole" bits of information from the Sierra Club's Cascade Checkerboard News, December 2003, p. 2)

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 17835 | TRs | Pics
Tom
Admin
PostFri Dec 12, 2003 11:52 pm 
Typical BS advocacy spin by the Sierra Club and their pals. Did they mention anything about the MFK being converted to a horse trail in their Checkerboard News? Three cheers for whoever bought that land. Pushing for alternative E ensures the MFK is gated at Dingford. down.gif Pushing for alternative E ensures a priveledged few have access. down.gif Pushing for alternative E ensures Dutch Miller becomes a horse highway. down.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Sore Feet
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 6304 | TRs | Pics
Location: Out There, Somewhere
Sore Feet
Member
PostSat Dec 13, 2003 12:12 am 
Grr. Goddamn politics. The folks at Goldmyer are good people, but if they want the road paid for by the public, they damn well better push for the road to not be gated. vent.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Good news on the Middle Fork decision?
  Happy Birthday speyguy, Bandanabraids!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum