Page 10 - the NOISE February 2014

usFs publishes new FOresT plAn FOr COCOninO nF
sTOrY bY CinDY COle
On December 20, 2013, the Coconino National Forest (NF) issued a “No- tice of Availability” regarding the newly released draft Land and Resources Man- agement Plan (draft forest plan) and its ac- companying Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). The draft plan and DEIS combine for a total of nearly 1000 pages of documentation. The public has 90 days to participate by submitting comments on the draft plan by March 20.
On January 15, 2014, the Coconino NF held a meeting at the Sedona-Oak Creek Airport to initialize public outreach in the Se- dona area. A second meeting is scheduled at the same location for February 25.
The draft forest plan updates the previous plan that was instituted in 1987. While there have been 22 amendments to the plan since its adoption, it is clear that a more compre- hensive overhaul is due. The United States Forest Service (USFS) states the goal of the revised plan “is to provide an improved for- est plan that better reflects the current and future needs of the forest, wildlife and plant species, as well as the needs of people who live near and enjoy the beauty of the Co- conino National Forest.” The plan is intended as a guide for use, direction, and develop- ment of lands within the approximately
1.8 million acres of the Coconino NF over the next ten to fifteen years. The forest an- nounced its goal to revise the forest plan in 2010 and has been working on various stag- es of the process ever since.
In 1998, Amendment 12 was added to the 1987 forest plan to address specific issues in
the Sedona/Oak Creek Canyon area of the for- est. It included the establishment of detailed management areas and specific guidelines for land exchanges and scenery directives.
One of the “Guiding Principles” of the original Amendment 12 stated that “We rec- ognize the national and international impor- tance of the Sedona/Oak Creek ecosystem. We respect the links between ourselves, all human activities and the natural world, and realize that the environment is a sensitive and limited living system in need of actions to sustain and enhance it. We will not regard the area as a potential theme park for com- mercial exploitation at the expense of nature. We will not sell the day to profit the hour.” Do
these words ring as true for Sedona today as they did in 1998?
The new forest plan will cover all aspects of management for the Coconino NF includ- ing recreation, vegetation, wildlife, motor- ized access, timber, mining, water sources, and grazing. With regard to recreation, the draft plan states that “Some of the trends and conditions related to recreation include: increased use of developed recreation areas; changing demographics; increased conflicts in social values, culture, and expectations tied to public lands; new types of recreation; the adoption of a new scenery management system; increased recognition of tribal cul- tural uses and values; and pressures on ripar- ian, wilderness, and other special areas.”
The draft plan is offered with several al- ternatives that are part of the DEIS. The dif- ference between the four options has to do primarily with wilderness and other habitat management areas. All of the plans incor- porate already designated wilderness areas. New wilderness designations require an act of Congress which may or may not result from their inclusion in the forest plan.
Alternative A is a “no action” plan. This means that it would retain the 1987 plan as amended but without any further variations. Due to the many changes that have already occurred in the Coconino NF and the neigh- borhoods it surrounds, this alternative is of- fered but is not really considered viable.
Alternative B is the actual proposed re- vised plan. It retains relevant elements of the 1987 plan and fully incorporates per- tinent aspects of Amendment 12. Some of the directives from Amendment 12 have been adopted into forest-wide standards in this option. The planning team is currently working on documentation that will clearly map out items from Amendment 12 to show how and where they have been incorpo- rated in the draft forest plan. Alternative B also includes recommendations for three new wilderness areas, totaling 14,767 acres and one proposed geological area. The rec- ommended wilderness closest to Sedona is Walker Mountain which is in the Rimrock/ Lake Montezuma area.
Alternative C increases the number of proposed wilderness to 13 including areas around East Clear Creek near Camp Verde.
In addition, this version proposes one new geological area, one botanical area, and eight Wildlife Habitat Management Areas (WHMAs). In a memo dated November 29, 2013, the Arizona Game & Fish Commission expressed concern about this aspect of Al- ternative C. It was noted that “WHMA’s were developed without Department input and in response to comments from environmental groups (Grand Canyon Wildlands Council, Sierra Club). While ostensibly intended to benefit particular wildlife species, they could significantly restrict public access.”
The final Alternative D does not include any additional wilderness, geological, botan- ical, or habitat areas but allows for “increased social infrastructure use.” For example, it more loosely defines “scenic integrity” to al- low things like additional power lines near wilderness areas.
The January meeting was categorized as a “Workshop & Open House” and began with
an introduction of the professional facilita- tor from Logan Simpson Design who ran the meeting and USFS personnel who were in attendance. Only eight members of the public were present. The Red Rock Ranger District’s (RRRD) District Ranger Nicole Branton, who took her post in September, was there but deferred to the planning team when introduced saying “this is their show.”
Vern Keller is the new Acting Forest Planner for the Coconino and joined the for- est earlier this year. Of note is that Social and Economic Lead Sara Dechter will be leaving the USFS by mid-February. She is the officer who is handling recreation and special use issues for the forest plan. As this topic area is of great concern for Sedona and Oak Creek Canyon, it will be necessary for her replace- ment to get up to speed very quickly. A fi- nal forest plan is scheduled to be released in spring 2015. Ms. Dechter has taken a posi- tion with the City of Sedona.
The primary purposes of the January 15 meeting were to introduce the public to the main aspects of the draft forest plan, to ascertain what the key topics of interest and concerns are for the people of Sedona, and to offer instruction on how members of the public can write effective comments for USFS consideration. A short poll was taken during which meeting attendees were asked
to rank the issues that were of highest con- cern to them. The top three issues chosen by this group were sightseeing, hiking and biking, and motorized recreation. These items are scheduled to be addressed in more detail at the second public meeting sched- uled in February.
Information and tips on how to effectively comment on the draft forest plan were dis- tributed in the form of handouts to meet- ing attendees. One of the “Tips on Effec- tive Commenting” states that “This is not a voting process. Comments are considered based on content, not quantity. While all comments will be considered, we find sub- stantive comments related to the alterna- tives the most useful.” It further described
“substantive comments” as those that “pro- vide factual information, professional opin- ion, or informed judgment that is relevant to the action being proposed. A substantive comment is “specific, comparative, or solu- tion oriented” and “provides the reason why” going beyond “just expressing an opinion.”
The degree to which the USFS is able to consider and even take action on a submit- ted comment is based on its specificity and content. The facilitator advised against fil- ing comments like “Please don’t do this. I don’t want this to happen.” These types of comments are opinion only and are not ac- tionable. If you wish to have your comment seriously reviewed by the Forest Service, the recommendation is to include specific refer- ences to the section of the forest plan you are concerned about and your suggestions and alternative solutions on the issue.
Air TOur OperATOrs in COnversATiOn wiTh usFs & FAA
Following the workshop, one concerned member of the public questioned Ms. Bran- ton regarding helicopter noise in scenic and wilderness areas of the RRRD. In the past, the USFS has dismissed this issue as out of their hands. Once an aircraft leaves the ground, it falls under the jurisdiction of the Federal Avia- tion Administration (FAA) and cannot be con- trolled by the city or the USFS. But Ms. Branton said that the RRRD has begun to take a more proactive approach to this issue anyway.
Recently, the DR met with air tour opera- tors in Sedona and spoke with them about noise issues and other community concerns.
10 • FEBRUARY 2014 • the NOISE arts & news • thenoise.us
NEWSFeATure