Monongahela Natl. Forest plan revision

“http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/mnf/plan_revision/plan_revision.htm

Note that the forest service's preferred alternative is #2. Our preferred alternative is #3, which provides for more wilderness areas.

Toggle up at the site to get advice to respond to the plan and note that only substantive comments are being accepted, i.e., you can't just say you want more wilderness; you have to offer reasons why.”

“Today is the last day for comments for the new Monongahela National Forest Plan. The Forest Service is recommending alternative 2, which would provide for the least wilderness and triple the timber harvest, while we are recommending Alternative 3.

Send comments via email today, or get letter postmarked by today.

[url]For email, go to comments-eastern-monongahela@fs.fed.us[/url]

Due to changed rules, you must supply reasons why you prefer the alternative you prefer.

Examples, increase wildlife protection, habitat diversity, watershed protection, recreational opportunity, etc.

For a personal touch, after explaining your reasons, discuss your feelings about the Mon.”

“Thanks Geobeet/ I'm headed to the site.”

“ok Geo, so is there a place that summarises these options well?”

“the summary is 72 pages - damnit”

“You can read that or take my word, which tells you what you need to know. Alternative 2 is the Forest Service's preferred alternative, which is the worst of the lot. Alternative 3 provides for the most wilderness designation, which is the best of the lot.”

“The following is an email from Matt Keller, executive director of the West Virginia Wilderness Coalition:

November 16th, 2005
Mon Forest Comment Drive a Huge Victory for Wilderness!

Dear Friends of West Virginia’s Wild Places:

I just wanted to drop you a quick note to share some information we received. Because of your involvement as well as many others throughout the region who care about the Mon, the Forest Service has received over 15,000 comments on their draft plan! As many of you know, their ‘preferred’ Alternative 2 poses a significant threat to the Mon by more than tripling logging, increasing clear-cut sizes and reducing or eliminating protections for special places like Roaring Plains, Seneca Creek and others.

While the analysis of comments has yet to be done, we are confident that the vast majority of them will be in support of Alternative 3 and of recommending significant new wilderness areas for designation. The Forest Service will not be able to ignore this overwhelming response and must act to improve their draft plan dramatically. To those of you who wrote comments, held ‘Wild Mon’ parties, encouraged other to write or helped with phone banking, thank you! You’ve made a very really difference for the future of our forest.

While this is a big win for wilderness, the battle is not over yet. Stay tuned for more ways to get involved and make a difference.

Sincerely,

Matt”

“I'll add my personal thanks to those who took the time to respond. This has been an opportunity to help guide the future of a land we love.”

“Thanks Geo!!!”

“here is my email to them:

I recommend option 3.

Here are my reasons:
increase wildlife protection, habitat diversity, watershed protection, recreational opportunity, etc.

MNF is a beautiful area and has rare natural wonders not known anywhere else in the Middle Atlantic Region. It has wonderous wildlife and beautiful forests. Please do not spoil this amazing area. Please preserve it as much as possible. There are anyother areas like it in the US. It is a hikers paradise, but if the forests are cut down, it will be a sad place to visit. Animals will lose their homes. Please preserve the wilderness within MNF as much as possible.

thanks,

Rob Danner
York, PA”

“crap, my email sucks! The forest is doomed.”

“Do not rush out and slit your throat just yet. I am certain that not all the 15,000 comments were written by English majors. Thanks for taking the time to express what you feel. The main thing was that we inundated them with comments favoring more wilderness, and that message should be loud and clear. Let's see what they do with it, and if they pick Alternative 2, we will revolt!”

“Actually, we'll more than revolt. We'll file suit!”

“Tripling the logging might be OK so long as it is within areas of second growth.

Old growth, roadless areas and wilderness are scarce in the eastern US and I feel all remaining such areas should be left as they are.”

“That was the point of Alternative 3 - to lock up as much of the roadless areas as we could with wilderness designation, which is round 2 of the effort.”