Response

More documents

Recommendations

Info

DOROTHY WHISENHUNT DOMINIQUE WHITAKER BOB WHITE RICHARD L WHITE CHARLES WHITE DELBERT W. WHITEHEAD PAMELA WHITEHEAD IRVIN R. WHITING RICHARD WHITLATCH JIM WHITLOCK D.D. WICK SAM WICKBERG ARTHUR WIEBE KEN WIENKE ERNEST WIENSY MARK WIGG BERT G. WILCOX MIKE WILDE DAVID WILDE STEVEN E. WILDE RUTH T. WILEY PAT WILEY ROBERT WILHINSON ROBERT WILKEN ROBERT B. WILKERSON SHELLY WILKESON PAT WILKESON MIKE WILKESON BILLY R. WILLES EVERETT DALE WILLIAMS JACK E WILLIAMS TIMOTHY B. WILLIAMS ERNIE WILLIAMS PETER K WILLIAMSEN DWIGHT WILSON ALAN L. WILSON KELLY WILSON VIRGIL W. WILSON WILLIAM F. WILSON DAVID D. WILSON GLEN WILSON DEANNA WILSON LARRY S. WILSON DICK E. WILSON CARL E AND RUTH WILSON LLOYD V. WILSON RONALD F. WILSON W. TRAVIS WILSON WESLEY E. WILSON DONALD L. WILSON LARRY WILSON BARBARA C. & D. WIMAN LOIS WINCHESTER RICHARD C. WINFIELD ROYCE M. WINNER MR. & MRS. BOB WINSETT ROY WIRTZ SANDY WITT GENE WITT DONALD G. WITTE JACKIE WOBBE CAMERON F. WOGAN KENNETH M. WOLCOTT PHIL WOLD GUS WOLF J. N. WOMACK RODNEY WOMACK HERBERT WOOD NORMAN D. WOOD JEFF WOOD BRIAN WOOD BILL WOOD JAMES C. WOOD TERRY WOODARD JOHN L WOODLAND CLAYTON WORDEN RICHARD C. WORK VANCE R. WOUSER D.J. WRAY VANCE WRIGHT TERRY WRIGHT G. WRIGHT ALLEN & DEBRA L. WRIGHT WILL C. WRIGHT FRANK R. WRYN BOB WRYN RANDY WUTRON ELMER WYATT RICHARD D. WYLIE HOWARD WYNANT CLINTON W. WYNN ROBERT R. WYRICK ROBERT YAGER JIM & MADIE YARDLEY CLAY E. YATES G. M. YATES WAIHUN YEE WAIYEN YOGI' YEE CATE YOCUM KENTON EU YODER 11 SCOTT YORK CAROL LYNN YORK STEVEN YOST WALLACE H. YOST EUGENE M. YOST WILLIAM R. YOUNG B YOUNG GLENN C. YOUNG LELAND E. YOUNG SHAWN YOUNG KATHY L. YOUNG DOUGLAS A. YOUNG TED YOUNG SHARON L. YOUNG T. JOE ZAROSINSKI LEONARD ZASTERA SHIRLEY ZASTERA A.E. ZENONIAN STEVEN ZIEGLER FRED ZIMMERMAN JO ANN ZIPSE JOE ZORN DONOVAN C. ZUPAN R -24
Comments and <strong>Response</strong>s
Page 1 and 2: United States Department of Agricul
Page 3 and 4: This document is printed on recycle
Page 5 and 6: Ninety-four percent of the response
Page 7 and 8: Businesses and Organizations ALLA M
Page 9 and 10: ROBERT AURNAGUE-DESPAIN LEE R. AUST
Page 11 and 12: C. M. BURDUCK SID BURGDORF KATHERYN
Page 13 and 14: ROD DAVIS WISBY D. DAVIS JOE DAVISO
Page 15 and 16: HENRY FREEMAN OLGA A. FREEMAN EDNA
Page 17 and 18: CHARLES HEATON JIM HEBERLEIN JOE HE
Page 19 and 20: TOM L. KELLER DONNA KELLER RAYMOND
Page 21 and 22: TOM MARKLEY JOHN D. MARKS RICHARD H
Page 23 and 24: E. & W. NEUBERT BILL NEWELL JEANNE
Page 25 and 26: JOHN R. REYNOLDS JUDY REYNOLDS BILL
Page 27 and 28: RICHARD A. SMITH CRAIG W. SMITH WAL
Page 29: GERALD E. VERMILLION W. HARRY VETHE
Page 33 and 34: often when conditions are optimum f
Page 35 and 36: we do not normally conduct prescrib
Page 37 and 38: The Proposed Land and Resource Mana
Page 39 and 40: Comment D-19. 15. These standards a
Page 41 and 42: Firewood Comment The demand for dea
Page 43 and 44: of the Forest plan and the complian
Page 45 and 46: Response Chapter 4 of the FEIS has
Page 47 and 48: these standards to be applied at th
Page 49 and 50: Lands Comment To acquire all inhold
Page 51 and 52: Comment The plan need not be amende
Page 53 and 54: Comment Page IV-34. Wilderness Mana
Page 55 and 56: Comment Since the State Highway sys
Page 57 and 58: Comment Page IV-60 (22) - Facilitie
Page 59 and 60: Comment Page IV-10 - Effects of the
Page 61 and 62: While it may be true that some area
Page 63 and 64: Park. We are concerned about how th
Page 65 and 66: Mountain Pine Beetle Comment With r
Page 67 and 68: Comment A final comment with regard
Page 69 and 70: that .'..Alternatives B and C are t
Page 71 and 72: Comment Also, I feel that along wit
Page 73 and 74: Comment The habitat management stan
Page 75 and 76: Comment The conversion of 74.2 perc
Page 77 and 78: Comment PP IV40. 8. Disturbance of
Page 79 and 80: Other Comments Comment I am in favo
Page 81 and 82:
Response Research Natural Areas are
Page 83 and 84:
Response The discussions in chapter
Page 85 and 86:
Pelican Butte Comment The plan shou
Page 87 and 88:
Comment Outside of the three design
Page 89 and 90:
Response The current winter sports
Page 91 and 92:
Because the only reason given in th
Page 93 and 94:
Response True. Effects will be dete
Page 95 and 96:
Response Scoping for the Forest Pla
Page 97 and 98:
Comment The main points we wish to
Page 99 and 100:
Comment The DEIS does not adequatel
Page 101 and 102:
Comment The Winema did not perform
Page 103 and 104:
Comment Webster's Third New Interna
Page 105 and 106:
worst case analyses are presented.
Page 107 and 108:
Comment IV-14 Para. 3. (and all oth
Page 109 and 110:
Comment The proposed monitoring pla
Page 111 and 112:
may be reluctant to authorize them.
Page 113 and 114:
Comment A complete assessment of en
Page 115 and 116:
the the soils, riparian zones, and
Page 117 and 118:
Comment Studies in Arizona and Cent
Page 119 and 120:
Response Final Forest Plan recogniz
Page 121 and 122:
Comment Trout unlimited recommends
Page 123 and 124:
soil conditions, plant phenology, t
Page 125 and 126:
Comment The LRMP states that 'The l
Page 127 and 128:
Recreation Comment I, then, fully u
Page 129 and 130:
Comment What is the difference betw
Page 131 and 132:
Response Wildernesses were not only
Page 133 and 134:
Response The terms 'snowmobile,' wa
Page 135 and 136:
Crater Lake National Park, Upper Kl
Page 137 and 138:
Response Agreed. These are some of
Page 139 and 140:
Response The FEIS preferred alterna
Page 141 and 142:
Comment We request that the WNF ins
Page 143 and 144:
Comment The National Forest is supp
Page 145 and 146:
Comment I also do not see why so mu
Page 147 and 148:
Comment P.11-51. It should be state
Page 149 and 150:
Comment Guidelines for visual manag
Page 151 and 152:
Comment If there was a road into th
Page 153 and 154:
ment. I believe that a niche market
Page 155 and 156:
Comment Where possible, the plan sh
Page 157 and 158:
Roads and Corridors Comment The pro
Page 159 and 160:
and to reduce road maintenance expe
Page 161 and 162:
Comment Specifically, there is a ne
Page 163 and 164:
esponse to public comment, addition
Page 165 and 166:
Response The number of miles to be
Page 167 and 168:
KLAMATH COUNTY HISTORICAL LUMBER AN
Page 169 and 170:
Comment According to Henshaw, the i
Page 171 and 172:
should be planned as a part of the
Page 173 and 174:
Comment I have made a continuous st
Page 175 and 176:
thus tends to have a higher risk of
Page 177 and 178:
it should be realized by the plan a
Page 179 and 180:
log and lumber haul which depends o
Page 181 and 182:
Soils Comment Can Eastern Oregon, t
Page 183 and 184:
Threatened and Endangered Plants an
Page 185 and 186:
Response The Area 4 Forests, which
Page 187 and 188:
Spotted owl - Spotted owl habitat a
Page 189 and 190:
Response The current status of the
Page 191 and 192:
Timber Management Comment Has any p
Page 193 and 194:
Comment I also feel that not enough
Page 195 and 196:
Response I am sorry if we led you t
Page 197 and 198:
The harvest levels should be pulled
Page 199 and 200:
Comment In my opinion, clearcutting
Page 201 and 202:
Response Yes, this is true; and, fo
Page 203 and 204:
The Forest definitely looks differe
Page 205 and 206:
Comment DEIS, 11-84, Table 3A - All
Page 207 and 208:
Comment People need affordable hous
Page 209 and 210:
Response The Winema National Forest
Page 211 and 212:
The citation at the bottom of page
Page 213 and 214:
were changed to remove logging with
Page 215 and 216:
trees on an acre with no reductions
Page 217 and 218:
Response The present Timber Resourc
Page 219 and 220:
Comment When managing future lodgep
Page 221 and 222:
to produce a clear block of wood be
Page 223 and 224:
Response The DEIS was designed so s
Page 225 and 226:
Response The discussion for the ope
Page 227 and 228:
Comment We recommend that the Winem
Page 229 and 230:
Response We did not input the uneve
Page 231 and 232:
Response The inventory has been upd
Page 233 and 234:
Response Chapter 4 of the Forest Pl
Page 235 and 236:
of the plots are still available an
Page 237 and 238:
There are no mitigating measures to
Page 239 and 240:
Chapter 4 of the FEIS in Effects of
Page 241 and 242:
and regenerated often. The mixed co
Page 243 and 244:
Response Yes, we agree that timber
Page 245 and 246:
Comment I request that you closely
Page 247 and 248:
The Winema's Forest Plan will not c
Page 249 and 250:
Response The FEIS Preferred Alterna
Page 251 and 252:
Response We elected not to make thi
Page 253 and 254:
Comment D-80 Timber 1. Change to re
Page 255 and 256:
acre of uneven-aged management rece
Page 257 and 258:
Comment Adjustments to yield estima
Page 259 and 260:
The forest does note that certain c
Page 261 and 262:
6. Improve the forest's ability to
Page 263 and 264:
emphasizes timber production over o
Page 265 and 266:
Comment Mixed Conifer and Lodgepole
Page 267 and 268:
Water Comment Marsh, which is mostl
Page 269 and 270:
area values and define water qualit
Page 271 and 272:
compliance with water quality stand
Page 273 and 274:
Comment The time frame of 50 years
Page 275 and 276:
Comment The riparian management are
Page 277 and 278:
Furthermore, the DEIS (pgs. 111-59-
Page 279 and 280:
Response There will be no programme
Page 281 and 282:
Response Class IlIl streams are pro
Page 283 and 284:
upper limit which would make monito
Page 285 and 286:
management activities, it does not
Page 287 and 288:
eceived the priority that it might
Page 289 and 290:
Response We agree that the fisherie
Page 291 and 292:
Response Alternative E was the Pref
Page 293 and 294:
are included. Additional study is n
Page 295 and 296:
ODFW recommends all pure aspen stan
Page 297 and 298:
elk habitat. You should include suf
Page 299 and 300:
Response The Forest Plan provides a
Page 301 and 302:
Response The Plan will provide spot
Page 303 and 304:
Response Management Area 9 address
Page 305 and 306:
Comment No nesting or population su
Page 307 and 308:
costs. Our analysis indicates that
Page 309 and 310:
logical reason not to allow elk num
Page 311 and 312:
Comment From a wildlife perspective
Page 313 and 314:
Response The description of MA 8 is
Page 315 and 316:
Response The Forest is attempting t
Page 317 and 318:
Comment In summary, NFMA requires t
Page 319 and 320:
Response Recreation demand has been
Page 321 and 322:
Comment The riparian area managemen
Page 323 and 324:
old-growth stands located in a five
Page 325 and 326:
pine sites produce more forage in d
Page 327 and 328:
Comment P.IV-16 Below-cost Timber S
Page 329 and 330:
Response See the Glossary for defin
Page 331 and 332:
Response The goals for Management A
Page 333 and 334:
Comment Need for Further Documentat
Page 335 and 336:
different levels of protection woul
Page 337 and 338:
Comment Threatened and Endangered S
show all

Response

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?