White River 

National Forest 

Supervisor 

Martha Ketelle 

proudly displays 

a day’s worth of 

comment letters 

received in 

response to the 

draft planning 

documents. 

The current 

Forest Plan, 

completed in 

1984, generated 

less than 300 

comment 

letters—a good 

day’s worth of 

comments for 

the draft Forest 

Plan Revision 

and DEIS. 

(Photo courtesy of Bill 

Jeffries, WRNF)

Issue 5 July 2000 

The comment period for the White River’s Proposed 

Revised Land and Resource Management Plan (draft 

Forest Plan) and Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

(DEIS) ended—after nine long months—on May 9. The 

Forest received more than 14,500 comment cards, 

letters, e-mails and faxes. We appreciate the effort 

everyone put into writing their comments. 

All the letters we received were read, and the comments 

within them were identified. Your comments were then 

consolidated into what are called “public concern 

statements.” Written responses to these statements will 

be in the final forest plan documents. The planning team 

is currently writing responses to the public concern 

statements. 

Your comments are very important to us—they will help 

us finalize the planning documents; they let us know 

what issues are important to you and how you think 

National Forests should be managed; and, they also 

show us where we need to improve our communication 

efforts with you. 

There are several themes that run through the 

comments. These include: 

See Comments, page 3 

14,571 Comment Letters Received!! 

Dear Friends, 

The White River reached a major milestone in the 

forest plan revision process with the close of the 

comment period on May 9. Although longer than we 

anticipated, the expanded comment period provided 

the opportunity for more individuals and 

organizations to express their views. I was 

impressed and gratified by the level of involvement 

of so many people. We received more than 14,000 

comment letters; and with the lengthened comment 

period we responded to many requests to make 

presentations to town councils, county 

commissioners and numerous organizations. All 

comments that were postmarked by May 9 will be 

addressed in the final Forest Plan. 

We’ve now embarked on the process of evaluating 

the comments and developing the final Plan. We will 

also be incorporating the strategy for lynx habitat 

protection and the results of the National Roadless 

Area Conservation Project into the final planning 

documents. Our goal is to have the Forest Plan 

completed and signed by Regional Forester Lyle 

Laverty in May 2001. 

Another challenge is to keep you informed over the 

next year. We are available to answer questions and 

meet with groups; and we will continue to keep you 

updated on our progress with additional newsletters. 

With summer here, employees and volunteers are 

out on the Forest completing projects and greeting 

visitors. We hope to see you pursuing your favorite 

activity this summer on the White River. 

Again, I appreciate your interest in the White River 

National Forest. We are making decisions at the 

beginning of this new millennium that we hope will 

ensure the continued enjoyment of the Forest for 

generations to come, as well as sustaining the 

land’s resource values. 

Sincerely, 

MARTHA J. KETELLE 

Forest Supervisor 

White River National Forest 
Page 2 Forest Plan Focus 

Although travel management is 

just one of the issues being 

addressed in the forest plan 

revision process, it received a 

great deal of attention during the 

comment period. That attention is 

due in part to the decisions that 

will be made in the Forest Plan 

and the site-specific Travel 

Management Plan. 

The Forest Plan divides the Forest 

into management areas and 

identifies the types of travel 

allowed or prohibited within these 

areas (e.g., it identifies areas 

available for winter motorized and 

non-motorized travel, and areas 

available for summer motorized 

and non-motorized travel). The 

comment period on the draft 

Forest Plan closed May 9. 

The Travel Management Plan is 

site specific—it contains very 

specific management direction for 

each road and trail on the White 

River National Forest. For 

example, the types and seasons 

of use allowed on each road or 

trail on the Forest will be identified 

in the Travel Management Plan. 

The decision on the Forest Plan 

will be made in May 2001. The 

Forest Plan will be accompanied 

by a final EIS and a selected 

alternative will be identified. A 

travel management plan will 

accompany each alternative in the 

final EIS, including the selected 

alternative. 

Many of you commented that 

making the forest plan decision 

and the travel management plan 

decision at the same time was 

confusing and difficult to follow. 

Many groups and individuals also 

said there was not enough field 

time to study specific roads and 

trails. For these reasons, there will 

be another opportunity to 

comment on the Travel 

Management Plan. 

This additional comment period 

will give those who wish to 

comment again on site-specific 

travel management issues the 

opportunity to gather field 

observations, take field trips, and 

study road and trail use and 

conditions this summer and the 

summer of 2001. 

This additional comment period 

only applies to the site-specific 

Travel Management Plan. All of the 

Travel Management Plans (one for 

each alternative) will be available 

for comment—this includes the 

management of individual roads 

and trails, types of uses permitted, 

possible seasonal restrictions and 

potential closures. 

The 90-day comment period for the 

Travel Management Plans will 

begin after the decision is made on 

the final Forest Plan in May 2001. 

When this comment period is over, 

and comments are reviewed, a final 

decision will be made on the sitespecific Travel Management Plan. 

Travel management comments that 

were submitted by May 9, will be 

considered when the final forest 

plan documents are written. These 

comments are very important and 

will be incorporated, to the extent 

possible, into both the final EIS and 

the associated Travel Management 

Plans. 

More Time to Comment on Travel Management 

The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits 

discrimination in all its programs and activities on the 

basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, 

age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and 

marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply 

to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 

alternative means for communication of program 

information (Braille, large print, audio tape, etc.) should 

contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202)720-2600 

(voice and TDD). 

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, 

Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten 

Building, 14th and Independence Avenue SW, 

Washington DC 20250-9410 or call (202)720-5964 

(voice or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity 

employer. 

Receipt of this newsletter is an indication that you are 

on our mailing list. If you do not wish to receive future 

mailings, please let us know. Government mailing lists 

are subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 

and may be released to the public under certain 

conditions. If you do not want your name released, you 

should not be on this mailing list. 

Forest Contacts

If you have questions regarding the revision 

process or the comments we received on the 

draft Forest Plan, the following people 

may be contacted at the Supervisor's 

Office by calling (970) 945-2521: 

Dan Hormaechea, Planning Director 

Carolyn Upton, Forest Planner 

Sue Froeschle, Public Affairs Officer

If you would like to be added to 

our mailing list or need to change 

your address, please contact 

Bridget Eisfeldt at (970) 945-

2521. 
Forest Plan Focus Page 3 

Comments, from page 1

Healthy forests are important to people 

Multiple use is the Forest Service mandate 

Recreation is a valid use of National Forest lands 

Travel management is difficult to understand and should be separate from the Forest Plan or should 

require an additional comment opportunity 

Private property rights need to be respected 

More collaboration needs to be done with local entities 

Public comments are important and should not be ignored 

This list represents a very general and preliminary review of thousands of comment letters. Many specific 

comments were submitted, and all will be considered, although some comments were “out of scope”—or 

outside the White River’s decision-making authority. 

Forest staff will be available this summer and fall to visit with groups or individuals who would like to know 

more about the comments that were submitted on the draft Forest Plan. Contact the Forest if you would like to 

review or talk to someone about the comments. A list of public concerns and written responses will be included 

in the final set of forest plan documents. This information will be available to you when we release the final 

Forest Plan in May 2001. 

Roadless Area Conservation Project 

As if the forest planning process wasn’t complicated enough—now there is a national roadless proposal! 

In October 1999, President Clinton asked the US Forest Service to come up with ways to manage remaining 

roadless areas within the National Forest System. Initial public meetings were held last December, including one on 

the White River. The draft documents (a draft environmental impact statement and a proposed rule) for the 

Roadless Area Conservation Project were released on May 9; the comment period ends on July 17. 

There are three proposals in the documents: 

1. Prohibitions: The proposed action prohibits road construction and reconstruction in roadless areas. This 

proposal ensures that, in the short-term, roadless characteristics of areas currently without roads are 

maintained.

2. Procedures: The proposed action calls for local Forest Service managers to evaluate whether and how to 

protect roadless characteristics, in the context of multiple-use management, during forest plan revisions, in 

current inventoried roadless areas and other smaller unroaded areas. This proposal addresses the longterm question of how all areas currently without roads should be managed.

3. Tongass: This proposal only addresses the Tongass National Forest in Alaska.

Each national forest contributed a roadless area inventory for this nation-wide analysis—the White River’s roadless 

area inventory was completed as part of the draft forest plan revision process for the Forest. The inventory was 

used primarily to determine what areas on the Forest had wilderness characteristics. The roadless area inventory 

maps show there are 642,000 acres of roadless area on the White River—these, and other smaller unroaded areas, 

will be the lands impacted by the national roadless proposal. These maps, shared with the public at the December 

meeting, are currently available for review on the roadless web site at www.roadless.fs.fed.us. 

The national roadless project, like the White River Forest Plan Revision, is currently in the draft stage. No final 

decisions have been made on either project. Therefore, the full impact of the roadless proposal on the Forest Plan is 

not clear. The Forest Plan will be reviewed in light of this draft roadless proposal to determine if any additional 

analysis is needed, or if any changes need to be made to the forest plan documents. 

More information on the Roadless Area Conservation Project may be found at www.roadless.fs.fed.us. 
Page 4 Forest Plan Focus 

Address Correction Requested 

The Canada lynx, a bobcat-sized 

carnivore that lives in dense forests 

and feeds mainly on snowshoe 

hare, was listed as a threatened 

species under the Endangered 

Species Act on April 24. While the 

White River’s draft Forest Plan 

included direction for lynx habitat 

management, the listing of the lynx 

has made it even more important for 

the Forest Service to manage this 

habitat. Forest biologists continue to 

work with the US Fish and Wildlife 

Service and the Colorado Division 

of Wildlife to find the best ways to 

do this. 

The White River is working with 

other National Forests in Colorado 

and Wyoming to develop a 

consistent approach to lynx habitat 

management. This effort will result 

in several forests amending their 

current forest plans to include lynx 

direction. Because of where the 

White River is in the process, this 

information will be incorporated 

into the final planning documents 

rather than as an amendment to 

the existing Forest Plan. 

Details of the lynx forest plan 

amendment process can be found 

at www.fs.fed.us/r2/lynx. Written 

comments will be accepted after 

the DEIS for the lynx management 

direction is completed—the DEIS 

should be available in late July or 

August. Comments on how the 

lynx management direction relates 

What’s up with the Canada lynx? 

to the White River National Forest 

and the White River Forest Plan 

should be made at that time. 

The final Forest Plan for the White 

River, due out next spring, will 

include information on how lynx 

habitat will be identified and 

managed on the Forest. This will be 

based on the best science and 

professional input available. 

Because of recent developments in 

lynx habitat studies, lynx direction in 

the final Forest Plan may be 

different than what was in the draft 

Forest Plan. 

For more information on the Forest 

Service Rocky Mountain Region 

Forest Plan lynx amendment effort, 

or how it may impact the White 

River’s final Forest Plan, call Keith 

Giezentanner at (970) 945-3244, or 

visit the website cited above. 

Forest Plan Focus 

White River National Forest 

900 Grand Avenue 

PO Box 948 

Glenwood Springs, CO 81602-0948 

Inside This Issue 

Comments, Comments & More Comments 

More Time to Comment on Travel Management 

Roadless Area Conservation Project