Forest service plan for cibola national forest

[Ropinfool]

is everybody aware of what the forest service plan is for the cibola national forest in NM? looks like they are in bed with environmental groups and want to designate much of it as wilderness areas.

hope folks will stand up and fight to keep public land open.

 

[Ropinfool]

Cibola National Forest hosting workshops to identify lands potentially suitable for wilderness consideration
Release Date:?Aug 19, 2014??
Contact(s): Champe Green, Forest Planner


Albuquerque, NM ? August 19, 2014.? The Cibola National Forest is hosting a series of public collaborative workshops to identify and inventory lands that are potentially suitable for wilderness consideration. The Cibola is conducting this assessment as part of its forest plan revision process, which requires forests to assess for potential wilderness.
?This is the first step of a lengthy process that we will use to determine whether an area should be recommended for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System,? said Forest Supervisor Elaine Kohrman. ?There will be many opportunities for the public to participate throughout the process.? Kohrman said that no decision has been made and will not be made until the revision process is completed.
The first round of workshops will be held in the following communities:
Albuquerque? - Tuesday, September 9 ? ? ? ? ?
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
UNM Continuing Education Bldg. North; Rooms B & C
1634 University Blvd. NE, Albuquerque, NM
Grants - Thursday, September 11
6:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
Grants High School, Performing Arts Auditorium
500 Mountain Rd.,? Grants, NM
Mountainair - Tuesday, September 16
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Dr. Saul Community Bldg.
109 Roosevelt, Mountainair, NM
Socorro - Thursday, September 18
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Socorro County Annex Bldg., Commission Room
198 Neel Ave., Socorro, NM
The Cibola will also have an interactive mapping tool posted on its website. This tool will provide another opportunity for the public to participate in this collaborative process. The mapping tool will be available on September 9, 2014.
Once the inventory process is complete, the next phase will be to evaluate the areas identified in the inventory phase to determine if the area meets wilderness characteristics. The Cibola will hold a second round of collaborative ?public workshops on early 2015 to evaluate the lands not eliminated during the inventory phase.
?Because of the high interest in this process, we're asking everyone to sign up for one of the workshops to ensure we have adequate accommodations,? Kohrman said.? To sign up, please call 505.346.3900 or send an e-mail to: [email protected] August 29, 2014. Anyone who needs assistance with verbal translations or accessibility should contact the Cibola a week before the workshop that they are planning on attending.
For more information, please go to the Cibola?s website: http://www.fs.usda.gov/cibolaand click on the Forest Plan Revision link or contact Champe Green, Forest Planner at 505.346.3889 or [email protected].
?
Electronic version of this media release
-30-

 

[smarba]

Thanks for heads up!

 

[JFWRC]

Yes-Thanks for heads up. Any bets out there that wolf introduction or expansion should I say will be part of this plan down the road? We best pay attention carefully as a community of hunters on this issue.

 

[mozey]

For me it depends on what the plan intends. I wouldn't be for any more wolf reintroduction or any of that kind of BS (FWIW, I've already seen wolves in the Cibola and Santa FE NFs), but I don't so much mind them restricting motor vehicle access in certain areas. I think more wilderness in that sense is a good thing. We'll have to watch.

 

[Ropinfool]

the intent of the plan is to identify areas for wilderness designation. it's all on the website. areas can be restricted without wilderness designation. do some research as to what the wilderness designation means.....it wouldn't be good for hunters or outdoorsmen. in this case it could designate 30+ miles of land as wilderness. now people can exaggerate all they want, but nobody is going to hike 20-30 miles to hunt.

part of the criteria for designation is that the areas be over 5000 acres and roadless. now what the forest service has been doing is no longer maintaining roads and blocking off roads for years. now they are claiming that the areas are "roadless" when in reality, they made them that way and are taking a blind eye to the existing roads which have been there all my life, and are still being used.

it's going to be interesting for sure. one thing though is on their website, there is a lot of support from environmental groups. people who've never even set foot in new mexico. sportsmen of all need to stand up since this issue will always come up. first it's wilderness, then national park.....NO HUNTING! don't believe it? it's already happened nearby in the El Malpais national monument. we used to be able to hunt that area. wake up people, the forest service doesn't want us up there!

 

[gleninaz]

Only two units here were implemented last year on the new roadless plans and thy made everyone camp in a couple of areas and closed most of the smaller roads we always used to camp on. My turkey hunting unit will soon implement and that will make camping illegal in all but two main areas. It will be like a KOA.

 

[mozey]

And that's the kind of crap I would definitely be against.

 

[ELKMAN]

Does anyone know where a map of the area is they are talking about?

 

[Ropinfool]

sorry i can't copy the link but go the the website address in the memo above, then forest plan revision webpage, then click on the "new collaborative mapping tool", then scroll down and click on Mt Taylor RD. that's the proposed map, both mt. taylor and zuni's included.

 

[Sierra]

So is NMWF supporting this?

 

[505]

Is water wet?

 

[ELKMAN]

Thanks Ropin!

 

[GOV]

First of all, the sky isn't falling folks. Wilderness designation was mentioned in the forest planning proposal by the enviros, but between suggestion and implementation takes years of public meetings and eventually an act of congress. Regardless, some of NM's best hunting opportunities are found in already-designated wilderness areas. Gila and Pecos Wilderness hunting? Off the charts! Furthermore, wilderness does not exclude hunting or grazing - in fact it clearly acknowledges these traditional land uses in its proclamatory language.The Cibola is a huge forest with a ton of great backcountry hunting opportunities. Sportsmen led wilderness designation (where appropriate) or sportsmen's backcountry special management areas could ensure that our kids will have killer refuge areas to hunt in for generations to come. Our two recent monument designations, Rio Grande del Norte and Organ Mountains Desert Peaks also guarantee great public lands hunting (and fishing in RGDN) opportunities far into the future. Again, hunting and fishing are clearly acknowledged in the proclamatory language for both these designations. Places that are already-roaded or developed can and should remain open as long as big game corridors and watersheds aren't adversely impacted. Hunting anywhere near a motorized route generally sucks west-wide unless the road in question backs up to non-motorized refuge country. Sportsmen in the Carson recently helped establish relatively small non-motorized Habitat Protection Areas (several thousand acres in size but surrounded by adequate motorized access) and the hunting quality and trophy quality went from mediocre to exceptional in only a few years. Let's not be spooked by land protection designations - they more than often benefit our community in huge ways. The key is for sportsmen to LEAD these campaigns and be the ones drawing boundaries and borders that are appropriate for our needs....

 

[GOV]

By the way, I'm the Executive Director of NMWF and have hunted and fished throughout NM since I was a little boy...

 

[maxbowhunts]

Make no mistake, The New Mexico Wildlife Federation is the one sportsmen's organization that goes to bat for Hunters and anglers not just sometimes, but every time there is an attack on NM resident hunters and anglers. The NMWF is part of the decision making process during the time before the hammer hits and NMWF always represent it's membership and even hunters who are not members to ensure that NM resident hunters have a fair chance at getting tags, access, and opportunity. NMWF does support wilderness campaigns when it is the right thing to do, and again, NMWF is part of the process. If there are lands with wilderness characteristics in the Cibola that have been studied during their management plan revisions, NMWF will look at that very closely and make sure that it serves all hunters and anglers in NM before the organization lends support. There is a place for all who consider themselves conservationists. In stead of criticizing an organization and making uneducated assertions, look into their past and see the positive outcomes that have been generated because of the involvement of great organizations like The New Mexico Wildlife Federation. I am proud of my association with NMWF and I will continue to advocate and be a voice for all NM resident hunters and anglers.

 

[Elkbow]

This may be a good thing for hunters, sportsman and others.
I would like to see maps of the actual areas they are considering for Wilderness status......but I see a lot off positive things having Wilderness areas in certain areas, for one it will stop human change and increase wildlife, therefore better hunting and it also increased wild life in the forest surrounding the Wilderness.... yes you have to get off your butt and walk in or ride a horse but that should not limit you, I just spent 11 days in a wilderness hunting elk and was successful after hiking in and out every day, and I had to hire a outfitter to bring it out on a mule but well worth it, I am 54 now and when I am to old to hike in I will hire someone to pack me in and leave me and then pack me out after several days. Other pros is it will keep it off limits to those who support the Land transfer acts, and its less costly for the forest service to manage. Think about it be opened minded and lets see what is actually proposed.
B

 

[Sierra]

Welcome to the site guys. This must be a very important issue for NMWF for so many of you guys to sign up to this site and make your first post.

Can you guys tell us a little about yourselves? Are you guys pro-wolf?

 

[greatwestern]

I'd be interested in any meaningful response to your inquiry as well Sierra, but based on my past engagements on this very forum with Vespach and our dear ol Jason, I'm not expecting much other than the typical smoke, mirrors, and evasion.

But, to be fair to the new NMWF dudes here, I will lay such reservations aside, and see what they have to say for themselves.

Thanks,

Adam Simms

 

[GOV]

Ok Adam Simms and "Sierra." Sierra, what's your real name so I know who I'm addressing here? And what are YOUR backgrounds?

So here is some information about me, Garrett VeneKlasen.Almost 50 years old. Born and raised in New Mexico. Hunted, trapped and fished all over NM, CO and AZ with my dad and oldest brother since I was just a little kid. Started guiding people fishing as soon as I got my driver's permit. Worked in the sporting goods retail world starting late in high school. Worked as a part-time hunting (private land elk in NM and CO) and fishing guide. I lived in South America (Amazon) and was a fishing camp host in Venezuela and Brazil. I had a outdoor travel company for 22 years and sent people all over the world fishing and wing shooting. I also freelanced for Field & Stream, Grey's Sporting Journal and Fly Fisherman Magazine. I started the NM chapter of BHA (volunteer), then worked for TU for three years before taking the ED position at NMWF. What else do you want to know about me?

Wolves. Let's talk facts...

The federal Mexican grey wolf recovery program was initiated in 1977 (http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/mexicanwolf/).

Federal law (USFWS) supersedes state law when it comes to Mexican grey wolf management because of the Endangered Species Act. Per the ESA, only wolves that pose an imminent threat to human life of livestock can be legally killed or trapped.The NMDGF is trying to amend current state statute (http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/commission/documents/19_35_6-Amend-proposed-09_09_14.pdf) to say NMDGF has the final say over federal mandate on predator release "for the purpose of recovery (wolves included)" in the state, but they're setting themselves up for a nasty lawsuit they will ultimately lose and spend a ton of your license dollars in the process. Wasting precious license dollars on crap like this makes no sense.

Being "anti-wolf" is all well and good, but in the end it doesn't mean ##### unless you think you can convince congress to change the ESA. Like it or not, wolves are on the southwestern New Mexican/AZ/Mexican landscape and will continue to be managed as an endangered species until the USFWS reaches its targeted population management goals. Bitching, moaning and fear mongering about wolf armageddon is a complete waste of time. If you want to get pissed about something, let's talk about the proposed expansion of White Sands Missile Range (to the tune of more that 300,000-acres) or the fact that the NMDGF just screwed NM residents out of at least 8 bighorn ram tags a year.

Anyway, NMWF believes that our existing Mexican wolf population should be managed - within the boundaries of its original recovery range (and not expanded as proposed) like all other native NM game animals, using sound science and best management practices until the USFWS to reaches its intended population goals. The reality of this remains to be seen for numerous reasons, Remember that this has been going on for almost 40 years now and do you see a wolf under every bush? When and if the USFWS does reach its population goals, NMWF supports the hunting and trapping (again, using best management practices) of wolves to ensure their population does not have an adverse impact on other wildlife species.

Me personally? I'm certainly not afraid of wolves nor afraid that they'll ever reach population levels in NM in my lifetime or perhaps ever to have enough of an impact on our game herds to make diddly squat of a difference.When I was a guide in Alaska, I lived and camped around wolves (big ass northern wolves) and never gave them a second thought. They were simply part of the landscape.

Now I don't have time to get in a pissing contest with folks, so if you want to continue this conversation or any other one, just pick up the phone and call me at 505.670.2925. I'm all ears.

And one more thing,everybody. Try and show up at more NMDGF commission meetings. If you can't go, call your Commissioners and keep them on track. Pat them on the back when they do the right thing and give them hell when they don't. And call your legislators and the Governor and regularly make sure they all know how you feel as a sportsman or woman.

Values unite us, issues divide us. And we as a community sure as hell can't afford to be divided.

Signing off... GVK

 

[dwylie]

Just wondering if anyone has thought about mobility limited outdoorsmen when making travel management plans? Quite a few of us out there, some fought fiercely for our country. A lot of Forest roads being closed as well as the new wilderness additions denying access to public land, for those of us who can't afford to pay to be packed in and packed out of course.

Please make it worth your time to respond NMWF. Any plans or thoughts? Your support here would be much appreciated.

 

[Elkbow]

Ok --- I am Brian Thompson - born and raised in NM and am 54, I have hunted, fished and trapped all over NM, CO and WY, I am a Boy Scout leader and conservationist. No I am not with the NMWF but I do support them 95% of the time and they have published a couple of articles of mine in their Outdoor Reporter Newspaper, I also get involved with them on certain issues and with the NMGFD commission and the National Forests departments and also I write letters to our congressmen and ect.
I am just a average working man who has a passion for hunting and the outdoors.
No I dont support any Wolf program - I have seen what it has done in parts of WY and UT, but I believe it will stay in the Gila only here in NM, I have more problems with over ATV/OHV use and poaching in this state and the NMGFD commission when it comes to Outfitters and non -resident tag allotments. I also worry about politicians who want to take away our BLM and National Forest systems to develop the land and lock us out.
I think making parts of National Forest into small Wildernesses can be a good thing.....I want more wildlife which equates into more permits and better hunting and keeping our public lands public and pristine. To many hunters just ##### but never actually get involved, and most dont even pay attention.

 

[greatwestern]

Heh, well there you go Mr Klasen; that wasn't presumptuous nor pontificating at all...you sure you got it all in there?

As for myself, as far as this "discussion" (you seem to be more interested in lecturing)is concerned, I'm just a 4th generation New Mexican sportsman, the kind for whom your group claims to advocate. But NMWF has failed to convince me thus far, and the attitude you display here as a spokesman leave me trusting NMWF even less.

I find your closing statement incredibly ironic in the context of the rant that precedes it. And no, you didn't really answer the question.

Good day sir,

Adam Simms

 

[NMPaul]

Welcome Elkbow, GOV, Maxbowhunts. It is good to hear all perspectives.

As hunters, I think all groups agree on 80% of the issues, but, fight like hell over the last 20%.

Good quote.

"Values unite us, issues divide us. And we as a community sure as hell can't afford to be divided."

I assume "community" means hunting community.

 

[Ropinfool]

GOV sounds like a tree hugger!

locals are OVERWHELMINGLY against it. wilderness designation will cut off access for many folks, including future generations. If the NMWF supports this then i just lost all respect for them as well.

sad to see sportsmen developing this environmentalist mentality. we need to force our goverment agencies to "manage" instead of cut off access to our public lands. wilderness is only good for some spotted owl, but when im old and can't get around then i won't be able to go to places that ive been visiting since i was a kid with my father.

 

[dwylie]

Mt. Taylor elk hunting was great up until about 10 years ago when management decisions were made that since then have increasingly made the quality worse. Seems it would be prudent to revisit those management decisions (late season cow elk hunts, horn guards on water tanks, etc.) before bringing extreme options to the table such as closing Forest roads and creating wilderness.

I had an article published in the Abq Journal about how no consideration for mobility limited folks exists in the current decision making process thus stripping away access to public land.

Please give it a read.
http://www.abqjournal.com/459601/opinion/mobilitylimited-folks-being-shut-out.html

Dustin

 

[NMPaul]

>Mt. Taylor elk hunting was great
>up until about 10 years
>ago when management decisions were
>made that since then have
>increasingly made the quality worse.
>Seems it would be prudent
>to revisit those management decisions
>(late season cow elk hunts,
>horn guards on water tanks,
>etc.) before bringing extreme options
>to the table such as
>closing Forest roads and creating
>wilderness.
>
>I had an article published in
>the Abq Journal about how
>no consideration for mobility limited
>folks exists in the current
>decision making process thus stripping
>away access to public land.
>
>
>Please give it a read.
>http://www.abqjournal.com/459601/opinion/mobilitylimited-folks-being-shut-out.html
>
>Dustin

Good to hear from you Dustin.

 

[GOV]

Thanks for being cordial NM Paul... And yes, "community" means the hunting community.

I don't have the time or the energy to get in an internet pissing match with someone I can't look in the eye.

For now, I'm going to stick with the "values unite us, issues divide us" theme and leave it at that.

The offer still stands about me sitting down in person with you all as individuals or as a group to discuss wolves, wilderness, travel management, elk calling, tag allocation, fighting anti-trapping legislation, and etcetera. Through civil dialogue comes consensus and pragmatic decision making. Someday that will make the sportsmen community an unstoppable force of nature. Let's keep the politics out of it. It's definitively our Achilles heel.

Again, my phone number is 505.670.2925 and I'm happy to travel to you to hear your story and listen to your perspective even if I completely disagree with your way of thinking.

As a parting note, I'd like to leave you with a couple more issues that should be keeping us all up at night. I can assure you that our legitimate opposition loves the fact that sportsmen have become so dysfunctional and divisive...

http://www.kptv.com/story/26502898/peta-creates-billboard-based-on-longview-hunters-bear-encounter

http://www.rollcall.com/news/contra...ublic_hands-236231-1.html?pg=1&dczone=opinion

 

[SLM]

I would agree, until sportsman find a way to unite and be heard as one voice, we will continue to lose ground. Now we all fight in different directions depending on what is important to "me". ( human nature)

If we could ever pick one issue such as Jennings Law, outfitters tags, SCR, (or?) and beat it as one voice, not as a win for NMWF, SFW or any group but as a whole,we would gain a lot more clout on other issues.

 

[Sierra]

>......or the fact
>that the NMDGF just screwed
>NM residents out of at
>least 8 bighorn ram tags
>a year.


So if it was up to you, how many of the bighorn ram tags would you allocate to non-residents?

 

[cantgetdrawn]

Three years ago the Wilderness and Roadless Area Release Act was up before the US Congress. It would have opened up roadless areas that were closed but would not have wilderness designation. Most sportsmen groups supported it (NRA, NSSF, SCI, etc). The RMEF initially supported the act but after pressure from its membership switched positions and opposed the act. Many hunters prefer hunting in roadless areas. These are not tree huggers, these are hunters that like to get away from roads. Personally I wish it would have passed, it would have minimized what the NFS could do in the Cibola NF, but name calling does no one any good and I am still a member of RMEF.

This in-fighting does no one any good.

Jennings' law is a good example of where we can all come together. NMWF is one of the only local sportsmen's organizations with full time staff. This means they can more easily lobby politicians to introduce bills to benefit sportsmen.

They also monitor the Game commission and have people at pretty much all the commission meetings. I know of no other sportsman organization with those resources. I am not a member but monitoring their webpages you notice issues are brought up there before you here about them in other places.

Let's work together when we can.