Chat
Nanno, you do qualify, because you responded during the "Official" comment period.
Here is the information for #4:
Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and the Revised Shoshone Land Management Plan (EIS No. 20140007). The Responsible Official is Daniel J. Jirón, Regional Forester.
The objection must clearly state that it is an Objection to the Shoshone Land Management Plan Draft Decision. In electronic objections, the subject line should contain: Objection to the Shoshone Land Management Plan Draft Decision.
For #7, you will need to refer to the following document:
http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCU...446260.pdf
It is the response to all the comments that were received during the "Official" comment period.
You can do a "search" on Pack Goats to see how well they responded to your comment. Depending on what you see, and how you interpret the response, you can use that as a basis for your objection.
Basically, my response had to do with the fact that I didn't think they adequately analyzed the very tiny, marginal difference in risk between having a few carefully-managed, controlled pack goats, and having no pack goats at all, with respect to disease transmission between pack goats and wild sheep. And also the fact that they continued to lump pack goats with other domestic livestock (sheep and free-ranging goats) with respect to their analysis.
I told them to go back and do a better, more site-specific Risk Analysis. I told them to include Probabilities of Risk, not just the Risk itself. I told them to include mitigation measures & best management practices. I also asked them why they didn't include members of NAPGA and/or Pack Goat Users in their collaborative process & why they weren't listed as Contributors to the Plan.
I also said they inadequately analyzed the "ripple effect" (their words, not mine) that this Decision would have on the entire community of Pack Goat users on all Federal Lands that have Wild Sheep Habitat, because all Federal Land Managers are going to be using this Plan as a model when the the time comes for them to revise their own respective Land Management Plans. This Decision will not just affect the Wind River Range; it could potentially affect a HUGE area in the Western U.S.
So, depending on your comments, you can decide if you have grounds for an objection. I do know that NAPGA has hired a lawyer & that they plan on also filing an objection. I am going to file an objection because 1)what could it hurt? 2)I feel strongly enough about this Issue, and 3)the greater the number of people that object, perhaps the better chance we have of at least sitting down & discussing the issue with the Forest Service.
Here is the information for #4:
Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and the Revised Shoshone Land Management Plan (EIS No. 20140007). The Responsible Official is Daniel J. Jirón, Regional Forester.
The objection must clearly state that it is an Objection to the Shoshone Land Management Plan Draft Decision. In electronic objections, the subject line should contain: Objection to the Shoshone Land Management Plan Draft Decision.
For #7, you will need to refer to the following document:
http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCU...446260.pdf
It is the response to all the comments that were received during the "Official" comment period.
You can do a "search" on Pack Goats to see how well they responded to your comment. Depending on what you see, and how you interpret the response, you can use that as a basis for your objection.
Basically, my response had to do with the fact that I didn't think they adequately analyzed the very tiny, marginal difference in risk between having a few carefully-managed, controlled pack goats, and having no pack goats at all, with respect to disease transmission between pack goats and wild sheep. And also the fact that they continued to lump pack goats with other domestic livestock (sheep and free-ranging goats) with respect to their analysis.
I told them to go back and do a better, more site-specific Risk Analysis. I told them to include Probabilities of Risk, not just the Risk itself. I told them to include mitigation measures & best management practices. I also asked them why they didn't include members of NAPGA and/or Pack Goat Users in their collaborative process & why they weren't listed as Contributors to the Plan.
I also said they inadequately analyzed the "ripple effect" (their words, not mine) that this Decision would have on the entire community of Pack Goat users on all Federal Lands that have Wild Sheep Habitat, because all Federal Land Managers are going to be using this Plan as a model when the the time comes for them to revise their own respective Land Management Plans. This Decision will not just affect the Wind River Range; it could potentially affect a HUGE area in the Western U.S.
So, depending on your comments, you can decide if you have grounds for an objection. I do know that NAPGA has hired a lawyer & that they plan on also filing an objection. I am going to file an objection because 1)what could it hurt? 2)I feel strongly enough about this Issue, and 3)the greater the number of people that object, perhaps the better chance we have of at least sitting down & discussing the issue with the Forest Service.