Tellico Closing!?!? Updated information enclosed! MUST READ!

Dear Interested Party:
The USDA Forest Service is seeking comments on two proposals regarding management of the Upper Tellico Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) System:

1. An Environmental Assessment (EA) for the long-term management of the Upper Tellico OHV System. You may download a copy of the EA and related graphics at http://www.cs.unca.edu/nfsnc/tellico. If you would like to receive a paper copy of the EA, please e-mail your request to: [email protected] or call (828) 257-4817, and one will be mailed to you. For questions concerning the project or the EA contact Candace Wyman, Project Coordinator, at 828-257-4816.

2. A temporary closure of the Upper Tellico OHV System for resource protection, effective April 1, 2009. This closure would prohibit possession or use of a motorized vehicle on a road or trail within the Upper Tellico OHV System, with the exception of highway-legal vehicles on 420-1 and certain other exceptions described in the closure order until a final project decision is implemented.The Upper Tellico OHV System is located on Tusquitee Ranger District, Nantahala National Forest, Cherokee County, NC. In June 2008, we publicized a proposal for long-term management of the System, designed to greatly reduce the amount of soil leaving the System and entering the Tellico River and its tributaries, while still providing an OHV trail system. This proposal is referred to as the “proposed action” or Alternative B and is described in detail in Chapter 1 of the EA. We received around 1,500 public comments on the proposed action. Alternatives to the proposed action were developed in response to the comments and environmental issues identified by the Agency. A wide range of comments was received, so six alternatives are analyzed in the EA, identified as Alternatives A through F. We would now like your review and comment on the alternatives and analysis before making a final decision on long-term management of the System.

The following is a brief description of the alternatives analyzed in detail in the EA. Please refer to the EA, Chapters 2 and 3, for more information about each alternative.

• Alternative A is the “no action” alternative that reflects the existing trail system with 2007 management and funding levels.
• Alternative B is the “proposed action” that was released in June 2008 for public comment. It was developed to address the problems initially identified in trail condition surveys conducted in 2007-2008.
• Alternative C closes the OHV System, but maintains over 10 miles of existing Forest system roads in the area, open year-round or seasonally, to provide for public highway-legal vehicle access for hunting, fishing and other recreation uses. It was developed in response to public concerns that the proposed action (Alternative B) did not go far enough in eliminating trails on sensitive soils and trails near water.
• Alternative D was developed in response to public concerns that the OHV Trail System should meet current trail density and challenge level standards, and not require a Forest Plan amendment.
• Alternative E was developed in response to public concerns that the proposed action (Alternative B) would eliminate too many high challenge OHV experiences.
• Alternative F was developed in response to public concerns that the proposed action (Alternative B) would eliminate too many OHV trail miles.

The environmental concerns that initiated the proposed management changes are described in the EA, as are the projected direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects of each of these Alternatives.

The EA shows that the Upper Tellico OHV System has extensive damage and contributes unacceptable levels of sediment into the Tellico River and its tributaries. Sediment is leaving the OHV System from more than 2,000 locations along the trails. The Agency is in violation of North Carolina state water quality standards because of the conditions on Upper Tellico OHV System. Since the Upper Tellico River watershed is located in an area of steep terrain, highly erosive soils, and high rainfall, maintaining an OHV trail system without causing significant environmental damage is extremely difficult.

While I understand how important the Upper Tellico OHV System is to OHV users, the impacts to water quality are so significant that I cannot recommend keeping the System open at this time. After careful consideration of the environmental effects of the alternatives as presented in the EA, my preferred alternative is Alternative C, which closes the OHV System. Alternative C would maintain over 10 miles of existing Forest system roads (currently also OHV trails), open year-round or seasonally, to provide public access for hunting, fishing and other recreation uses. Trail 1 (FS Road 420-1) would be paved and kept open as a through route for highway-legal vehicles.

I want to emphasize that a final decision has not yet been made. This public review period is an opportunity for you to give us constructive feedback. I encourage you to review the environmental assessment and provide us with any information that you think we have not considered adequately. Your comments need to be as specific as possible and you must provide the following information: 1) Your name and address; 2) Title of the project; 3) Specific substantive comments on the proposed action, along with supporting reasons that I should consider in reaching a decision; and 4) Your signature or other means of identification verification. For organizations, a signature or other means of identification verification must be provided for the individual authorized to represent your organization.

Comments must be postmarked or received within 30 days beginning the day after publication of this notice in The Asheville Citizen-Times. Comments may be mailed electronically, in a common digital format, to: [email protected]; or by regular mail to: National Forests in North Carolina, Attn: Candace Wyman, 160 A Zillicoa Street, Asheville, NC 28801, or faxed to 828-257-4263. Hand delivered comments must be received within our normal business hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

Thank you for your continued interest in management of the National Forests in North Carolina and the Tusquitee Ranger District.

Sincerely,

MARISUE HILLIARD
Forest Supervisor

Click to expand...

To whom it may Concern,

My name is Brian Meyers from Kalamazoo, Michigan. I am writing in response to two recent releases from the United States Forest Service; the Environmental assessment (EA) and the temporary closure of Tellico Upper OHV area.

First I would like to address the Temporary Closure. I was extremely disappointed to hear about the extended closure of the Upper OHV area. I have understood the need for winter closure and fully support parts of the trail system being closed during the winter months. However, extending the closure due to the recent EA release has put myself and many others in limbo after making plans to visit Tellico as soon as the park opened. Not only has this closure put my plans on hold, it is going to seriously hurt local businesses that have been waiting all winter for the trails to re-open. In this current economic crisis, this extended closure could cause some serious financial hardships for many in your local economy. I would like to ask that you reconsider the extended closure and consider allowing Tellico to opened as planned and run as it has until the EA is decided upon.

I recently had the opportunity to read though the Forest Service’s recent EA, as well as the Southern independent trail assessment (SITA). After taking some time to break down each study, I have come up with a few questions/concerns that arise from dissecting both.

Tellico River water quality. In the Forest Service’s Supervisor’s statement release, he states that the Agency is in violation of the North Carolina state water quality standards; however the SITA states that the Streams are healthy and have excellent water quality per North Carolina Standards and are capable of sustaining viable, reproducing native trout populations. Which results are correct? Do there need to be more tests? Can the FS provide a notice of violation from the State of North Carolina?

Trail repair/updates costs. According to the Alternative F on the EA, the cost for repairs and updates on trails at Upper Tellico OHV will cost more then $5,000,000. The Alternative F proposal also includes closure of all of Trail 2 and all of Trail 12. The SITA report covers repairing all the current trails, as well as repairing Trail 2 and Trail 12 but gives a total cost of repairs and updates at $2,200,000. Nearly 60% less then the EA estimated costs. Why are EA costs so high? Can the EA numbers be justified?

Estimated Net Expenses. On page 199 of the EA, it shows costs of operations for each Alternative. It shows the Net Expense of Alternative A as $236,178. While it shows the Net Expense of Alternative C as $221,056. So according to this report, it will actually only save $10,000 in annual expense from closing the park to keeping the park open. Granted, I am comparing the “Do Nothing” option, which we both know is not a good option. However, none of the numbers for keeping the park open seem to be out of line with current cost of operations or the estimated cost with the park being closed. In the SITA report, they state the Annual Operation and maintenance at approximately $100,000 per year. Why are the EA costs so high? Can the EA numbers be justified? Why would the park cost so much annually if it is closed?

Local Financial impact. The EA states that OHV users bring in nearly 4 times the amount of money as anglers; a yearly total of almost $4.5 million. After eliminating this amount of money from the local economy, does the Forest Services have any proposals to help local business or stimulate the area? Has the Forest Service done any studies on how many jobs will be lost, internally and externally? Can the local region sustain the loss of income?

I don’t 100% agree with any of the proposed Alternatives, but if I had two selections, I would go with E and F. Of these two Alternatives, I would have to agree more with E, though both seem to be good options for all parties involved. I do strongly feel that Alternatives C and D would complete cripple the local economy and Alternative D would be just as bad as Alternative C in the long run. Eliminating the high challenge areas would keep myself and just about everyone I know way from Tellico.

I am an avid trail rider and I travel long distances to enjoy difficult trail riding. Tellico Upper OHV area is renowned for its amazing trail quality, however closing anymore of the difficult trails without adding new obstacles will cause me to travel to other parks. The wonderful thing about Tellico is the natural surrounding and the beautiful Great Smokey Mountains. I believe that Tellico is a unique opportunity here in the United States to explore the mountains and enjoy our hobby. I am heart broken to know that there is a possibility that this will be taken away. I would like you to consider my opinion as well as other OHV user’s opinions when the final decision will be made on the trails.

Regards,

Brian Meyers.

Click to expand...

I am writing in response to the recent Environmental Assessment report for Upper Tellico OHV area. The report was recent released by the United States Forest Services in regards to the current trail conditions and repair options.

I am not sure how familiar you are with this area or any of the current issues, so please excuse me if I am covering information you may already know.

The Upper Tellico OHV Area has been open and owned by the USFS for nearly 22 years. In 2005, Trout Unlimited threatened a lawsuit against the USFS for allowing trails to erode and sediment to reach the Tellico River. In response to this lawsuit, the USFS closed several renowned trails in the trail system, as well implying a winter closure of the entire area.

The USFS also started to analyze the area and put together an Environmental Assessment (EA) report. During this time, the Southwest Four Wheel drive association hired an outside company to conduct a similar report (Southern Independent Trail Assessment, SITA). Both reports were released to the public this past Friday, Feb. 27th.

Tellico was scheduled to be re-opened after the winter closure on April 1st. However, the USFS Supervisor has issued an order for the trails to remain closed until the EA is decided upon. This order as put many people including myself in limbo, as we had planned to make a trip to visit the Upper Tellico OHV area as soon as it was opened at the beginning of April.

In the USFS EA, they state that 4wheelers bring in $4,500,000 per year to the local area. My question, is does the State Government have a plan to help these local businesses or has this not been addressed? Many businesses depend on the offroading business and without it, stand to loose everything! When the winter closures and other miscellaneous trail closures went into effect, many local businesses saw losses in almost 50% of their normal business!

I would like to know your opinion on the trail closures and effects they will have on the local economy. I would also like to know if there is anything being consider by the State Government to help these businesses in the event the trails never open again. I would also encourage you to support a compromise between the USFS, Trout Unlimited and the Offraoding community! After reading both reports, I do believe that the proper repairs and maintenance practice can be done in order to continue the use of Upper Tellico OHV area for 4wheelers, and Anglers.

Thank you for your time,

Brian Meyers

Click to expand...

jcroffroad said:

We are offering 15% off anything we sell in exchange for a letter, and we wanted people to be educated about what is going on.

Click to expand...

Jump This said:

Time appears to be short and the BOD is willing to do whatever we can.

Rick

Click to expand...

Jump This said:

Brian,
The BOD at takes all land issues very seriously and want to know what we can do to help.
We can push for letter writing and motivate people to make the appropriate phone calls as well.
We also have financial resources that may help.
Please let me know if you or any other organizations that are leading in this fight to keep Tellico open need any funding.
Time appears to be short and the BOD is willing to do whatever we can.

Rick

Click to expand...