Forest Service releases Tahoe forest plan objections
The U.S. Forest Service has published 12 formal objections to a “forest plan” that will guide management of the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit for the next 15 years.
The plan is entering a 90-day objection resolution period during which the USFS will work with the objectors to determine whether their objections can be resolved.
Objections focus on firefighting and fuel-reduction strategies, habitat management, wildlife protection, wilderness designations and over-snow and off-highway vehicle access and restrictions.
The Forest Service chief in Washington, D.C., is overseeing the objection resolution process. Following that, the regional forester will sign a record of decision for the forest plan to take effect.
Only individuals or groups that commented in earlier phases of the plan’s creation could file objections related to those comments. More than 18,000 people commented on a draft forest plan. Considering so many views in a plan to manage 150,000 acres of public land is a “Herculean task,” some objectors acknowledge in letters to the USFS.
Among the 12 objectors are area fire chiefs. Fire chiefs representing Tahoe Douglas, Meeks Bay, Lake Valley, North Lake Tahoe, North Tahoe Fire, Fallen Leaf Lake and the city of South Lake Tahoe filed a joint objection letter.
In the letter, the chiefs state they have “substantive concerns” about some of the plan’s firefighting and fuel-reduction strategies, as well as land management, fuels management and fire suppression standards that if implemented “could negatively impact lives, property and public safety.”
Heavenly Mountain Resort says that parts of the forest plan would “improperly impede” its rights to terrain inside its ski area special-use permit boundary.
Heavenly points to a 200-acre cap on the increase of “operational footprint acres” of ski areas and slopes in the basin, arguing that would impact its existing special-use permit rights. The Vail-owned resort also objects to creation of a special refuge area for whitebark pine in its permit and operational boundaries, arguing that conservation is better served through an existing management agreement with the Forest Service.
Notice of Objection
(PDF 639 KB)
(PDF 42 KB)
(PDF 225 KB)
(PDF 177 KB)
(PDF 269 KB)
(PDF 519 KB)
(PDF 10,074 KB)
(PDF 12 KB)
(PDF 9,241 KB)
(PDF 44 KB)
(PDF 4,677 KB)
(PDF 529 KB)