sobo

Luna, I would not agree that I am "otherwise wrong" on all accounts. The process I outlined above generally works for project actions, which is what I've been dealing with for the last 15+ years. You're referring to programmatic actions. I should have been more clear. After reading Jim's latest post on this subject ^^ I would agree that the process is correct, and is being implemented as intended, as scary as that sounds. I would also agree that it's a sneaky way to get around public comment on FMPs.

mattp is mostly correct, and it seems that Jim may not have completely understood the nuances of the NEPA process. The plans are to be considered Categorically Excluded under NEPA, not from NEPA. There is no such thing as being Categorically Excluded from NEPA (Jim), nor being "exempted from NEPA" (mattp). The lead agency is still obligated by law to provide an opportunity for public input/comment. It does not mean that the plans do not have to go through the NEPA process. From one who deals with NEPA/SEPA/ECS issues every day as part of my real job (when I’m not spraying here), a ranking of Class II - Categorically Excluded (or “CE” for NEPA), or Categorically Exempt - Determination of Non-Significance (or “CE-DNS” for SEPA), does not mean that the programs or projects represented by the document can continue on full speed without public comment. What it does mean is that the lead agency, in this case the Forest Service, has reviewed their document/plan/project/action/update and have made a preliminary determination that it falls within the bounds of CE (for NEPA). The only thing this means is that the Forest Service has determined (internally) that they do not need to write an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). They must now consult with other potentially affected agencies (Corps of Engineers, Fish & Wildlife, Ecology, OAHP, EPA, NMFS, NOAA, tribes, counties, etc.), and the review by those agencies may change that preliminary determination. The preliminary determination must now be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the affected area, and/or by the local governmental clearinghouse for such things (a Council of Governments or some such thing). The publication must include a general description of the project, the agency’s preliminary determination, and how and where to make comment upon the preliminary determination if you do not agree with it. The time limit is set by WAC 197-11 in the case of SEPA, and is a minimum of 15 days from the date of first publication. The lead agency may extend the comment period on its own. The time limit for NEPA is set by Part 23 CFR 771, and is a minimum of 30 days. After the time period for comment, the lead agency must address each and every comment received, regardless of who made it. Only then is the preliminary decision finalized either as the same, or it may be revised to a more strict determination if warranted. Let me clarify here that in the SEPA process, the lead agency makes an “estimate” of what the determination will be before publication, then sends out the document for comment. In the NEPA process, the Class of the determination is determined by the lead agency (whether or not an EIS or an EA is warranted), then the comment period opens and closes, review/revision of the plan/project takes place to address the comments received, the revised document is recirculated to agencies so that they may assure themselves that their comments have been addressed, then a final determination (such as a FONSI - Finding Of No Significant Impact) is issued by the reviewing agencies, not the lead agency. Reviewing agencies may object to what the FS thought when it submitted the document to them for review, but ultimately it is up to the reviewing agencies to police the lead agency (in this case, the FS). And there is still the public input issue. And of course there is the appeal process, which can go on for years (take the White Pass Expansion to Hogback proposal, for instance). The bottom line is that the public still has, has never lost, and will not lose, the opportunity to comment. That opportunity has not been skirted in the least by ranking Forest Management Plans as Categorically Excluded under NEPA. Fish & Wildlife, NMFS, tribes, or anyone may decide that an EA or an EIS is required (and have the documentation/evidence to prove it). Then you get another opportunity to comment upon that document. It pays to understand how the process works. In closing, I would reiterate mattp’s comment that we, as climbers, have not taken much notice of forest planning. Thus endeth the lesson. Class dismissed.

Your point is well taken. I should know better. Post deleted. Apologies.

Post deleted by sobo

Nevermind. Thanks, Bug, for the land line number. Although the barmaid who answered the phone only recently moved to The Emerald City, she was reasonably adroit in her orienteering skillz and was able to provide satisfactory, albeit cryptic, directions to the site of libation imbibement. I just may meet a bunch of you Fokkers yet!

I happen to be heading over to Seattle this afternoon. What time does this shindiggle kick off? And in what part of Seattle is it? I have to get to a hotel in Shoreline afterwards for a seminar tomorrow morning.

When you say "straight off the trees", do you mean that you were using a short (relatively) sling from the tree, with the biners quite near to the tree? Did your rope stay (mostly) dry that way, or did it saw thru the top of the falls and get messy? We ran about 30 feet or more from the tree to the lip of the falls, and our rope stayed pretty dry. We did dry-tool laps on both sides of the ice, too, after we got in a few laps on what ice there was. I was trying a stacked tools manuever, and my planted axe came busting right out. I pitched backwards, still on my feet, and, forgetting for a brief moment that I was on TR, flailed wildly with my tools and managed to stick 'em back in before I weighted the rope. That was kind of a wierd feeling... Kind of like when you lean back in a chair and it starts to fall over, and you catch yourself just at the last second

Cragg and I were discussing the installation of chain anchors for TR at Horsetail, but the rock looks a bit too insecure for bolts. But it sure would beat that BS of the 60-foot sling for the top anchor. Did you look at the rock on top at all or have you thought of the feasibility of this action?

So, Alex, those must have been your tracks that led over to the park bench, then? We got there about 1:30-ish on Saturday, and pecked it up pretty good. Half a dozen laps or so, each. How did you manage to cover so much ground in one day? Strobach, Clear Creek, and Little Naches? Did you happen to check out Union Creek at all?

OK, so I just spent the last 3 hours or so in my office reading the new guide. To what project do I bill this time? Seriously, I'm stoked for Tieton multis on Goose Egg. South Fork "hexagonals" look fun, too. OK, now on to re-reading Alex's and Jason's guide for my upcoming adventures this weeknend... My boss is gonna kill me if he finds out...

Check this out.

Welcome! There's hordes of 'em in Spokane and those environs. You should be hearing from them soon.

Got mine at lunch, and have been reading it ever since. I should just take the rest of the day off... Nice guide.

Eric, Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

Just use the FRS frequencies. Like Alex sez, while it might be nice to have the longer range capability for emergencies, I don't find the cost justifiable. They also come in handy for ice climbing, too, when the waterfall isn't completely frozen up yet.

Anybody out there with a copy of ANAM 2002 handy at work? (although the date in question is in 2001, the book is published early the succeeding year, with the year of publication in the title - don't ask me why they do it that way; it doesn't make a lot of sense to me either)

I think I may have been in attendance at some of that band's gigs in years long past. Pretty good stuff. Bummer about the accident, but it sounds like he's taken the cards dealt and turned them into a winning hand. Saw Cragg about a month ago. He's working on replacing the Cobra pick I loaned him last year when he broke his. I expect we'll be hooking up once it gets a might colder over here. Merry Christmas, Wes!

Cool, Wes! BTW, love the avatar image!

I just turned 45, had my physical, and my doc ( a general practice MD) suggested that it is something I should seriously consider, given my recreational lifestyle. He also said some stuff about glucosamine that I should look out for, but I don't remember exactly what all that was. In general, he gave it a for me. I should call him up again...

Now you know why I said the above.

That seems like a rather disingenuous comment. Ricardo is right; research works. swaterfall: next time you run across an RMI guide, talk to him/her about how they got hired. Ask all the questions you want/they're willing to answer. It's prolly best not to grill them when they're with a herd of clients on route, tho. Look them up at the RMI barn by the lodge or at the Muir hut. Also, I know of at least two posters on this board who are guides up there. And talk to the rangers about RMI, too. They have info about them as well. They have to.

You have been having better luck than I with the search function, then. I only seem to get hits for threads that have been started since the most recent upgrade. No returns for threads older than a coupla months or so.

Hood River - Big Horse Brewpub or the 6th Street Bistro Of course, this is only for folks not headed directly to PDX, as it's on the north side of the hill.

Quirky. "So, what's your dog's name?" "She's quirky." Of course, any number of other adjectives would work fine. Or you could name her

Truly poetic. How long did it take you to write that?