Forest Service Response to Concerns Regarding Proposed Motorized Use Restrictions in the Blue Mountains.

The U.S. Forest Service has responded to our request to rescind the 2005 Travel Management Rule. If you find their response inadequate, we encourage you to contact Chief Tom Schultz at tom.schultz@usda.gov, Deputy Chief Chris French at chris.french@usda.gov, and the DOGE team at doge@house.mail.gov.

The response came from a Regional Forest representative, even though we originally addressed our request to higher leadership.

Good Afternoon,

U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Chief Thomas M. Schultz, Jr. received an email from you regarding the delivery of the Forest Service mission to the public. The Chief has asked me to respond.

As you know, National Forests are managed for multiple uses including timber, recreation, water, minerals, wildlife habitat and others. Our goal in managing the National Forests is to ensure that these forests retain the multiple use values they provide to the American public for the long term.

I would like to assure you that our management strategy in Oregon includes timber production, grazing, mining, and energy activities that support industry and the economic health of our local communities. The Blue Mountains Forest Plan revision currently underway on the Wallowa-Whitman, Malheur and Umatilla National Forests is focused on improving forest health and delivery of benefits to the public in Eastern Oregon. In addition, ongoing and future documents related to this plan will be specifically developed and reviewed to ensure that the intent of recent Executive Orders is met.

Public access and active forest management are top priorities for us. We have not proposed any standards or guidelines in the plan revision that would require a travel management decision. To be clear, there are no travel closures, route designation, or travel management currently planned in this area.

We welcome public input in the Forest Plan process. For more information on the Blue Mountains Forest Plan Revision process, including upcoming opportunities for official public comment and engagement, please visit https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/umatilla/home/?cid=fseprd1188541 or email sm.fs.bluesforests@usda.gov.

If you have additional questions please feel free to reach out to me or the local Forest Service Leadership, we are happy to discuss with you.

Sincerely,

Jacque Buchanan

Forest Service Shield

Jacqueline Buchanan

Regional Forester

Forest Service

Pacific NW Region

p: 503-808-2790

c: 303-476-8861

jacqueline.buchanan@usda.gov

1220 SW 3rd Ave

Portland, OR 97204

__________________________________________________________________________________

FAFA's Response back:

Dear Ms. Buchanan,

Thank you for your response on behalf of Chief Schultz regarding the Forest Service’s management of our National Forests, particularly the Blue Mountains Forest Plan revision. While we appreciate the acknowledgment of multiple-use principles and the importance of economic activities such as timber production, grazing, and energy development, your response does not fully address our primary concerns regarding the 2005 Travel Management Rule and its impact on access, economic opportunities, and forest health.

Our original message was not solely focused on the Blue Mountains Forest Plan but rather on the broader issue of the Travel Management Rule and its failure to serve the best interests of the American public. We specifically urged the Forest Service to rescind this rule, which has resulted in excessive motorized access restrictions that hinder responsible forest management, recreation, and rural economies. Your response does not address this request.

Additionally, while you state that there are no travel closures or route designations planned as part of the Blue Mountains Forest Plan revision, our concern extends beyond this specific revision to the larger pattern of access limitations created by the Travel Management Rule. The attached map in our original email illustrates how current and proposed restrictions severely impact public access, a point that remains unaddressed in your response.

Furthermore, we raised concerns about the lack of meaningful collaboration with local communities, particularly in Eastern Oregon, where the Forest Service has chosen to reuse a previously withdrawn draft plan rather than engaging in a transparent, locally driven process. By your staff’s own admission, the current draft plan is at least 80% the same as the one that was withdrawn by Forest Service leadership in 2018. This is not an acceptable approach to planning, as it disregards the input of local residents, as well as your own leadership and fails to acknowledge the reasons for the previous plan’s withdrawal. It very much feels like region 6 is heading down the same failed path as it did in 2014 through 2018,

We are also deeply concerned that the current Blue Mountains Forest Plan revision process does not follow the Trump administration’s guidance, which states that climate change is not to be a guiding principle of federal decision-making. However, the 2012 Planning Rule that this revision follows mentions climate change 91 times, and the most recent draft of the plan still refers to climate change 16 times. This approach is not in alignment with current federal direction and suggests that the plan is being developed based on outdated priorities rather than the actual needs of the communities that depend on these forests.

In addition, while we acknowledge that the plan revision itself does not designate specific travel routes, it does set the foundation for future restrictions if adopted in its current form. This outcome would be unacceptable to the vast majority of residents in the region, who have consistently voiced their opposition to policies that limit access and economic opportunities.

For these reasons, we strongly urge the Forest Service to halt the current planning process immediately until the agency can align with the administration’s guidance and develop a forest plan that truly meets the needs of local residents—rather than setting the foundation for a closed forest.

We remain committed to advocating for policies that balance active land management with resource use, local decision-making, and economic prosperity. Given the importance of this issue, we respectfully request a more direct response to our concerns regarding:

The potential for rescinding or significantly revising the 2005 Travel Management Rule.

A halt to the Blue Mountains Forest Plan revision until it is aligned with current administration guidance and reflects the needs of the region’s residents.

We appreciate your willingness to engage on these topics and look forward to a more detailed response addressing the specific concerns raised in our initial message. We would suggest a follow up with Mr. French regarding these issues. In 2018 he, and staff from around the country and from your national headquarters made it very clear that we had been heard. With the actions of the planning team and local leadership we feel like we have been less than heard and much more like the stance of the agency is we will take what you give us and like it, no matter what.

We look forward to a response from the Chief, Deputy Chief and yourself.

Sincerely,

Don George

President - Forest Access For All

donaldgeorge01@gmail.com