Laserfiche WebLink
<br />..r.o <br /> <br />of keeping thcl~onstant for all alternatives e.ctivelY eliminated them from <br />comprl?hensive '-'uation. A legitimate questio ould be asked is: Could <br />vegetation management objectives designed to maintain a healthy forest be <br />achieved at lower cost than proposed if the road system were scaled down or <br />otherwise morli tied? It seems reasonable that the information provided in the <br />planning process should permit addressing this question. <br /> <br />,. <br /> <br />In contrast the plal1ning approach used by most other natiol1al forests provides <br />tlwt the road system (and the costs associated with it) will vary according to <br />the managernent objective of the alternative being evaluated. <br /> <br />/G In separate direction, outside the scope of his appeal, dated MilY 31,1985, <br />the Chief of the Forest Service instructed the Regional Foresters to carefully <br />evalu?te oPl'Ortunities to reduce timber costs and enhance revenues. This memo <br />also l10ted that sample natiol1al forests have been selected in several regiol1s <br />to eV31uate adcJitiol1al opr~rtul1ities. These evaluations may well lead to Ser- <br />v ice-wide recOJrmendat ions on ways to reduce costs and enhance revenues and to <br />" cornprehel1sive actiol1 plan to carry out those recommendations with the objec- <br />tive of a substantial reduction in the volume of timber sold \Jith revenues <br />less than costs. <br /> <br />/7 ^ppendix E of the Nlalysis of the Mana'Jement Situation for the San Juan, <br />d,lted Sept"iIlber 19131, provides a general discussion of the process that was <br />followed in developing the Stage II Suitability T\nalysis, but does little to <br />interpret the results or explain how the analysis was used in the planning <br />lJroccss. <br /> <br />,St)'5 <br />-- <br /> <br />- 13 - <br /> <br />..... ..... <br /> <br />'.' ~ <br />