Laserfiche WebLink
5 <br />Table 5-1 <br />DEIS Comments and Responses <br />Commenter Comment Comment/Response <br /> <br /> generations of Americans. (b) In order to carry out the policy set forth in this <br /> Act, it is the continuing responsibility of the Federal Government to use all <br /> practicable means, consistent with other essential considerations of national <br /> policy, to improve and coordinate Federal plans, functions, programs, and <br /> resources to the end that the Nation may- (1) fulfill the responsibilities of <br /> each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations; (2) <br /> assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and esthetically and <br /> culturally pleasing surroundings; (3) attain the widest range of beneficial uses <br /> of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other <br /> undesirable and unintended consequences; Preservation of historic, cultural, <br /> and natural heritage (4) preserve important historic, cultural, and natural <br /> aspects of our national heritage, and maintain, wherever possible, an <br /> environment which supports diversity and variety of individual choice; (5) <br /> achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit <br /> high standards of living and a wide sharing of life's amenities; and (6) <br /> enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum <br /> attainable recycling of depletable resources. (c) The Congress recognizes that <br /> each person should enjoy a healthful environment and that each person has a <br /> responsibility to contribute to the preservation of the environment." <br /> The FEIS has added Alternative 3 - No Activity In Roadless. Based on these <br /> requirements, the EIS fulfills these obligations. <br />Colorado Wild, et 17 Just because the Forest Service is considering approving a more destructive <br />al. alternative does not mean that the agency cannot or should not analyze a less <br /> destructive alternative that protects roadless character. <br /> RESPONSE: See response to Colorado Wild et al. comment 15 and 16. <br /> Further, roadless character, as defined, has already been altered and/or <br /> compromised in this area as documented in the EIS, Chapter 3, Inventoried <br /> Roadless Area. <br />Colorado Wild, et 18 Because of the many values of roadless areas in general -and the West Elk <br />al. IRA in particular - it is entirely reasonable for the Forest Service to consider a <br /> proposal that limits road construction to areas outside the IRA. This would be <br /> so even if the RACR and implementing guidance were not in effect, because <br /> the IRA contains important roadless, wildlife, and other values. We <br /> understand that an alternative that protects roadless character would still <br /> permit Mountain Coal to continue its operations in the area for at least several <br /> years. Permitting years of continued coal mining while protecting critical <br /> roadless values would appear to be a more than reasonable compromise that is <br /> very deserving of serious consideration. <br /> RESPONSE: The Proposed Action was designed to limit to the maximum <br /> extent possible road construction in IRA (FEIS, Chapter 2, Proposed Action, <br /> Proposed Activities in IRA). Further, an alternative that described the <br /> scenario of Not Constructing Roads or MDWs in IRAs was considered, but <br /> not analyzed in detail in the DEIS. This alternative has been added to the <br /> FEIS as an alternative analyzed in detail (FEIS, Chapter 2 Alternative 3 - No <br /> Activity In Roadless). In addition, this conce t is inherent in the No Action <br />178 Deer Creek Ventilation Shaft and E Seain Methane Drainage Wells FEIS <br />• <br />• <br />~, <br />i <br />