20 years. Long enough to witness two generations of cicadas. Long enough for a child to be born, grow up, and become a parent.

And 20 years is how long Western Colorado Alliance has worked to implement a successful Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison (GMUG) Forest Plan for our local forests. This work has faced delays and avoidance tactics throughout that time.

Finally, this past August, the Forest Service released its official GMUG Forest Plan draft. The draft includes four different alternatives. Alternatives A, B, C, and D. Officially, there are no preferred alternatives, however, alternative B, the staff proposal, starts with the most weight.

Alternatives include:

Alternative A is the no-action alternative, which reflects the 1983 forest plan, as amended to date, and accounts for current laws, regulations, and terms and conditions from biological opinions.

Alternative B, described as the “blended” alternative, was released for public feedback as the working draft revised forest plan, and it was subsequently updated in response to public feedback and internal Forest Service review. It proposes a modest amount of additional wilderness, an active vegetation management program, and a balanced approach to competing uses and values on the national forests.

Alternative C, described as the “active management emphasis” alternative, with fewer special area allocations, more active vegetation and fuels management, less restrictive recreation use management, more motorized settings, and more areas allocated as suitable for timber production.

Alternative D, described as the “special area emphasis” alternative, with more special area allocations, a smaller vegetation and fuels management program, more active and restrictive recreation use management, more non-motorized settings, and more areas conserved as undisturbed forest.

Throughout October, Western Colorado Alliance members have visited three areas, either within or overlooking the GMUG. From each location, we were able to view scenic and vital public lands for protection within the GMUG.

We understand the balance that needs to take place between industry and conservation. We are concerned that most alternatives favor extraction over protection. That is why we support alternative D.

For reference, the Forest Service’s proposed 2007 GMUG Forest Plan recommended approximately 125,000 acres in 19 areas for the additional wilderness. Today’s draft plan, released under the Biden administration, recommends 34,000 acres in the preferred, or “blended” alternative.

Every one of us can make a difference. We have until November 26 to make public comments. We will be hosting our final writing workshop in the last week of November, so make sure to stay tuned to your email for updates.

The Forest Service wants to hear from you about the areas that you feel need to be protected. You can learn more about the plans here:

https://gmugrevision.com/

And please submit a comment about the importance you place on protecting the outdoors by using this link:
https://tinyurl.com/comment-gmug