Santa Fe Project comments submitted by individuals
… it bears emphasizing that too many of the largest and most “catastrophic” fires that have occurred in the last twenty years have been the result, not of natural causes and Park Service and Forest Service inactions, but of human and agency “management” actions…
Read full comment
… This project plan is quite appalling in its lack of all relevant detail except for acreage, especially given its enormous scale and the potential for catastrophic unintended consequences. …
Read full comment
… It appears the US Forest Service does not consider smoke from the prescribed burns to be a public health hazard. It is time to wake up to this fact. This smoke is literally life threatening for many people. …
Read full comment
… My health and the health of many of our citizens, particularly the elderly and children, is being hurt by this repeated burning so close to where we live. Our city residents are suffering. There is no known safe level of exposure to small particulate matter in smoke. …
Read full comment
… What few references to climate-related factors I’ve seen in your communications, or heard at your meetings, is seriously outdated and impoverished – to say the least! … We thinned our 10 acres several years ago following a State Forestry prescription. We have not seen any benefit. In fact, our land has noticeably suffered. Thinning in drought conditions is NOT forest restoration; it’s deforestation. When I think of what we did to degrade our 10 acres being done on 50,000 it makes me very angry and determined to fight your plan every inch of the way. …
Read full comment
… I am greatly appreciative to the USFS for their fire fighting work. These are brave men and women, and they deserve our sincere gratitude. But I would not advocate thinning the entire Forest to protect those private properties (like mine) near to Forest boundaries. …
Read full comment
… I strongly suggest that prior to initiation of this project, the particular circumstances that would justify the cutting of any larger trees be explicitly defined, and that associated decision criteria be specified and reviewed by a stakeholder group. …
Read full comment
… As the world struggles to find ways of slowing global warming, there are few that are less costly than NOT spending millions of dollars to release carbon via purposely burned forests! It is virtually insane to do the opposite of preventing climate change. …
Read full comment
… We ask the Santa Fe National Forest to provide reasons for an exception to the Roadless Rule, which has been granted by the Regional Forester. This rule has been upheld by the courts many times but this time the Forest Service seems to have created its own rule. …
Read full comment
… When I walk in these areas that are being cleared it is like walking through a culled group of people chosen for their age shape and size, it is becoming a monoculture without the diversity that has taken so long to grow. Where are the future generations? …
Read full comment
… for me, after reviewing the scoping document, attending meetings, and hiking through other prescription areas in the Santa Fe National Forest for many years, I am firmly and completely against any semblance of thinning and burning currently exemplified …
Read full comment
… If this burning of 50k acres of pristine forest is such a great idea, why not share it with the public, and allow a fair and transparent Environmental Impact review of all aspects of this burning before any more of it takes place? … When you keep things that you’re doing from the public, and act to block any fair process from taking place, (like a review and analysis that would insure that harm isn’t being irreversibly committed), you destroy the public’s faith in your institution. … Step up and do the right thing. …
Read full comment
… I appreciate the goals of the SFMLRP and agree with them in principle. However, without a comprehensive EIS using all of the latest research (not just GTR-310 or cherry-picked studies) and evaluating alternative actions, including no action, it is my view that the severe thinning and prescribed fire planned for over 50,000 acres will do serious and lasting damage to the Santa Fe National Forest and result in serious negative effects on recreation, tourism, wildlife habitat, air quality, and overall desirability of living in and visiting Santa Fe and the Santa Fe National Forest. …
Read full comment
… To use fire to prevent fire in this district, which is heavily inhabited, is a very dangerous prospect with our unpredictable summer winds. Please analyze this further. There are other solutions that could be advanced, such as the Santa Fe Conservation Alternative… I live outside of Cañada village and would be devastated to witness such destruction. It would have a direct impact on our lives, our well-being, our watershed and the local wildlife, including endangered plant and animal species. Please evaluate the actual impact on human health, including those with asthma and other health conditions. We have many, many elderly residents in this area, including my mother. Many people report feeling ill during prescribed burns…
Read full comment
… Up to 21,000 acres are to be ‘thinned’ (the Forest Service’s favorite term); but which in reality ends up being pretty close to clear cut. Come with us to visit a ‘thinned’ area to witness the destruction for yourself… [The] Project is intended to protect lives, homes, and property -even though much of the ‘thinning’ will be done far away from any human structures, but will negatively impact many wild animal ‘structures’ and habitat. The Project will result in the destruction of animal and insect habitat. It disrespects the rights of nature, ignores the health of Santa Fe’s economy and tourism, and frankly is an affront to the very soul and reason we live here…
Read full comment
… I write to say that I believe that [the Project] deserves a complete and thorough analysis via a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement. … I think that the Santa Fe Community Based Conservation Alternative has clearly been well thought out, fully addresses the project’s objectives, has been submitted to you with the best of intent, is based on valid precepts and deserves your utmost attention. I am sure that the forest service shares the community based goals of those who submitted the Alternative…
Read full comment
… Though apparently there has not been a full monitoring of the local impact of air pollution on our community from prescribed burns, it is a known fact that even short term exposure has harmful effects especially for those suffering from lung weakness and disease. Recent studies have also shown that it may likely have a negative effect on the cognitive development of children. … I am writing to you not only on behalf of my young students, and to all of us here now, but for the generations to come, urging that we preserve and protect the natural beauty and benefits of the Santa Fe National Forest, and its importance to our health and well being and that of those to come. This is our highest responsibility.
Read full comment
… Please ensure that an Environmental Impact Statement is prepared that cites the negative impacts of extensive burning and clearing over several years… As you know, the Santa Fe National Forest is marred by unlawful roadways already… Illegal trapping is already a significant hazard for two and four legged visitors and remedying these improper roadways would help to enhance safety in the area… The proposed actions in the designated roadless areas will not provide a remedy to the existing safety hazards posed to those who reside near the forest. The proposed plan will merely provide a false sense of security…
Read full comment
… As a resident of Santa Fe’s Wildland Urban Interface, I am deeply concerned about the enormous size of this proposed project, the short comment period allowed to the public. Unfortunately the repeated response by the Santa Fe National Forest Service employees is that there will be no Environmental Impact Statement regarding its effects on our beloved forest. … As currently written, the scoping document does not delineate the potential for environmental harm to a host of critical resources, including: (1) inventoried roadless areas (IRAs); (2) high and moderate value wilderness characteristic areas; and (3) endangered species, forest service sensitive species, and critical habitat, leaving the “potential for environmental harm” largely unknown….
Read full comment
… An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be done because of the sheer size of the project and the scientific controversy regarding the cause of large forest fires.
There is no safe level of 2.5 particulate matter. Everyone who breathes smoke is being adversely impacted to some degree. Especially vulnerable populations, like the young, pregnant women, the elderly, those with chemical sensitivities, cardiovascular disease, asthma, or respiratory disease, and even those with diabetes, are at increased risk from exposure to smoke and these groups account for more than half the population. Repeated prescribed burns exposes people to much more smoke than a rare natural fire that might occur in the project area. Furthermore, smoldering fires such as those that occur during prescribed burns emit more particulate matter than hotter fires. …
Read full comment
… I am writing to object to the proposed plan for a number of reasons but, primarily, because of all the suffering that will be caused. And, I firmly believe such terrible suffering is so needless… First, I know that this project will cause immense suffering for all the creatures who live in the forest. It will destroy our forest and all the beautiful creation therein. … I ask you to reconsider and not cause the harm the project will surely cause. I ask for myself and I ask to please end the suffering for our young people and other vulnerable individuals. I recently suffered a major cerebral vascular event at my home in Santa Fe which is believed to be due, in part, from the smoke I have endured from recent prescribed or treated burns. …
Read full comment
… I insist that no project move forward without current, sound science –that includes climatological science -to back up the planned actions and acreages. I have seen no evidence that that is the case currently; the science referenced is all over 10 years old and does not reference Climate Change nor take it into account. As such I request that this Project not be rushed nor prioritized by the USFS until it reviews current science and offers something other than verbal assurances… The details provided so far for the project are insufficient for even a well-informed person to assess the potential local impacts of this project as proposed. Only vague hand-waving was given at the public meeting, when –for a project occurring so close to so many people –it seems obvious that a clearer picture of acreages, treatment types, and specific locations is necessary.
Read full comment
… As home owners adjacent to the Santa Fe Forest, Forest Rd 79, we question the unprecedented scale of this project, its reluctance to reveal specific details, and seeming lack of deep environmental analysis. For example, necessarily roads/machines will intrude into wildlife habitat; this effects a loss of wildlife security… “In wilderness lies the salvation of the world,” (Thoreau), and this project’s impact to our wilderness (roadless areas have great value!) will lessen the economic value of our home, and most certainly our joy in inhabiting our forest. … You state in your letter to the public that this project will improve the forest’s resilience to insects, disease, and climate change, yet the opposite seems the case: a tree is not a forest. On its own a tree cannot establish a consistent local climate. It is all at the mercy of wind and weather. But together, many trees create an ecosystem that moderates extremes of heat and cold, stores a great deal of water, and generates a great deal of humidity…
Read full comment
I am writing to express my support for [the Project]. … Based on my observations I suggest that if the western slope of the Sangre de Cristo mountains does not receive treated as described [in the scoping document for the Project], the fire will burn with the ferocity that occurred in so many locations of the untreated Jemez mountains and the Pajarito plateau. The results will be devastating for the communities and residences located downstream from the burn areas. … The public cries of pain and outrage will be substantial!. I place minimal weight to the argument that mechanical treatment and subsequent low-intensity burning will substantially harm flora and fauna. I have been in the forest when controlled burns have been ongoing, and I did not find them threatening. The velocity of the fires is slow enough that fauna, including myself, can move on. The intensity of the fire is low enough that those faunae that cannot move on can hunker down and wait out the event. …
Read full comment
… [I] have a number of concerns with the Forest Service’s proposal: … Because this project will have significant impacts to these and other resources, a thorough, site-specific analysis of all environmental impacts in an Environmental Impact Statement is required. … The Forest Service must analyze a full range of alternatives to the agency’s proposal, including the Santa Fe Conservation Alternative submitted by WildEarth Guardians and others. … The Forest Service must consider the best available science. The agency cannot cherry-pick the science and data to support its proposal while ignoring contrary, credible views and data. …
Read full comment
… I have toured the sites of the Cerro Grande and Las Conchas fires and I understand the concern about fires in the national forests. I request that the Forest Service provide an Environmental Impact Statement. … The public has been insufficiently included in the planning stages. This is evidenced by and the result of the poorly distributed notice of the comment period. The forest serves to moderate our weather and to enhance growth and biodiversity in the area in many ways. The project as outlined does not appear to respect many of these traditional values …
Read full comment
… Although the present administration continues to deny and suppress all data on climate chaos, I cannot and will not support your intended thinning project in our forest. To me it will destroy what we barely have left with none of the stated objectives realized. I therefore ask you to abandon this project and at the very least, re-orient your awareness to the reality and the urgency of climate change and the damage a project of this magnitude will do to our forests and to us.
Read full comment
The Forest Advocate
Santa Fe, New Mexico