I Support Preferred Alternative D That Would Limit Visitors to Fossil Creed to 1700 Per Day Along with the Other Improvements and Limitations

From: Roybal, Marcos A -FS To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: FW: Fossil Creek Date: Monday, January 23, 2017 3:56:27 PM

From: Branton, Nicole -FS Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 3:55 PM To: Roybal, Marcos A -FS ; Munding, Elizabeth A -FS Subject: FW: Fossil Creek

From: Barbi Buchanan [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 2:14 PM To: Branton, Nicole -FS Subject: Fossil Creek

I support Preferred Alternative D that would limit visitors to Fossil Creed to 1700 per day along with the other improvements and limitations. Thanks for asking for feedback.

--Barbi

Barbi Buchanan 480.330.6049 cell 1108 No. Alyssa Circle Payson, AZ 85541-3371 From: NICK Elenz To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Monday, January 23, 2017 9:05:23 PM

I have hiked in the area for 30 plus years, I get the permit, ok with it. What I would like is some way to permit back country hikers to allow access into the canyon earlier than the current 8 Am, in summer. I have sometimes in the past hit the trail in the dark before sun rise. It is the best time to be in the wilderness, when the sun rises. Please consider it. Thank You Nick Elenz 602 881 2399 From: Rich Rudow To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Monday, January 23, 2017 11:23:57 AM

Hello,

As an avid hiker, canyoneer, and paddler, I'm enclosing these comments to the Fossil Creek CRMP. In general, it's my view that the preferred Alternative (E) is far too heavy handed in the development of infrastructure to enable increased use. As you know, the main problem at Fossil Creek has been increased use by people who don't have a sense of Wilderness ethics. I applaud the use of adaptive management to maintain the Wilderness values of Fossil Creek, but the preferred alternative suggests the use of adaptive management as a tool to build infrastructure to enable vastly increased visitation. I cannot support this idea.

I believe the "People At One Time" (PAOT) should remain at the current level rather than be allowed to expand as a result of infrastructure construction. Allowing more people will only bring more impacts. The permit system has shown success in reducing the environmental impacts and it should be maintained and improved. I'm in favor of modest infrastructure improvement, using a thoughtful adaptive management process involving the public in the design phase, to further reduce the impacts of the current PAOT, but not development focused on cramming more people into an already sensitive area.

Paddlers have been using Fossil Creek for kayak and packraft outings for many years. I believe paddlers are far more educated in Wilderness ethics and safety than the general "water play" swimmer, tuber, or jumper. I'm troubled that paddlers are lumped into this water play category. Paddlers need to be broken out from this water play category and regulated based on their unique ethics and safety attributes. Furthermore, I'm firmly opposed to any closure of waterfalls or other features to paddling. Fossil Creek is special because it's one of the very few year round water courses deep enough for paddling. Paddlers deserve the right to paddle through rather than having to walk around regulated features. Of course, I fully support regulations to ensure that paddling is safe such as the use of customary safety systems (PFD's, helmets, throw bags, scouting waterfalls). I could support thoughtful restrictions on paddling in order to help safety around the waterfalls, such as scouting falls to alert swimmers to paddlers playing through, or the use of seasonal restrictions, such as running the falls in the off seasons, if scouting proves to be ineffective. I fully support the detailed comments submitted by the American Packrafting Association on the Fossil Creek CRMP.

Finally, I do not support commercial guiding in the Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic area. There are already too many people with impacts. Guiding will reduce the number of permits available for the unguided recreational community.

I sincerely appreciate the work the Forest Service is doing to balance the visitor experience at Fossil Creek with minimal environmental impacts.

Thank you for receiving my comments,

Rich Rudow Mesa Arizona From: Vergano, Brendan A. To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Monday, January 23, 2017 7:55:00 PM

Please keep Fossil Creek public access! My family and I have gone to Fossil Creek many times over the past couple of years and it would be a shame if it were closed down. It is a beautiful place for all the enjoy and should be kept open for all. -Brendan Vergano From: Joni Ward To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Cc: Dawn Goldman; Kris Schloemer Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Proposed Actions Comments Date: Monday, January 23, 2017 11:55:29 AM [email protected] To: U. S. Forest Service Fossil Creek CRMP Group Re: Fossil Creek CRMP Proposed Actions Comments Date: January 23, 2017

I am writing to express my opinion about the proposed actions for the CRMP for the Fossil Creek area. Over the last 5 years I have been the coordinating botanist on a Floristic Survey of the area bounded on the west by the old Irving Power Plant site and the east by the confluence of Sand Rock and Calf Pen Canyons, including the Fossil Springs Trailhead and Trail, Fossil Creek Botanical Area, the Flume Trail and Wilderness area and FR 708 between these two areas. This project entitled “Fossil Creek Watershed” originated out of the Plant Atlas Project of Arizona (PAPAZ) and has included up to 12 other botanists and volunteers (occasionally including USFS Staff). We have collected from about 72 families and have a list of about 350 taxa so far. My colleagues on this project, Dawn Goldman and Kris Schloemer, have submitted detailed opinions on this matter as well. As your group is well aware, this area is rich in habitat, wildlife, archeological sites and geological formations including the unique formations in and along Fossil Creek.

Having visited this area multiple times, in all seasons over the last 5 years, including a recent “bucket list” backpacking trip, I just want to say “Thank you” for the 2016 interim management reservation system. The difference in the amount of trash and overall apparent disruption in the habitat of the area was striking in a positive way. In 2015 we had all agreed that we would not visit the Waterfall Trail again because it was just too depressing with all of the trash and the reservation system in 2016 made a big difference.

Realizing that one cannot pick and choose parts of the proposed action plans I feel that Alternative B with enhanced protection would offer the best protection of this beautiful treasure while still providing access for the public. I find the following actions appropriate and attractive:

The addition of “vault and portable toilets, trash receptacles, kiosks, signs, interpretive trail, barriers, bike racks and gates” would provide a safer, healthier and richer experience.

The setting aside of a site for Tribal use, assuring this has been vetted with the tribes that would use it, would provide a secluded, protected area.

The designation of camping sites at Fossil Spring Historic Dam would provide for a wilderness experience in this unique habitat.

Development of the West Welcome Center with interpretive displays, trails, vault toilets and parking will encourage visitors to learn more about the habitats around Fossil Creek and their significance historically, prehistorically and as part of the Verde River Watershed. Continued closer of FR 708 between the junction of FR 591 on the east and the Waterfall Trailhead (Lewis) on the east. (see note below)

I would ask reconsideration on the following point in Alternative B: Consider closing the waterfall area to swimming-I have hiked all along the Waterfall Trail and there are many spots for swimming. I approve of the waterfall overlook and restricting swimming will protect the habitat and protect people from injuries. The “hanging gardens” in this area have not been fully documented and closing the waterfall to swimming would protect this are for future studies.

In Alternative C, one of the actions includes adding picnic tables and camping sites at the Fossil Springs (renamed Bear) Trailhead. I like this idea as it allow more of the general population to explore the area without having to hike a steep trail or drive in from Camp Verde. This site is already somewhat developed and has been used for grazing and would not add any additional disruption to the habitat.

Please do not open FR 708 between the junction with 591 on the east and with Lewis Trailhead on the west. Herbarium records found in SEINet indicate that Galium collomiae can be found along this section of road. While we have not observed it along the road, I believe we will find it in the future.

Thank you for extending the time for providing input on the Proposed Alternatives. I had a family emergency and having additional time helped me get this done.

Yours truly,

Joni Ward 1261 E. La Jolla Drive Tempe, Arizona 85282 [email protected]

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad From: Wirl, Austin C. To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Monday, January 23, 2017 8:14:27 PM

To whom it may concern,

I am emailing to you today to petition you to keep Fossil Creek open. The permit program that the government has implemented has worked, and shutting down this beautiful piece of property frankly makes no sense whatsoever.

This property is very important to not only me, but also the entire state as a whole. I am not from Arizona but I can tell the people here have a passion for this land and would feel terrible if the feds were to shut it down.

Regards, Austin Wirl Embry Riddle Aeronautical University - Prescott, AZ 208-891-7122 | [email protected]

ARIZONA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION

1910 W. JEFFERSON• PHOENIX, ARIZONA• 85009 TELEPHONE: (602) 252-6563 • FACSIMILE: (602) 254-0969

MARK DANNELS, COCHISE COUNTY SHERIFF, PRESIDENT JIM DRISCOLL, COCONINO COUNTY SHERIFF, VICE PRESIDENT

THE ARIZONA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION IS THE ONE UNITED CREDIBLE VOICE REPRESENTING LAW ENFORCEMENT AND PUBLIC SAFETY FOR THE COUNTIES OF ARIZONA

January 24, 2017

Marcus Roybal Coconino National Forest P.O. Box 20429 Sedona, AZ 86341

RE: Fossil Creek CRMP

Dear Mr. Roybal:

The Arizona Sheriffs Association wishes to express concerns as part of the public comment period for the upcoming Comprehensive River Management Plan by the U.S. Forest Service regarding the Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River in the Coconino and Tonto National Forests. While it is the sheriffs offices of Yavapai and Gila counties that handle the first responder, search and rescue, and law enforcement issues in the Fossil Creek recreation area, the Arizona Sheriffs Association believes that any type of forest management plan in Arizona requires the input of local agencies, especially law enforcement.

It is our understanding that after an initial permitting plan was put into place in consultation with local law enforcement, five new alternative plans have now been proposed by an outside company. These new options were established without the input of local law enforcement or any of the community working groups that were used to come to a consensus on the permitting plan. The U.S . Forest Service is suggesting moving forward with Plan E, which closes the lower waterfall and prohibits waterplay in that area. This is the main attraction of the area and closing it would be an economic loss to area businesses and seems like a dramatic approach given that the permitting plan has been successful.

Requiring permits for the Fossil Creek area resulted in some of the public safety goals that were identified at the beginning of the process. For example, in the past season in the Yavapai County portion of the creek, there have been no fatal accidents, no DU!s on Fossil Creek Road, and vehicle crashes and Search and Rescue missions were both reduced by half.

However, there are other components of Plan E that would be welcome changes for law enforcement. A rehabilitation of FR 708 would once again provide the access law enforcement needs when an emergency situation arises and time is of the essence. In addition, we would encourage the maintenance of the upper springs trail and we oppose the removal of the bridge from the Irving service road.

AN AFFILIATE MEMBER OF THE ARIZONA ASSOCIATION OF (OUNTIES • JEN MARSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR page 2 of 2

As you know, local law enforcement plays a crucial role in public safety needs of all of Arizona's recreation areas. Any of our sheriffs, especially those from Yavapai and Gila are willing to sit down and discuss these items in further detail.

Thank you for your attention to this important issue and we look forward to continuing to be partners in providing access and safety for those wishing to visit Arizona's public lands.

Sincerely,

The Hon. Mark Dannels President, Arizona Sheriffs Association Cochise County Sheriff

AN AFFILIATE MEMBER OF THE ARIZONA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES• JEN MARSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR From: Jon Vick To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Cc: Alan Newberry; Carlos Pinzon; Dan Collins; Davin Benner; Dean Wells; Don Walker; Donna Littlepage; Doug McGlothlin; Jake Hotsenpiller; Jim Reilly; Jon Lewis; Justin Cartwright; Larry Lemke; Mark Yost; Matt Maurer; Mike Neal; Paula Swenski; Rich Kilgore; Robb Keller; Vince Myers; Gary Griffith; Steve Vick Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 3:52:18 PM

I am a lifetime Arizona resident who has enjoyed Fossil Creek for years.

I highly approve of the current management plan. It works great, and has done much to preserve the area. In fact, I support increasing the user fee in order to cover costs of additional personnel to ensure those enjoying the area are complying with rules, including safety and habitat preservation.

That said, I am very much against the proposal to limit access to only a few "parking areas" along the creek. There are better ways to prevent the need for emergency rescues and degrading of the habitat by a few irresponsible people.

Fossil Creek is an Arizona jewel that swimmers, hikers, boaters, backpackers, and campers should all be able to enjoy. It is worthy of state or even national designation, and responsible steward-citizens will pay more for the privilege of enjoying it while protecting it at the same time. Please keep the creek open to responsible, taxpaying citizens.

Sincerely,

Jon Vick Teacher, Prescott Valley, Arizona From: American Packrafting Association To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek comments Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 10:59:49 AM Attachments: APAcomments-FossilCreek.pdf

Hello,

Please accept the following PDF document with comments on the Fossil Creek CRMP from American Packrafting Association.

Would you please confirm that you received the document and are able to open it?

Thank you,

Brad Meiklejohn President

We will see you on the trails and on the water!

******************************************

American Packrafting Association http://www.packraft.org

Board of Directors Brad Meiklejohn, President Thomas Turiano, Vice President Moe Witschard, Treasurer Forrest McCarthy Roman Dial Theresa Lundquist David Nix Sarah Tingey American Packrafting Association PO Box 13 Wilson, WY 83014 907-947-6437 [email protected] www.packraft.org “At the water’s edge…just keep going”

January 25, 2017

Marcos A. Roybal Fossil Creek Project Coordinator Coconino National Forest Red Rock Ranger District 8375 State Route 179 Sedona, AZ 86351

Dear Marcos Roybal;

We have reviewed the Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River CRMP proposed actions and alternatives, and appreciate the opportunity to comment on behalf of our 1,300 members and the paddling and conservation communities. The American Packrafting Association (APA) is an international association of paddlers dedicated to the conservation of wild rivers and wild places, promotion of packrafter safety and education, and preservation of packrafting opportunities on wild rivers and in wild places.

We fully appreciate the extreme challenges planners face in writing this CRMP and commend the Coconino National Forest on generating five reasonable and simple alternatives, and sharing them with the public in an open, simple, and organized way. We appreciate the diligent care you have taken to protect this unique and sensitive place, both in the past and in the CRMP alternatives, while delineating sustainable carrying capacities for the area’s growing recreational interests.

For APA and its members, Fossil Creek is of paramount importance as a venue for packrafting in the southwestern U.S. because of its uniquely magnificent geology and hydrology, and its rareness as a perennial navigable stream in an otherwise vast dry desert. For packrafters, whose inspiration for outdoor endeavors is born in a desire to ephemerally experience unique and magnificent landscapes like Fossil Creek by paddling or hiking, we not only advocate for the conservation of waterways and the privilege to paddle them, we also care equally about preserving wildness and biodiversity in the landscape through which rivers and trails run. The APA Board and staff have therefore collaborated intensively with local and regional paddlers and hikers, and American Whitewater, to carefully craft our comments below. Bluntly, we strongly favor a combination of alternatives B and C—Enhanced Protections and a Non-Motorized Experience—both to preserve Fossil Creek in a more pristine state, while allowing for managed paddling, hiking, biking, swimming, and camping. However, we will direct our comments toward the preferred alternative—Long-term Adaptive Management—with the intention of steering that plan toward the conservative end of the spectrum.

In general, we are concerned that Alternative E—Long-term Adaptive Management—would give authorities the green light to act and react in Fossil Creek without sufficiently involving stakeholders in the planning/design process, and without committing to a long-range vision for Fossil Creek. If Alternative E has any vision, it is for building up infrastructure to handle maximum use, rather than envisioning how to preserve and highlight the area’s wild, scenic, and recreational attributes. The preferred alternative conjures images of a city-park-like environment, with boardwalks, bridges, picnic tables, benches, fences, and closed signs instead of the quiet backcountry paradise many of us desire. That said, as much as we may romanticize to the contrary, the reality is that Fossil Creek has become too popular, and access to this unique area is too easy, to sustain the impossible dream scenario without further degradation of area resources. Hence, we suggest a downscaled version of the preferred Alternative E that aligns with the following principles:

LOW VISITOR NUMBERS

All of the alternatives, except for Alternative A, propose adjustments to visitor capacities, ranging from 610 People At One Time (PAOT) in Alternative B to 1705 PAOT in Alternative E. We advocate for preserving the wild and scenic quality of Fossil Creek by continuing the current reservation system and capping vehicle and PAOT numbers to Alternative B levels.

Comments Coconino National Forest implemented a permit system at Fossil Creek in 2016 specifically because of overuse and associated refuse, erosion, and other impacts. Since the implementation of the new reservation system, it has been widely hailed as a resounding success. The outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs) at Fossil Creek have been greatly enhanced by scaling back the number of visitors. Scaling use back up to more than double the current capacity has the potential to reverse the positive progress already made, regardless of new infrastructure that may be added.

Suggested Revision to Preferred Alternative Limit visitation/PAOT initially, and use a thoughtful adaptive management process that instills LNT ethics to scale back up capacities to Alternative B levels. Improve existing facilities by grading and resurfacing roads and parking areas, and increasing signage, fencing, and trails. Transgressing users can be fined and banned from the area, rather than removing privileges from responsible visitors.

DISASSOCIATE PADDLING from WATER PLAY

None of the alternatives specifically addresses the interests of paddlers, who are lumped under “water play” in the alternatives. Paddlers should not be lumped as such, but rather managed as a separate user group. Paddlers have developed longstanding safety mechanisms, backcountry experience, and Leave No Trace ethics that are rare among everyday inner-tubers and swimmers, etc.

Comments Paddlers have a long history of recreation and stewardship in Fossil Creek both prior to and since the removal of the hydroelectric dam. Not only is Fossil Creek an exceptional river resource for paddlers because of its extraordinary natural qualities—the only navigable travertine waterway in the United States—it is also of critical importance to the paddling community because of limited alternatives in the dry State of Arizona. Outside of spring run-off events on the Salt and Verde, or Grand Canyon lottery permits, Fossil Creek is the only whitewater waterway in Arizona with year-round flow deep enough for paddling. Hikers and motorists have thousands of other options. Paddlers do not. With the middle stretch of Fossil Creek designated as a “recreational” river under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, paddlers request recognition as a unique recreational stakeholder in the management of Fossil Creek, and to be

2 addressed separately from hikers, swimmers, bicyclists, equestrians, and motorized users during any future Adaptive Management Process.

In the big picture, paddlers are represented by local and national organizations, which have established ethics and codes of conduct, and can wield influence over group behavior. On Fossil Creek, paddlers are likely the most well-equipped and skilled recreationists to visit the area. Paddlers are ordinarily equipped with appropriate clothing and equipment for the river environment, including drysuits, PFDs, helmets, first aid supplies, and high-tech footwear, watercraft, and rescue equipment. Moreover, because paddlers typically train in swift water and high-angle rescue techniques, they can be important allies to Forest Rangers in making the river environment safe and enjoyable for all visitors. While numbers of paddlers should be limited like all other users, paddlers request continuing access, regardless of swimmer accidents and behavior, along the entire length of Fossil Creek, and especially within the Wild and Scenic recreational middle section of Fossil Creek.

Suggested Revision to Preferred Alternative: The distinct management and enforcement objectives that are warranted for paddling on Fossil Creek could be accomplished by designating the stream as a Blue Trail, similar to the Verde River, but with one significant difference. Because of its small size, Fossil Creek is suitable only for small paddle craft, such as kayaks and packrafts. Hence, no additional infrastructure, such as new trailheads, trailer parking, or boat ramps, would be required. The purpose of the Blue Trail designation would be to recognize and manage paddling as an existing and independent recreational use of Fossil Creek, and to help ensure that paddlers have a seat at the table as an independent stakeholder in the adaptive management process. The Blue Trail designation could include requirements for special paddling permits, standards for paddle craft, minimum standards for training and certification, equipment such as PFDs, helmets, whistles, and throwbags, and mandatory safety practices such as scouting waterfalls.

Also, because many paddlers embark from middle and upper Fossil Creek for multi-day paddling trips that end far downstream on the Verde River, we request a special parking allotment for paddlers who need to leave vehicles overnight for several days. For spur-of-the-moment paddling trips when river flows are high during permit season, perhaps there would be a workable Blue Trail mechanism to save a paddling trip permit or two for online booking two or three days prior to a trip date.

SWIMMING and WATER PLAY ACCESS

Alternatives C, D, and E propose closing “Middle Falls” (aka the Fossil Creek Waterfall) to water play, and building a falls overlook structure instead. Alternatives C and D propose closing access to the Fossil Springs area, and building an overlook at the end of a shortened Flume trail. We advocate for preserving opportunities for swimming and water play throughout Fossil Creek. Utilize your most innovative planning professionals to devise an adaptive management strategy that limits visitation initially, and then scales back up to Alternative B levels, while retraining visitor behavior and instilling Leave No Trace ethics.

Comments The proposed closures to swimming and water play at Middle Falls and Fossil Springs are not supported by analysis or complete information. We understand that certain areas may have “cultural or natural resource issues,” but any closure would need to comply with CFRs on closures and public use limits (36 CFR 1.5). We have not found any information about user impacts with regard to these resources. Any closure would be highly controversial. If paddlers were lumped with water play, a closure at Middle Falls would be a tremendous loss. The large pool at the base of this class IV rapid has been used for years as a 3 training ground for local paddlers to practice their swift water rescue skills, eskimo rolls, and waterfall paddling. Such a closure would not be consistent with the management of the central section of Fossil Creek as a recreational Wild and Scenic River. Trail overlooks placed at these sites or far downstream are an inadequate substitute for being able to actually experience the creek and its exceptional and unique travertine waterfalls, whether as a swimmer or paddler.

Suggested Revision to Preferred Alternative Since no comparative analysis or determination has been completed with regard to opening or closing Middle Falls and Fossil Springs swimming areas, all of Fossil Creek should remain open to swimming and water play. Initially, swimming and water play should be reduced dramatically before scaling back up to Alternative B levels in a thoughtful adaptive management process that engages directly with users to increase backcountry skills and LNT behaviors. If unforeseen challenges arise (at Fossil Springs’ “Toilet Bowl” for example), new regulations can be put in place in an adaptive management process, which might include the following:

• Require the use of safety equipment such as PFD, helmet, whistle, and throw-bags in the swimming areas, with fines for non-compliance. • Restrict or ban specific practices such as “cliff jumping,” with fines for non-compliance. • Add signage with rules and guidelines for swimming and water play in the falls area to promote safety and skills for individual/group impact minimization.

In any case, paddling should be disassociated from the management of swimming and water play, so that if closures to the latter are warranted, paddling would still continue under the Blue Trails management scheme.

MINIMIZE PARKING and INFRASTRUCTURE at REC SITES

A variety of infrastructure projects are proposed in Alternative E, including the following: • a permanent visitor contact booth, vault toilet and temporary parking at Junction • installation of bike racks and vault toilets at other key locations • construction of a vehicle and pedestrian bridge at the Irving site, with installation of picnic tables, parking, boardwalks, and other infrastructure on the north side of the creek • construction of parking, vault toilet, trash receptacles, and trailhead at Cactus Flat • construction of a welcome center with interpretive displays, interpretive trail, parking, vault toilet, trash receptacles, and a host-admin site with its own administrative vault toilet at Heinrich

Comments In general, we support the following:

• construction of permanent visitor contact booths, toilets, and temporary parking at entrance stations • installation of small facilities such as toilets, picnic tables, and bike racks to reduce user impact • construction of parking, vault toilets, trash receptacles, and a trailhead at Cactus Flat • improvement of parking at Homestead and Tonto Bench • keeping new development out of the Irving area • elimination of the “waterfall overlook” idea • ensuring that visitor fees will not increase to fund proposed developments • reclamation of old hydro plant site 4

We generally support the idea of expanding infrastructure as needed to sustainably absorb anticipated use for the purpose of reducing impacts, but do not support added infrastructure that would detract from the natural spectacle, or the requirement that visitors use skill and good judgment to walk, climb, and paddle through the terrain. We do not believe that creating a city park atmosphere is in the spirit of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Certain improvements, such as installation of vault toilets, would be valuable, and bike racks would serve to make shuttling between trailheads easier. However, some of the proposals to expand infrastructure are concerning.

“Powerhouse Falls” (aka “Double Drop Falls”) near the Irving parking area is one of the most scenic sites and best whitewater rapids on the entire creek. This area exhibits outstandingly remarkable values that have the potential to be significantly degraded by the construction of a bridge over the creek at the Irving site, expanded parking access, and installation of picnic tables, kiosks, boardwalks, and other infrastructure in the vicinity. Powerhouse Falls is a Class III-IV rapid that is frequently run by kayakers and packrafters, and the area also is popular with swimmers. Therefore, the potential exists for collisions between paddlers and swimmers. Diligent scouting by paddlers and swimmers, and good communication between these groups are critical for accident prevention. These habits are instilled through education and mentorship. Accident potential would be exacerbated by increasing the number of people in the area with increased parking and facilities. Also, people viewing the scene from the bridge would be a distraction for swimmers and paddlers who are focusing on safety, especially if cameras and videos were inciting “Kodak courage.” Parking should be strictly limited at Irving with stiff fines for violations.

Currently, visitors tend to congregate on the east side of the upper falls where there is some shade, quick access to cooling creek water, and mostly durable surfaces. In general, visitors do not use the area around the hydro plant because it has little shade, and it does not provide a good view or access to the falls and pool. If planners would like to attract visitors to the site of the old hydro plant, considerable work would be required to improve this area enough to pull visitors off the east bank. Removal of old concrete foundations, addition of shade trees, planting of dust-reducing low vegetation, and installation of picnic tables and toilets would be an expensive prospect requiring a vehicle bridge for heavy equipment over Fossil Creek. Pulling people from the east-side rocky banks to the old hydro site would necessitate what would be a very unpopular closure of the east side of the creek to revelers.

Suggested Revision to Preferred Alternative To preserve the wild and scenic feel of Fossil Creek’s coveted pools and waterfalls, we advocate for minimizing vehicular intrusions into the Irving and Lewis (Waterfall) Trailhead areas. Instead, we recommend developing and improving parking at Cactus Flat, Homestead, and Tonto Bench to accommodate the majority of parked vehicles. Rather than developing the undisturbed area around Heinrich for an entrance station, perhaps that development would be better placed near Homestead. Then, we suggest enhancing the visitor experience by improving trail access from remote parking to the Irving area. Preserve the tranquility of the Irving area, and assist paddler and swimmer safety and coexistence efforts by maintaining current parking capacities at Irving and Lewis Trailhead, and rejecting the bridge idea across to the old hydro plant.

If planners feel it is important to develop some new facilities at the old hydro plant site, we do not expect that this area would be used without considerable investment, and without closing the east side to picnicking. In this case, we would advocate for the construction of a pedestrian/horse bridge across Fossil Creek about 320 yards downstream of the falls and pool, along with the development of a trail along the west side of the creek. Reclamation of the hydro site and infrastructure improvements would then be carried out by hand and horse, rather than by heavy machinery, which would be much cheaper and both the process and result would be more in line with Wild and Scenic values. If the east side near 5 the falls was not closed to picnicking, we would support improving and maintaining the picnic area immediately north of Irving parking lot, but do not support the construction of unnatural overlooks or decks.

We also advise selecting a preferred alternative that develops a boardwalk, increased parking, picnic areas, and other infrastructure at the Tonto Bench area. Tonto Bench includes scenic cliffs and pools similar to the Irving site, and a boardwalk and picnic tables in this area would serve to highlight the outstanding recreational values of the Fossil Creek area for less mobile or disabled visitors. Parking capacity can be increased on the south side of the road at Tonto Bench, at much less expense and intrusion than constructing a bridge at Irving. Moreover, the creek at Tonto Bench is a placid non- whitewater section of creek, which would make increased visitation much less of an issue for accidents and conflicts between user groups compared to increased visitation at Irving.

Beyond specific concerns about Irving, APA also requests more transparency about the capital expenditures required to develop and maintain so many new facilities 20 miles from the nearest paved road. A cost/benefit analysis for this infrastructure development, operation, and maintenance should be undertaken, and proposed sources of development capital should be expressed. There is concern that the proposed infrastructure at Fossil Creek might necessitate increasing permit costs to levels that some of our members might not be able to afford paying.

MINIMIZE OHV ACCESS

We support Alternative C—the Non-Motorized Experience—because the speed, whine, and dust of passing vehicles greatly detracts from values delineated in Fossil Creek’s Wild and Scenic designation. The allowance of off-highway vehicles on area roads poses great problems for pedestrian safety and enjoyment, and could necessitate alternative parallel trail building with associated impacts. However, we understand that the local motorized community is passionate about maintaining the privilege to cross Fossil Creek on FR 708. Firstly, the road already exists, so no new road building would be required. Secondly, impacts on the river corridor would be small if access was limited. Thirdly, there is historical precedent of people enjoying their motorized experience in Fossil Creek. For these reasons, we are willing to compromise, and support limited permitted motorized access along the entire length of FR 708 across Fossil Creek canyon, as well as regular road maintenance as needed for motorist safety and passage for administrative vehicles. If possible, we would suggest somehow segregating the road corridor between Homestead and Lewis Trailhead into motorized and pedestrian lanes.

MAINTAIN FR 502

We support maintaining access and road quality on FR 502 to Childs, as well as controlling erosion and improving parking without increasing parking area sizes at Sally May, Purple Mountain, and Mazatzal.

Comments FR 502 has served as an important takeout point for paddlers running the whitewater section of the Verde River from Beasley Flat, as well as a put-in location for groups paddling down to Sheep Bridge. FR 502 also acts as an access route for groups paddling Fossil Creek below Mazatzal trailhead to the confluence with the Verde. Although vehicle access is less important for packrafters, who can walk to and from the Verde River, restricted access along this road would be a considerable inconvenience for other boaters. There is little evidence that Fossil Creek below Mazatzal trailhead has any of the overuse issues

6 that led to the permit requirements for the central section of Fossil Creek. Installing a gate on FR 502 would add administrative burden for forest rangers to monitor and manage, with questionable benefit.

Suggested Revision to Preferred Alternative Keep FR 502 open to all travel from FR 708 junction to Childs. Improve the road, parking areas, and trailheads without increasing capacity.

IMPROVE HIKING OPPORTUNITIES

As packrafters, we look for opportunities to combine paddling with hiking. We advocate for the development, improvement, and maintenance of trails as necessary to minimize the need for road walking, and to enhance the experience of “human-powered approach” to popular areas along Fossil Creek. Hence, we would not support complete or partial closures of trails from the south rim to Fossil Springs, or on the Flume Trail from the Irving area. We do not support the construction of an overlook at the end of a shortened Flume trail. We support the construction of a trail from Cactus Flat to Irving, with the River Connector and Irving Connector spur trails. We also support limited and permitted camping opportunities at appropriate places along Fossil Creek.

COMMERCIAL GUIDED OUTFITTING AND HIKING

Alternatives B and E propose to extend privileges to outfitters/guides, including designating one camping site, regular user-day allotments, as well as reserved parking at Sally Mae, Purple Mountain, and potentially the Lewis/Waterfall trailhead as well.

Comments We understand that commercial outfitters would need a guaranteed level of access in order to conduct business in Fossil Creek. However, we are concerned that there is simply too much non-commercial public interest in Fossil Creek to justify blocking out any user-days for commercial uses. Moreover, we question what the purpose, need, and interest might be for commercial outfitting in Fossil Creek. Guides for horseback riding and paddling might be valuable and warranted, but it seems unlikely that visitors would need or want to hire guides for hiking and camping in Fossil Creek. On a positive note, we understand and appreciate that the regular presence of good guides could improve public safety in Fossil Creek, both as a preventative influence for accidents, as well as providing on-site first response. Guides also could provide some education and interpretation about the area’s natural history, human history, and how to behave in such a way that protects resources. However, in our experience, guides must be focused on their clients, and tend to avoid the crowded areas where accident prevention is needed. All considered, we feel that the benefits of allowing commercial outfitting do not outweigh the cost in access to the general public.

Suggested Revision to Preferred Alternative Remove any allotment for commercial outfitting in Fossil Creek. APA again thanks the Coconino National Forest for your efforts on behalf of Fossil Creek and the paddling community. We hope you will consider our comments and incorporate them into a redrafted preferred alternative. APA intends to step up our efforts at Fossil Creek to educate packrafters about safety, Leave No Trace principles, and coexistence with other visitors.

7 Sincerely,

Brad Meiklejohn President, American Packrafting Association

APA Board of Directors Brad Meiklejohn, President, Eagle River, AK Thomas Turiano, Vice President, Wilson, WY Moe Witschard, Treasurer, Bozeman, MT Theresa Lundquist, Jackson, WY Forrest McCarthy, Jackson, WY David Nix, Salt Lake City, UT Roman Dial, Anchorage, AK Sarah Tingey, Mancos, CO

APA Executive Council David Chenault, Missoula, MT Mike Curiak, Grand Junction, CO John Davis, Adirondacks, NY Chris Erickson, Portland, OR Jim Harris, Park City, UT Bretwood Higman, Seldovia, AK Ryan Jordan, Bozeman, MT Wendy Loya, Eagle River, AK Luc Mehl, Anchorage, AK Eric Riley, Jackson, WY Wyatt Roscoe, Jackson, WY Rich Rudow, Phoenix, AZ Jared Steyaert, McCarthy, AK Richard Stout, Jackson, WY

8 From: christina brooks To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 2:14:28 PM

To the Coconino Forest District:

I recently read an article in the Arizona Wilderness Coalition about plans to increase motorized vehicle access to Fossil Creek. Right now, I think the access is perfect as the access is not easy for all to get to. One really needs to want to get there and make this a very special outing. I felt fortunate that I could go with a friend in an AWD vehicle. The day was so serene, the water such an amazing cause for celebration and enjoyment. The wildlife and trees and plants were made for one of the best days ever. I think these areas need to be protected from too many visitors. When we went we filled up two bags of garbage because even with the current public access, people do not take care of the land. I fear that by opening up the area to motorized vehicles would increase the damage that we saw just on that one day, with more trash, more pollution to the area, and more damage to the serenity of the beautiful creekside setting.

From, Christina Brooks [email protected] From: Roybal, Marcos A -FS To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: FW: Fossil Creek Public Comment Period Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:19:36 PM Attachments: image001.png 20170125124843436.pdf

From: Branton, Nicole -FS Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:04 PM To: Roybal, Marcos A -FS ; Munding, Elizabeth A -FS Subject: FW: Fossil Creek Public Comment Period

From: Terry Keller [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 2:43 PM To: Branton, Nicole -FS Cc: 'Gary Morris' ([email protected]) Subject: Fossil Creek Public Comment Period

Ms. Branton,

Please accept the attached comments regarding Fossil Creek.

I hard copy of this letter is also being mailed to you if this format is not acceptable.

Thank you!

Terry

Terry Keller Fire Chief Copper Canyon Fire and Medical Authority (928) 567-9401 Office (928) 300-1263 Cell (928) 567-3919 Fax [email protected] www.cc-fma.org

All messages created in this system belong to either Camp Verde Fire Dsitrict, Montezuma Rimrock Fire District, or Copper Canyon Fire and Medical Authority and should be considered a public record subject to disclosure under the Arizona Public Records Law (A.R.S. 39-121). District employees, District public officials, and those who generate email to them, should have no expectation of privacy related to the use of this technology. To ensure compliance with the open meeting law, CCFMA, CVFD or MRFD Board Members who received this message should not forward it to other Members of their respective Board. Board members may reply to this message, but they should not send a copy of their reply to other members of their Board.

CONFIDENTIAL - The information contained in this email message is confidential, and intended for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this information is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify me immediately at (928) 567- 9401.

Copper Canyon Fire & Medical Authority

268 Salt Mine Road, Camp Verde, AZ 86322 www.cc-fma.org Phone (928) 567-9401

January 25, 2017

Ms. Nicole Branton, District Ranger Coconino National Forest 8375 State Route 179 Sedona,AZ

Dear Ms. Branton,

I am responding to the Coconino National Forest's public comment period regarding the proposed master plan for Fossil Creek.

The Copper Canyon Fire and Medical Authority (CCFMA) serves the communities of Camp Verde, Rimrock, and Lake Montezuma, but also provides ambulance and rescue services to over 500 square miles of primitive country surrounding these communities. Every year, the Authority responds to a significant number of rescues in the downstream areas of Fossil Creek and along the road leading into this area from State Route 260. However, the greatest number of the annual rescue activity in this area is along the first three miles below the headwaters of the creek and these rescues are primarily handled the Pine Strawberry Fire District and other rescue agencies in Gila County.

This correspondence is meant to express my concern about the additional burden that could be imposed on CCFMA if some of the options proposed in the master plan results in the closure of Forest Service Road 708. As you are probably aware, a large number of rescue events occur at the water fall area on Fossil Creek. As noted above, the Pine Strawberry Fire District is the closest available emergency medical service agency to that location. Closing the 708 road not only shifts the potential rescue burden to CCFMA, it also creates an unacceptable and extended response time due to the 14 miles of rough dirt road to reach this area from Camp Verde. Rapid responses to emergencies on this rough road frequently results in damage to our ambulances or other apparatus. Closing the 708 road will also take our very limited paramedic staffing out of our primary response area for extended periods of time, resulting in delays to emergencies within our taxing district. These delays will surely not sit well with our taxpayers, and also shift the burden of covering these local responses to even other jurisdictions since our crews will be committed in Fossil Creek. Furthermore, CCFMA does not currently have legal jurisdiction to respond to medical emergencies along the trail to Fossil Creek. If we become the closest responders to this area by closing FS Road 7081 we would need to seek permission from Pine Strawberry Fire District in order to operate within their legal response area, resulting in even additional delays.

As you can see the proposal to close FS Road 708 results in a cascade of events with respect to rescue for victims of accidents or illness in Fossil Creek Canyon. None of these events serves public safety at all. Therefore, / urge the Forest Service to keep FS Road 708 open and maintained. As you may know, the power companies which operated the two power plants for nearly a century were able to keep the road open and maintained. The public also routinely used that road for travel between Strawberry and Camp Verde during that long period of time.

From a public safety perspective, it was also unwise for the Forest Service to close the service road from the old Irving Power Plant to the dam. That action now prevents any convenient access for rescue vehicles for emergencies at the Upper Springs area and adds hours to any rescue at that location.

I'm aware of the comments submitted by Chief Gary Morris of the Pine Strawberry Fire District and I strongly support the need for a "public safety impact study", regarding the rescue crisis in Fossil Creek. This additional "public safety" chapter should be inserted in the planning process. Additionally, I fully support all five of Chief Morris' recommendations for improving public safety at Fossil Creek.

Note: A hard copy of this letter is being sent via US Mail in addition to the electronic version that has been emailed.

Respectfully submitted,

Terry Keller Fire Chief From: Clare McCormick To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 5:32:46 PM

Dear US Forest Service,

While I would love to have unimpeded access to all our national lands and forests I realize that they need to be managed so that we, the people, do not love them to death. As literally an oasis in a desert landscape, Fossil Creek of course draws all living things to it—including sun-scorched Arizonans. We rely on unique places like Fossil Creek to rejuvenate our sense of belonging in the natural world. However, the Creek’s ecosystem—plants and animals—rely on Fossil Creek for their ability to survive. Without a healthy, unpolluted watershed there would be no sanctuary for them, as well as for humans.

I am in favor of use restrictions, including quota access, that balances the natural system with appropriate recreational uses for people. I do not favor any increasing motor vehicle access as that disproportionately would adversely effect this special and very fragile ecosystem.

Thank you for all the work you do to provide healthy ecosystems and use management so that we have a vibrant natural world for ourselves and for our children.

Sincerely, Clare McCormick Prescott, AZ From: michael milillo To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:40:26 PM

I am a relatively frequent user of the Fossil Creek Wilderness and Scenic River area. It is such a special and beautiful area. Use needs to be controlled and managed to keep it special. It is a shame to see people abusing the area with trash, human and pet excrement in close proximity to the stream. Camping streamside has created problems. The easier access is made, the greater the potential for abuse. I am in favor of Alternatives B or C, which would manage access and provide enhanced protection of the resource. Thank you.

Sent from my iPad Mike Milillo From: Roybal, Marcos A -FS To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: FW: WWW Mail: Fossil Creek Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 10:35:05 AM

-----Original Message----- From: Avila, Federico - FS On Behalf Of FS-Coconino Webmail Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 10:34 AM To: Roybal, Marcos A -FS Subject: FW: WWW Mail: Fossil Creek

Marcos,

This is from our webmail.

Thank you.

Freddie Avila Visitor Services Information Assistant Forest Service Coconino National Forest, Supervisor's Office p: 928-527-3602 [email protected] 1824 S. Thompson St. Flagstaff, AZ 86001 www.fs.fed.us

Caring for the land and serving people

-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 8:11 AM To: FS-Coconino Webmail Subject: WWW Mail: Fossil Creek

Hello, I couldnt find a specific place to make a comment regarding the future of a Fossil Creek. The only way that this fantastic river will survive is if option c, the roadless option, is adopted. The roadless option will minimize the negative impact that visitors have. Those visitors who have to put forth an effort to access the river are not typically those who leave garbage, cut down trees for firewood, or spray graffiti on the rocks. More accebility will undoubtedly bring more of those who have no interest in preserving natural beauty. Every time access is increased and made easier the quality and natural health of the environment declines. The Forset Service does not have the time nor the money to patrol and protect all the places it is charged with protecting. Please dont facilitate the end of fossil creek. Not every beautiful place in the state needs a parking lot. Sincerely,Jonathan PsenkaArizona Resident From: Munding, Elizabeth A -FS To: [email protected] Cc: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock; Roybal, Marcos A -FS Subject: RE: concerns/suggestions for fossil springs Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 12:42:45 PM Attachments: image002.png image003.png

Thank you Mr. Smith for your input—verbal and written. I will immediately add these comments to our comment inbox—shown in the “cc” line. Have a wonderful day in beautiful Strawberry. -- Elizabeth

Elizabeth A. Munding NEPA Planner Forest Service Coconino National Forest, Red Rock Ranger District p: 928-203-2914 f: 928-203-7539 [email protected] Physical Address: 8375 State Rt. 179 or Mailing Address: P.O. Box 20429 Sedona, AZ 86341 www.fs.fed.us

Caring for the land and serving people

From: ron smith [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 12:37 PM To: Munding, Elizabeth A -FS Subject: concerns/suggestions for fossil springs

Hi Elizabeth- Enjoyed speaking with you on the phone. Thank you for answering my questions.

At the risk of stating the obvious - there appears to be a conflict between a "wild and scenic river" and a "recreational area". We have several concerns, among them are:

1) Habitat degradation/destruction with resulting impacts to fish, wildlife and plant populations. Allowing off-road vehicles of any type is inappropriate and disruptive due to noise, exhaust fumes, trail rutting and resultant erosion.

2) The resource should be managed to mitigate accidents/deaths. Unprecedented numbers of rescues negatively impact the Pine/Strawberry Fire Department and EMT personnel; and Pine/Strawberry tax payers.

3) None of the proposals seems to address the potential impact of increased vehicular traffic and resultant noise which threatens and disrupts the rural character, charm, tranquility and quiet of the Strawberry Valley Community. All access from the Strawberry side is unnecessary and should be permanently closed. Access from the Camp Verde side via Highway 260 is safer and does not disturb any residential area.

Suggestions:

1) Consider "resting" the entire area for an extended period to allow habitats, plant and wildlife populations to recover. This would also give you time to prepare the area for the public.

2) Consider seasonal specific area closures to allow for nesting/breeding of certain species.

3) Designate specific trails/areas for bird watching/wildlife viewing only. Not accessible for any other activity.

4) Confine swimming and water play to a specific supervised area.

5) Schedule specific recreational activities for specific times or seasons to avoid conflicting activities competing for the same space at the same time. would also allow for a higher quality outdoor experience.

6) We saved the most radical for last. Extend the wilderness area boundary to enclose the entire corridor and put the area under wilderness area rules.

OK - thanks for the opportunity to comment. Regards, Ron and Virginia Smith Permanent full-time Strawberry Residents From: ron smith To: Munding, Elizabeth A -FS Subject: concerns/suggestions for fossil springs Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 12:40:28 PM

Hi Elizabeth- Enjoyed speaking with you on the phone. Thank you for answering my questions.

At the risk of stating the obvious - there appears to be a conflict between a "wild and scenic river" and a "recreational area". We have several concerns, among them are:

Suggestions:

1) Consider "resting" the entire area for an extended period to allow habitats, plant and wildlife populations to recover. This would also give you time to prepare the area for the public.

2) Consider seasonal specific area closures to allow for nesting/breeding of certain species.

3) Designate specific trails/areas for bird watching/wildlife viewing only. Not accessible for any other activity.

4) Confine swimming and water play to a specific supervised area.

6) We saved the most radical for last. Extend the wilderness area boundary to enclose the entire corridor and put the area under wilderness area rules.

OK - thanks for the opportunity to comment. Regards, Ron and Virginia Smith Permanent full-time Strawberry Residents From: William Pitterle To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 6:22:39 PM Attachments: Comment_Jan2017.doc

I am Commander of Tonto Rim Search and Rescue in Gila County. Please accept my attached comments regarding plans for Fossil Creek. Thank you,

William J Pitterle Commander - Tonto Rim Search and Rescue 404 N Whitetail Dr Payson, AZ 85541 928-978-9105

Tonto Rim Search & Rescue Squad, Inc. P.O.Box 357 Pine AZ, 85544 www.trsar.org

January 25, 2017

Fossil Creek Public Comment Period 2016/2017

I am Commander of Tonto Rim Search and Rescue Squad, and my SAR unit is the one most frequently called into Fossil Creek for rescues.

I would like to state that I am in agreement with the points made by Pine-Strawberry Fire Chief Gary Morris. We work together on most of the rescue missions in Fossil Creek.

I would like to add one additional point from my perspective as Commander of a group of Search and Rescue volunteers. Northern Gila County simply does not have much population to draw from for volunteer rescuers. Unlike Phoenix, Tucson, or even Flagstaff, the pool of potential rescuers is small, and many of my squad members are retired. They are tough, there is no doubt, and we do many extremely difficult rescues every year, but a difficult rescue in Fossil Creek can drain my squad resources for a couple of days. Fossil Creek missions frequently come in multiples, and often during the hottest days of the summer. It has occasionally been difficult to pull a functional team together for a difficult mission in the peak of our season.

It is for these reasons that I support the points that Fire Chief Gary Morris has made.

Thank you,

William J Pitterle Commander - Tonto Rim Search and Rescue [email protected] 928-978-9105

From: JM Trudeau To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock; Amber Fields Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 11:08:42 AM

To the US Forest Service, Coconino and Tonto Forests,

We would like to comment on the Fossil Creek CRMP. We are Joe Trudeau and Amber Fields, of Prescott, Arizona. The first time we camped together was at Fossil Creek in 2002, while studying Forestry and Parks and Recreation Management at NAU. A couple years later we began dating, and then soon graduated from NAU, thus beginning our careers in natural resources management and conservation. Fifteen years later, we are now a happily married couple, and still work in the conservation field, being co-owners of Hassayampa Forestry & Ecological. Our relationship, and the fifteen years of working for the land, began at Fossil Creek. We hope that the public can retain good access to the great recreation experiences found at Fossil Creek, but we also feel that because of the incredible increase in use over the last decade or two, that some resources demand increased protection.

We value wilderness protection, clean watersheds, good wildlife habitat, abundant quiet recreation experiences, and opportunities for educational and transformative experiences in Nature. Based on our values, we feel that a mix of Alternatives 2 and 3 is the best option for providing a broad range of visitor services and recreational opportunities while protecting the most important aspects of this truly remarkable Wild, Scenic, and Recreational River. We also support protecting the botanical area and Fossil Springs to the fullest extent.

Motorized access should by no means be increased in and around Fossil Creek. ATV’s, UTV’s and trucks are vectors for invasive species; they increase fire risk; they cause erosion, siltation and other resource damage; they disturb and sometimes run over wildlife; they are noisy and smelly and disrupt primitive recreational activities; and overall degrade the Outstanding Resource Values of the Fossil Creek area. Per Alternative 3, we believe that FR 708 between the Waterfall trailhead and the gate west of FR 591 should be closed to motor vehicles and remain open to non-motorized use. There is no reason that we should be allowing any type of motorized recreation to cross this remarkable canyon (per FR 708).

People should be encouraged to hike, bike, or ride a horse in areas like Fossil Creek. Old roadbeds make great trails when closed to motor vehicles and maintained for trail use. We also encourage and support the building of new trails for primitive, quiet recreation, like those included in Alternative 3. Our hope is that trails would be built to International Mountain Bike Association specs so they could handle the heavy mountain bike and horse use that I would expect.

Overall we like Alternative 3 just a bit more than Alternative 2, but an aspect of Alternative 3 that we disagree with is closing designated recreation sites along roads to remain open (Mazatzal, Purple Mtn, Sally Mae). Why curtail access points along open roads? Was this put in there to make Alternative 3 less appealing to most users? Also, if the road to Childs is to remain open, then don’t implement a permit system, because under this Alternative, motorized users are asked to give up enough already. We like the camping in Alternative 2 more than Alt. 3. We think that there should be abundant designated sites to give folks the chance to camp out in Nature, as in Alternative 2.

Thank you for your good work as stewards of our National Forest. We understand the difficulties inherent in managing such a beautiful and popular site. We’re glad to have the opportunity to comment on this important plan revision.

Sincerely,

Joe Trudeau & Amber Fields

PO Box 1013

Prescott, AZ

86302

(603) 562-6226 From: Bennett, LeeAnn To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Cc: Bennett, LeeAnn Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Thursday, January 26, 2017 5:26:03 PM

Dear Forest Service, The most important thing to me is the protection of the natural resources found in the Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River corridor. I think that opportunities for recreation can also be considered as resources that need management and protection. I have seen pictures of this area and I can see why there are so visitors. It really is a pretty special place. But special places like this need protection and sometimes, restoration. I would hope that locals appreciate this place as much as visitors and are involved in helping to maintain the area (i.e., volunteering to clean up trash). Alternative B w/Enhanced protections is the closest to what I think would accommodate most visitor recreation. But, I would modify this alternative by closing off the waterfall to swimming for visitor safety and its cultural significance to Native Americans. Additionally, the closed section of FR708 should be made into a bike trail or a trail for exhaust-muffled models of atvs.

Further, I agree that a permit system should continue to be used to cut down on trash and overuse , but the forest service still needs to determine visitor carrying capacity (how many visitors can come into the forest at any one time and not degrade forest resources?). I don’t believe that making more parking is going to do anything more than increase traffic congestion in the area. Maybe some arrangements should be made for local visitor shuttles. That way huge parking areas don’t have to be constructed within the forest itself and the congestion due to the presence of so many vehicles would not occur. Thank you for this opportunity to express my views. Sincerely, LeeAnn Bennett From: Bettina Bickel To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Thursday, January 26, 2017 4:13:16 PM

Dear Fossil Creek Project Coordinator and Team,

Wild and Scenic designation mandates preservation of Fossil Creek's “Outstandingly Remarkable Values”, including water quality and free- flowing nature, wildlife including native fish, and riparian vegetation. Unfortunately, excessive human visitation is the greatest threat to these values, as mounds of trash are left, riparian vegetation is trampled and killed, wildlife habitat is damaged, and quiet recreational opportunities are ruined. The unique and special values of this river call for greater preservation efforts as reflected in Alternatives C (Non-motorized Experience) and B (Enhanced Protections). The proposed expansion of motorized use and recreational access, as reflected in the Alternative E (Proposed Action – Long-term Adaptive Management) is not in the best interest of this river, and threatens the values for which this was designated a Wild and Scenic River. The Service should emphasize protection of ORVs, not on maximizing recreational opportunities. Maximizing human visitation would effectively turn the area into an urban water park, and increased development (such as huge parking lots and an overlook at the waterfall) would permanently damage the wild character of Fossil Creek.

Please do not increase motorized use. Motorized access expands human impacts, serves as a vector for invasive species, can contribute to increased erosion and siltation, and is contrary to preservation of the “ORVs” of Fish and Aquatic Resources, Wildlife, Water, and Quiet Recreation.

Please include educational opportunities to help increase public awareness and respect for Fossil Creek's wild ORVs.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important project.

Bettina Bickel From: Marianne Davis To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP - Comments Date: Thursday, January 26, 2017 1:20:53 PM

Hello, Thank you for allowing more time for the public to comment on the Fossil Creek Comprehensive River Management Plan options. I grew up in Arizona, currently reside in Sedona, and care deeply about our public lands and watersheds. I have been to Fossil Creek for hiking many times over the years.

I have done much traveling throughout Southwest's natural areas - mainly hiking and camping, and also backpacking, boating, and mountain biking. I personally see Fossil Creek as a unique treasure, especially in the context of the US Southwest, and recognize its outstanding biological value for wildlife species that are riparian habitat users, riparian obligates, and of course semi-aquatic and aquatic species, as well as the impressive diversity of flora. I also see the important geological, hydrological, and cultural value of the springs, the creek, and its watershed. I commend all those, including the USFS, that have restored this area and helped conserve it.

Here is what I feel is the most important about the new management options:

In general, I am strongly against allowing more motorized use, so against alternatives D and E. There should be some excellent natural areas that can provide the non-motorized experience to outdoor recreationists, especially those pristine places by water in a state where that access is very rare. That said, I worry about law enforcement, stewardship/etiquette enforcement, fire crew response, and search and rescue response...so I really think on-site "ambassadors" to educate the public during day-use and enforcement personnel should be stationed there on site. I don't think just a visitor contact booth is enough. If it's important to restore 708 for fire and safety motorized reasons, please keep it completely closed to the public. In this instance, perhaps a permit system for guide companies to bring people down from the Strawberry/Pine area in vans could be initiated - still closed to all personal vehicles, especially ATVs which have ruined many beautiful places with awful noise pollution and unfortunately too many riders not abiding by travel restrictions. This would help bring some business back to the Payson, Pine, and Strawberry communities. I feel alternate D and most especially E are unacceptable also because they both increase the PAOT. Alternate E proposes a quite ridiculous amount of users (even if this is a slow increase over time, we are still getting to that identified PAOT.) The place already has too many users, even with the current permit system (which has helped immensely!) to feel like it's actually wilderness or even to offer its permitted users connection to nature in general. Why would E be the proposed action? Flexible is not the important adjective in describing this; this plan is the most unacceptable to me and others I know. I don't want to see this gem become a splash-park playground. I know that Alternate A is not actually an option the FS can select, which is good because I strongly support some development improvements in B and C, especially those helping with toilets and trash for water quality, and those improvements for public safety at use areas. I see alternates B and C as shifting use types around to different areas. I see benefits to both. Some elements I like in B as opposed to C, is that it provides some more recreation options along 502 and gives the tribal nations back some private use. I do however like the concept of C better, but uncertain of the complete details.

Thank you for doing your part in including the public in your process. With population and interest in outdoor recreation increasing in Arizona, our public lands will require more attention such as increased educational outreach in basic tenants of stewardship, law and etiquette enforcement, and of course the funding to accomplish those. I think most people, when they really think about it, want our natural areas - especially those offering the true gift of surface water - preserved so that generations to come can enjoy them as we have.

If any of my comments are unclear or if you launch any follow-up planning discussions, I would like to be notified.

Can you please notify me that you received my comments?

Best regards, Marianne Davis [email protected] Sedona, AZ From: Jacqueline Drenth To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Thursday, January 26, 2017 8:21:17 PM

Dear Forest Service,

I understand the need to protect this land and cherish it. I am one who picks up trash along my hikes. The current permit system has allowed my friend s and I to have life changing experiences and is one of my favorite places to visit in the state. Enforcing a tougher permit system to check for glass and ensure proper trash pick up is key. Plan A or Plan B still allows avid hikers and Arizonans to experience fossil with less people and more respect for the land.

Thank you for understanding and protecting, Jacqueline Drenth

Sent from my iPhone From: MICHAEL C NEAL To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Thursday, January 26, 2017 8:59:10 AM

To whom this may concern,

As a fourth generation Arizona native, I have significant changes to the Fossil Creek watershed and its' management over the years; having gone from single-use (resource extraction) to multiple-use, to heavily restricted use just within my lifetime. To be honest, these days, the USFS seems to be way too reactionary in the direction of it's policies. I worked many years for the USFS and the agency has changed dramatically during this period, mostly not for the positive, but I do recognize that a lack of funding for non-fire activities is a big driver in this.

Sometime during my childhood (mid to late 1970s) I started to see a significant change in the level of recreational impacts to Fossil Creek. The only saving grace at that juncture was the inclusion of the upper watershed in the designated Wilderness system. By the early 1980s all the accessible areas of the creek, downstream of the wilderness boundary were being trashed by "casual" recreational; by this I mean those that are not engaged in a specific sport of activity, such as fishing, backpacking, kayaking, etc.. (I don't consider hiking a specific sport because it is an inherent aspect of all the others). I recognize that dealing with casual recreationist is the biggest challenge throughout public lands, because they are the majority use group, tend to have the lesser knowledge base, lack a public lands ethic, cross all demographic lines, are not engaged with the agencies as a unified group, and frankly are the most apathetic overall.

For this reason, I feel strongly that the casual recreation group is the one that needs to be targeted with restrictions, whether this takes the form of outright restrictions or increased use fees. I suppose you can guess that I am an avid backpacker, fisherman, kayaker, but also a biologist and former wilderness/recreation guide. While this might suggest a bias, I have also worked for the USFS, BLM, NPS, and state agencies responsible for administering public lands; so, I really do see both sides of the coin and share in the challenges land managers face.

For instance, I understand that Preferred Alternative E proposes a prohibition on "water play" at the main waterfall. While I don't mind the idea of limiting or restricting wading and/or swimming in certain areas, the term "water play" is a bit vague and would seem to restrict a sporting group (kayakers) that has demonstrated very little impact to this or other systems, including all the Wild and Scenic Rivers it's membership organization seek to protect. For this sporting group, Fossil Creek represents a precious resource, in that there are almost no places in the Southwest where sustained flows can be found, much less year-round.

Regarding access, toll booths, and facilities - it is just a travesty that the USFS is so engaged these days in saving people from themselves, long the sole purview of the NPS. If you want to close roads and restrict access during wet periods, build all the facilities mentioned in preferred alternatives, etc. just push for designation as a National Park or Recreation Area and turn it over to the Department of Interior and the NPS. Wet periods in Arizona are the best for boating, it's fine if you need to protect Fossil Creek from sedimentation during these periods, but don't restrict access to the Verde.

If access and recreation numbers are going to be restricted or limited under all the alternatives, I highly recommend a permitting system similar to that utilized by the White Mountain Apache Tribe, where individual activities are permitted at different rates or for free. For instance, activity categories could include: general day use (including ATV, 4x4 and hunting use = fee and restricted number of vehicles or persons per day), overnight camping (separate from all other categories = fee and restriction on the number of vehicles), fishing (non fee, but restricted number per day), kayaking/.boating (no fee, but restricted number per day), etc. I suggest no fee for the later two groups, because they are user groups that are comprised of far fewer participants and generally have less impact on resources overall.

In closing, I would like to say that while public lands are here for all tax-paying Americans I do understand the need to restrict activity in high use and/or areas of special conservation concern. That said, management should target the problem - numbers and type of recreation and especially the "bad apples". To prohibit or restrict all user groups just for the sake of appearing fair, is not striking a good balance and makes public land agencies appear incapable of true dynamic management.

Thanks for your time,

MCN From: Garrett, LaRon To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek Options Date: Thursday, January 26, 2017 11:40:09 AM Attachments: Fossil Creek Public Comment Submitted Jan 2017.pdf

The Town of Payson appreciates the U.S. Forest Service exploring the options for improving the situation at the Fossil Creek area near Strawberry. Tourism is one of Payson’s main industries. Visitors to the Fossil Creek area are part of that industry that helps the retail establishments in Payson continue to operate. Therefore, we urge the Forest Service to adopt a plan that will continue to support the tourism aspect of this beautiful area.

Another concern is the public safety aspect of the Fossil Creek area. With it open to the public, it needs to be in such a way that area first responders can have adequate access to assist any one that may need help. The Town of Payson supports the ideas of the Pine-Strawberry Fire Chief, Gary Morris, which is attached to this email. I understand he has also submitted this directly to you as a comment.

Again, thank you for exploring options to make better use of the public lands.

LaRon G. Garrett, P.E. Town Manager Town of Payson 928-472-5041

______This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com ______From: Christopher Russell To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Thursday, January 26, 2017 2:15:11 PM

Please do not eliminate the hiking, swimming, camping in the fossil springs area. It's favorite swimming area for our family. Many great memories. I think the current permit method is working well.

Christopher M. Russell Gilbert resident CMR Don't blame the alfalfa. From: Lacey Jo Schuster To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Thursday, January 26, 2017 8:31:12 PM

Dear Forest Service,

The current permit system for Fossil Creek created for the best experience I have ever had. It promoted protection of the forest and drastically decreased the amount of litter. I was able to go two different times and thoroughly enjoyed my experience without crowds. Please continue using the current permit system and consider increased protection of the current plan. Plan A and B will effectively protect the ecosystem while allowing for use of our beautiful land. If you adjust the parking lot and amount of vehicles by making the hike further to the Waterfall it will continue to monitor the pollution. In addition you can increase the cost of permit to at least $6/person, if not $10/person to promote protection of our lands.

Thank you for all that you do to protect our forest and for taking into consideration the public's opinion.

Sincerely,

Lacey Schuster, MS From: Greg Watts To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Thursday, January 26, 2017 9:18:35 AM

User comments of the Fossil Creek area. I have recreated and camped along Fossil Creek for over 35 years before the U.S. Forest Service began restricting access by putting up fencing 100 feet from the tree lined area's along Fossil Creek. It totally ruined my experience as I always enjoyed parking under the tree's for shade and to camp, plus hear and see the creek near my camp. What a blessing it was for me and all the responsible users to camp so close and hear the creek. When the Forest Service put up the fence it also came with new rules as the creek area was only for day use and no camping overnight was permitted. Also after fencing off the area the Forest Service did not make alternative places to park forcing users to park along the road in certain area's and also there is no shade 100 feet away from the creek to park under or next to and you can not hear the creek from this distance. In my opinion the U.S. Forest Service totally ruined my experience keeping me from camping in the area and only day use, plus no shade to park near and no alternative parking made to make up for what the Forest Service took away by fencing off the area. There is also in the management plan on weekends to force people to park near the entrance dirt road FR708 and Highway 260 and take shuttle buses to recreate the area which I am against, and who is going to police the parking lot to make sure vehicles are not broken into as the thief's will know the vehicle owners will be far away for hours before getting shuttled back. I made comments to the U.S. Forest Service a few years back when A.P.S. was decommissioning both the power plants to leave the bridge over Fossil Creek going to Irving Power plant and to leave the housing to be used as a place for Forest Service staff or volunteers to live at to help police the area and give them satellight phones to call emergency services when needed, but my concerns/requests were not acted on and A.P.S. demolished the housing and removed the bridge, plus stopped maintaining the dirt road from Highway 260, FR708 back to the former power plants. Since Fossil Creek boarders 2 National Forests is there an agreement between both Federal Agency's to maintain the dirt road for user safety? I like the J-Johns put at key access area's but trash cans would be helpful and more signs like "Pack it in, pack it out" would be helpful from those who are not responsible or have no room to hall back there trash on the shuttle bus on weekends. Installation of shade Ramada's and additional parking area's is greatly needed along Fossil Creek. I hope my comments will not be going to deaf ears. Thanks for your consideration. Greg Watts 1/26/17 address: P.O. Box 1788 Black Canyon City, Arizona 85324 From: Terra Spruce To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 11:18:17 AM

Hello,

My name is Terra Welch. I have read all proposed action plans, and familiarized myself with the plans. I am voting for Alternative A, and to not make any changes to the current plan. I have been here several times, hiked in, hiked out, picked up garbage, and even brought my kids to enjoy this special place for an unforgettable camping experience there. It is such a magical place, and would hate to see it be closed to the public for recreational use. Although I know there are many people who don't take care and appreciate the land, I am not one of them. I am an avid hiker, and know how special this place is to our state, and to those who of us that are nature lovers. Please keep this beautiful places open for those of us who truly appreciate the unique beauty and experience this wonderful place has to offer!

Thank you for you time and consideration.

Sincerely, Terra Welch

Sent from my iPhone From: Thomas O"Keefe To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments of American Whitewater Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 7:47:52 AM Attachments: 20160226_fossil_creek_wild_and_scenic_crmp_scoping_comments.pdf

Please find attached comments of American Whitewater.

Thomas O’Keefe, PhD Pacific Northwest Stewardship Director American Whitewater 3537 NE 87th St. Seattle, WA 98115 425-417-9012 [email protected] @AmerWhitewater Thomas O’Keefe, PhD Pacific Northwest Stewardship Director 3537 NE 87th St. Seattle, WA 98115 [email protected]

January 26th, 2017

Laura Jo West, Forest Supervisor Coconino National Forest P.O. Box 20429 Sedona, AZ 86341

Electronically submitted to: [email protected]

RE: Comments of American Whitewater on Comprehensive River Management Plan (CRMP) for the Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River

Dear Ms. West:

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on the Comprehensive River Management Plan (CRMP) for the Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River. We believe that the development and implementation of a CRMP is critical to ensuring that the values that caused a stream to be designated as a Wild and Scenic River are protected and enhanced. At the same time the CRMP should ensure that the public’s connection to Fossil Creek remains intact and strengthened through designation.

American Whitewater is a national non-profit 501(c)(3) river conservation organization founded in 1954 with approximately 6000 individual members and 100 local-based affiliate clubs, representing whitewater paddlers across the nation. American Whitewater’s mission is to conserve and restore America’s whitewater resources and to enhance opportunities to enjoy them safely. As a conservation-oriented paddling organization, American Whitewater and our local members have been active stakeholders in the effort to designate Fossil Creek as a Wild and Scenic River and develop a CRMP. American Whitewater has a significant percentage of members residing in close proximity to Fossil Creek as well as members who travel from across the country to experience this unique resource.

Inspiring River Enthusiasts to be Advocates for River Conservation

Rivers are protected by the members of the public that know them best through personal connections, and it is vital for the fate of both protected and yet-to-be protected rivers that CRMP’s maintain, protect and celebrate these connections. The goal of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act is to celebrate special rivers, and ensure they stay special for current and future generations to enjoy. It is a flexible piece of legislation that requires sustainable and inclusive management. Although this makes the law a popular tool for protecting rivers, over 70,000 large dams exist in this country and less than 1% of rivers are protected from dams by

the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.1 For the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to remain a viable and popular conservation tool, a CRMP must protect rivers without unduly alienating or disenfranchising would-be river enthusiasts. The experiences current voters and youth have today in wild streams—rather than looking at them from an upland trail or car—will shape the future of river conservation and the fate of freshwater ecosystems nationwide. With this goal in mind, we encourage the Forest Service to include alternatives within the Fossil Creek CRMP that inspire people to sit on the banks of the creek, engage in a spiritual moment in this desert oasis, take a swim or leap from a rock, put on a mask to observe native roundtail chub, or paddle downstream over waterfalls and across emerald pools.

In your cover letter for the scoping process you reference the need to “balance recreational use with protection of Fossil Creek’s water quality, free-flowing condition, and outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs).”2 We note that recreation is itself an ORV that the agency is obligated to protect and enhance and not simply balance with other values. All ORVs need to be protected and enhanced while balanced appropriately with each other. Section 10(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act specifically states that “each component of the national wild and scenic rivers system shall be administered in such manner as to protect and enhance the values which caused it to be included in said system without, insofar as is consistent therewith, limiting other uses that do not substantially interfere with public use and enjoyment of these values.”3

Paddling is a Rare, Unique, and Exemplary Value of Fossil Creek that should be Protected and Enhanced

As American Whitewater and others have commented in the past, Fossil Creek’s waterfalls, deep pools, rapids, geology, scenery, water quality, and flow regime combine to make it a rare, unique, and exemplary whitewater paddling resource. A big highlight for paddlers is that Fossil Creek can be boated for a longer season than other regional streams. Another highlight is the waterfalls: fun, relatively safe, and great for paddlers with a wide variety of skill levels. One of the primary elements of a river is of course its bed, and every type of rock offers different types of rapids for paddlers to experience. Travertine is a relatively rare type of riverbed, and a high quality one for paddlers to enjoy. Paddling is an ancient, healthy, sustainable, immersive way for the public to experience the recreational, scenic, and other values of Fossil Creek. It should be recognized as one of the activities that defines the recreational ORV in the CRMP and should be protected and enhanced under the plan.

1 https://www.rivers.gov/wsr-act.php 2 Letter announcing comment period for Comprehensive River Management Plan (CRMP) for the Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River, Forest Supervisor Laura Jo West Coconino National Forest, November 22, 2016. 3 16 U.S.C. § 1281(a)

Regardless of the specific details in the plan, we greatly appreciate the implicit acknowledgement that paddling Fossil Creek is an acceptable activity, as it is on Wild and Scenic Rivers throughout the country. The paddling community has a deep connection to Fossil Creek, and we are glad the Forest Service respects that connection.

Whitewater Boating and Navigability of Fossil Creek

Depending on flows, Fossil Creek is navigable by small whitewater craft from above Fossil Springs to the Verde River. In an arid region with boating opportunities that are dependent on rare precipitation events, Fossil Creek is unique in providing year around opportunities for recreational boating. It has been featured in river guidebooks for more 25 years.4 In 2005 the Arizona Public Service Corporation decommissioned its Childs-Irving Hydropower Project along Fossil Creek, restoring normal water levels to the stream for the first time in over 100 years.5 These restored flows further enhanced opportunities for river-based recreation on Fossil Creek. The most popular section of Fossil Creek begins from the Waterfall (34.415, -111.605) and continues down to the Fossil Creek Bridge (34.394, -111.630).6 Paddlers access the run by parking at the Waterfall Trail Parking area (Lot 5) and hiking in to the waterfall with their boat and gear. Paddlers generally boat down to either the Fossil Creek Bridge or an intermediate access point at Irving. It is possible to navigate the river down to the Verde River confluence although this is less frequently done. Another alternative is to drive to the Fossil Springs Trailhead and hike the approximately 3.1 mile trail down to the river at Fossil Springs and float down to the Fossil Creek Bridge or alternate access points along the way.7 With the vehicle closure of Forest Road 708 between the Waterfall Trailhead and Fossil Springs Trailhead however, boating this section requires a long vehicle shuttle out and around on Highway 260 between Strawberry and Camp Verde and two separate access permits.

We are pleased to see recreation recognized as an Outstandingly Remarkable Value and support this determination. The Forest Service Handbook states that “in order to be assessed as outstandingly remarkable, a river-related value must be a unique, rare, or exemplary feature that is significant at a comparative regional or national scale... Recreational opportunities are, or have the potential to be, popular enough to attract visitors from throughout or beyond the region of comparison or are unique or rare within the region.”8 Fossil Creek clearly meets this standard, attracting visitors from Arizona and across the country to experience the unique riparian habitat and recreational opportunities provided by a perennial stream flowing through an arid landscape. It is the only readily-

4 Arizona Rivers and Streams Guide. 1989. Arizona State Parks. Phoenix, AZ. 5 Order approving surrender of license & removal of project works, and dismissing application for new license re Arizona Public Service Co's Childs Irving Project, w/ Chairman Wood concurring statement attached under P-2069 , Arizona Public Service Company (2004) 109 FERC ¶ 61,036. 6 https://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/River/detail/id/5061/ 7 https://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/River/detail/id/5260/ 8 Forest Service Handbook 1909.12-2006-8, Chapter 82.14

accessible travertine creek in the entire country that is regularly enjoyed by whitewater boaters. While Fossil Creek is regularly enjoyed by local paddlers, many visitors from across the country are attracted to the unique paddling experience this creek provides. The Forest Service resource assessment appropriately identifies whitewater recreation as one of the activities that supports the determination of recreation as an Outstandingly Remarkable Value, although it incorrectly implies that the creek was “discovered” by whitewater boaters following decommissioning of the hydropower project.9 The discussion of recreational resources in the CRMP should explicitly clarify the history of recreational boating on Fossil Creek that predates the decommissioning of the hydropower project.

Alternatives C, D, and E propose to close the Waterfall to “waterplay.” It is unclear what activities encompass waterplay. A distinction should be made between boating—a form of navigation on the waterway—where individuals pass through an area and activities such as swimming where individuals spend extended periods of time at one site. We do not support closure of the Waterfall or segments of the creek to whitewater boating. Additionally we have concerns that limitations on swimming and contact access to the water at the Waterfall would not be consistent with agency obligations to protect and enhance the recreation value. The Waterfall is the primary access point for whitewater boaters and one of the most highly valued recreation sites along the entire river corridor. For similar reasons, we do not support provisions of Alternative D that would close the Waterfall Trail (aka Lewis Trail) given its importance in providing access to this unique, rare, and exemplary feature representing a defining element of the recreational ORV. Eliminating opportunities for the public to engage in contact recreation with the creek in favor of interpretive exhibits at a welcome center and a drive-through experience would diminish the recreational ORV.

Permit System

We generally support a limited-entry permit system and acknowledge positive benefits that include increasjng the quality of the visitor experience, and reducing the number of vehicles turned away, search and rescue calls, health and safety incidents, and the amount of trash collected from previous years.10 However, the system does pose challenges for paddlesports enthusiasts who often make the decision on whether to take a trip based on hydrologic conditions that they are unable to easily predict a month in advance. Of 17,962 permits reserved in 2016, 4,937 were no-shows and 606 were cancellations, resulting in over 30% of

9 At Page 12, Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River Resource Assessment, USDA Forest Service, Updated January 16th, 2016. 10 2016 Visitor Use Summary for Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River, Becky Smith, USFS Forestry Technician (Recreation), Red Rock Ranger District Coconino National Forest November 28, 2016.

reserved permits that were not used. We request an analysis of alternative systems for permits that provide more flexibility and recognize that a one-month planning horizon is not appropriate for all users. Specifically, we recommend that an alternative be included to provide for a block of permits (20-30%) that would be available for short-term reservations a day or two in advance. A system with this flexibility should include adaptive management provisions that describe how to allocate permits based on a quantitative analysis of visitor use. By including this flexibility in the CRMP, these future modifications could be implemented without additional environmental analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act.

In addition we support analysis of an alternative that includes a penalty for no- shows. On the Middle Fork Salmon Wild and Scenic River the penalty for a no- show (i.e. those who do not cancel their permit on recreation.gov) is a restriction from holding a permit on the river for three years. We suggest that the Forest Service analyze other permit systems administered by the agency and evaluate actions that serve to reduce the current unacceptably high number of no-shows, including both penalties for no-shows and incentives for timely cancellations.

Access

Some of the boating opportunities available on Fossil Creek require hiking with boats and gear. The hiking required (e.g. Waterfall Trail) can still be reasonably done in the course of a day trip to the river. Continued opportunities for day use however require vehicle access to the river (e.g. parking at Waterfall Trailhead). Reduced vehicle access to the river could limit opportunities for day use.

Some of our local members have commented that Forest Road 708 has been closed during rain and snow events and that this often occurs during the periods of high flow that are most attractive for whitewater boating. This impacts access to opportunities on both Fossil Creek and the Verde River. The most frustrating experiences are those where a paddler secures a permit to access Fossil Creek and then drives to Camp Verde only to find that Forest Road 708 has been closed and the information recording or website has not been updated accordingly. We request that access closures be more limited and that the Forest Service consider the desire our community has to access this resource when the water is high and other forms of river-based recreation may not be appropriate. If a closure is necessary for health and safety reasons, a better procedure to communicate this information should be implemented by promptly updating phone recordings and website and utilizing social media tools.

Forest Road 502 provides critical access to Childs on the Verde River. We want to ensure that paddlers have vehicular access to the Verde River for the enjoyment of that river’s many values. Management actions regarding access should not unduly limit paddler access to the Verde River. Future management of

Forest Road 502 should recognize that it serves as a critical access point to the Wild and Scenic Verde River.

Alternative D contemplates restoring connectivity between Camp Verde and Strawberry via Forest Road 708. We support additional analysis of this element of Alternative D. Reopening 708 between Strawberry and Fossil Creek would enhance access for the local community and paddler access and enjoyment of Fossil Creek. It addition it could improve visitor safety by decreasing response time for emergency access. Having this road available as a shuttle route would greatly simplify logistics by reducing time and expense for those who run the river from Fossil Springs to Fossil Creek Bridge. If there are compelling biophysical reasons why vehicular use of this road would lead to substantial interference with protected river values we request that this be documented in the draft CRMP. We do not support elements of Alternative D that propose to close several of the day use sites, including Purple Mountain, Sally May, Tonto Bench, Waterfall Trailhead, Fossil Springs Dam, and Fossil Springs Trailhead, while encouraging visitors to experience the river at a welcome station and from the inside of their car. These elements are inconsistent with the “protect and enhance” standard for the recreation ORV because they diminish recreational opportunities that are currently available along the creek. Given the inconsistency with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and agency guidance for implementing it, these actions should not be further analyzed as they do not meet the Purpose and Need.

We also do not support actions considered in Alternative C that would eliminate parking at Fossil Creek Bridge, Irving, and Waterfall Trailhead. This would extend the distance to hike in to the Waterfall with boats and gear and would make it prohibitive for day trips on Fossil Creek.

Stewardship

Whitewater paddling is a low impact activity and our community is dedicated to the stewardship of Fossil Creek. We actively promote Leave No Trace principles that our membership embraces.11 Many of our local members have participated in river clean ups. We have the ability to efficiently travel the length of the creek and access sites that are challenging to reach from land. Kayakers have removed truckloads of trash from Fossil Creek in the past and will continue to steward this treasured resource.

As users who spend limited time in one location, whitewater boaters generally have a low impact on day-use sites as they travel through the landscape on the water’s surface. Due to this fact, whitewater boating generally has less of an impact on issues like soil compaction and reduction of ground cover representing recognized impacts of recreational use along Fossil Creek.

11 Leave No Trace: The Paddlers’ Footprint at

Our community also practices river safety and works to promote a safe environment for all recreational users along rivers. American Whitewater established the Whitewater Safety Code.12

Capacity

We support the goals of Alternative E to increase capacity (quantified as “People at One Time” or “PAOT”) from 780 to 1750 if infrastructure is built, management capacity allows, and visitor behavior promotes sustainable river value protection. Concurrent with this potential increase, we support actions that provide flexibility and options to access recreational opportunities on Fossil Creek on short notice (i.e. do not limit all permits to the one month in advance reservation system).

In our previous comments on the CRMP alternatives we expressed concern that the range for PAOT was too narrow for a robust analysis appropriate under the National Environmental Policy Act.13 We thank you for providing a wider range as requested in our earlier comments. We believe the greatest potential for modest increases in capacity exists with education focused on improving visitor behavior and management actions that encourage the right types of users. We support appropriate flexibility in the CRMP to allow managers to adjust PAOT based on active resource monitoring.

Conclusion

Thank you for the opportunity to provide scoping comments on the Comprehensive River Management Plan (CRMP) for the Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River. We are strong supporters of protecting this resource in a manner that allows the public, and particularly whitewater paddlers, an opportunity to directly experience this incredible oasis in an arid landscape.

Sincerely,

Thomas O’Keefe, PhD

12 https://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Wiki/safety:start 13 Comments of American Whitewater Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic CRMP Alternatives, June 11th, 2014.

From: Madeline Ames To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 11:24:51 PM

Hello,

I'm sure you have received many emails regarding this subject. Thank you for allowing the public to have a say in this matter. While, of course, the protection of the Fossil Creek Wilderness Area is the most important when deciding in this, I don't understand how the proposed act E could be for anything but profit. I appreciate the permit system, as an avid visitor this system has made it so much more enjoyable to visit. The trash was ridiculous at times but it seems much better managed. Its unfair to take away a place that so many people love and respect because others are careless. I would really like option A to be continued, as it hasn't really been given a chance yet. It would be a very sad thing if one day our children weren't allowed to play in the beautiful waters of Fossil Creek. It would just be wrong. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Madeline Ames From: Robyn Ashley To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 8:12:57 AM

Please only decide on Options A or B, it is not right to take away swimming privileges due to someone else's ignorance. If anything, raise the fees and lower the amount of people allowed. This place has been a sanctuary to me and many others, it would truly be heartbreaking if any other options were selected. It is not okay to build structures here and ruin the wildlife that exists. From: AmandaLovesPenguins . To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek Planning Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 10:41:03 PM

Hello!

First and foremost thank you to everyone for their planning efforts and helping to keep Fossil Creek a beautiful place to visit and relax. I am an Arizona native born in west Phoenix and my first time visiting Fossil Creek was last summer with my mother. She is also an Arizona native of 64 years and was able to hike down the waterfall trail with ease. We LOVED the permit system and I found it easy to use and plan accordingly for. The website was VERY easy to follow and we enjoyed seeing and talking to the Rangers at the check in station. We felt very safe the entire time and enjoyed the low amount of traffic and noise in the area. We did not enjoy seeing unprepared people in flipflops hauling BIG coolers down to the waterfall. PLEASE PLEASE consider banning coolers.

-Alternative B- I believe would be a great option. I would be heartbroken to see more motorized vehicles and damage to the area. Please consider Alternative B as a starting place for Fossil Creek. We would love to visit again next year and liked the ease of the permit system. We would even be willing to pay more to avoid motor vehicle noise and traffic.

Thank you for considering my thoughts. Amanda Asselin From: Sandy Bahr To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Cc: Barbara Hawke; [email protected]; Jennifer Martin; [email protected] Subject: [CAUTION: Suspicious Link]Re: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 5:24:12 PM Attachments: Fossil Creek Management Comments_final_01-27-2017.pdf

PROCEED WITH CAUTION: This message triggered warnings of potentially malicious web content. Evaluate this email by considering whether you are expecting the message, along with inspection for suspicious links.

Questions: [email protected]

Please use this version, just one small edit. Thanks.

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Sandy Bahr wrote: Please see attached. Thank you.

Sandy Bahr

Chapter Director

Sierra Club - Grand Canyon Chapter

514 W Roosevelt St.

Phoenix, AZ 85003

Phone (602) 253-8633

Mobile (602) 999-5790

[email protected]

http://www.sierraclub.org/arizona

Facebook.

Sandy Bahr Chapter Director

Sierra Club - Grand Canyon Chapter

514 W Roosevelt St.

Phoenix, AZ 85003

Phone (602) 253-8633

Mobile (602) 999-5790 [email protected] http://www.sierraclub.org/arizona

Facebook.

Grand Canyon Chapter ● 514 W. Roosevelt St. ● Phoenix, AZ 85003 Phone: (602) 253-8633 ● Email: [email protected]

January 27, 2017

Coconino National Forest Attention: Fossil Creek CRMP P.O. Box 20429 Sedona, AZ 86341 Sent via email to [email protected]

Re: Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River Comments on Preliminary Alternative Concepts

Dear Fossil Creek Project Coordinator:

Please accept the following comments on behalf of Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon Chapter and the Arizona Wilderness Coalition.

Sierra Club is a national nonprofit organization of approximately 2.7 million members and supporters dedicated to exploring, enjoying, and protecting the wild places of the earth; to practicing and promoting the responsible use of the earth’s ecosystems and resources; to educating and enlisting humanity to protect and restore the quality of the natural and human environment; and to using all lawful means to carry out these objectives. Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon Chapter was organized in 1965, and, prior to that, our members were also involved in protecting Arizona’s resources. We have a significant interest in protecting and restoring the water quality in Arizona’s rivers, lakes, and streams. It is within that context that we are submitting these comments.

Sierra Club – Grand Canyon Chapter has a long-standing interest in Fossil Creek. We have been participants in planning processes, have members who have long enjoyed the creek for hiking, swimming, wildlife watching, and more, and we sponsor regular service projects in Fossil Creek. Our members and volunteers are deeply concerned for the future of Fossil Creek.

Arizona Wilderness Coalition (AWC) represents more than 1700 wilderness supporters in Arizona. Our mission is to permanently protect and restore wildlands and waters in Arizona for the enjoyment of all citizens and to ensure that Arizona's native plants and animals have a lasting home in wild nature. Our members, supporters and volunteers enjoy Fossil Creek and the surrounding wilderness areas for many activities, including hiking, birding, fishing, nature study, equestrianism, photography and more. Our supporters also place great value on the “existence value” and ecosystems services provided by unique rivers like Fossil Creek, and the important interplay between two adjacent designated wilderness areas and a Wild and Scenic River. AWC has been significantly invested in the preservation of Fossil Creek for a number of years. We were the authors of the original proposal that was instrumental in designation of Fossil Creek as a Wild and Scenic River, and we continue our involvement with

Wilderness Stewardship projects that have removed large amounts of trash from area in the past few years.”

Congress designated approximately 16.8 miles of Fossil Creek as Arizona’s second Wild and Scenic River on March 30, 2009. Under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, the Forest Service is required to prepare a CRMP within three years after the date of a Wild and Scenic River designation (i.e., by March 30, 2012). The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act requires that the Forest Service describe existing resource conditions, including a detailed description of the outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs) of Fossil Creek in the CRMP. The Forest Service is required to protect and enhance the ORVs through the development of the CRMP. The WSRA states that “in such administration the primary emphasis shall be given to protecting its esthetic, scenic, historic, archeologic and scientific features.”

National Environmental Policy Act Requirements (NEPA)

NEPA emphasizes “coherent and comprehensive up-front environmental analysis” to ensure an agency “will not act on incomplete information, only to regret its decision after it is too late to correct” (Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project v. Blackwood, 161 F.3d 1208, 1216 [9th Cir. 1998]). NEPA thus requires federal agencies to analyze the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed action (42 U.S.C. § 4332[C]; 40 C.F.R. §§ 1508.7, 1508.8, 1508.25 [the scope of a proposed action must include connected, cumulative, and similar actions]; Sierra Club v. Bosworth, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 28013 [9th Cir. 2007]). Cumulative impacts include the impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time (40 C.F.R. § 1508.7). A cumulative effects analysis must also provide detailed and quantifiable information and cannot rely on general statements and conclusions (Neighbors of Cuddy Mountain v. U.S. Forest Service, 137 F.3d 1372, 1380 [9th Cir. 1998]).

We are disappointed, if not dismayed, by the alternatives presented, especially in light of the extensive feedback and the legal mandates for protecting the resources of Fossil Creek. It is evident that the agency has failed to provide a reasonable range of alternatives and must do so in future NEPA documents. The full range of alternatives must meet the requirements of the law to protect the ORVs of Fossil Creek, however, and a thorough analysis of each alternative’s impacts to ORVs must be included in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.

Alternative E is contrary to the provisions in the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and its requirements to establish ORVs and to develop a plan that protects them. Sierra Club asks that the Forest Service create and offer as a new alternative provisions found in both Alternative B and Alternative C with some modifications. We offer the following comments regarding proposed actions within the various alternatives.

Reservation System: Sierra Club appreciates the successful implementation of a reservation system at the Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River (FCWSR) and acknowledges the efforts of Coconino National Forest (CNF) staff and volunteers to better manage the area. Since human visitation is the most important potential harm to the Outstandingly Remarkable Values (ORVs), we agree that managing the number of visitors (PAOT) is an essential management tool to maintain and improve the resource.

However, we do not agree with the statement on page 9 of the Alternative Management Concepts that “Outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs) would be protected or enhanced throughout the Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River corridor under all action alternatives.” In fact, the proposed action would allow for degradation of ORVs.

The key problem that the USFS must address in Fossil Creek is overcrowding – people are loving it to death. Yet the proposed action calls for increasing the types of recreation available in Fossil Creek to appeal to and attract more visitors. The cap for visitors per day is raised to address this and the proposed action then also includes significant infrastructure development to support so many people. This is not sustainable and will harm the ORVs. Rather than focusing on increasing opportunities for recreation, visitors, and infrastructure, the Forest Service should focus on providing a quality experience by managing and limiting the visitor demand for Fossil Creek in ways that will:

-Protect ecosystem integrity and wildlife habitat value -Retain the current “wild” character of Fossil Creek -Educate visitors to promote responsible use of the area

None of the visitor numbers proposed in any of the alternatives are consistent with the protection of the ORVs.

PAOT: Apparently, the PAOT is calculated by assuming that all available parking locations are filled with vehicles bearing more than four persons per car. This is a faulty and unacceptable assumption. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act requires the ORVs to be maintained or improved; it does not require the Coconino National Forest (CNF) to admit as many visitors as can possibly be brought into the area. As a result of this assumption, recreation management has become the primary goal of the Preliminary Alternative Concepts document instead of the ORVs. The Forest Service has a higher calling than crowd control and should value resource protection, retention of the “wild” character of this Wild and Scenic River, and individual visitor experience above maximization of visitor numbers.

The “wild” nature of Fossil Creek is an integral part of its character, as supported by its designation as “Wild and Scenic.” Alternative E, currently the Proposed Action, increases visitors per day from the current 780 people at one time to 1705 people at one time. This dramatic increase in visitors per day will negatively impact opportunities for solitude, will harm resources, and most importantly will necessitate significant infrastructure development that would, without question, irreparably alter the “wild” character of Fossil Creek.

There is no legal requirement for CNF to accommodate visitor demand to the extent that it degrades the ORVs or prevents improving the ORVs in existence at the time of designation. In fact, to the contrary, there is a mandate for the CNF to establish and protect the ORVs. The PAOT should be calculated to protect ORVs, not to make maximum use of parking spots. For all the alternatives, the PAOT limits are excessive. For all the alternatives, the purpose of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, a legal requirement to maintain or improve the ORVs, should be the prime consideration.

Recreation Is Overemphasized: Recreation is over-emphasized in the draft and visitor numbers are generally excessive and certainly unsustainable. The non-recreational ORVs should be given increased emphasis in all alternatives or the Forest Service will be destroying the resources for which the creek was restored and designated under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The Preliminary Alternatives would fail the tests in the proposed “Preliminary and Draft Fossil Creek Monitoring and Adaptive Management Actions” matrix.

The original Arizona Wilderness Coalition proposal for the Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River (2003) did not include recreational values as an ORV. At that time and long before the creek was restored and designated, maintaining/enhancing ecological integrity was the prime concern and recreational uses of the area were minimal. Similarly, the first WSR-related planning documents from CNF (2002) also do not include recreation as an ORV. The ORVs identified by CNF and the stakeholders from inception were related to protecting the unique natural environment. Recreation as an ORV appears for the first time in CNF WSR assessment documents released in 2011, then modified in 2013 and 2016. The justification given was that since flow has been returned to the creek, visitor use has grown exponentially, so visitor management is increasingly important. While visitor management is clearly crucial, and responsible enjoyment of our natural world is something Sierra Club supports and encourages as part of its mission, maximizing the number of PAOT in Fossil Creek would negatively impact ORVs while also negatively impacting visitor experience. Visitor uses of Fossil that damage ORVs, especially “waterplay,” must be managed through restriction of PAOT. Boating on Fossil Creek should be prohibited in order to protect the ORVs, including the travertine, native fish, and riparian vegetation.

Infrastructure development to support varied recreation such as an overlook at the waterfall would irreparably damage the wild character of Fossil Creek and should not be considered. Likewise, camping at Fossil Springs should be prohibited to protect this sensitive area. Any camping in the Wild and Scenic River corridor should be for education, research, and administration only.

We suggest that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) team go back to the basics and review the requirements of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WSRA), study the management plans of other WSRs, and review the conceptual work by Francesco Valenzuela, Director of Recreation for Region 3, in 2013.

Waterplay Is Excessive: A key concern is that waterplay is now the main recreational activity instead of other activities consistent with the non-recreational ORVs, and that excessive waterplay ultimately harms the other ORVs. Note that neither the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WSRA) nor the Resource Assessment lists “Waterplay” as a criterion for a recreational ORV. Furthermore, “Waterplay” is not a unique and outstandingly remarkable feature of FCWSR; there are plenty of pools for waterplay in Phoenix and nearby Slide Rock State Park is dedicated to waterplay. There is no requirement in the WSRA to accommodate recreation types that conflict with other ORVs.

Sierra Club is concerned that waterplay harms native fish, damages vegetation on the stream banks, disturbs wildlife, and generates noise that interferes with other visitor experiences. Sierra Club requests that a preferred alternative be developed to restrict waterplay and help visitors understand the unique features in FCWSR. In other words, all the alternatives should strongly downplay waterplay. Boating, cliff diving/jumping, and swimming should be prohibited at the falls for safety and for resource protection.

Further, Sierra Club is extremely concerned that the FCWSR reservation website contains visitor photos that promote only waterplay and do not mention the other ORVs in the FCWSR. CNF should not promote visitor photos, especially photos of visitors climbing on and jumping off of the falls – a clear public safety hazard that may damage the travertine. These photos encourage behaviors that are inconsistent with the purpose of the FCWSR. We request that CNF delete the waterplay photos and replace them with photos that communicate the ORVs. See: https://www.recreation.gov/permits/Fossil_Creek_Wild_And_Scenic_River/r/wildernessAreaDetails.do ?page=detail&contractCode=NRSO&parkId=74997#

Photos uploaded by visitors on Sunday, August 7 2016 to the Recreation.gov web site, with text describing the “swimmin’ hole”

Add Educational Information: All the alternatives should include educational amenities that will increase visitors’ appreciation of wildlife and public lands and the ORVs of Fossil Creek. This is an excellent opportunity for CNF partnerships with other organizations. Brochures, signs, children’s activities, and docents should be available to explain the unique hydrology, ecology, and history of the area, to help justify the importance of public lands, and to ensure that visitors are aware of the rules for visiting the FCWSR. For all alternatives, we strongly support a staffed visitor center during the reservations season, similar to the proposed Heinrich west welcome center as described for Alternative B but located on the canyon rim at the junction of FR708 and FR 502. We do not support permanent infrastructure in the canyon.

Inappropriate and Excessive Motorized Access: The proposed motorized access in the proposed action is contrary to the purposes of the WSRA. • The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WSRA) states that WSR management should focus primarily on (prioritize) the riverine resources that qualified as ORVs in the eligibility phase of the WSR designation process. • The "protect and enhance" clause of the WSRA requires the managing agency to reach beyond protecting the status quo (which, legally, are the existing resources conditions at the time of designation) to actually improve and enhance the ORVs whenever possible. Increasing motorized access is not consistent with this "protect and enhance" clause. • Most of the Fossil Creek WSR borders the Fossil Springs Wilderness and the Mazatzal Wilderness Areas. A fundamental wilderness and resource management principle holds that any given land unit should be managed in ways that complement the management goals of adjacent lands; this justifies reducing motorized use, not increasing it. • Increased motorized access and infrastructure development along the “Recreational” segment of the river pose an additional threat to preservation of the ORVs – diminution of the wild character and ecological integrity of downstream stretches of the river. As a “Wild” segment of the river is downstream of the “Recreational” segment, management of the Recreational segment should be tempered and aligned toward greater consistency with management in the bracketing Wild segments. Intensive human activity in the Recreational segment can degrade water quality and stream function that impairs the ORVs in the downstream Wild segment. • The proposed motorized access along the river threatens the sensitive ecological values that support the ORVs of Fish and Aquatic Resources, Wildlife and Water - and also Riparian Communities and Botany, which we contend remain ORVs that were integral to eligibility determinations for the river. Motorized access provides a vector for magnified human impacts, bringing to the river amplified numbers of visitors, trash, invasive species and pollutants. Motorized access along the river also can promote increased erosion and siltation that can harm water quality.

Alternative D: Alternative D is inappropriate, unnecessary, and not in keeping with the purpose of the WSR designation. There is absolutely no justification for introducing passenger cars for “Scenic Driving” and through traffic into the river corridor – not now and not ever.

Alternative D mentions “scenic driving” but there is no Scenic ORV. So why scenic driving is mentioned or permitted?

Alternative D calls for a passenger car ready roadbed for FR 708 from FR591 to Lewis Trailhead. Will the roadbed permit two-way traffic? Would a new bridge be needed? This plan is unrealistic because CNF engineering studies have found that it would cost millions to repair the road to minimum standards and that APS historical maintenance costs exceeded $100,000 per year. CNF has neither provided exact costs nor identified a funding source. The first priority for expenditures should be protecting the resource, not constructing and repairing roads that increase stress on the resources - especially the wildlife.

We suggest that Alternative D be completely reworked to create a wider spectrum of choices reflecting the unique values that are the basis of WSR designation.

Alternative E: The 62” wide limit for vehicles in Alternative E is excessive. This rule would allow some of the older Willy's Jeeps - a fairly good-sized vehicle - to make the trip. Additionally, a Polaris 4-seat OHV is 62.5” wide. Will a vehicle such as this be allowed? How will this be enforced – will someone measure? Considerable maintenance will be required to keep the road open for such use. FSR 708 from Strawberry should be closed to all vehicular access at or near the present gate.

Fossil Creek Trail (Bear Trail): To better protect visitors, we suggest that CNF improve public communications and supervision. Before reservations are accepted, visitors should read and acknowledge a statement of the difficulties and an equipment list needed for a safe hike. At the trailhead during the peak season, volunteers should chat with visitors, describe the hike, and check for proper gear. CNF should reduce the number of permits to improve the visitor experience at the springs and to further cut rescue calls. CNF is not required to accommodate every visitor in these natural areas.

Adaptive Management: A robust monitoring program and conceptual use of Adaptive Management (AM) must not be used to support or rationalize a management scheme that values maximizing PAOT above all else. If implemented, AM is acceptable to Sierra Club only when: • The management plan includes a clear statement of management objectives, desired conditions, current conditions, and a monitoring plan organized around the ORVs. • The range of potential AM actions should be constrained and defined for each management objective. AM actions must not permit or create degradation. Management actions outside of the defined AM range should require more comprehensive analysis. • A monitoring data collection plan is included and funded. The plan should describe the monitoring procedures, frequency, and locations for each management objective. The monitoring plan should be comprehensive enough to inform potential AM actions, yet simple enough to be sustainable. Monitoring activities should address all ORVs as directly as possible. The monitoring plan is expected to change as CNF and stakeholders gain experience with managing the FCWSR. • A monitoring workgroup should meet at regular intervals, or when resource conditions change, to review monitoring data and make recommendations for AM changes to the responsible official. The workgroup should be led by CNF staff and include a range of stakeholders. • Planned AM actions should include public notice and comments before activation. • Monitoring records must be maintained permanently in a form that is available for current and future public review. • Adaptive management should be a consistent strategy across on all alternatives or not be used at all, and it must be implemented in a manner that is protective of the ORVs. Both initial and maximum PAOT levels should be included in each alternative. • The limitations of a monitoring program must be acknowledged and taken into consideration, including the fact that once monitoring detects problems, damage has already occurred. • Management must be conservative and at all times err toward protecting ORVs and retaining the “wild” character of Fossil Creek. • This principle requires that each alternative include an initial PAOT in addition to the maximum PAOT that is listed in the current alternatives. The initial PAOT should be selected to assure with confidence that no further degradation of the ORVs occurs and that damaged areas have an opportunity to heal and achieve the desired conditions. A monitoring history should be established at the initial PAOT levels and reviewed to certify that ORVs are at desired conditions before increasing the PAOT to a higher level.

Miscellaneous Discussion: For road access: In Alternative B, FR708 from Lewis to the FR591 gate is closed except for emergency use but in Alternative C it is open to non-motorized uses. We see no reason why it should be closed in Alternative B. If people want to hike, bike, or ride horses on the road, let them. There should be no difference in road maintenance, but CNF would need to monitor and control potential conflicts between these user groups. For road access: Alternative B allows no use of the Middle Fossil part of 708, which is an unnecessarily extreme restriction. For road access: Alternative C requires that FR502 would be gated at the FR708 junction and a non- fee permit be required for Childs, yet this is not required for the other alternatives. Sierra Club favors this protective measure for all alternatives in order to help protect the visitor experience at Childs from traffic diverted from Fossil Creek. For recreation sites and infrastructure: Alternative C & D suggest closing five sites yet propose increased PAOT over Alternative B. It doesn’t make sense to cram more people into fewer sites. We support having fewer sites and fewer people in order to protect the ORVs. For swimming and waterplay: the higher visitor use alternatives D & E include fewer swimming spots, which does not seem logical. Limiting waterplay to protect the travertine, native fish, and riparian vegetation should be considered for any preferred alternative. For areas closed to recreational use: Visitor use of the Botanical Area should be determined by resource protection and should be consistent for Alternatives B-E and should be included in any preferred alternative. For non-motorized trails: the conditions on Alternative C should apply to Alternative D. If PAOT is kept to a minimum and there is sufficient education as to protection of ORV then there should be minimal or no need for paid outfitters and guides in Fossil Creek. Alternative C should be renamed “Quiet Recreation” or some similar term, replacing “Non- motorized Experience,” which defines the experience in terms of what it is not. Renaming the Waterfall Trail to Lewis Trail (if the trail is retained) and Fossil Springs Trailhead to Bear Trailhead is a good idea. We suggest limiting the length of time between a reservation and a visit so people don't forget or have so many changes of plans. We do not prefer a wait list. As a public safety issue, special access for hunting activity, especially shooting, in the middle corridor is not appropriate during the reservation season. Fishing is an allowable recreational activity subject to the same management as any recreation – no special access should be allowed. In fact, special precautions are necessary to protect the spread of invasive nonnative species into the parts of Fossil Creek that have been restored for native fishes. Initial construction costs, annual facility maintenance costs, and monthly operations costs for each alternative should be included in the EIS. Also, the EIS should include a realistic estimate of annual funding available to implement the management plan. These economic factors are important because the environmental impacts will grow if inadequate funding precludes planned resource monitoring and visitor management. To reduce sedimentation in the creek, we ask CNF to address soil erosion from the existing roads in the creek corridor. This is necessary to protect the ORVs. We encourage CNF to consider the potential economic benefits to the Strawberry/Pine communities from increased bike, horse, and hiking access to the FCWSR. In particular, consider connecting the Arizona Trail through to the existing Mail Trail. CNF would need to monitor and control potential unauthorized access by bikes into wilderness areas and also limit bikes in any Wilderness Study Areas. Permanent structures and special opportunities for concessionaires, guides and outfitters to operate in Fossil Creek would represent a significant shift in the character of Fossil Creek. Outfitters and guides should have to meet the same requirements as other users, and have similar access as other users, for all alternatives. Commercial interests should not take precedent over individual users. Strategies identified in multiple alternatives that involve prohibiting access to the waterfall or other areas except with a guide or outfitter are unacceptable. Guides and outfitters are expensive. These proposals would make the most popular aspects of Fossil Creek available only to people who can afford to pay a guide. That is not what a public agency should be doing with a public resource. Guides and outfitters must not be favored at the cost of access for other visitors, but provisions enabling guided school groups, scouting clubs and/or other educational organizations should be included. Limits on those who repeatedly secure permits to sell to guides and outfitters should be implemented. A new bridge at Irving to get vehicles to the north side of the creek is unnecessary and represents far too much development for this Wild and Scenic River.

Conclusion: The focus on Non-Motorized Experience and the emphasis on Enhanced Protections in Alternatives B and C (modified as suggested in these comments) should be developed into a new preferred alternative that protects the ORVS and that is most appropriate for these outstanding waters. Since anecdotal evidence from the first year of new restrictions suggest that resource damage from overcrowding has been greatly reduced but not eliminated, retention of these restrictions with a decrease in visitors per day appears reasonable. The maximum PAOT should be decreased and an initial PAOT should be specified. Additional development should be minimal and some off-season camping may be allowed. Waterplay should be better controlled and education should have increased emphasis. Adaptive Management should include the conditions discussed above.

We ask that the USFS develop and select a modified alternative that protects this amazing resource while allowing for appropriate access to the area rather than the Alternative E, and that the Forest Service reassess the actions common to all alternatives identified above for their consistency with protecting the ORVs of Fossil Creek.

Thank you for considering our comments.

Sincerely,

Sandy Bahr Chapter Director Sierra Club – Grand Canyon (Arizona) Chapter

/s/ Barbara Hawke Executive Director Arizona Wilderness Coalition

From: Roybal, Marcos A -FS To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: FW: WWW Mail: Fossil Creek Comp Mgm"t Plan Date: Monday, January 30, 2017 8:51:39 AM

-----Original Message----- From: Avila, Federico - FS On Behalf Of FS-Coconino Webmail Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 8:43 AM To: Roybal, Marcos A -FS Subject: FW: WWW Mail: Fossil Creek Comp Mgm't Plan

Marcos,

Another webmail for you.

Caring for the land and serving people

-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 8:33 PM To: FS-Coconino Webmail Subject: WWW Mail: Fossil Creek Comp Mgm't Plan

I vote for Alternative B for Fossil Creek Comp Mgm't Plan. Please do not go with Alt E. All we need is more foot and auto traffic - more garbage and pollution. Shades of Slide rock, and dirty diapers being rinsed in the water we all swam in. You're supposed to be protecting our precious natural resources. From: Juli Burdette To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 10:12:02 PM

Thank you for accepting public comments. Please, on behalf of myself, our family, and all fellow nature lovers and hikers, continue with plan A or B! The other plans would do a great disservice to such a beautiful area. This area must be protected and motorized vehicles and large groups will destroy this pristine wilderness. Please continue to allow swimming and camping as our family will enjoy this, as is, for years to come.

Thank you, Juli Burdette

Sent from my iPhone From: Veronica Burris To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 11:32:32 PM

Please no action.. I do not want the proposed action.. I choose No Action From: Elias Butler Photo To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 4:38:30 PM

Dear Coconino National Forest,

As a longtime resident of Coconino County and a photographer and hiker, I’ve made several trips to Fossil Creek Wilderness both before and after the dam was removed. I was there on the day when the creek was returned to its original bed when the dam removal was completed - quite a sight I can assure you. I’ve also written about Fossil Creek for the AZ Daily Sun to feature the hiking and springs (back in the 1990s).

This is a unique wilderness and has long required some measure of protection against overuse. Our culture’s lack of education in how to behave in the wilderness, such as how to dispose of human waste or camp responsibly, has resulted in a mistreated jewel of Arizona. I applaud your efforts to help the riparian area heal.

A full-time ranger in residence would be a great job for some lucky soul. And could result in a change in behavior by the weekend party and Instagram crowds.

As for the OHV drivers, please don’t allow an increase in motorized access nor traffic. The human impacts increase with motorized visitation as you know. It’s a wilderness area and a Wild and Scenic River of course, which is an incredibly rare combo in these parts.

I encourage you to increase efforts to preserve Fossil Creek, as noted in Alternatives C and B. Please do not go with Alternative E!

Thanks for hearing me out.

Cheers, Elias Butler

1. Fossil Creek is a uniquely special river in Arizona.

2. Wild and Scenic designation mandates preservation of the river’s “Outstandingly Remarkable Values,” water quality and free-flowing nature.

3. Motorized access should not be increased. Motorized access expands human impacts, serves as a vector for invasive species, can contribute to increased erosion and siltation, and is contrary to preservation of the “ORVs” of Fish and Aquatic Resources, Wildlife, Water, and Quiet Recreation

4. The unique and special values of this river call for greater preservation efforts as reflected in Alternatives C (Non-motorized Experience) and B (Enhanced Protections). The proposed expansion of motorized use and recreation access, as reflected in the Alternative E (Proposed Action – Long-term Adaptive Management) is not in the best interest of this river, and threatens the values for which this was designated a Wild and Scenic River.

5. And add your personal experience – if you have enjoyed Fossil Creek, describe your great experience, and ask that the incredible values of this river be preserved and not degraded.

Elias Butler Photography www.eliasbutler.com 928-255-2922 From: Gladys Cazares To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 9:56:42 PM

To Whom it may concern, You can't close off fossil creek waterfalls completely, proposal B would be the best proposal. We need nature in our lives, but at the same time I think we need to increase prices for permits that way we can hire people to clean it since people are disgusting and don't know how to simply clean after themselves or how park rangers and fine people who trash the area. Please don't close it off completely. Thank you! From: CanISayFSAS . To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 11:57:32 PM

Hello,

I wanted to get my two cents in before the deadline about the proposed changes to be made to Fossil Creek wilderness area. I have been an avid visitor to the area for eight years, and have seen many changes in visitation over that time. It is obvious to me that a change had to be made due to vandalism, leftover trash, and carelessness in such a pristine part of Arizona. That being said, I believe that the recent permit system that has been put in place was much needed and, in fact, extremely beneficial to the area. The stronger presence of rangers both at the entrance to Fossil Creek Road, as well as within the wilderness boundaries in the canyon seem to have had a beneficial impact on visitors who may not understand what "pack it in, pack it out" really means.

It is my hope that this permit system remains in place, and minimal or no further action is taken. The system works well as far as I've seen, and further development could potentially lure in more people who may not have thought of driving the long, primitive dirt roads before. I am in favor of option A more than anything. Things seem to be improving. Keep an eye on things, and if they don't get better over the next year or two, then consider subtle but impactful changes.

Most importanly; let's keep it wild!

Thanks,

Evan Dargen From: Kevin Garvey To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 11:17:56 PM Attachments: Fossil Creek CRMP - Kevin and Tess Garvey.docx

My daughter Tess and I have made our comments on the Fossil Creek CRMP in the attached file.

Thank you for your consideration of our concerns.

Kevin

Kevin Garvey, Ph.D. MHRS LLC Minor Home Repair Services [email protected] 602-751-8263 Fossil Creek Comments: Kevin Garvey, Tess Garvey

We have attended the meetings for the recent Fossil Creek proposals and have been disappointed by the fact that creek navigation was not even being considered. This despite the fact that kayakers (myself included) have attended every series of public meetings since they started. Our goal here is to rectify that.

Comments on Proposals:

1. Fossil Creek should remain open (year round) to kayaking and pack raft navigation - including the waterfall. 2. Greater access to the road to Childs and Fossil Creek is desirable during high water events. 3. The road from Strawberry should be reopened - assuming adequate funding can be obtained. 4. The visitor numbers should remain where they are or even reduced.

Fossil Creek Navigation: Fossil Creek offers several outstandingly remarkable values (ORV's) that directly relate to creek navigation via kayak or pack raft:

1. It is the only class III-IV river/creek in AZ with year round water flow sufficient for navigation. 2. Unique year round water features such as waterfalls and slots are not present elsewhere in AZ except during dangerous flood stage water flows. 3. The entire length has been navigated at one time or another by various members of the boating community and should be considered in your Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) 4. Finally, the boating community, as a whole, practices and supports "leave no trace". Our impact on the land and creek is minimal.

Access to Fossil Creek and Childs at high water: At high water, both Fossil Creek and Childs (our only Wild and Scenic Rivers in AZ) become inaccessible due to road closures. Unfortunately, makes them wild and unseen at a time they are the most challenging and exciting to boaters. Access should be part of your (ROS). At the very least, the notification system for Fossil Creek Road Closures needs to be more reliable.

Road to Strawberry: We would like to see it opened because many boaters come from the East Valley. Having to access Fossil Creek via Camp Verde adds an hour to their drive. That said, the cost of fixing up the road is cost prohibitive and may require cooperation between the town, county, state, and NFS agencies.

Visitor Numbers: This is a conundrum. The proposal is to increase visitor numbers in an environment that is already over used. Since we don't know what the NFS vision is for the area it is difficult to comment. Our initial reaction is no increases, but proposal E would provide flexibility.

Summary: Other boaters have already made numerous suggestions and comments and since we are ignorant of the budgetary, logistical, archeological constraints etc. that the NFS has to deal with, it is our opinion that proposing solutions to these issues on this end is not productive. We would however like the NFS to consider boaters as part of the ROS when making decisions about Fossil Creek. Thank you for your time and attention.

Kevin Garvey and Tess Garvey From: [email protected] To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 9:43:48 PM

Please retain the current character of Fossil Creek and Fossil Springs recreation areas. Several generations of our families have grown up visiting Fossil Creek to hike and swim. Keeping limited parking and the new reservation system (while maintaining the current activities) is the best option for conservation and maximized enjoyment of this site. Increasing capacity will make the small site less enjoyable. Please don't take away the full experience of Fossil Creek for future generations. Please pass Proposal A to retain the current character of Fossil Creek.

Charity Gray San Tan Valley, Arizona From: Hannah J To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 11:58:20 PM

I think plan A, what is currently in place, would be the best. I love going to Fossil Creek, but my favorite part is getting to swim in the crystal clear water.

I swam there for the first time last summer and it was the most magical experience. There is something so serene and almost euphorical about swimming in such perfect and clear water. The fact that it's an oasis in Arizona, makes it even more of a treasure that should be enjoyed by those who dare to trek the hot and extensive hike. I'm one for adventure, and swimming at these waterfalls lit a fire deep down in my soul. Having the opportunity to experience this filled me with awe and wonder about nature and life's little blessings. I remember opening my eyes under water and being able to see all the way to the bottom, watching the little fish swim below me, and I felt a sense of gratefulness and amazement. In that moment I realized that the world is so much bigger than me and any worries or troubles that could come my way.

It may seem silly that all of this came from a swim in those crystal waters, but that's what nature can do. It heals, it amazes, it creates happiness, humility, and fills hearts with joy.

During these cold winter months, I have been dreaming of the day that I can return to Fossil Creek and jump into those waters. I even bought an underwater digital camera to soak up the many times that I will enjoy those trips. For now, Fossil Creek is the closest, and most affordable thing to my dream of traveling to tropical paradise and snorkeling in crystal blue waters.

Please don't take away the adventure.

Sincerely, Hannah From: Candice Hesson To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 11:01:08 PM

I appreciate the opportunity to comment. There are three things that would increase visitor enjoyment while protecting the area.

1: Require permits throughout the year. This would allow greater control over the number of people accessing the area. 2: Maintain the wilderness character and designation of the area by limiting mechanized access, rather than facilitating it. 3: Institute patrols, ideally in plain-clothes, and ticket violators. I have been hiking there for 15+ years and have never seen a ranger outside of either the Strawberry or Irving parking lots. This is a hot button issue for me. There should be a zero tolerance policy for littering. We've all seen the day users abandoning trash, including diapers and toilet paper, building fires, etc., with no consequences. It seems the Forest Service defaults to banning access and swimming rather than punishing specific violators. This is unacceptable.

This is a premier wilderness area known for its swimming holes. This traditional use needs to continue.

Thank you, Candice Hesson Mesa, AZ From: Wendy Hodgson To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 10:27:43 AM

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed alternatives for Fossil Creek CRMP. I appreciate all of the work that is been done thus far by Forest Service working with concerned citizens, and recent efforts to address challenges in Fossil Creek (FC) is quite remarkable and is to be commended. I provide my comments in the spirit of collaboration and a deep desire to continue to manage this unique area with the priority being to protect the resources that make this area unique and important. Throughout the report it is stated several times that efforts are for “maximizing benefits for visitors while achieving and maintaining desired conditions.” Visitor Use Management Council defines “desired conditions” as “statements of aspirations that describe resource conditions, visitor experiences and opportunities and facilities and services that an agency strives to achieve and maintain in a particular area.” What are desired conditions and how are we to achieve and maintain “desired conditions?” Federal river-administrating agencies interpreted the Wild and Scenic River Act as a “non-degradation and enhancement policy… to protect and enhance values for which the river was designated….” Such designations are critical in light of the fact that that riparian areas in the Southwest contribute to bio-community diversity and are vulnerable. FC Wild and Scenic River Resource Assessment (2011) notes that in Coconino and Tonto National Forests, riparian habitat is the most productive biotic community in the Southwest with less than 20% of historic levels still in existence. The diversity of fish and animal life is dependent on FC and other rare riparian areas. As noted in the assessment, FC is the only one with continuous flow and un-fragmented corridor for dispersal or migration. The Fossil Creek area is determined as “outstandingly remarkable with respect to its designated values, which includes wildlife, fish and aquatic resources. Six of the nine values were individually deemed “outstandingly remarkable;” however, three of the nine, namely cultural, scenic, and “riparian communities and botany [plants]” were not. I would argue otherwise, particularly for “riparian communities and botany,” especially with additional research and a change in assessment methods and ideology. The 2011 assessment also states that recreation, fish and aquatic resources, wildlife, water, geology were outstandingly remarkable, meeting particular criteria, due in large part to the unique diverse “characteristics of the riparian corridor.” For fish, “high quality and wide diversity of habitat types support fish and diversity of macroinvertebrate species.” Likewise, the same for wildlife, including birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians: “the floristic diversity of aquatic and riparian vegetation provides a variety of physical structures [and food and no doubt countless other provisions for wildlife], which in turn supports a wider diversity of wildlife species. The diversity of this unique habitat demonstrates the outstandingly remarkable wildlife habitat of Fossil Creek [my italics}.” Without the diverse riparian plant community characteristic of the Fossil Creek area, there would not be diverse wildlife and fish habitat (or scenic values and desire for visitor use). Yet, the report considered riparian communities and plants [botany] as not “remarkable and unique.” Such a finding is misleading, especially when assessing a rare Southwestern ecosystem that continues to diminish. Although FC riparian areas and by default, its plants, are stated numerous times as being an important factor contributing to the great diversity and uniqueness of wildlife, recreation, fish and aquatics, etc. – all deemed “outstandingly remarkable” – riparian communities and plants are not. I believe this is due in large part to the criteria stated for designation as “outstandingly remarkable,” that the value “contains nationally or regionally important populations of indigenous plant species.” What is an important plant species and indigenous to where? What constitutes an important population of a plant? Are they important to another individual species or to the micro-, macro- or total riparian community here and elsewhere, particularly with respect to migratory species? In addition, “of particular significance are species considered to be unique and/or populations of federal or state (or candidate) threatened, endangered or sensitive species.” What are “unique species?” Habitat criteria is that the river “provides exceptionally high quality habitat for plant species indigenous to region… especially for federal, state listed and sensitive species.” In that riparian areas in Arizona and the Southwest are rare and diminishing, the riparian community – whose foundation is plants – should be viewed in a more inclusive and holistic manner. That the arguably unique FC riparian area (and other riparian areas with perennial flows) does not include – as far as known - any federally listed species and relatively few sensitive species, risks minimizing the importance of plants, particularly when viewed as the foundation for the areas’ biotic communities. Such a view can potentially influence management proposals and outcomes as well, and because of plants’ foundational role (much of which is still unknown), affects all organisms comprising this rare bio-community. With all due respect, information on plants in the otherwise well written and informative Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River Resource Assessment (2011) was significantly less when compared with that for other values such as wildlife or fish. This in my opinion reflects our lack of knowledge and understanding of the complexity of plant species and role they play in ecosystems. Increased collaboration, with potential for funding, between agency staff and botanists much experienced in Arizona/Southwest floristics, rare and invasive plants (including the Arizona Rare Plant Task Force) and plant systematics is encouraged. Continued collaboration will result in a better understanding of plants and their role in the ecology of FC. Desert Botanical Garden staff, working with citizen scientists, continue to better document the flora of this region; population status of the more rare species, including possible new, previously unknown cryptic species may emerge. As clearly stated in the report, “the richness of species diversity around FC led to the creation of the FC Botanical Area (of which I am very supportive). Additionally, Fossil Creek sits between two predicted Arizona endemic hot spots, namely Verde Valley and base of Mogollon Rim (Hodgson et al. 2013. GIS-based analysis of endemic plant distributions of Arizona. National Fish & Wildlife Foundation Report, on file at Desert Botanical Garden).

It is through this lens that I review the proposed alternatives. Obviously, a considerable amount of time went into the development of this plan and respective alternatives, which I greatly appreciate. In my opinion, the guiding principle for this plan should revolve around the fact that FCCRMP is a rare, unique and endangered habitat. People visiting areas with water in Arizona have unfortunately resulted in too many negative outcomes, their activities a challenge to monitor and supervise. Resulting activities/impacts are, in my opinion, due in large part to lack of supervision/oversight by too few agency staff/volunteers, and lack of understanding one’s impacts, as well as the significance of the unique resources that ultimately brings them to the area.

Capacity. Again, because of the unique qualities of this unique habitat, visitor number should be conservative, with numbers reflecting more the needs of the resource vs needs of the visitors, especially during a time when the area needs rehabilitation and is still in its infancy with regards to monitoring past and present use patterns. I support the present 610 PAOT and do not support increasing it to 1705 PAOT (with motorized trail users, which I do not support as well). It is unknown how much time will be required to rehabilitate certain areas, but again, we need to give resources the benefit of the doubt.

Road Access. I am very concerned about opening FR 708 as a thoroughfare to or through Fossil Creek canyon from Strawberry by vehicular traffic as stated in Alternatives D and E. Vehicles are the vectors of not only more people but exotic plant species. Additionally, the noise vehicles less than 62 inches wide (which would include ATVs) would be detrimental to both non-motorized visitors and possibly wildlife as well (traffic has been shown to be detrimental to song birds). I am more in favor of access via FR 708 to Junction, Cactus Flat and Homestead only.

Recreation sites and Infrastructure. I believe in the power of education involving interpreting natural/cultural history and thus support more interpretive opportunities, including signage and a new interpretive trail as outlined in Alternatives B, D and E. Cactus Flat and junction of FR 708 and 502 is strategically and environmentally (is already impacted) an appropriate place for visitor needs. I hope that the Forest Service continues to work with those having expertise in respective areas of interpretive opportunities. However, it is important to design and implement with the needs of the resources as paramount, with as little impact as possible. I do not have a strong opinion on whether or not we need a boardwalk across the creek at Irving. Providing a pedestrian bridge would help in localizing – and controlling - the people in this area, especially if picnic areas are available across the creek (where is the proposed parking area located?).

Swimming and waterplay. I support proposed restoration efforts and hope that staff/volunteers use germplasm from plants in the area. If so, once plans are accepted, such an effort should start immediately and native plant growers contacted to assist in providing material. I recommend restoration of badly impacted areas along the creek and Lewis Trail, and at the Waterfall. Visitors may not have access to specific areas prior to restoration, and then limited access to areas along the Lewis Trail once staff/volunteers complete the Lewis Trail and Waterfall view area restoration/rehabilitation, with the activities monitored/supervised. I support prohibiting waterplay at the waterfall before the development of access points elsewhere in the recreation area of the corridor, rather than prohibiting waterplay after such development.

Areas closed to recreational use. I propose providing limited, controlled and monitored access by permit only to areas above Fossil Springs, the historic dam and Botanical Area, although the Plan, with input from botanists who have and continue to work in this area, should detail designated areas for visitation within the Botanical Area. This provides access to Mail Trail, Bear Trail and Sand and Calf canyons, the latter rarely visited. Staff should not close Bear Trail. However, FR 708 below the rim and to FC Canyon should remain closed to vehicle use.

Non-motorized trails. I support designation of the Lewis Trail as a systems trail, connecting the Flume Trail to Bear Trail, construction of new Creek View Trail from Cactus Flat to connect to FR 708 and Flume Trail, and creation of Rim Trail loop that connects with FR 708 trail (not road). Such support is again given only if the agency does not increase the number of visitors and their activities monitored. Alternative D closes off most trails, with few to hike. Flume Trail, already impacted, is an excellent trail for all levels of hiking abilities, rewarding hikers to fine views and opportunities to observe first-hand the diversity of the region. I do question the development of a trail to a wildlife blind in an area that appears to be close to a high visitor use area – will wildlife visit the area? As with all other components of the Plan, agency staff/volunteers should monitor closely visitor use impacts, and compare with baseline data. Staff should install photopoints to assist in short- and long-term monitoring efforts to help gauge impact use on new or amended trails, as well as lack of use on closed trails.

Camping. I encourage the Plan to allow only clustered camping year-round with up to 10 sites amongst Homestead, Mazatzal, Purple Mountain and Sally May. Camping at the historic dam might be allowable but it is not clear what the Plan means by “special service and interpretive events.” Forest Service should permit such events only if they are natural/cultural interpretation-education theme- based for the area, under the strict control of environmentally educated and experienced personnel. Again, Forest Service staff/volunteers should monitor such activities and compare with baseline data to better assess impacts, both negative and positive.

Additional types of recreational uses. I am adamantly opposed to opening up FR 708 from Strawberry to Fossil Creek canyon for any length for reasons explained under Road Access.

I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the FCCRMP. As a professional botanist who has enjoyed working closely with Forest Service personnel, and as an avid hiker/outdoorsperson, I can appreciate the challenges faced with developing a Plan that is acceptable to many divergent users. The opening of this area to visitors provides unique opportunities to address what appears as an impossible task – to protect a unique and vulnerable ecosystem while also catering to – and hopefully educating and enlightening – visitors who want to experience its uniqueness. I encourage the Forest Service to continually reach out and work with professionals in the field of natural history, particularly as it relates to this region. Very little is known about the inner workings of biotic communities here or elsewhere, let alone what species exactly occurs in the region (upon which is the basis other studies build). Thus, the need for agencies and the public, in a concerted effort, to make resource protection a priority, while also educating the populace.

Sincerely, Wendy C. Hodgson Professional botanist 423 W. Euclid Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85041 27 January 2017

From: Deanna Hunt To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 12:01:29 PM

To whom it is concerned,

I believe this last year, 2016, the system worked really well at Fossil Creek and I'd like it to stay as is.

My vote is for Alternative A" Existing Condition, no action.

Thank you,

Deanna Hunt From: Jacqueline M. Hunter To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil creek cmrp Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 9:37:51 PM

I vote for option A keep as is! My next choice would be B more limited useage. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. Must we ruin every good thing in this state just for more money!

Jacqueline Hunter 1153 w.morelos st Chandler, az 85224 From: T.J Knutson To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 10:10:48 AM

To whom it may concern, I would like to submit my vote for proposal "A". I'm living in Idaho and plan to travel to fossil creek twice this year. It holds a special place in my heart and I hope it remains a special, primitive, wilderness experience. Thank you for all you've done for the forest! Tj

Sent from my iPhone From: Rex Kuhn To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 11:39:41 PM

I prefer Alternative A.

1. Keep the swimming at the waterfalls and along the creek open. 2. Continue with permits, but increase the price and adjust the timeframe for obtaining permits.

I frequent Fossil Creek since I first heard of it in 2012. It is my favorite place in Arizona, even more so than Havasupai because I can play in and around the waterfalls and the water in Fossil Creek is usually clear, whereas this is not the case at Havasupai. Of the three travertine systems that I frequent in Arizona, Fossil Creek has the clearest water.

I hope Alternative A is implemented because it will allow me and my family and friends to continue to enjoy Fossil Creek, particularly the two main waterfalls, namely the old dam waterfall (Fossil Springs Trail 18) and the lower waterfall (The Waterfall Trail). I hope that Plan E is not implemented as it eliminates swimming at the lower waterfall. I do not want C or D for the same reason.

In the first meeting that I called and listened to, "no shows" were mentioned as a concern. I suggest doing the reservations one at a time and charging more than $6. For example, the Left Fork of North Creek (The Subway) in Zion National Park has an on-line permit system for the month of April. In February, I can apply for a permit in May. The current permit system for Fossil Creek allows me to reserve for the entire permit season. I would increase the cost of the permit (another example is Coyote Buttes North - The Wave, were the cost is $7 per person and permit is obtained in advance on-line). Both the Wave and the Subway allow for permits on-line a few months in advance and there are also permits available the day before at the BLM office or the National Park Visitor Center.

Rex Kuhn From: Bill To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock; Roybal, Marcos A -FS Subject: Fossil Creek Public Comments Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 2:44:49 PM

Coconino National Forest

In regards to the comment period for Fossil Creek’s long term management plan. It appears that the Forest Service is planning to have long term operations around Plan E. These comments and concerns are related to the current issues affecting whitewater boating in the area and concerns with Plan E. I am a whitewater kayaker and outdoorsman and I have regularly enjoyed the boating and recreational opportunities on Fossil Creek for over 11 years. I have kayaked above the springs on high flow events during spring snow melt, and have boated nearly every week of the year, and every section of the creek. Kayakers have been enjoying Fossil Creek during high flow events long before the flow was restored to the creek and the dam was decommissioned. In addition, the long term plan for Fossil Creek also affects boating, rafting, and canoeing on the Verde River as the road to Childs (FR 708 to 502) has been closed repeatedly during rain, snow events. These rain and snow events are also the high flow run off events that many boaters prefer, while enjoying the Verde River. The most commonly kayaked section of Fossil Creek is the 18-20 foot waterfall (at the end of Lewis/Waterfall trail) to the Irving power plant location. All sections of Fossil Creek have been kayaked from the above the springs at high flow, all the way to the Verde River. The section below Purple Mountain is rarely run due to decreasing gradient and large amount of wood in this area.

Kayaking should be considered for special designation as an Outstandingly Remarkable Value (ORV) on Fossil Creek for the following reasons. 1. This is one of the only creeks that has continuously boatable flows year round in the entire southwest. Kayakers have traveled from all over the southwest and the US to enjoy this whitewater gem. I have even boated with a kayaker from New Zealand on this creek. 2. This creek is one of the few in the nation that is generally considered safe for intermediate boaters and yet still challenging for more experienced kayakers due to a combination of the clear water, consistent low volume flow (42 CFS), and steep gradient (185 feet per mile). 3. This is the only reliably accessible travertine creek in the United States that is regularly kayaked. 4. Kayakers have the unique ability to reach areas of the stream for cleanup that would otherwise require swimmers to traverse the entire length of the creek. Kayakers have removed truckloads of trash from Fossil Creek in the past and will continue to help maintain the river in the future provided they are granted the privilege to access the area. Approximately 1,000 pounds of trash have been removed from the creek in the past 10 years, via clean up events and regular removal while boating. 5. Kayaking is a very low impact sport on the fossil creek environment. Kayakers do not generally set up a barbecue and spend the day in one spot on the creek. In addition, kayaking does not affect sedimentation, bank erosion, and botanical health as we do not wade around in the water for hours on the banks of the creek. The typical kayaker spends around 2-3 hours kayaking the “Classic Section”, and I have run this section in as little as 20 minutes. 6. Kayakers truly practice and understand a “leave no trace” philosophy.

Issues with Plan E and current problems affecting boating on Fossil Creek and the Verde River:

1. The current plan E aims to close waterplay at the end of the “Waterfall Trail” soon to be called the Lewis Trail. This would prevent us from boating one of the highlights of this area, unless kayakers were given a special use permit for this area. This waterfall is vital to the enjoyment of the “Classic Section” of the river for kayakers. This has been the largest waterfall that many boaters have and will ever run. This waterfall provides a rare opportunity to practice running larger waterfalls in a safe environment. The pool at the bottom of the waterfall provides practice for wet exists, roll practice, and the opportunity to paddle under the falls and practice waterfall escape techniques. We would propose a special use permit for kayakers to continue to enjoy this area. 2. It is vital that FR 502 has unrestricted access to Childs and that we have access to Fossil Creek on high flow events (On numerous high flow events access to both Fossil Creek and the Verde have been restricted with closure of the FR 708). We would propose better options for accessing these areas or special permits for kayakers to continue to enjoy these areas during rain and high flow events: a. The 502 and 708 roads are vital to river access on the Verde River. This access point is required for boaters traveling from Beasley Flats to Childs, and boaters traveling into the Wild and Scenic area of the Verde River system. b. I have had fellow kayakers that had permits to enter Fossil Creek and were turned away since the FR 708 was closed. Many times the recording for Fossil Creek was not corrected causing these boaters to drive up to Camp Verde with a permit, only to find out that the road was closed. 3. Opportunities to boat on Fossil have been dramatically limited with the difficulty in obtaining a permit and the dramatically limited access to the Fossil Creek area as the road is commonly closed every time it rains or snows in the area. We would propose the forest service setting aside 10 permits per day for the use of kayakers.

Thank you for allowing us to continuing kayaking this river with the future generations.

Bill Langhofer [email protected] One of the numerous clean up events on Fossil Creek!!

Kayaking the left slot of the Irving Power Plant Rapid.

One of the numerous waterfalls on the section between the 20 foot waterfall and the Irving Power plant section “Classic Section”

This is a list of boaters that have asked to be included in this letter to the forest service:

1. Dr. Bill Langhofer, 7311 E Thomas Road, Scottsdale Arizona, 85251 [email protected] 480-945-8484 2. Allan Watts, 2243 E State Ave. Phoenix, AZ 85020, 602-364-7331 3. Dan Bramble, 502 E. Jura Circle, Payson, AZ 85551

4. Stephen D. Yeager

5. Justin Donnell, [email protected]

6. Bob Hirst

7. Tom Sisterman, 281 N del Sur Dr.,Vail, AZ 85641 [email protected]

8. Craig Woodman, 5912 E. Voltaire Ave., Scottsdale, AZ 85254, [email protected] 602-741-9638

9. Chris Yarrington, 2119 N. Calvin Cir., Mesa, AZ 85207 602-679-0397 [email protected]

10. Marina Bravo Foster, 7701 E. Avalon Dr., Scottsdale AZ 85251, [email protected] 623.332.8054

11. Chase Wright, 4109 E Chambers Street, Phoenix Arizona, 85040 [email protected] 602.999.8621

12. Melissa Mitchell, 4109 E Chambers Street, Phoenix Arizona, 85040 [email protected] 480.236.2336

13. Kristin Murray, 1807 w. Islets Ave. Mesa, AZ 85202

14. Paul C. Wheeler, 980 S. Paperflower Ave., Tucson, AZ 85748 520-440-7860

15. Dr. Chad Winthrop, 1689 E Maryland Ave Phoenix AZ 85016 [email protected] 480 442-4712

16. Roger Larson, 19025 N 13 th Place, Phoenix, AZ 85024 [email protected]

17. Alex Duyvejonck, 1325 Mesa, Grand Junction, CO 81501

18. Tom MacCallum, 495 Parkview Drive, Park City, UT 84098

19. Pam King, 495 Parkview Drive, Park City, UT 84098, 435-649-3913

20. Mike Curiak, 2497 Power Road #5, Grand Junction, CO 81507 970-245-1374 [email protected]

21. Lowell Hollars, 10530 E Charter Oak Dr., Scottsdale, AZ 85259 480-391-0169 [email protected]

22. Charles Albright, 1408 Washington Street, Reno, NV 89503 [email protected] 775-324- 5102

23. Craig Langhofer

24. Logan Myers, 28915 CR 331, Buena Vista, CO 81211 719-229-9333

25. Jenifer Johnsrud, 1004 S Redbud Dr., Loveland, CO 80538 970-290-0096

26. Scott Williams, 1400 Wilmoore SE, Albuquerque, NM 87106 [email protected] 505- 908-5526

27. Bob Deuso

28. Abraham Cobb, 8 Vista Grande Circle, Santa Fe, NM 87508 [email protected] 505- 699-9371

29. Steve Haire, 201 Venceino Dr, Grand Jct, CO 81503 [email protected] 605-484-0201

30. Ben Petri, 14365 Foothill Rd, Golden, CO 80401 [email protected] 303-715-8211

31. Matt Spahle, 449 E Pierce St., Tempe, AZ 85281 602-770-7283

32. Nate Bushnell, 8711 E Pinnacle Peak, PMB 369, Scottsdale, AZ 85255

33. Thomas Langhofer, 25250 SR 2, South Bend, IN 46619

34. Mark Reed, 2201 North 161st drive, Goodyear, AZ 85395

35. Tess Garvey, 15817 N. 10th St, Phoenix, AZ 85022, [email protected] 602-882-9073

36. Jens Jensen PE, PO Box 268, Nutrioso, AZ 85932 [email protected] 928-339-4677

37. Chris Pawlowski, 5725 Marconi Ave, Scottsdale, AZ 85254 [email protected] 602- 843-6523

38. Nancy Murbach, Scottsdale, AZ 85251

39. Daryl Lang, 27209 North 65th Place, Scottsdale, AZ 85266

40. Danica Weston, 449 E Pierce St, Tempe, AZ 85281

41. Stacey Harmon, 16802 S 36th Way, Phoenix, AZ 85048

42. Jeff Merten, 122 South Hardy, #50, Tempe, AZ 85281

43. Tracey Metzger, Gilbert, AZ 602-541-3455

44. Ryan Fair, 860 N McQueen Dr. #1025 Chandler, AZ 85225 [email protected]

45. Carrie Ann Donnell, [email protected]

46. Aaron Riding, 10065 North West, 307th Ave, North Plains, OR 97133 aaron.riding.gmail.com 602-502-1323

47. Aubrie Reed, 2201 North 161st drive, Goodyear, AZ 85395

48. Kevin Garvey,15817 N. 10th St, Phoenix, AZ 85022, [email protected] 602-751- 9263

49. Jeremiah Jensen, 1851 S Emerson, Mesa, AZ 85210, [email protected] 602-803-4099

50. Dannie Keil, 12231 N 19th Street #222, Phoenix, AZ 85022 480-208-2411

51. Jim Clarkin, 27749 N 67th Place, Scottsdale, AZ 85266, [email protected] 480-251-9905

52. Walt Carr, 3920 E Carol Ann Way, Phoenix, AZ 85032, [email protected] 602-432-2993

53. Pierre Burns, 8220 Montecito Ave, Scottsdale, AZ 85251

54. Douglas Lewis, 316 Mimbres Dr, Los Alamos, NM

55. Tess Garvey, 15817 N 10th St, Phoenix, AZ 85022, [email protected] 602-882-9073

56. Helen Jones, 3920 E Carol Ann Way, Phoenix, AZ 85032, [email protected] 928-600-4288

57. Jorge I Arango, 1264 E Acoma Dr., Phoenix, AZ 85022

58. Michael Carney, 619 16th St, NW, Albuquerque, NM 87104

59. Peter Eisner, 2040 E 3rd Street, Tuscon, AZ 85719 520-465-6600 [email protected]

60. Bart Harvey, 1712 36th St., SE Rio Rancho, NM 87124

61. Patrick Garvey, 41167 Cimmaron St., Clinton Township, MI 48043 [email protected] 248- 388-0931

62. Corey Spoores, 4800 Calle De Luna NE, Albuquerque, NM 87111

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Andrea Levy To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 10:08:03 PM

I am a resident of Phoenix, AZ and I support Alternative B in order to ensure protection and proper care of the area and to avoid overuse so future generations can also enjoy it.

Thanks, Andrea Levy Sent from my iPhone From: Andrea Levy To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 10:15:40 PM

I vote for Alternative B for Fossil Creeks's proposed changes

Sent from my iPhone

Sent from my iPhone From: Luca Licciardi To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 10:41:03 PM

I experienced Fossil Creek on my 23rd birthday this past year for the first time. I brought a group of friends who I all thought would most definitely appreciate the trip. It turned out to be one of the best times of my life and the same for others. Swimming in that water is indescribable. Putting goggles on and diving underneath was epic.! It would be a shame if swimming is not allowed at some point. I think the current set up is the best plan of action. The limited parking passes during the busy months is a good way to do it. I don't think anything could be changed. Thank you.

Sent from my iPhone From: Cynnstar To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 10:22:23 AM

Hello, I am opposed to any changes that would reduce the wild character of Fossil Creek, including increased access for motorized vehicles. We are losing pristine wilderness every day. PLEASE--protect Fossil Creek--don't squander it. Cynthia Loucks Prescott, AZ From: Miranda, Valerie To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 1:05:25 PM Attachments: image001.png image002.png image003.png image004.png image005.png

I vote for Option A.

Thank you,

Valerie

MassMutual Retirement Services Participant Information Center Phone 800-854-0647 | M-F 8:00 am - 9:00 pm EST Registered Representative of MML Distributors, LLC, a Mass Mutual Subsidiary. Supervisory Office 100 Bright Meadow Blvd, Enfield CT 06082.

Visit us on:

This e-mail transmission may contain information that is proprietary, privileged and/or confidential and is intended exclusively for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. Any use, copying, retention or disclosure by any person other than the intended recipient or the intended recipient's designees is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient or their designee, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete all copies.

Registered representative of and securities offered through MML Investors Services, LLC Supervisory Office:

1295 State St. Springfield, MA 01111-0001 (413) 737-8400 From: Lori Murphy To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 10:27:38 PM

My first choice is D. We should improve and maintain the roads to enable entry from both sides of the creek. We are only creating more pollution and environmental harm by requiring people to drive farther and for longer periods (on poorly maintained roads) than would exist if the Strawberry side was opened and maintained.

Second choice is E. at least we can take our ATV into the creek from the Strawberry side.

Either choice, make sure you maintain the requirement for passes for fees. Also patrol and post signage to remind people to take out their garbage... patrol is the key here.

Best Regards, Lori Murphy

Sent from my iPad From: April Noneya To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 6:55:08 PM

Hello,

I'd like to give my opinion for the proposed changes to access of Fossil Creek. I think camping in designated areas should still be allowed, as well as swimming. I would like either Alternative A or B to be chosen. Being able to explore such a beautiful area and swim at the falls is such a rarity in our state. I think implementing the permits was a great idea and that should continue. We've gone a couple of time before and there were way too many people there. I also hope that with less people, due to permits, that there will be less trash left behind. That requirement may deter people who aren't environmentally friendly.

Kind regards,

April H. From: [email protected] To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 3:35:01 PM

I strongly oppose the provision of "Limited or no waterplay would exist at some creek locations" in the proposed action Alternative E. In my opinion, this is the primary attraction for the majority of visitors.

In 2015, I was appalled by the amount of trash and people who seemed to be woefully under prepared during my visit to the Fossil Springs Trailhead on the Stawberry side of the WSR corridor and my hike to the historic dam. My friends and I brought extra trash bags and hauled as much as we could carry out.

With the introduction of the permit system, my observations were the opposite during a return visit to the same location in 2016. The introduction of the permit system appears to have effectively screened out the portion of the public who would not take the time to plan their visit beforehand. This system supports and rewards the efforts of those who employ LNT (leave no trace) principles.

CRMP "Alternative B – Enhanced Protections" makes the most sense to me as it will allow for limited camping which can discourage "bandit" camping in-season.

Chris Norton, Phoenix, AZ 85003 From: Randy Peckenpaugh To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 5:30:34 PM

I support Option A - No change.

Thank you...

Randy Peckenpaugh 2703 E. Dartmouth St. Mesa, AZ 85213 [email protected] From: Robyn Plyler To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek Proposed Alternatives Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 8:15:22 AM

I vote option A as my preferred option, or option B as a secondary. Please, please do not go with any other of the "proposed" alternatives. They are awful From: Plyler Robyn A To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek Vote Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 8:18:18 AM

1. A 2. B.

Robyn Plyler Salt River Project

From: Robyn Plyler To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek Alternatives Vote Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 8:24:16 AM

Hello,

I would like to vote for Option B. I feel like closing down major features of this area is wrong, I think that the current $6 fee is too low and of raised, would weed out the people who are "ruining" this area. I thought the permit system went swimmingly this year, pun intended. This place is amazing and taking away swimming privileges would be devastating to those of us who actually love, and try to take care of and preserve this place. Thanks for your consideration -- Robyn Plyler From: Rebeca Rodriguez To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 1:17:35 PM

Dear Ranger Branton,

I am writing in support of Alternative B for the Fossil Creek CRMP. My support is also for keeping existing system trails open and not decommissioned. It is important to keep wild places wild and less development is better. These types of places allow us to enjoy pristine nature, provide healthy ecosystems for flora and fauna, and provide us fertile grounds for scientific research.

Thank you for listening to my opinion on the matter.

Enjoy the day,

Rebeca Rodriguez Tempe, Arizona 85281 From: Lauren Sherwood To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek Plan Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 4:38:26 PM Attachments: FossilCreekComments.pdf

Hello there!

I have attached my comments on the Fossil Creek Plan Alternatives.

Thank you so much for hearing what the public has to say. I know I had a lot to say.

I am looking forward to commenting in the future as things develop more with the future of Fossil Creek.

Please let me know if you are unable to view/read the comments and I can send the attachment again.

Thank you so much,

Lauren Sherwood Prescott, AZ Hello, my name is Lauren Sherwood and I hail from Prescott, AZ!

When I first heard about the proposed changes for Fossil Creek, my heart sank. I became as active as I could. I listened into the first phone-in meeting and I attended the public meeting on January 9, 2017 in Camp Verde. I have dedicated 18 posts on my personal Instagram and Facebook account to spread the word about the 5 alternatives, with just about two weeks straight of postings leading up to each comment period deadline. I posted all the literature and notes that I collected from the public meeting and scanned and posted it all onto the Arizona Hiking Group Facebook Page. I recently was invited to the Forest Service meeting that will be held in Scottsdale on Feb 8th for members of Arizona Hiking Group to see what solutions we can come up with and so we can discuss how important Fossil is to us. I am very grateful that the Forest Service is going out of their way to hear hiker’s voices. Thank you for an unscheduled, private, if you will, meeting. As an avid hiker and land-locked mermaid, seriously, thank you.

So here are my thoughts on Fossil Creek and how I believe the future of it should be addressed:

Preface: The first time I went to Fossil Creek was in 2012/13. My friends and I started out going to The Waterfall but quickly switched to hiking 8 miles round trip to the Fossil Springs Dam Waterfall because of its remoteness and lack of drunk people and weed smokers hotboxing it in that cave by the waterfall. We would wake up before the sun, rendezvous at a Walmart parking lot in Prescott and carpool over to Fossil Creek. It reached a point where waking up before the sun wasn’t enough. I totally noticed the overcrowding. I tried to take a friend from California to Fossil a couple years ago, and that whole summer I would arrive at 7am and there would be a “full” sign already out. I am not denying its popularity, but I am defending its sacredness. However, up until the January 9th public meeting ( I went to Fossil before the meeting), I hadn’t been in two years because it would get too full too early. It was hard enough to get back into Fossil and then last year, I was unable to obtain a permit on weekends I was free. I accepted that fact. All in all, the permit system worked; reduced trash, traffic, visitor numbers, emergency calls, everything. I am happy to pay a fee to enter Fossil Creek. I understand that special things come at a cost. While the permit system took the spontaneity out of going to Fossil, I believe it eliminated everyone but the die-hards. By that I mean no people who think they know how to camp from Scottsdale, less high school kids playing hooky, less large family reunion gatherings on the side of the dirt road, grilling and drinking less than ¼ mile from the creek. When I attended the public meeting, I was shocked to find out that Alternative A wasn’t even a viable option because there is technically not a lot of change, if I understood the Forest Ranger correctly. However, thank you for acknowledging that the permit system worked. I would completely agree that it worked and was necessary.

In short, naturally, I would like to see the existing system trails remain OPEN and waterplay along the creek and at waterfalls continue and not be prohibited. I stand by Alternative A, wholeheartedly. Change the trail names, fine. However, I fail to see how decommissioning trails and carving out new ones from a sensitive system makes any sense. As far as Alternative B goes, I do not see where The Waterfall (the main attraction) is mentioned. I fail to see any sort of favor for hikers and swimmers in any of the Alternatives. In any Alternative, besides A, swimming at the Fossil Springs Dam Waterfall is prohibited. I find a few inconsistencies in all the information in regards to these Alternatives. I have tried to understand and decipher them to my best abilities. The chart in the “Summary of Preliminary Alternative Concepts” states that both Alternative A and B will allow access to Fossil Springs area (exact words are: “yes-Day use hikers”). In the description of, ‘Trails” under Alternative B on the packet of paper titled, “Fossil Creek Comprehensive River Management Plan Summary of Action Alternatives”, it states that the Flume Trail will be shortened and come to a halt at a lookout. From what I’m gathering, swimming will be allowed (in Alternative B) at The Waterfall, but not the Dam Waterfall? I am not for Alternative C, D, or E because I do not wish for the Fossil Springs area to be closed to all use. Which brings me to my next point in regards to Native American cultural and historical usage at the waterfalls. I am going to quote some more information from the “Summary of Preliminary Concepts”: “The Yavapai and Western Apache tribes have indicated that unmanaged recreation use impacts traditional and contemporary cultural sites and practices.” I know that ignorance and carelessness cannot be cured. Trash is an issue. While I am absolutely not dismissing the cultures and values at hand, one should not have to be Native American (and because if one is not) and in return, be exempt from the opportunity to appreciate, respect, experience, leave no trace behind and call Fossil and it’s waters sacred. Fossil Creek , The Waterfall and the Fossil Springs Dam Waterfall are sacred to me. Fossil is sacred to everyone who respects it. If the entire 17 miles of Fossil Creek is so sacred, why was a power plant built there? Why was a dam built on the creek? Granted, these things are no longer an issue, and thus, it created something that EVERYONE can enjoy, together. While my personal history doesn’t date back as old as the Yavapai and Western Apache, I value Fossil Creek. Please don’t take that away from everyone who isn’t Native American.

Perhaps, to eliminate and encourage Leave No Trace/Pack it in pack it out/Take nothing leave only footprints, the Forest Service could establish posts with biodegradable trash bags, kind of like neighborhoods that provide bags so dog owners can pick up after their pets. Not only would that encourage people to pick up after themselves, but there would be room in a bag to pick up trash along the trail and as people see it-or seek it. If a bag gets loose and flies away, while that is not a goal, it would only effect the area temporarily. Along with that, it would be interesting to ban alcohol, or at least fine people when they get caught with it, even if it is in a tin can and not glass. A fine might be more practical in discouraging the consumption of alcohol because I don’t think it needs to go as far as searching people’s cars. Eventually, people would get the point and not want to pay anymore fees, resulting in less emergency calls due to broken femurs from jumping off the waterfalls in drunken stupor, dehydration, etc. There was a Camp Verde Firefighter at the public meeting who said he had only responded to (1) call that was not alcohol related. Alcohol is not the only source of stupidity and disrespect, but it is a contributor.

I respectfully fail to see how building bridges, paving roads, establishing picnic tables and having designated lookouts reduces any amount of visitor traffic, yet these topics are being labeled as, “improvements”. My fear is that the development of Fossil Creek will only encourage more people. Increasing visitor numbers is completely contradictory to the whole purpose of the plan to protect a “Wild and Scenic River”. Coupled with that, I believe Fossil should be difficult to get back into. It is at least 16 miles on the washboard dirt road just to the Irving site. I think the road should have that “inaccessible” feel to it and that it should not be paved. Opening the road might decrease such a cluster. However, I believe the road, itself, should stay open to normal vehicles like Jeeps and not solely devoted to ATV’s and Side by Sides. Those UTV’s are extremely noisy when compared to a normal 4x4 vehicles. The nature of an ATV encourages people to go off the main dirt road and in turn, be more rambunctious and destructive. I think opening the dirt road all the way from the Camp Verde side to Strawberry would alleviate a lot of traffic and wear and tear coming from the Camp Verde side, since that is currently the only side open. There are volunteer groups that exist that would be willing to help the Forest Service clean up the 4 miles that is closed off. You can count me in.

Shortening up or removing trails to “match people up to the right experience” (Phone-in meeting) should not encourage a person to NOT put their hiking boots on and go for a hike. No one said one had to hike all 8 miles to the Dam Waterfall, but wearing Mary Janes to walk across a bridge to have a picnic at a table is not a realistic way to portray nature and the wilderness. It is called Fossil Springs Wilderness Area. Areas for people who do not wish to properly gear up should be directed to Slide Rock and the South Rim of the Grand Canyon. Fossil Creek should not be commercialized, exploited or developed. I do not believe that trails should be catered to those who think they are entitled.

All in all, I believe existing trails and waterfalls should remain open for hiking and swimming. A full day at Fossil with the opportunity to camp overnight ¼ mile from the creek is what the wilderness should be about! A well-rounded, self-guided nature experience.

Thank you for your time. I’m not the only one in our amazing state of Arizona that appreciates it and doesn’t take it for granted.

Lauren Sherwood Prescott, AZ @lolosherhood

From: Craig Gentry Shumway To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil creek crmp Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 7:40:50 PM

First thank you for taking the time to preserve our natural resources and make sure we have amazing places to visit and see. Your work and time is greatly appreciated.

Of the proposed actions I would put my vote behind proposal a. With that being said I actually like E but I can't vote for it with the restriction of no swimming at the waterfall. If that were to be changed I think E would be the best option. The waterfall is one of the best spots on the creek and I believe it should be left to be fully enjoyed.

Thank you for your consideration.

Craig Shumway From: Robin Silver To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: FOSSIL CREEK CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 3:15:29 PM

Sent to email: [email protected] RE: FOSSIL CREEK CRMP

The Center for Biological Diversity ("Center") is a non-profit, public interest, conservation organization with more than 1.2 million members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places. Our mission is to conserve imperiled native species and their threatened habitat and to fulfill the continuing educational goals of our membership and the general public in the process. Maricopa Audubon Society (“MAS”) is a non-profit organization dedicated to the enjoyment of birds and other wildlife with a primary focus on the protection and restoration of southwestern riparian habitat through fellowship, education, and community involvement. MAS is a chapter of the National Audubon Society. MAS has over 2,300 members, primarily in central Arizona. Both the Center and Maricopa Audubon were among the original partners responsible for the successful return of full flow in 2005 to Fossil Creek. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the preferred alternative (E) for the Fossil Creek CRMP. First of all, we are grateful to the Forest Service staff who have worked so tirelessly and bravely to manage and protect Fossil Creek and to the Forest Service administrators who have finally provided the resources to staff to accomplish this work. With this said, the Center and Maricopa Audubon offer the following specific comments regarding the Proposed Action, Alternative E, Long-term Adaptive Management.

1. CAPACITY:

Preferred Alternative E proposes, 1705 PAOT (people at one time). This number is far too high. In 2016, Fossil Creek was well managed and protected for the first time since full flows were returned in 2005. This resulted from a permit reservation system instituted between May 1, and October 1, 2016. "The Coconino National Forest Red Rock Ranger District's November 28, 2016, Visitor Use Summary for Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River, authored by Becky Smith, USFS Forestry Technician" (USFS 2016) presents a summary of the 2016 season. USFS 2016 states, "2016 Statistics...Total number of people with permits that visited Fossil Creek/Fossil Springs: 47,927" and "Total number of vehicles let in to Fossil Creek/Fossil Springs: 11,681." The permit system represented approximately 150 days. This scenario where Fossil Creek is well managed and protected experienced an average of approximately 320 and approximately 78 vehicles/day. Preferred Alternative E proposes a scenario of five times more people than a scenario where Fossil Creek is well managed and protected. It is hard to imagine how massive the infrastructure and management capacity will need to be to handle a capacity of five times more people than the current well managed and protected scenario. Table, "Key Differences Amongst Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River CRMP Alternatives," offers a footnote to "Capacity." The footnote states, "Alternatives B-E reflect maximum capacity. PAOTs in all action alternatives are based on an estimated 5 people per vehicle, except for outfitter/guide vehicles, estimated at 8 people per vehicle, and for vehicles less than 62 inches wide, estimated at two people per vehicle. In alternatives with increases in capacity (alternatives D and E), capacity would initially reflect current management (154 vehicles and 780 PAOT). Over time and if appropriate, adaptive management would be used to increase capacity to the numbers listed as infrastructure is built, management capacity allows, and visitor behavior promotes sustainable river value protection." USFS 2016 uses 3.89 persons per car "established in previous years" not "5 people per vehicle" in this footnote. In addition, USFS offers no explanation for the numbers that "reflect current management...780 PAOT" when a PAOT of 780 is more than double pthe USFS 2016 daily average of approximately 320 which represents a well managed and protected objectively observed scenario. The proposed PAOT of 1,705 is more than twice the "current management...780 PAOT" under the current well managed and protected scenario. Although USFS can build infrastructure and develop "current management,' Fossil Creek itself is not going to get any bigger. People who would be satisfied with crowds should go to a water park in the Phoenix metropolitan area, not Fossil Creek. A Wild and Scenic River should not be an urban amusement park for the masses. Visitor numbers should reflect the capacity of Fossil Creek, not the infrastructure.

2. Road Access

Preferred Alternative E proposes that FR 708 from the gate west of FR 591, at Deadman Mesa Road, be rehabilitated and reopened to public as motorized trail. This proposal ignores past Forest Service concerns regarding safety and costly maintenance of FR 708 from Strawberry. At best, it is not practical to maintain FR 708 from the gate west of FR 591 for anything but a pedestrian trail, or maybe also a horse trail. Please note and please explain such a dramatic about face from past concerns regarding safety and costly maintenance reflected in the following excerpts: "Current Road Condition: On August 16, 2011 an informal assessment of maintenance issues and general road conditions was performed on the 708 road. Approximately six culverts had varying combinations of damaged ends, exposed tops, and/or erosion at inlet/outlet. These culverts need replaced. The road surface is down to rock in many areas and is therefore not suitable for grading with no fines with which to work. Many signs are damaged or non-existent (including delineators). As you drop off the mesa, the cliff on the south side of the road is heavily fissured and rock fall is likely to be a continuous issue as wind and water erosion continues to adversely affect the stability of the cliff wall. Future consideration should include how to mitigate this potential hazard. The north edge of the road (the ‘fill’ side) has several areas where erosion is causing narrowing of the roadway. A simple fill placement in these areas is not feasible due to the vertical slope below." (FR 708, FOSSIL CREEK ROAD HISTORICAL DATA AND MAINTENANCE COSTS, undated.)

"*$180,000 a year was budgeted for road maintenance and that included maintaining roads to gain access to the plant on a year‐round basis from both Strawberry and Camp Verde. The $180k included maintenance personnel salary, maintenance of owned equipment, any rental of specialized equipment, and funds for hired contractors if needed. *Maintenance was performed in‐house with personnel that worked at the plant except on those out of the ordinary occasions when they didn't have the equipment/expertise to perform the maintenance. Maintenance included snow plowing, grading, frequent clearing of landslides, and erosion repair." (Email: From:xxxx...Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 12:35 PM...To:xxxx...Cc:xxxx...Subject: Fossil Creek Road)

"Long Term Needs: investigating/mitigation of potential rock slide area: easily $1,000,000+" (Email: From:xxxx...Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 9:47 AM...To:xxxx...Cc:xxxx...Subject: RE: Fossil Creek Road.)

"This rock slide is in the same location as a rock slide that happened about a year ago. The cliff above the road, in this area, is unstable. Some of the rocks are too big for a backhoe to move. In my opinion, any heavy equipment, larger than a back hoe, working under this part of the cliff, could cause more rocks to come down." (Email: From:xxxx...Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 6:13 PM...To:xxxx...Subject: FW: Photos road 708 rock slide.)

3. No Mention of Cattle Actively Defecating Directly into Fossil Creek and Increasing Sedimentation from watershed uplands into Fossil Creek

USFS has inappropriately constructed a "water gap" providing access directly to Fossil Creek" west bank just upstream of the Fossil Creek Bridge. This "water gap" is not on any of the Fossil Creek CRMP maps. There is no mention and no explanation in Proposed Alternative E concerning the fact that such access and continued upland cattle grazing continue. These activities are antithetical to the core values represented by the restoration of Fossil Creek. Please explain why USFS chooses to allow continuation of such activities.

Robin Silver, M.D. Co-Founder and Board Member Center for Biological Diversity PO Box 1178 Flagstaff, AZ 86002 Phone: 602-799-3275 FAX: 928-222-0077 Email: [email protected] WEB: www.biologicaldiversity.org

From: Jared Smith To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 12:15:32 PM

Hey there. I just wanted to take a moment to contact you regarding Fossil Creek access. In my opinion, Fossil Creek is one of the most amazing gems we have in Arizona. Anyone who is an AZ native considers it sacred ground, in a way. A lot of us are very worried that we won't be able to enjoy it for much longer. Please don't take it away from us. Please allow us to continue to swim there and enjoy its beauty. Myself and many others would be happy to volunteer as a cleanup crew if that helps in any way. Fossil is an AZ staple. We would be devastated if we weren't able to go enjoy the beautiful waters anymore. Thanks for your time.

-Jared Smith From: Julio Souffle To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 10:42:51 PM

I believe alternative A or B would be the best option, It would be a good idea to decrease the access of how many people can be there at a time. That's why I think option B would be even better because it would decrease the amount of people but the people that are there will get to have a full experience! Also, you should add strict signs for people who are trashing this beautiful place, maybe increase the permit fee so you guys can afford to pay someone to walk around the areas and fine people

Sent from my iPhone From: Michael Spruce To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 1:38:29 PM

Please to not close this area. I support issuing permits and limiting the number of visitors. We live in a beautiful state and this types of areas need to be kept open for future generations. I have been camping north of Payson since the early 70's and pray that I can continue to take my grandchildren for many years. Thank you, IOS Michael Spruce Director of Quality Control 1-844-422-5371 From: Sydni Talleri To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 1:27:22 PM

I believe alternative A would be the best path for the Fossil Creek wilderness at this time. The permit system seemed like a huge success last year, especially with the amount of trash and rescue calls drastically reduced from the previous year.

In 2014 I attempted to visit Fossil Creek and was turned away very early in the morning, and these were most of the stories I heard about visiting Fossil Creek. The implementation of the permit system allowed me to finally visit the area and it was well worth the small fee.

Being able to swim at the waterfall areas was the best part of the trip. That is the biggest downfall I can see to the proposed plan E. Additionally, even with the permit system, the waterfall area was still crowded but not as bad as what it used to be I'm sure. Adding more people does not seem like the right answer, at least for right now.

Thank you,

Sydni Talleri From: Sarah Louise Thomson To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 10:42:08 AM

I took a look at the plans and personally believe that leaving the permit system in place with no other changes is the most logical alternative. Firstly, it costs less to continue to use a program already created. As a taxpayer, wasteful spending is a big concern to me. The permit system is simple and reasonable.

Secondly, I would concur that the area has been misused by many irresponsible people. Increasing forest service presence and limiting the number of visitors with the permit system is a good way to keep irresponsible users in check. All of the other plans 1) cost more money and 2) punish responsible users.

Please leave the permit system in place for a few years and evaluate the results then. Please do not punish responsible people for the deeds of others with increased cost and restrictions.

Respectfully, Sarah Thomson

Sent from my iPhone From: Andrew Vann To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 4:03:47 PM

Fossil Creek is a very unique and special place to Arizona boaters as well as those across the region. It is one of the few travertine creeks in the world that is kayakable. The waterfall is unique in that it is low volume, but has a large and deep enough pool to be safely run by boaters of intermediate skill. In fact, this is the only true waterfall I have kayaked. Therefore, kayaking should be considered for special recreational designation as an Outstandingly Remarkable Value (ORV) on Fossil Creek.

The impacts to the environment associated with kayaking tend to be less than most other recreational activities along the creek. Kayakers tend to be well educated in Leave No Trace practices, both as a result of participation in permitted multi-day river trips and through the outdoor experience gained in learning to kayak. Kayakers are safety-focused, and generally boat in small groups to provide safety for each other. The hazards associated with Fossil Creek (primarily trees and other debris) are common to most rivers and creeks of the southwest, and can be managed by intermediate boaters.

Fossil Creek is clearly a special place to many people, and receives use accordingly. I do not feel expanded vehicle access to the area would be consistent with maintaining the character of the landscape that makes it special. I believe a permit system similar to the one in place now for the summer months is appropriate to limit use to a reasonable level.

Please consider these thoughts when developing the CRMP for Fossil Creek.

Sincerely, Andrew Vann Flagstaff, AZ From: Maria Wallace To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 8:38:57 PM

My choice is for the very least change to keep it natural. Choice A. All it needs is a restroom.

Sent from my iPhone From: Susan To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 4:32:56 PM

Good afternoon. I would like urge keeping Fossil Creek less disturb by any further opening to expansion that will impact the beauty and balance of the ecosystem. When my children were small, I use to take them to Red Rock Crossing for family time. It was a beautiful, secluded and quiet place. Then alterations were made, and a lot of the quiet beauty was lost. Now, I see mostly people who have little respect for the beauty of nature around them, it's turned into another Slide Ride *eye roll* and that's a sad evolvement. Please don't let Fossil Creek be stripped of it's serenity and beauty. Thank you

Susan Wesley Flagstaff, Arizona

"A man's goodness is truly measured by what he is, not what he does." Deepak Chopra From: Stephanie Wojtak To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Friday, January 27, 2017 3:54:57 PM

Hello,

My first visit to Fossil Creek in my 31 years of life was August 2016. It was amazing! I joined a friend and her family for her birthday. We loved being there. We hiked to the lower water fall and enjoyed our day. What we packed in, we packed out and I think that everyone that wants to enjoy what Mother Nature has given to us needs to do the same! I am choosing alternative A and/or B.

- Having the permits was good for the certain parking areas ( I am glad we got the closer parking area!) - Keep swimming and camping available. That’s why we want to visit, to cool off and enjoy the peace and calm! - People who litter should have consequences, I don’t know how that is possible to have a park ranger down there and how often. - Appreciate the accommodation of ATV riders, but not necessary because the pollution and noise. (Take it to the desert!) We want to hear the water!

Thank you for your time in reading my email.

Regards,

Stephanie

Stephanie Wojtak | HOA Coordinator Shelton-Cook Real Estate Services, AMO® 2850 East Camelback Road, Suite 300 Phoenix, AZ 85016 602-474-3570 Office |602-391-2832 Fax [email protected] www.Shelton-Cook.com

From: Brian Cahill To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Saturday, January 28, 2017 12:06:38 AM

Hello my name is Brian Cahill, I reside at 1441 s lindsay dr mesa AZ 85204. I have read the proposed plans in Fossil Creek CRMP. I am most concerned about the proposed action to ban water play at the main waterfall and the fossil springs dam. They are two of the best swimming holes in the state and are one of the most remarkable, outstanding qualities of fossil creek. They both have deep water and cliffs that you can jump off of. Cliffs are very important for a lot of people who love to jump and dive.

I would like to suggest 3 things.

1 a ban of alcohol around the main waterfall swimming hole. I believe this would cut down on trash and injuries or deaths.

2 introducing a fine for littering and posting signs in the parking lots.

3 composting out houses for bathrooms. They smell much less than other out houses and are more environmentally friendly.

Thank you for your time

Brian From: Andrew Call To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Springs Wilderness Date: Saturday, January 28, 2017 7:15:52 AM

I’m a little late to the comment deadline but wanted to add my voice. I’ve been going to Fossil Springs for 15 years and am happy to see something changing. I’ve seen the lack of conscience visitors leaving trash (entire coolers full of trash on one trip). This amazing place needs to be preserved. That said, I’m disappointed in the different plans. I understand we need to adjust and accommodate many visitors but Fossil Springs is large enough to section the area into different types. It seems your plans have plans for the many different visitors, vehicle, horseback, camping etc.. The one I would add and don’t see to the plans is an area for backpacking visitors. I best place for this is the damn area. It would be great to see this area sectioned off for a limited number of backpacking permits. We could keep the “wild” in wilderness, at least in this area of fossil springs.

Arizona drives a large out of state and in state backpackers that are looking for remote, beautiful wilderness areas to bask in nature and NOT hear the rumble of cars, nor feel pavement or concrete under their feet. A limited backpacking permit would be freakin awesome and help preserve this area.

Thank you.

Andrew S. Call 623.523.3943 [email protected] www.andrewscall.com

From: Sharlene Charbeneau To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek Camp Date: Saturday, January 28, 2017 7:57:03 AM

Option 2 From: Tami To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Saturday, January 28, 2017 6:59:04 AM

Please keep things the way they are. My opinion is option A. I love love love Fossil Creek

Tami Gurka

Sent from my iPhone From: Savannah Kralovec To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Saturday, January 28, 2017 1:48:17 AM

The "proposed plan" for Fossil Creek would ultimately be such a bummer for everyone from recreation enthusiasts and casual hikers. It is such a beautiful and hidden gem and altering the current system would not be ideal. The system this year with the limited passes available seemed to work really well and is the best plan moving forward, so I am personally in favor of either no action taking place at this time or slightly enhanced protection.

Savannah Kralovec From: Paul Loven To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Comments Date: Saturday, January 28, 2017 9:47:50 AM

Leave Fossil Creek alone. Option's A or B are fine. It has been doing just fine without human intervention for a very long time.

Paul E. Loven, President http://lovenandassociates.com Retirement Specialist 602.690.0164 From: Buaey Lui Ho To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Saturday, January 28, 2017 3:02:42 PM

Pls don't take away the swimming privileges from the public. I think the permit system is great, control the number of visitors to the area. I am for protecting the environment by all means, if this means to reduce the number of swimming holes, but pls do not completely eliminate swimming privileges from the whole creek. Swimming is one of the ways people connect with nature too, and such a welcomed activity after a long hike in. Thanks.

Gail Paepke

Sent from my iPad From: Roybal, Marcos A -FS To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: FW: Fossil Creek Public Comment Date: Friday, February 03, 2017 8:05:33 AM Attachments: Fossil Creek Letter AFDA.pdf

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 8:08 PM To: Roybal, Marcos A -FS Subject: Fossil Creek Public Comment

Marcos;

Please see attachment.

Chief Morris ARIZONA FIRE DISTRICT ASSOCIATION

February 2, 2017

Ms. Nicole Branton, District Ranger Coconino National Forest 8375 State Route 179 Sedona, AZ 86351

Dear Ms. Branton;

This correspondence reflects the Arizona Fire District Association (AFDA) public comment regarding the proposed management plan for Fossil Creek. The AFDA comment is specific to the rescue and emergency medical services our member agencies provide to citizens accessing Fossil Creek.

Two fire districts are directly impacted by the proposed Fossil Creek management plan; The Pine-Strawberry Fire District is the closest available emergency medical service agency to Fossil Creek and has carried the greater burden of 490 hikers/visitors rescued over the past two years. The Copper Canyon Fire District is located to the west of Fossil Creek and carries a lesser burden but has a greatly extended response time to the creek.

We believe that with the public visiting Fossil Creek there will always be some level of medical emergencies occurring at the creek. What's critical to emergency response agencies, however, is rapid access to the victim.

In support of the Pine-Strawberry and the Copper Canyon Fire Districts, the AFDA seeks to express our concern about the limited access to victims experiencing a medical emergency in Fossil Creek which exists today and likely will be worsened if certain options in the proposed management plan are adopted.

Fossil Creek - Public Comment 2017-02-02 ARIZONA FIRE DISTRICT ASSOCIATION

The Forest Service closed this road several years ago and a once convenient and relatively prompt rescue now typically exceeds 5 hours. Patrols by the Forest service are now virtually nonexistent. This road needs to be reopened.

The Association is also aware that the Forest Service also rejected a proposal from the Gila County Board of Supervisors, the Gila County Sheriff and his two Posses, and the Pine Strawberry Fire District to improve the Upper Springs trail, at their cost, to allow a side-by-side ATV access to victims on this trail. Such an improvement would reduce a 5-7 hour rescue to one and a half hours. Again, prompt access to the victim is important to saving lives and we urge the Forest Service to proceed with this improvement.

We are also aware of comments submitted by Chief Gary Morris of the Pine Strawberry Fire District and the AFDA strongly supports his recommendation for a "public safety impact study" to be included in the planning process. Additionally, we fully support all five of his recommendations for improving public safety at Fossil Creek.

Sincerely; ~~~ Mary Dalton, President

Arizona Fire District Association

P.O. Box 6778

Chandler, AZ 85246

Fossil Creek- Public Comment 2017-02-02 From: Marianito, Linda To: Roybal, Marcos A -FS Cc: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock; Adams, Judy -FS; Dechter, Mike -FS; Blazek, Steven; Moad, Brett; Marianito, Linda Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Question/Comment RE: WAPA Transmission Lines Date: Monday, February 06, 2017 3:36:08 PM

Hello Marcos

It was good to speak to you on the phone today regarding your Fossil Creek CRMP project and how the preferred Alternative E relates to our existing WAPA transmission lines that cross near the Fossil Creek CRMP boundaries. As you mentioned on the phone, it appears that existing transmission ROW’s are grandfathered in and the CRMP process/project will not affect our right to conduct routine maintenance within our ROW permit, including vegetation management.

I also informed you that WAPA is currently working with Judy Adams and Mike Dechter on a Programmatic Environmental Assessment that analyzes our routine O&M and Integrated Vegetation Management on the entire WAPA lines from Glen Canyon to Rogers substation in Mesa, AZ. This includes the short segment that crosses Fossil Creek CRMP area.

I would appreciate being added to the mailing list for the Fossil Creek CRMP and would like the document to reflect/verify that our rights would be maintained. Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you.

Linda

Linda Marianito | Environmental Manager Western Area Power Administration | Desert Southwest Region (O) 602.605.2524 | (M) 480.695.6360 | [email protected] Join us on Twitter

Senator Sylvia Allen Committees: Arizona State Senate Education, Chairman District 6 Natural Resources, Energy, & Water Appropriations

February 7, 2017

Ms. Nicole Branton, District Ranger Coconino National Forest, Red Rock District Post Office Box 20429 Sedona, AZ 86341-0429

Dear Ms. Branton,

The purpose of this letter is to support the public safety agencies who have already submitted public comments related to the Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River Management Plan.

Fossil Creek is in Arizona Legislative District 6, which I represent, and I am concerned about the number of rescues occurring there each year. I would like to request that the management plan include direct input from all public safety agencies and rescue organizations who respond to emergencies at Fossil Creek.

As I'm sure you are aware, a public safety crisis exists at Fossil Creek. For the years of 2015 and 2016, the Gila County Sheriffs Office and the Yavapai County Sheriffs Office, along with various other rescue agencies and fire districts, responded to Fossil Creek and rescued a total of 490 hikers or visitors. Four fatalities also occurred during the same period.

This large number of rescues has placed a heavy burden on both Sheriffs Offices, pulling deputies from community patrols for 5 to 7 hours or more to complete a rescue. These frequent and lengthy rescues also pull paramedics from the communities of Strawberry and Camp Verde leaving their communities with substantially reduced paramedic service. A similar heavy work load is placed on several different volunteer rescue organizations. This is a troublesome concern to me.

Prior to the Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River designation, the number ofrescues was relatively modest. More importantly, rescue agencies had convenient and direct road access to the victim's location. A rescue could be accomplished in an hour and a half with a small number ofrescue personnel. Today, a rescue can take as much as 5 to 7 hours (or more in some cases) and require as many as two dozen or more rescue personnel to move a victim 4.5 miles uphill to a trailhead. This length of time seems unacceptable considering it used to take far less time to complete a rescue in the past.

1700 West Washington Street, Room 303 • Phoenix, AZ 85007 • Phone: 602-926-5409 Toll free: 1-(800) 352-8404 x65409 • E-mail: [email protected] This letter is not suggesting that Fossil Creek be closed to the public, nor is it suggesting that access be restricted to a small and unreasonable number. I recognize that with visitors to the creek there will always be some level of medical emergencies. The public safety agencies are requesting that the U.S. Forest Service restore convenient access to victim's locations which existed prior to the Fossil Creel Wild and Scenic River designation. This includes keeping Forest Service Road 708 open to the public and maintained to allow emergency vehicle travel, restoring the old Irving Power Plant service road to the headwaters of Fossil Creek, and improving the Upper Springs Trail to allow more rapid access and extraction of victims suffering medical emergencies. I also suggest that the Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River Management Plan include a "public safety impact study" similar to what has been done with an "environmental impact study".

Finally, I would suggest that the U.S. Forest Service improve the Fossil Creek permit website and other published materials relating to Fossil Creek to include an honest description of the rigors and risks of visiting Fossil Creek, along with a description of minimum water supplies and other required equipment which would allow safe travel in the creek.

I appreciate your attention to this matter, and I thank you for your continued service to the public through the Coconino National Forest. Please contact me with any questions you may have regarding this letter.

Sincerely, ~~ Senator Sylvia Allen Legislative District 6

SA:kls

1700 West Washington St. Room 304 • Phoenix, AZ 85007 • Phone: 602-926-4138 Fax: 602-41 7-3255 Toll free : 1-(800) 352-8404 x64138 • E-mail: [email protected] Blue Ridge Fire District Office of the Fire Chief

Ms. Nicole Branton, District Ranger Coconino National Forest 8375 State Route 179 Sedona, AZ 86351

February 8, 2017

Dear Ms. Branton;

The Blue Ridge Fire District is located north of the Pine Strawberry Fire District and has a mutual aid

agreement v.1ith the Pine Strawberry Fire District. \ttJe provide backup1 mutual aid response to the Pine Strawberry communities should they be committed to other emergencies

This correspondence reflects our public comment regarding the proposed management plan for Fossil Creek.

As fire chief, I'm well aware of the public safety crisis in Fossil Creek and its adverse impact on the Pine Strawberry Fire District. The burden of responding to 490 rescues of hikers or visitors over the past t\vo years not only directly impacts the Fire Strawberry, but has a trickle down adverse affect on my fire district. When the Pine Strawberry Fire District is committed to a rescue event for as long as 5-7 hours, the Blue Ridge Fire District and the Payson Fire Department provide backup mutual aid response to the Pine Strawberry communities should there be emergencies in the absence of their paramedics and firefighting crews.

I agree that with the pubiic visiting Fossii Creek there will always be some levei of medical emergencies occurring at the creek. What's critical to emergency response agencies, however, is rapid access to the victim.

I wish the express the Blue Ridge Fire District's concern about the limited access to victims experiencing a medical emergency in Fossil Creek which exists today and likely will be worsened if certain options in the proposed management plan are adopted.

I am aware that prior to the Wild and Scenic River designation, access to victims in Fossil Creek was relatively prompt. The service road from the Irving Power plant up to the dam at the headwater springs for the creek vvas opened. This allo1vved rescue agencies and an ambulance to drive to this location to treat and package the patient and transport them relatively quickly. The road also allowed Forest Service to routinely patrol the area to enforce the camp fire ban. The Forest Service closed this road

5023 Enchanted Lane, Happy Jack, AZ USA 86024 PH: (928) 477-2751 FAX: (928) 477-2765, www.brfdaz.org Blue Ridge Fire District Office of the Fire Chief

several years ago and a once convenient and relatively prompt rescue now typically exceeds S hours. Patrols by the Forest service are now virtually nonexistent. This road needs to be reopened.

The Forest Service has also dosed the Forest Service 708 Road to the public and has installed gates on the Strawberry side and the bottom of the canyon near the water fall trailhead. While emergency service agencies have combinations to locks to allow them to use the road, we are concerned that the road has not been maintained for a number of years and its rapid deterioration will shortly prevent vehicle travel (i.e. ambulance). From a public safety perspective we strongly urge to Forest Service to reopen and maintain the FS 708 Road.

I am also aware that the Forest Service also rejected a proposal from the Gila County Board of Supervisors, the Gila County Sheriff and his two Posses, and the Pine-Strawberry Fire District to improve the Upper Springs trail, at their cost, to allow a side-by-side ATV access to victims on this trail. Such an improvement would reduce a 5-7 hour rescue to one and a haif hours. Again, prompt access to the victim is important to saving lives and we urge the Forest Service to proceed with this improvement.

The local Fire Districts are burdened with the task of responding to medical and other emergencies within the Tonto & Coconino National Forests while receiving no support of funding, equipment, access or communications infrastructure to aid in the response or recovery of those injured. The US Government has a responsibility to also ensure effective public safety to its citizens and visitors. We urge you to assist us. Life threatening emergencies require a proper response level to prevent further injury or death. A maintained road can rectify this and prevent public suffering of prolonged response. Our concerns should be a priority in the plans.

I am aware of comments submitted by Chief Gary Morris of the Pine Strawberry Fire District and strongly support his recommendation for a "public safety impact study" to be included in the planning process. Additionally, I fully support all five of his recommendations for improving public safety at Fossil Creek.

Sincerely;

John Banning, Fire Chief

5023 Enchanted Lane, Happy Jack, AZ USA 86024 PH: (928) 477-2751 FAX: (928) 477-2765, www.brfdaz.org WHISPERING PINES FIRE DISTRICT 10603 N. Houston Mesa Road Payson, Arizona 85541 928-474-3088 office, 928-4 72 -33 92 fax

Fossil Creek NGCCA

Ms. Nicole Branton, District Ranger Coconino National Forest 8375 State Route 179 Sedona, AZ 86351

February 8, 2017

Dear Ms. Branton;

The Northern Gila County Fire Chiefs Association includes fire chiefs of fire departments and fire Districts in Northern Gila County. That foot print includes the Pine Strawberry Fire District and the Fossil Creek area. This correspondence reflects our public comment regarding the proposed management plan for Fossil Creek.

The Association is well aware of the public safety crisis in Fossil Creek and its adverse impact on the Pine Strawberry Fire District. The burden ofresponding to 490 rescues of hikers or visitors over the past two years not only directly impacts the Pine Strawberry Fire District, but has a trickle down adverse affect on other fire departments and Districts in northern Gila County. When the Pine Strawberry Fire District is committed to a rescue event for as long as 5-7 hours, the Payson Fire Department and the Blue Ridge Fire District often have to respond as backup on mutual aid response the Pine Strawberry communities should there be emergencies in the absence of their paramedics and firefighting crews.

The Association believes that with the public visiting Fossil Creek there will always be some level of medical emergencies occurring at the creek. What's critical to emergency response agencies, however, is rapid access to the injured or ill person(s).

In supp01i of the Pine-Strawbe1Ty Fire District the Northern Gila County Fire Chiefs Association wishes to express our concern about the limited access to victims experiencing a medical emergency in Fossil Creek which exists today and likely will be worsened if certain options in the proposed management plan are adopted.

We are aware that prior to the Wild and Scenic River designation, access to victims in Fossil Creek was relatively prompt. The service road from the Irving Power plant up to the dam at the headwater springs for the creek was opened. This allowed rescue agencies and an ambulance to drive to this location to treat and package the patient and transport them relatively quickly. The road also allowed Forest Service to routinely patrol the area to enforce the camp fire ban. The Forest Service closed this road several years ago and a once convenient and relatively prompt rescue now typically exceeds 5 hours. Patrols by the Forest service are now virtually nonexistent. This road needs to be reopened. l

WHISPERING PINES FIRE DISTRICT 10603 N. Houston Mesa Road Payson, Arizona 85541 928-474-3088 office, 928-472-3392/ax

The Association is also aware that the Forest Service also rejected a proposal from the Gila County Board of Supervisors, the Gila County Sheriff and his two Posses, and the Pine Strawberry Fire District to improve the Upper Springs trail, at their cost, to allow a side-by-side A TV access to victims on this trail. Such an improvement would reduce a 5-7 hour rescue to one and a half hours. Again, prompt access to the victim is important to saving lives and we urge the Forest Service to proceed with this improvement.

We are also aware of comments submitted by Chief Gary Morris of the Pine Strawberry Fire District and the Association strongly supports his recommendation for a "public safety impact study" to be included in the planning process. Additionally, we fully support all five of his recommendations for improving public safety at Fossil Creek.

Sincerely; /4,W~ Ron Sattelmaier Whispering Pines Fire District - Fire Chief Northern Gila County Fire Chiefs Association - Chairman From: Roybal, Marcos A -FS To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: FW: Fossil Creek Date: Monday, February 13, 2017 7:46:06 AM Attachments: Fossil Creek Mounted Posse.pdf

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2017 9:41 AM To: Roybal, Marcos A -FS Subject: Fossil Creek

Marcos;

Please see attached letter that was forwarded to me regarding the Fossil Creek.

Chief Morris Ms. Nicole Branton, District Ranger Coconino National Forest 8375 State Route 179 Sedona, AZ 86351

Dear Ms. Branton;

The Gila County Sheriffs Mounted Posse regularly responds to Fossil Creek multiple times each summer to assist sheriffs deputies and the Tonto Rim Search and Rescue Squad members in extracting subjects experiencing medical emergencies on the Upper Sp~lngs Trail. On some occasions the injured or ill subject is place on the saddle of a horse which is then led up the trail to the trailhead. On other occasions the subject is incapacitated and is loaded into a "Big Wheel" litter. The litter is attached by rope to a horse of mule which is slowly led 4 miles up hill to the trailhead and the subject is placed in an ambulance. This procedure requires up to a dozen rescue personnel to complete. Three or four rescuers are needed on each side to keep the liter upright. This is a very laborious on rescuers and other fresh rescuers are required to rotate in and relieve exhausted rescuers. From time of dispatch to the time the subject is delivered to the trailhead is typically 5 - 7 hours

In addition to the rescue event being very laborious for rescuers it also presents a lot of physical work by the horse or mule and can wear them out. Using horse (because a side-by-side" ATV can't penetrate the trail) also presents a risk of further injury to the subject. Any "spooking" of the horse or mule, even rith a" break away release" device, almost certainly will dump the litter and subject. .

This correspondence reflects the Gila County Sheriffs Mounted ~osse public comment regarding the proposed management plan for Fossil Creek.

The Mounted Posse is well aware of the public safety crisis in Fos~il Creek and its adverse impact, not only for the Posse, but also other rescue agencies. The 490 rescues of hikers or \ visitors over the past two years, alone four fatalities, is clearly a public safety crisis that needs to be resolved by the Forest Service. Further, 5 to 7 hour rescue events are not only detrimental to the subject experiencing a medical event, it also has a trickle down adverse affect on other rescue agencies related to stripping paramedics and patrol deputies from protecting their communities for long periods of time.

The Mounted Posse recognizes that with the public visiting Fossil Creek there will always be some level of medical emergencies occurring at the creek. The Posse agrees with other respondents that critical to emergency response agencies is rapid and convenient access to the injured or ill subject.

In support of the all the other respondents, the Posse is very concerned about the limited access to victims experiencing a medical emergency in Fossil Creek which exists today, and likely will be worsened if certain public safety options are not inserted in the proposed management plan.

The Forest Service has also closed the Forest Service 708 Road to the public and has installed gates on the Strawberry side and the bottom of the canyon near the water fall trailhead. While emergency service agencies have combinations to locks to allow them to use the road, we are concerned that the road has not been maintained for a number of years and its rapid deterioration will shortly prevent vehicle travel (i.e. ambulance). From a public safety perspective we urge to Forest Service to reopen and maintain the FS 708 Road. The Posse also participated in a proposal from the Gila County Board of Supervisors, the Gila County Sheriff, the Tonto Rim Search and Rescue Squad, and the Pine-Strawberry Fire District to improve the Upper Springs trail, at our cost, to allow a side-by-side ATV access to victims on this trail. Such an improvement would reduce a 5-7 hour rescue to one and a half hours. It also is a much safer approach of extracting subjects. It will allow more prompt extraction and eliminates the concern of a horse spooking and dumping a subject on a litter. The Forest Service rejected that proposal. Again, prompt access to the victim is important to saving lives and we urge the Forest Service to proceed with this improvement.

We are also aware of comments submitted by Chief Gary Morris of the Pine Strawberry Fire District and the Mounted Posse strongly supports his recommendation for a "public safety impact study" to be included in the planning process. Additionally, we fully support all five of his recommendations for improving public safety at Fossil Creek described in the attached "White Paper".

Sincerely; ~ - ~

Gila County Mounted Posse Commander Earl Chitwood 928-23 8-0005 P. 0. BOX 1551 Payson, AZ 85 54 7 From: Jeremy Bell To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek Proposals Date: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 3:15:41 PM

Hi Nicole, We met at the hiking group meeting in Phoenix last week. I wanted to follow-up with you regarding my concern as to why all Fossil Creek proposed action plans ban swimming and jumping at the waterfall. As discussed this is in the 'recreation' area and recreation such as this should NOT be restricted. The current plan for handling this works well, there is no need for this type of government intervention in this area. As we know these activities have not caused issues for the many, many years people have been enjoying this area. Please let me know what the reasons are that this provision was included in all proposals.

Also, please let me know how to work with your group to prevent this type of unnecessary and unacceptable ban from ever occurring.

Thank you, Jeremy Bell From: Gail Griffin To: FS-comments-southwestern-coconino-redrock Subject: Fossil Creek CRMP Date: Monday, February 27, 2017 4:03:51 PM

February 27, 2017 Coconino National Forest Laura Jo West Forest Supervisor Attn: Fossil Creek CRMP P.O. Box 20429, Sedona, AZ 86341 Dear Laura Jo West: As a state senator who chairs the Senate Natural Resources, Water & Environment Committee, I would like to pass along my comments at the invitation of the Coconino and Tonto National forests on the issue of the Comprehensive River Management Plan (CRMP) for the Fossil This proposal can limit the economic growth of local and rural communities by foreclosing water and other development opportunities, as well as limiting the use of land for agricultural, forestry, and other practices. The designation of Fossil Creek as a Wild and Scenic River does not consider the adverse effects to the private property and multiple use policies. This proposal clearly conflicts with private property owner rights of landowners by preventing them from using their land in ways that are inconsistent with the Act. The designation of Fossil Creek does not consider the negative affects to local control and protection of the historic, cultural and local economies in the areas. I am concerned with protecting the rights of land owners and recreation abilities of the citizens of Arizona, and express great opposition to the Fossil Creek CRMP. A range of alternatives is discussed in the report, with Alternative A representing no change. This alternative should be adopted to allow proper access, development, and tourism through the area that greatly benefits the state of Arizona without the suppressive actions entailed in being a designated river. I hope you will consider the information I have provided that supports eliminating a Wild and Scenic River designation upon Fossil Creek. I hope that the Coconino National Forest reconsider their plan, and instead adopt a more conservative view on the threatened land development rights of Arizona citizens. These federal designations should not be passed without coordination and approval of state, county and local communities.

Sincerely, Gail Griffin Senator, District 14 Arizona State Senate

R E G I O .N A L CHAMBER., COMMERCE PAYSON • PINE • STRAWBERRY • STAR VALLEY • CHRISTOPHER CREEK P.O. Box 1380 Payson, AZ 85547

To whom it may concern:

First, I wish to thank the many men and women of the US Forest Service, the men and women stationed in our local ranger offices, the thousands of people who come to Rim Country every year to enjoy the many beautiful public parks, trails and attractions and mostly I want to take this opportunity to thank the men and women who dedicate their lives to the safety, protection and survival of the public at large specifically the Tow11 of Payson Fire Department, the Pine/Stra,vbeny Fire District, the Gila County Sheriffs Office, Tonto Search and Rescue and the many other Rim Country Region 1st responders.

I \V:rite this letter, for your consideration regarding the Fossil Creek Wilderness Area, in my role as the Membership Manager/Director of the Rim Country Regional Chamber of Commerce (RCRCoC) and on behalf of and in the best interest of the RCRCoC 332 members, the Rim Country business community and the citizens of Rim Country as a whole.

I personally believe that the Fossil Creek area is arguably one of the most beautiful places in the entire state of Arizona and certainly should be considered among the most beautiful natural areas in the United States. \,Vhile it seems a lot of this discussion has been centered on the thought or belief that a management plan needs to be in place for the Fossil Creek \Vilderness Area the truth is that a management plan needs to be in place for the people who visit and enjoy the outdoor activity that Fossil Creek has to offer. The river, surrounding vegetation and wildlife ifleft alone would do just about whatever the eons of time had planned for them no management or supervision required.

However the eons of time did not have "left alone" in the plans for Fossil Creek and as more and more and even more visitors to the site have become increasingly disrespectful to the beautiful natural surroundings and in many cases completely ignorant to the safety and well-being of themselves and the thousands of creek goers around them the need to manage the public has become a glaring issue that has rippled through every level of Rim Country

It is the official position of the Rim Country Regional Chamber of Commerce that in its current condition Fossil Creek represents at its best a public safety crisis and at its worse a catastrophe waiting to happen. While the current reservation system has lowered the number of rescues by "half' it is nothing more than a band-aide masking a developing nightmare. Local 1st responders are already strained with limited personnel, budget restrictions and large service distances to cover. Currently rescues covering a total distance of between 9 -12 total miles are taking up to and sometimes more than 7 hours. Rescuers have to hike in and out on foot carrying gear and victims on trails and unmaintained forest roads that get increasingly more and more dangerous with each passing storm.

It is our position that the US Forest Service should improve all existing forest roads including forest road 708, the service road at the Irving Plant and the upper springs trail. The continued efforts of the Pine Strawberry Fire District, the Rim Country Regional Chamber of Commerce, the Rim Country Regional Visitor Center to inform and dissuade visitors from attempting the incredibly difficult hike should remain until the roads and trails are brought up to conditions that support, at the very minimum, proper rescue efforts and the current reservation 'website and all future websites regarding fossil creek should very visibly notify the public of the clangers and requirements (water, shoes, sunblock etc.) for hiking Fossil Creek.

As I'm sure you know minutes and even seconds are critical in many rescue situations and 7 hours for a 12 mile round trip rescue because of unmaintained roads and a dismantled bridge is completely unacceptable. It is our position that no management plan of any kind can be effective without managing and planning for the safety of the public at large and the men and women dedicated to their rescue.

It should be noted that I ·write this letter after much discussion with many of our 332 members. The Rim Country business community is well aware of the economic impact that Fossil Springs Wilderness Area has. Many feel it could be a bigger draw than the Tonto Natural Bridge, Slide Rock or tubing the Salt River. Many feel if done correctly and monitored by the Ranger district that it could again be a huge seasonal draw. The economic impact already felt by the limitations of public use have already hit Rim Country. Several small hotels in Pine and Strawberry have closed unable to count on the summer influx of visitors needed to maintain operations while facing larger lower priced hotels situated closer to the other Rim Country attractions and amenities. \Ve have seen the same happen with restaurants, gift shops and various other small businesses. It doesn't take a degree in business to understand that when you cut the amount of people traveling to an area by half that the local economy is going to be affected. Especially when you go from 100,000 or so dovm to 50,000 or less. be a huge summer draw for the area.

Still many others feel that limiting the number of daily people and not just the vehicle traffic is in the best interest of everyone. It would seem that your public comment meetings and additional findings appear to echo similar statements. Everyone I spoke with however agrees on one very important point. vVithout the ability to access the area with ease, for at least emergency vehicle and personnel access, that its just a matter of time before something very preventable takes place and another family or worse entire towns mourn the losses.

I am available and appreciate the opportunity to discuss this matter further.

Chris Bertone Membership Manager Rim Corn1try Regional Chamber of Commerce [email protected] 928.978.7767 cell