Draft EA
Friends of the Rio Hondo
Looking for more information on the 2023 Draft Environmental Analysis process?
This page contains the instructions we provided for writing comments. If you are looking for the blow-by-blow blogging we did on the process, we archived all that here
Commenting on the Forest Service's Draft Environmental Analysis for Taos Ski Valley Gondola and Other Improvements Project
March 27, 2023
Comments are due by 5/22/2023 11:59:59 PM (MDT). But remember the Forest Service's project website went down the day before comments were due for the Scoping Notice so you should submit your comments a few days before the deadline just to be sure.
The Project Home Page is here
The Draft Environmental Analysis is here
The supporting technical documents are here
Submit your comments here
Read the comments here
A guide to the NEPA process is here.
Even more information:
===============================
There was a meeting at the Ski Valley on Thursday, March 23rd about the Draft Environmental Assessment. At that meeting we learned a number of important things:
If people submit duplicated remarks (like a form letter) they only get counted once, no matter how many people submit them.
For this round of comments remarks need to be "substantive". That means its not enough to say you are for or against the project. You need to say why you are for or against the project and provide evidence of what is wrong with the project.
The comments we all submitted during the Scoping Notice phase were read and put aside. The Forest Service did not address them directly in the Draft EA. But they say they will address them directly this time!
So instead of a form letter we are asking folks to resubmit the individual comments they made for the previous step (the Scoping Notice) but to change them (if needed) so they are "substantive."
We are also asking folks to read the Draft Environmental Assessment and identify areas of concern (errors, omissions, inaccuracies, etc.) and write substantive comments about those concerns.
Writing Substantive Comments:
When writing comments it's not enough to just say you are against the projects, you have to be specific about what is wrong with the Draft EA. Responses that don't address issues with the document won't have an impact on the Forest Service's decision making process. The first step is to read the Draft EA and the Technical Documents. Then identify errors in the EA. Finally write your substantive comments concerning the errors and submit them to the Forest Service.
What Substantive Comments Do:
Question, with reasonable basis, the accuracy of information in the EA;
Question, with reasonable basis, the adequacy of EA;
Present additional evidence other than that presented in the EA;
Present reasonable alternatives, including "No Action" alternatives, other than those presented in the EA;
Identify failures to follow NEPA and/or Forest Service Regulations; or
Cause changes or revisions in the proposal.”
Identify unaddressed relevant issues
Identify miscategorized intensity: For example if the Draft EA says an issue will only have a minor impact when there is evidence that it will have a major impact
These comments should be supported by links to verifiable data, reputable studies, or other information
such as maps, photos, and well-documented personal experience.
What Do Substantive Comments Look Like?
"The Draft Environmental Assessment failed to consider newly available water quality data from..." and include a link to the data and a description of why it is important
"The Draft Environmental Assessment did not avail itself of publicly available maps documenting the presence of Thompson's Kissing Frog in the project area. Those maps are available at...."
"Soil erosion is already occurring due to work in the project area. That erosion is readily visible at the project site and I have attached photographs."
"The EA uses the wrong methodology for analyzing the impact to wildlife of removing riparian areas. The methodology used is outdated and has been superseded by Frommer's Methodology among academics and professional wildlife biologists. The method used in the EA is wrong because it fails to properly calculate reproductive rates. Frommer's Methodology uses a proven, field verified method to calculate reproductive rates."
"An alternative to building a light rail line is to extend Olson's Trail to the Visitor's Center" and explain why you think this is a good idea.
You should follow-up your substantive comment with a proposal for how to improve the Draft EA. You may suggest one, or more than one, revisions. Including:
a. Modifying alternatives, including the proposed plan. For example, "An alternative to building a new Recreation Center is to repurpose the existing but unused Archuleta Pavilion" and explain why you think this is a good idea.
b. Developing and evaluating alternatives not previously given serious consideration. For example, "Require the builder to include culverts to allow turtles to safely pass under the road";
c. Supplementing, improving, or modifying analysis. For example, "The Environmental Analysis should be modified to include data from the latest University land use report.";
d. Making factual corrections. For example, "The Environmental Analysis should be modified to include the National Weather Service current estimate of annual rainfall of 10 inches per year";
e. Suggesting restrictions to the project. For example: "The new roadway should be required to be at least 100 yards from the fossil beds."
f. If you identify errors in the process suggest how to correct the error. For example, "The Analysis failed to include a No-Action alternative. The Environmental Analysis should be modified to include a No-Action alternative."
You can make non-substantive comments if you feel you need to provide context to your substantive comments, but the Forest Service will ignore any non-substantive comments. Better to spend your time writing substantive comments.
In general:
Be polite. Don't be angry or abusive
Be specific. Point out specific examples and evidence that support your position. If possible reference studies or public information that supports your position.
Be informed. Read the Draft EA and the Technical Documents and educate yourself on the NEPA process
Here is a template to help you get stated:
============= Copy n' Paste =============
May 12, 2023
James Duran, Forest Supervisor
℅ Paul Schilke, Winter Sports Coordinator
P.O. Box 110
Questa, NM 87556
Re: Taos Ski Valley Gondola and Other Improvements Projects Draft Environmental Assessment
Mr. Duran,
[Introduce yourself and state why you are interested in these projects]
[If you submitted comments about the Project in the past you should include a statement like:] I would like to incorporate all prior comments I have submitted since the first notice in the Federal Register, inclusive of my Scoping Notice comments for this process.
[Identify each item you are concerned about.]
[Explain why it is a problem.]
[Tell the Forest Service what action you want them to take]
[These items must be substantive for the Forest Service to consider them. See Above]
[Repeat for each item of concern]
Overall, I am asking you to remand the Draft Environmental Assessment for the Taos Ski Valley Gondola and Other Improvements Project and take additional time to consult with the affected communities, study the potential effects of the project and gather additional information before proceeding. Once all of that has been completed I'm asking the Forest Service to develop an Environmental Impact Statement for these projects.
Thank you in advance for acting on my concerns.
============= Copy n' Paste =============
Comments on Duplicating Comments
3/30/2023
We've had people contact us who are concerned that they might be wasting their time if they send in duplicate comments. At the March 23rd meeting the Forest Service said duplicated comments only count once. So it makes sense that people are concerned.
Here's what we think about that:
Don't worry about duplicating comments.
First, you can't count on someone else commenting on the same issue as you. The only way to be sure is to do it yourself.
Second, we read most of the comments from the Scoping Notice and from what we saw people who were saying the same thing were saying it differently. That is, even if people were making the same point they were using different examples and reasoning differently.
This diversity of explanation is a strength. The Forest Service is picky about what they will accept as a valid comment so the more people who contribute the more likely one of them will construct their comment in a way that the Forest Service will accept.
Third, we think that having a large number of comments advances our cause even if some of them are duplicated. There is a hidden political aspect to this process. We think if only three or four people commented, the Forest Service wouldn't value their contributions much, no matter how good those comments were. But if three or four hundred people comment, even if many are duplicates, it shows a broader base of support.
Remember the Forest Service works for politicians, politicians sit up and notice when lots of people are asking for something. Taos Ski Valley Incorporated is also more likely to take us seriously. Large numbers also show our strength to potential allies. If we want other organizations to support us, it helps if we show a lot of participation.
Duplicate Away!