Letter: Stick to your mission, Forest Service

I have written before and, like a broken record, here I am again. US Forest Service, please think fairly and responsibly and clearly when it comes to the proposal of a paved road to the Berlaimont Estates. It is not the Forest Service’s job, nor responsibility, to enable millions of dollars in speculative development ventures within national forests. The Forest Service is only required to provide “adequate access” roads for “reasonable use and enjoyment” of in-holders (as many others and I have pointed out previously). 

This access and maintenance is already being provided, and the regulations provide timely closures for wildlife, as needed, and stated. It is incredulous that the Forest Service is even considering such a blatantly inappropriate move when it flies in the face of the Forests Service’s own mission statements, rules, and regulations. Nor do we national forest owners want, expect, or condone such luxury developments to suddenly appear within our national forests. 

As Cathy Blaser noted in her recent letter to the editor, and as brought-up at the Berlaimont gathering recently at Battle Mountain High School: While the developer/speculator pays millions for the road construction, the high cost of maintaining such a road year-round falls on the shoulders of the county and on us taxpayers.

These ongoing costs are for a select few to reach their second home “estates,” when most, or all, the homes may not even be occupied. Many second-home owners use their homes only a few weeks a year.  That’s unwarranted.

But regardless of the road maintenance costs, the road should not be there in the first place, according to the Forest Service’s own regulations.

Maria Minick

Edwards