USFS Draft Berthoud Pass Assessment - FOBP Reply

Hello Friends,

Sorry for the delayed update, but here is the letter Friends of Berthoud Pass has submitted to the public record regarding the US Forest Service assessment of conditions at The Pass.

While we weren't blindsided by any surprises in the document, we still have a few minor concerns, that, if addressed in a proper manner, will cease to be concerns.

Feel free to share any thoughts here, and if you would, please submit the same to info@saveberthoud.org. Thanks to the many of you who have joined our efforts, and shame on those of you who haven't. We're planning a really fun social event shortly and it sure would be nice to have everyone there who should be there!

Let us know what you think of the letter.

See ya at The Pass!

Quote:

---

Friends of Berthoud Pass
P.O. Box 48063
Denver, CO 80204
info@saveberthoud.org
www.saveberthoud.org


April 9, 2004

James S. Bedwell
Forest Supervisor
Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests and Pawnee National Grassland
240 W. Prospect Rd.
Fort Collins, CO 80524

Dear Mr.Bedwell,

The Friends of Berthoud Pass would like to once again thank the US Forest Service for continuing to maintain open channels of communication as we work together to fashion an equitable and sustainable future for Berthoud Pass. FOBP has been an open organization since it’s inception and we are dedicated to working with any and all stakeholders. We’d like to share some ideas and comments on the Draft Berthoud Pass Assessment released March 17, 2004.

We believe strongly in the USFS assessment with regard to providing for backcountry skiing, snow shoeing and snowboarding as outlined in the Integrated Desired Conditions. We recognize the myriad potential public uses of the area and support them all to the extent that one activity doesn’t supercede another to its detriment.

The issue of reclassifying the land in the vicinity of the former ski area is of concern to us. If the terrain is to be re-designated with a primary interest in scenic or wildlife issues, such a designation must not hinder the ability of the recreating public to access the area. This is a potentially volatile topic if not approached carefully and cooperatively. Furthermore FOBP is concerned that such designation not limit the future notion of a non-profit, co-operative ski and snow sports venture.

In that vein, while we acknowledge the Recreation Desired Conditions may not be amenable to the idea of a traditional, for-profit ski area, we’d like to make the point that a “non-traditional” or non-profit, co-operative area might, under the right circumstances, succeed. To that end, FOBP is concerned that policy limits set today not impede the ability to accomplish this in the future, either through stringent permitting standards, geographic constraints or other unforeseen barriers.

The Needs Assessment identifies that Berthoud Pass has failed several times as a viable, profitable ski area. FOBP believes that innovative and creative alternatives to the traditional for-profit ski business model do exist, and even though they might not be fully developed or even identified at this point, the USFS must be cautious to not hinder the possibility of any such future paradigm.

FOBP has made clear that we support the existence of some type of shelter at the top of The Pass. The benefits of a permanent facility at the summit have been well identified by the constituent parties and the Forest Service, and FOBP will support any effort to erect and operate sustainable facilities insofar as such a building falls within the scope of our organization. It is central to our mission that public recreation opportunities at Berthoud Pass remain accessible in a safe manner. A small scale, environmentally sensitive shelter, with safe parking, are key ingredients to this long term goal.

We applaud the Forest Service and especially the Clear Creek Ranger District for addressing our concerns and involving the voice of backcountry users in the Draft Assessment. We join you in your commitment to serving the needs of recreational users of Berthoud Pass.

Continued collaborative efforts will be needed to ensure that the Berthoud Pass corridor remains safe and recreational access is uninhibited. The Friends of Berthoud Pass is ready and willing to work hard with the Forest Service and all other stakeholders to ensure success. Please let us know how we can help facilitate this in any way.

Sincerely,


Friends of Berthoud Pass

---

Do you have a link for the Forest Service assement that you are addressing with your letter?

Sorry, yes. It's been posted before and is accessible through our web page, but here it is for ye lazy maggotses.

http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/arnf/news/me...assessment.pdf

An elocution reminiscent of a dewy breast in a mountain meadow.

Nicely done.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Buster Highmen
An elocution reminiscent of a dewy breast in a mountain meadow.

---

That reminded me of crazy high-alpine monkey loving on a bed of wildflowers. I mean the part about the sweaty breasts and all...

Thanks for the props. It took a solid effort on the part of the executive board to get this letter hashed out and we're pretty pleased with the result.

You read the DBA well. It looks like their prepping to have the Scenic value trump any consideration of allowing existing use or any type of development, including a poma or soime bare bones facilities.

I'm surprised that the Konsortium of KoOks here hasn't raised greater support for a low key, coop style ski area there.

The co-op concept is in the idea mill at the moment, but it doesn't have legs yet. I'd like to hear more of our members express an interest in the idea and support an initiative to explore its feasibility.

At present we have smaller ambitions that ought to get people stoked. For example, we're investigating the idea of a members-only shuttle service to help ease traffic and parking, while at the same time hooking ourselves up with a ride back up.

Anyone wanna donate a bus?

Flaccid members should be a hazard much later in life, like when you can't trust a fart.

So when you say Co-Op are you shooting for a Mad River kinda of Op or more like a Silverton kind of Op?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by jstead
So when you say Co-Op are you shooting for a Mad River kinda of Op or more like a Silverton kind of Op?

---

I'm thinking MRG, but I'd defer to M. Le Pinnoir and STD, among others more closely involved. But there would have to be a plan to get a lift and install it. At least there has been a history and a permit for Berthoud. Plus, BP is close to several urban centers that should provide the support for a coop.

Silverton has been hampered by BLM DEIS stuff. Once they get their full permit, things maychange for at least part of their terrain, but that's really up to the owners.

In the assessment, they say that the radio towers and road up Mines peak detract from the scenic quality of the area. A couple of pomas certainly would be less obtrusive, and barely noticeable considering the man-made structures already in place. Especially if the pomas were set back in the drainages away from the pass proper.

If they can make the scenic argument stick, I'd bet that would nix any chances of a lift, no matter how well done.

If it matters, get on the stick and write 'em.

Input is great. I certainly hope you passed your opinions on to the FS during the public comment period. We have been pushing the FS to post all the submited letters on their website. It will be interesting to see who all the other stakeholders are. There are certainly areas's of concern in the FS's need's assessment, I'll post the areas I highlighted when I'm home. I'd like to hear what y'all have to say.

BTW- I believe I have mentioned it before, I think it is possible to open 100% of the former terrain with only two surface lifts, no shuttles. One leaving from the old CC shuttle turnaround and climbing up to the old topshack and the other leaving from the old floral turnaround and going to the old E. side topshack (requires a turn though, something that might be tough? I dunno). Of course it will require dealing with a few extra highway crossings and some creative traversering.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Pinner

Anyone wanna donate a bus?

---

I can get you one in June. Someone will need to drive it back from Chicago, probably about $200-300 in diesel.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Buster Highmen
Flaccid members should be a hazard much later in life, like when you can't trust a fart.

---

I take it you're a trustafartian.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Shredhead
I can get you one in June. Someone will need to drive it back from Chicago, probably about $200-300 in diesel.

---

Let's see, if 10 maggots loaded up, that would be like $20-30 each for gas, $15-20 for food, $8-10 for hookers...

Will it be a short bus?

I think it should be decorated like Ken Kesey's acid test bus.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Alex P. Keaton
I take it you're a trustafartian.

---

No, I'm an old school, earn-your-flatulence kook who happened to get lucky. Very lucky.

She was a singular bean, undercooked and ripe for consumption. It was a party, we were getting wasted and equally aghast when we found out that the other skied.

Ski???? You ski? She said.

And I remember thinking, yeah, sure, a moist snaquette who says she can ski. Ho boy, I've been here before. Usually they can't ski and spend all day whining.

I'm so glad I was wrong. So wrong. So very, very wrong that it hurt really, really good.

Now we have a pair of undercooked beans of our own.

And that, my friend, is life in le jardin.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Pinner
Let's see, if 10 maggots loaded up, that would be like $20-30 each for gas, $15-20 for food, $8-10 for hookers...

---

I'll drive it back, but I can't do it until december.

Note: I am not kidding

Note #2: I will convert the $10 hooker money to singles and visit Shotgun Willies with the Pin man, funken, and board.

From sheet A-10 of the USFS draft...

Quote:

---

Base facilities are limited. Currently the lodge is 12,500 square feet with little room for expansion. Approximately 1,000,000 square feet would be needed to meet the needs of skiers.

---

That can't be for real, and has to be a misprint.

Also did anyone see the letter to the editor in the Daily Manifest(local grand county paper) from a Garst family member who owned the area from 1977-1987? They mentioned that a good portion of their income during that time period was during the summer selling lift rides and refreshments to the tourists on the pass. They say that none of the other owners have had any type of buisness operating during the summer and it is needed to keep the ski area in the black.

CO-OP? For what? To take me up the 15 minute boot pack/skin track? Shuttle rides? It's faster to just skin back up anyway instead going to the road, waiting while hitching, driving to top, then hiking again. I usually get picked up in less than 15 minutes of hitching. All the place needs is some improved bathrooms at the top, or wherever, and some improved parking. It's been proven that almost nobody is going to pay to ski there in any fashion. A lodge type building will just bring more punters than are already up there. I just checked the FOBP website and got this from the 'Our Goals' section
"...a shelter is crucial to the future safety and benefit of all users of the pass.
Why is a new structure crucial? I'm a regular user and was stoked to see the lifts go. I would be equally stoked to see the old lodge razed to the ground. We have enough developed land out there as it is, don't we? Losing more and more public land every day. There can't be enough public land under wilderness, or scenic designations these days. Aren't there enough 'ski ventures' in CO already? Leave the place raw. Go ski at one of the 26, or whatever it is, resorts that are already here if you want go have a resort experience. Berthoud. Great just the way it is! Lifts of any sort there are just flat out pointless. The hike is only 15 minutes to the top of any chair/lift that would go in fer crissakes!!!!!

Nice job on the letter by the FOBP adminstration, articulate, factually correct and thoroughly consistent.

I wrote a letter to the FS, and stated that I would like to see no lifts at all in the future for BP. I'm a memeber of the FOBP, but part of the radical right winged 'no lifts' faction.

As for a facility, some structure is critical for the environmental impact of the waste that is produced by the visitors to the pass. But really all it needs to be is a restroom facility with a trash receptacle.

I see Berthoud Pass as a trailhead with waste facilities. Less is more, let the beauty of the pass speak for itself.

[/B][/QUOTE]As for a facility, some structure is critical for the environmental impact of the waste that is produced by the visitors to the pass. But really all it needs to be is a restroom facility with a trash receptacle.

I see Berthoud Pass as a trailhead with waste facilities. Less is more, let the beauty of the pass speak for itself. [/B][/QUOTE]

I concur!!! Wholeheartedly!!

more feedback and comments