Friends of Berthoud Pass

Printable View

08-30-2005, 07:58 PM
Pinner

Friends of Berthoud Pass

Hello Friends,

The USFS recently released an Environmental Assessment examining the impacts and effects of their proposed reclassification of the public land management areas on the Berthoud Pass corridor.

The document offers an early and noticeable nod to FOBP and your input:

Quote:

"It is clear from public comments and the Berthoud Pass Assessment that some level of use at the Pass is desirable."

After examining the document, you’ll see that the Forest Service is considering applying new management classifications to the Berthoud Pass area. For the most part we’re in support of the reclassification. The USFS supports continued recreation at the Pass but also has a mandate to protect and enhance lynx habitat. Lynx recovery is an issue within our scope only insofar as management for wildlife corridors might potentially limit recreational access to the entire East side of the Pass.

Quote:

”Managing the area solely for lynx and other wildlife would not provide for continued recreational use of the area.”

Please take a look at the comments below and take a moment to offer your input to the public process if you feel so inclined.

Comments should be directed to:

Clear Creek Ranger District
PO Box 3307
Idaho Springs, CO 80452
PHONE: (303) 275-5166
FAX: (303) 567-3021
EMAIL:
comments-rocky-mountain-arapaho-roos...reek@fs.fed.us

As usual feel free to ask us any questions regarding our position or our perception of the issues at stake here.

Thanks for your continued support. It’s gonna be a great season—see ya at the Pass!
08-30-2005, 07:59 PM
Pinner

Friends of Berthoud Pass
P.O. Box 48063
Denver, CO 80204
fobp_info@yahoo.com
www.berthoudpass.org

August 30, 2005

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

Berthoud Pass Area Environmental Assessment Comment

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 Forest Plan Amendment for Berthoud Pass Area Environmental Assessment released in June 2005.

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.

Recognizing the value of wildlife linkage, research and conservation corridors, scenic areas and to our mind, most significantly, backcountry skiing and snowboarding, we support the proposed land reclassification with one caveat.

We are concerned about possible future use restrictions and would expect public participation before any prohibitions on non-motorized recreational use are considered in this area.

While we acknowledge the original Draft Berthoud Pass Assessment Recreation Desired Conditions released March 17, 2004 may not be amenable to the idea of a traditional, for-profit ski area, we’d like to once more reiterate the point that a “non-traditional” or non-profit, co-operative area might, under the right circumstances, succeed.

To that end, FOBP is determined and optimistic that land classification limits set today will not impede the ability to allow this in the future, either through prohibitive permitting standards, geographic constraints or other unforeseen barriers. Similarly, we would like the Forest Service to specifically insure that recreational access to “management area 3.55, Corridors Connecting Habitat” is not inhibited. Furthermore we would advise that consideration of any proposed future commercial, for-profit enterprise on the 12 acres designated “management area 8.21, Developed Recreation Complex,” undergo the strictest public scrutiny.

We support the Forest Service commitment to serving the needs of recreational users of Berthoud Pass, and applaud you for addressing our concerns and for including the voice of backcountry users in the future design of the Berthoud Pass Area.

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
08-30-2005, 08:09 PM
Villiage Idiot

Way to save the lodge! :rolleyes:

Give up already and do something productive.
08-30-2005, 08:09 PM
Cornelius

nice work! keep us posted if any more petitions signing/comment sending etc. is needed.
08-30-2005, 08:10 PM
Villiage Idiot

Yeah. Cus petitions worked so well in the past.... :rolleyes:
08-31-2005, 04:51 AM
shera

They couldn't fight Vail to save Lynx habitat so I guess fighting some backcountry skiers will be easier...

Could this go the way of the Kite Lake routes where you can't even go over there?
08-31-2005, 07:42 AM
Dr. Gaper

Quote:

Originally Posted by Villiage Idiot

Way to save the lodge! :rolleyes:

Give up already and do something productive.

+1

Aren't there some whales to be saved or something?
08-31-2005, 08:14 AM
homerjay

Quote:

Originally Posted by SheRa

They couldn't fight Vail to save Lynx habitat so I guess fighting some backcountry skiers will be easier...

Could this go the way of the Kite Lake routes where you can't even go over there?

I think the Kite Lake situation is more one of private land (mining claims) and liability situation. Some idiot hurts his/herself on a 14er and sues the owner.

Also, I would think that non-motorized travel would not be restricted, which is far different than installing chairlifts, etc. on a forest service lease like the Vail situation.

Either way, it is critical that Berthoud Pass, on both sides of the road, remain open for recreation.
08-31-2005, 09:11 AM
dbldmnd

What are the dates for lynx season again?
08-31-2005, 11:22 AM
Pinner

It's harder to be involved in the game than to sit and critique from the sidelines. :p

I'm not afraid of our detractors, in fact I encourage all comments as they encourage discussion at every level.

While I don't think the lynx is an immediate threat to access, the provision written into the current EA does leave wide open the potential for seasonal, and consequently for permanent, closures. If you look at the EA, they've classified the entire East side for primary management as a wildlife corridor. All that FOBP is doing at the moment is ensuring that access to the Berthoud backcountry remains free, non-commerical and non-motorized. It's not really "Us vs the Lynx," and to boil it down that way is simplistic and uninformed.

On an ongoin basis, we've been monitoring closely the development of the trailhead and facilities at the summit. The lodge is gone and the Forest Service is going to build something new up there. We'll stay involved and maintain a voice in how they redesign the parking, pedestrian crossing of US40, sanitary facilities etc. We encourage you to join us in this effort.

In addition to keeping a close eye on developments in the public management of Berthoud Pass, we also are dedicated to informing and educating users of the area in safe travel techniques and doing our part, however small, to maintain and enchance the environment and character of the area (ie: Adopt-a-Highway at the summit).

We're always eager to explain our positions and perspective, and we always act collectively, with the support and guidance of our members. We're grateful for the support we receieve and selfless about our efforts-- what we do is for the greater good of all backcountry skiers. Even Idiots.

If you can, please take a minute to let the USFS know that you're concerned that they not enact policy that would potentially limit public access to the East side (Hell's, Mines, Floral, etc all could be affected)

Thanks for the support, y'all.
08-31-2005, 12:09 PM
Villiage Idiot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinner

It's harder to be involved in the game than to sit and critique from the sidelines.

The arena is empty except for one man,
Still driving and striving as fast as he can.
The sun has gone down and the moon has come up,
And long ago somebody left with the cup.
But he's driving and striving and hugging the turns.
And thinking of someone for whom he still burns.
08-31-2005, 11:32 PM
Pinner

bump

I'm on the road and unlikely to be on a computer for the next several days. The public comment period on the EA expires Sept 5th, so if you want to tell the USFS to not shut us out of the East side, speak up. Tell the Forest Service you want their assurance that access to the East side remains unfettered regardless of management classification. We'll help you craft your comments-- just ask.

In return, can I ask that y'all maggety-type skier-people try to bump this up to page a few times between now and Monday?

Thanks all!
09-01-2005, 07:32 AM
Elkhound Odin

Is a copy of the Environmental Assessment on the FOBP web site? I didn't see it. Can someone provide a link? I'd like to read it before sending any comments to the USFS. Thanks
09-02-2005, 07:44 AM
Pinner

I don't believe it's been posted to berthoudpass.org yet, but hopefully one of the boys in Denver can get to it today? Or maybe check the USFS website? Or call the Clear Creek Ranger District and request a copy via fax?

Sorry I can't do more for you at the moment. I'm on dial-up in a motel in South Carolina. :(
09-02-2005, 09:25 AM
Foggy_Goggles

Link to the Environmental Assessment

I just got of the phone with Ken Tu, the FS employees responsible for the public comment. The comment period has been extended to Sept. 19th. Comments can be emailed to comments-rocky-mountina-arapaho-foosevelt@fs.fed.us Ken can be reached via phone at 970.295.6623. He is happy to discuss the plan. I find to things worthy of comment.

1. Any comercial development within the 12 acre parcel go under the strictest of scruitiny.

2. The Lynx designation on the east side does not prohibit recreational use in the future. The FS has indicated that further trail development is unlikely

Side comment: Has anyone ever seen as much as as a Lynx print is the area? I don't know anyone who has. It seems the whole Lynx deal is pretty questionable in general.

This whole Forest Service EA process is pretty confusing. If you have any questions about what is going on in general let me know.
09-02-2005, 09:29 AM
robokill1981

How about FOBP puts up a short email here that all can cut and paste. It would probably get a good response.
09-02-2005, 10:08 AM
Foggy_Goggles

Quote:

Originally Posted by robokill1981

How about FOBP puts up a short email here that all can cut and paste. It would probably get a good response.

I'm hoping the letter above contains enought cut and paste material. Basically, their are two alternatives:

A. Keep the ski area designation (no-action) B. Re-classify the land to Corridor Connecting Core (Lynx habitat), Developed REcration Complex (12 acres that could be developed in the future), Backcountry Recreation and a Senic Area.

The comments should address reasons you are in favor of A or B and the support reasons the Forest Service should consider when making the decision.