Indian Peaks Group Conservation Committee

Draft Minutes

February 4, 2004

THOSE PRESENT: Kirk Cunningham, Bev Baker, Justin Reilly, Billie
Gutgsell and Dave Kuntz (City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain
Parks Dept.)

1. Update On The Boulder Open Space And Mountain
Parks Visitor Management Plan - Dave Kuntz

Boulder's Open Space Visitor Management Plan is getting
attention not only in Boulder, but also nearby areas; Dave and recreation
group representatives were recently interviewed on NPR's "Colorado
Matters" program. When the Visitor Management Plan is finalized and
approved by Council, probably this summer, we may want to feature it in
an IPG General Meeting.

The recently passed ballot referendum should have a positive
effect on both the acquisition of new lands and on management of
existing open spaces. Approximately 7000 additional acres, or about $80
million worth, would be suitable for open space purchase, but with
varying degrees of availability. In addition, as a first priority, existing
open space bonds need to be paid off, and there is a considerable amount
of deferred maintenance that the Open Space Dept. inherited when it
absorbed Mountain Parks. At its highest point in recent years, the annual
budget for the open space program was $18 million, but is now down to
around $14 million.

Visitor management has been in the news in recent years because
of complaints that the Open Space Dept. "constrains recreational use." This has become an issue because of increasing visitation on limited acreage and because
historically Boulder open space, as the region's oldest such system,
allowed use without much constraint until conflicts arose from overuse.
At the same time, developing concerns about preserving the biologically-
rich transitional plains-to-foothills ecotone, everywhere becoming over-
developed, have arisen. Boulder's open space management has been
considerably more permissive than open space management in JeffCo and
other areas - those programs have learned a lesson about the down sides
of Boulder's permissiveness.

The major claims of OSMP mismanagement that have been raised
are: 1) too little access and too few trails, 2) limitations on dogs (which
are more lenient than elsewhere), and 3) limitations on bike use, which
were first restricted because of overuse of the Mesa Trail. At a recent
City Council retreat, Council members designated as one of their 6 top
goals, resolving conflicts with and between recreationists on open space.
Shawn McGrath and Will Toor put this issue on the table. Crystal Gray
was the only Council member to emphasize the protection of natural
resources.

The Open Space Dept. has convened two advisory groups on
visitor management in recent years. The first one recommended that a
zoning system be created and that environmental protection would be the
first priority when there was an issue about recreation impacts. A
planning effort based on these recommendations was delayed, however,
because of the time and attention required by the merger of the OS and
MP Departments. The most recent Visitor Plan Advisory Committee
recommendations endorsed the zoning concept and made some more
specific recommendations regarding dog problems, maintenance
activities, enforcement etc.

At present, a draft zoning map devised by staff partly on the basis
of suggestions from interest groups, has been prepared (but is not yet
publicly available). However, zoning is only one dimension of a multi-
dimensional management problem. It was considered necessary to hold
more stakeholder meetings to discuss the Department's draft, which has
been received positively by most interest groups. Two meetings will be
held this winter and spring, about 6 weeks apart. The first will cover more
process than substance and the second will focus on substance. The
object of the two meetings is to identify areas of consensus (if any) and
areas of disagreement, which package will be presented to the Open
Space Board of Trustees, then to Council, with a likely mid-summer
deadline.

To facilitate discussion, the staff has drawn up a specific list of
proposed management actions and their associated costs, with major
emphasis on capital projects and on staffing for education and
enforcement - rangers will play a prominent role in the result.
IPG members expressed concern about how the process will play
out and how participants will have their voices heard. A mediation format
will be used, but an overarching consensus is not expected. Each
stakeholder group will need to appoint a representative and that
representative should be present when results are discussed at Open
Space Board of Trustees and City Council meetings. Justin Reilly plans to
play that role. He will be meeting with Kirk Cunningham and Steve
Welter in the next week to discuss our bargaining position. That position
will be distributed to Ex-Com members prior to the first meeting.

2. Wildlife Issues - Billie Gutgsell

A. Conservation Certificate for habitat protection - SC support?

Mike Smith, Chapter Wildlife Chair, has been trying to think of
new and different ways of raising money from the public to support non-
game programs. The Conservation Certificate is one such idea, but Mike
has not yet found any way to push his idea with the Division of Wildlife.

B. Management Of Elk Viewing On The Caribou Open Space

Boulder County has control over elk-viewing on the Caribou
Open Space, but the City of Boulder has some interest because some of
its watershed lands are affected. The issue regarding elk-viewing is how
this can be allowed without overly disturbing the elk herd. Billie will be
attending the public meeting on this issue on February 11th sponsored by
the County.

C. Prairie Dog "Control" Regulations In Boulder

The City of Boulder is in a difficult position with respect to
controlling prairie dog populations on open space - it does not want to
poison them, but their populations are getting our of control and
damaging other open space values, like native plant communities, and
other control methods (relocating, birth control, predators etc.) either are
not proven or are otherwise inadequate. For example:

• birth control methods using sex hormones have not yet been proven to
  work,
• raptors, a chief prairie dog predator, are limited not by prairie dog
  numbers but by other aspects of their habitat,
• badgers are very territorial and their territories cover much larger areas
  than prairie dog colonies, so their numbers are too small to effectively
  control prairie dog numbers,
• foxes and coyotes have other prey as well as prairie dogs,
• relocation possibilities have maxed out in Boulder County and
  relocation to other counties is not allowed by state law without the
  permission of the receiving county (although whether they can be
  relocated to federal land in another county may not be a settled point),
• at present, the most effective control on prairie dog numbers is bubonic
  plague, but plague also is used by opponents of prairie dog colonies to
  oppose the presence of the animals on a public health basis.
  Soon there will be a meeting of state and local wildlife agencies to
  explore possible regional approaches to the prairie dog habitat issue.
  Councilwoman Crystal Gray is urging more attention to the establishing
  of a "mitigation bank" for prairie dog eradication, so that proper habitat
  for them can be purchased elsewhere.
• The IPG Wildlife Committee is still looking for a replacement for
  Billie as Chair in a month or two. The Committee needs less an "issue
  person" than someone who can organize volunteers for the wolf
  campaign (see below).

D. The Wolf Reintroduction Campaign

A map of potential wolf reintroduction areas in Colorado has been
put together by the Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project. It is a 2' x 3'
map on vinyl and Billie will get one copy of it for tabling displays. Billie
also has a copy of the accompanying book "Wolves in the Southern
Rockies," published in August, 2000. She is waiting for Tina Arapkiles of
the Southwest Regional Office of the Club in Boulder to initiate the wolf
reintroduction campaign. Tina will be giving a presentation on the
campaign at an IPG General Meeting on February 23rd at the Meadows
Library.

3. Letters Worth Writing

A. Revegetating The Hayman Fire Area - Jean Smith -
Comments Due By Feb. 16th

When the flames were raging in the Hayman fire in 2002, the best
use of a road was to get out or get in, depending on whether you were a
resident or a firefighter. Restoration and natural revegetation is
underway, but roads are contributing to the massive sedimentation: from
one to 86 tons per acre on average; from minor ruts in the roadbed to
gullies four feet deep in some places. Wildlife habitat, fisheries, water
quality, containment of weeds and many other factors are at risk.
Please write a letter to the Forest Service before February 16!
Their initial travel management proposal for the Hayman burn includes
closing 25% (about 60 miles) of the existing legitimate roads and all of
the user created and abandoned routes.

Many are opposed to this proposal. At two public meetings
enviros were outnumbered umpteen to 1 by motorized recreation
enthusiasts. Your letter is needed!

Some of you did mapping here, and we're counting on your
personal experience. The Forest Service agrees with many of your
recommendations. All the details are below

Jean Smith

Forest Service Proposes To Close Many Miles Of
Road In The Hayman Fire Area - Your Letters Of
Support Needed By February 16

The U. S. Forest Service has proposed to close up to 65 miles of
road in the 138,000-acre Hayman Fire area. We need lots of letters to
support this effort generally and to ask for some additional closures of
roads that are harming the environment. You will remember how the
racing flames of the Hayman fire dominated the news for a month in
2002. Now, with regrowth in many areas and restoration going on, we
can help nature recover faster, improve water quality and wildlife habitat,
and still leave plenty of recreational opportunities.

You have until February 16 to provide hard mail comments to:
Travel Management Project, USDA Forest Service, 540 Elkton Dr.,
Colorado Springs, CO 80907. Or e-mail comments to:
R2_psicc_hayman_recovery@fs.fed.us (Be sure to submit your full name
and hard mail address; otherwise, your comments might not be accepted.)
Various materials and maps are available at:
http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/psicc/hayres/travel/

Why We Should Support Most Of This Proposal.

It is a well-established fact that the Forest Service has a road
system that considerably exceeds the agency's ability to manage it
properly. Road construction and use, especially for those routes which
are not properly maintained, are known to cause many adverse impacts to
natural ecosystems, including: soil erosion, water quality degradation,
fragmentation of wildlife habitat, and propagation of noxious weeds. The
2002 Hayman Fire and subsequent monsoon rains damaged many miles of
road, which are now causing considerable resource damage, and would
need expensive repair and/or frequent maintenance to be safe for public
use.

The Forest Service has a responsibility to close or repair roads
that are causing resource damage. This is a golden opportunity for the
agency to establish a safe, manageable transportation system in the
Hayman Fire area that is sensitive to environmental concerns and realistic
in light of expected budgets.

In brief, of the 129 miles considered, the Forest Service proposes
to maintain 50% for public use, and to seasonally restrict, close,
decommission (i. e., obliterate), or convert to other uses the other 50%.
In addition, the agency proposes to decommission 35-70 miles of
unclassified (non-system, usually user-created) roads. While there are a
few problems, including leaving the Corral Creek-Longwater Gulch and
Hackett Gulch loop routes open, in general the proposal deserves our
support.

Make the following recommendations to the Forest Service in
your letter or e-mail comments:

• -- Strongly support the closure of all unclassified routes, especially
  illegally created routes.
• -- Support all of the routes the Forest Service proposes for year round
  closure or decommissioning. Of special concern are routes along the
  South Platte River such as Metberry 4WD (205) and Northrup (206),
  which are southeast of Cheesman Reservoir, and the section of Corral
  Creek (540) on the west side of the South Platte upstream to the Tarryall
  River, including the branches Crossover (220.A) and Widow Maker
  (220.B), which access a ford of the Tarryall River and two fords of the
  South Platte River. Closing these last three routes alone would reduce the
  damage from dispersed camping on the river bank and reduce the rivers
  fords, which are also damaging, to just one at Corral Creek.
• -- Request that the Forest Service reconsider its recommendation to leave
  Corral Creek, Longwater Gulch and Hackett Gulch routes open to
  motorized use. These routes provide easy access to the South Platte,
  including a ford connecting Corral Creek with Longwater Gulch, and
  contribute to riparian area damage and lower water quality. At a
  minimum all three routes should be closed well back from the riparian
  zone. Note that these routes all have very steep sections and have
  suffered severe damage from rains after the fire.
• -- Note that these strategic road closures near Cheesman Reservoir -
  Sheeprock (to the west), Wildcat Canyon (to the south), and Metberry,
  Longwater, and Hackett Gulches (to the southeast) would expand
  roadless areas, or at least keep the primitive qualities of such areas from
  being degraded by abusive recreation.
• ---- Support the proposed closure of the complex of routes from Road
  211.i west of Cheesman near Sheeprock; Kelsey Creek (536), Flat
  Saloon (543) and Brush Creek (535), which are cherrystems into
  Gunbarrel roadless area, as well as Cabin Creek adjacent to Green
  Mountain roadless area.
• --Ask that roads which are "converted to another use" not be converted
  to motorized trails, as the damage occurring on and near these routes (i.
  e., soil erosion, wildlife habitat fragmentation) would likely continue if
  they remain open to motorized use.
• -- Ask that all roads that have an adverse effect on water quality be
  closed. Again, the roads that are near and/or ford the South Platte River
  are the highest priority for closure and decommissioning.
• --Ask that the Forest Service consider wildlife habitat, especially riparian
  areas, when determining which roads to close. Note that under the Forest
  Plan, high quality habitat must be maintained in many parts of the
  Hayman Fire area.
• --Ask that the roads most damaged by the fire and subsequent rains be
  obliterated ("decommissioned"), not just closed. Leaving then on the
  ground may still allow resource damage, especially soil erosion and water
  quality degradation, to occur. Similarly, the roads that have the most
  seriously adverse impact on wildlife and habitat should also be
  obliterated.
• --Mention your own connection and interests in your comments.. We
  must counter the claim made in a recent email by the Executive Director
  of the Colorado Off Highway Vehicle Coalition (COHVCO) : "It's very
  important that the OHV community (that's the dirt bikers, ATV riders,
  snowmobilers and 4 wheelers) band together to prevent a wholesale
  closure of roads and trails in the Hayman area. That's what the enviro's
  (sic) want. Most of the enviro groups we OHV/4wheelers come in
  contact with are those that want to close ALL public lands to multi-use,
  especially OHV recreation. They sit behind their desks and devise plans,
  strategies, and concepts on how to accomplish these goals. They're so
  busy in doing this that they don't have the time or inclination to actually
  go out in the filed (sic) and work on public lands."
  Let the Forest Service know you do get out into public lands and
  that your requests are reasonable, given the amount of damage by the fire.
  Motorized recreation interests will besiege the Forest Service with
  lots of letters insisting that almost all routes, no matter how damaging,
  remain open to public motorized use. We must counter this with lots of
  letters from our side. Please take the time to write a letter on this
  important project.

For more information, call:

Jean Smith, Upper Arkansas and South Platte Project 719 748-8167
Rocky Smith, Colorado Wild 303 839-5900
Roz McClellan, Rocky Mountain Recreational Initiative 303 447-9409

B. Open space and environmental alert- eis study
For northwest corridor freeway (would connect Golden
with Broomfield)

This project doesn't just affect Golden, Broomfield, and
Westminster. Let CDOT know that we're not in favor of high speed,
interstate type highways cutting through our open space and
communities. See below for further background and talking points.

Background

The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has begun
an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for the Northwest Corridor. The
EIS study is basically meant to study transportation options in the same
study area as the previously performed North West Quadrant Feasibility
Study. That study concluded that transportation mobility would be best
served with a strategy of improved north-south arterial roads- not a high
speed, interstate type beltway facility. However, proponents of a beltway
connection through the Northwest Quadrant hope that yet another study
will somehow change what is needed in the way of transportation
improvements.

The EIS study is intended to study the impacts of a variety of
transportation improvements and alignments on the environment in the
Northwest Corridor. These improvements, especially a beltway
connection, could negatively impact air quality, wildlife habitat, open
space and other quality of life issues in the region. That is why all citizens
need to actively participate in the EIS study process, to inform CDOT
about the need to maintain environmental quality, the integrity of open
space and quality of life in the Northwest Quadrant.

Points for Public Input

The Sierra Club contact is Chapter Transportation Chair Bert
Melcher 303-770-3683 (a.melcher@comcast.net).

Visit the CDOT web site for this project.

Look at transportation alternatives for the entire northwest quadrant of
the metro area. This is mandatory under NEPA law and regulations.
Alternatives should include:

1. The recommended arterial improvements in the Northwest
   Quadrant Feasibility Study.
2. An "eastern alignment" roughly parallel to Indiana and/or
   McIntire that terminates at SH-58 or at I-70 near the intersection
   of SH-58.
3. The recent plan by Golden ("The Muller Study")
4. All alternatives must be considered as equal, without bias.
   Transparency and public comment must be ensured.

Do the Environmental Impact Statement carefully without rushing it.
Utilize the methods laid out in the CDOT Environmental Stewardship
Guide of March 2003. Ensure that the environmental resource inventory
of "understanding the environment" is accomplished before any screening
of alternatives is started. Comply with NEPA and CEQ guidelines in
using environmental parameters in creating and screening alternatives to
avoid and not just mitigating impacts.

* Ensure that the Study Area includes the ENTIRE Northwest quadrant
of the Denver metro area (as stated in the Federal Register), including the
Wadsworth Blvd corridor to at least Sheridan Blvd. Wadsworth is the
only through N-S corridor in the quadrant and excluding it would ignore
some of the major problem areas as well as some of the primary benefits
of transportation improvements. Further, it would bias the EIS against the
many citizens in that area who are protected by the "Environmental
Justice" provisions of NEPA.

* Participation in the EIS Consensus Committee should be widely open to
citizens groups from across the quadrant and not limited to governmental
agencies with token representation from environmental and economic
groups.

* The "Memorandum of Understanding" between CDOT, Arvada, Jeffco,
and Broomfield describes hasty and unrealistic deadlines that should be
ignored entirely in favor of a process that ensures a careful, thoughtful,
and thorough process. This document taints the entire EIS process and
should be renounced by CDOT.

* Land-use assumptions and projections are among the most important
criteria for transportation analysis. They are also some of the most
important issues to the public, especially in how they reflect future local
growth and environment. For this purpose,
o At the start of the EIS, provide the public with a clear
presentation of: 1) existing land use plans, zoning, and prospective
development; 2) what methods in this EIS will be used to estimate
future land-use, including induced growth and how you will allow
local government and public discussion of this. Consider quality
of life issues in assessing the appropriateness of induced growth
along the mountain backdrop.

o At such time as future land-use projections are made, these
should be made available for public discussion before they are
used for transportation modeling.

* If a toll road is a possibility, identify all investors, financial beneficiaries
such as land speculators or developers, etc. How do the returns and
benefits to these parties affect the setting of tolls?

* What is the role of the Colorado Tolling Enterprise (CTE) in the EIS
process? If tolling is considered as a funding alternative, will the CTE be
involved? At what point and to what degree?

* Provide a clear description of the modeling before the model runs are
made, so that the qualified members of the public can see this at the
earliest time.

* Describe right up front how your scope of work will address the
various environmental impacts of the alternative improvements, including:

• Air quality
• Noise
• Aesthetic impact on the mountain backdrop
• Separation of communities

* There are populations in the area subject to the provisions of
Environmental Justice (EJ) laws and regulations. Describe how you
propose to identify, analyze, and communicate with low income, ethnic,
elderly, disabled and EJ persons and address impacts and mobility as per
FHWA and other guidelines.

Send written comments by February 15th to:

Northwest Corridor EIS Team, CDOT
2000 South Holly St,
Denver CO 80222
Comments can also be made on the CDOT website at:
www.DOT,state.co.us/northwestcorridoreis/

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Make your voice heard! Find out how to get Take Action Alerts
and other important Sierra Club messages by email at:
http://www.sierraclub.org/email

Back to Top of Page

   get Involved

   get Connected

   get Informed

   get Outside