A message for concerned citizens:
“... Regardless of any legal action, the Wolf Creek Village plan will require many more years of planning, with the developer needing a permit from the Colorado Department of Transportation to access U.S. 160 and permits from Mineral County.
“There are a lot of opportunities for public participation on upcoming decisions that will probably stretch out for quite a long time,” Mark Pearson (with the San Juan Citizens Alliance) said. “There are enormous physical and structural limitations for a village up there. Is there enough water to support the city they are proposing to build? How are they going to get power up there? All this will require some significant planning and public scrutiny.” ( reported by Jason Blevins )
This post is a collection of information regarding ANILCA (the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act,), and it will be updated as new information becomes available.
It’s important because a controversial section of that Act has become LMJV’s trump card in forcing the USDA-USFS into supporting their development wishes, rather than pursuing a strategy of ecological caution and getting Alberta Park returned to the RGNF.
As for ANILCA §3210(a), basically when vast tracks of Alaska lands became part of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, this provision was added to the follow up ANILCA Act of 1980. The intention was to guarantee private land owners (that now found themselves landlocked within the newly established federally owned lands) road access.
Whereas at Alberta Park, RGNF, is a situation where the parcel of land was torn away from the Rio Grande National Forest by some heavy handed '80 style Washington DC political wheeling and dealing, that had USDA rejecting their own Rocky Mtn. Region USDA-USFS experts' considered facts and reversing their decision to reject Red McComb original devious land swap offer.
The Alberta Park parcel, in the middle of Wolf Creek watershed should never have been removed from the Rio Grande National Forest to begin with. It was and is a mistake that I believe deserves being reversed in light of contemporary Rio Grande River Basin water issues, and ecological common sense.
ANILCA §3210. Access by owner to nonfederally owned land
