VWC-EIS, Objection Issues and Responses #7, #8, #9 #10

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2018

Index of VWC-EIS, Objection Issues and Responses. 33 issues addressed 

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service

Rocky Mountain Regional Office 

Response to Objections on the Village at Wolf Creek Access Project, Rio Grande National Forest

My post of the "Index of the VWC-EIS, Objection Issues and Responses" has been amazingly well visited.  Ironically, I also put together a series of posts of highlights from those 33 responses.  Then I ran out of steam and it didn't seem important, and other matters were, and I was gone, now I'm thinking perhaps it's more important than I thought and that it would be good to post them after all.

___________________________________________________________________

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service

Rocky Mountain Regional Office 

Response to Objections on the Village at Wolf Creek Access Project, Rio Grande National Forest 

November 2018 Village at Wolf Creek Access Project Draft 11/15/18

Objection Issues and Responses 

Contents 

Issue 7: Alternatives involving mitigation measures and ANILCA terms and conditions were not analyzed

Issue 8: The no-action alternative is inappropriately dismissed

Issue 9: The Forest Service failed to incorporate the input of several key cooperating agencies

Issue 10: ANILCA and existing Forest Service regulations do not require enhanced road access be provided to the federally encumbered Leavell-McCombs Joint Venture parcels

VWC-EIS, Objection Issues and Responses #14, #15, #16

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2018

Index of VWC-EIS, Objection Issues and Responses. 33 issues addressed 

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service

Rocky Mountain Regional Office 

Response to Objections on the Village at Wolf Creek Access Project, Rio Grande National Forest

My post of the "Index of the VWC-EIS, Objection Issues and Responses" has been amazingly well visited.  Ironically, I also put together a series of posts of highlights from those 33 responses.  Then I ran out of steam and it didn't seem important, and other matters were, and I was gone, now I'm thinking perhaps it's more important than I thought and that it would be good to post them after all.

___________________________________________________________________

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service

Rocky Mountain Regional Office 

Response to Objections on the Village at Wolf Creek Access Project, Rio Grande National Forest 

November 2018 

Village at Wolf Creek Access Project Draft 11/15/18
Objection Issues and Responses 

Contents 

Issue 14: The property appraisal confirms adequate access and comparable properties exist

Issue 15: The effects on wetlands are inadequately analyzed

Issue 16: The ANILCA alternative would lead to a loss of Canada lynx habitat and reduced functioning of an important Canada lynx linkage

Red’s a billionaire and We Are The People. Down to brass tacks.

NO Village at Wolf Creek.

     

Durango Herald's, Jonathan Romeo wrote a story March 7th 2019 about the latest court twist in the Village at Wolf Creek saga:  "A Freedom of Information Act was filed nearly eight months ago by a coalition of environmental groups to obtain select U.S. Forest Service documents related to the controversial Village at Wolf Creek development atop Wolf Creek Pass. Two-hundred-and-thirty days later, and well past the Forest Service’s 20-day deadline, not a single file has been released.

But that should change Thursday after a U.S. magistrate judge ordered the Forest Service to start releasing documents asked for in the FOIA request. The order came in response to a lawsuit filed by opponents of the proposed housing and commercial development." ... "

(click on image for better reading)

After posting quotes from yesterday's Durango Herald article, I was reading the comments.  

Dennis points to ANILCA and cries foul on behalf of Mr. McCombs, 

“There is a law that says the USFS has to grant access to inholdings.”  

Is that a fact?  There’s another side to this story that's worth listening to, particularly if you want to understand the unrelenting opposition to the notion of bulldozing a Village at Wolf Creek into Alberta Park.

Among many other things, in 1980 ANILCA was created for property owners who suddenly found themselves in a landlocked ‘inholding’ because of a newly created National Park or other federal designated areas.  Alberta Park was legally designated integral to Rio Grande National Forest since its creation in 1908.

Petition: Keep Wolf Creek Wild - Change.org - Rocky Mtn Wild

Judge Matsch responded: “I understand the public interest but there is also the natural environment’s interest, which is what this is all about.”

Photo courtesy of: Alex Pullen

I’m a bit embarrassed that I didn’t know about this petition until today, but its a crowded life and there’s only so much bandwidth.  That’s why networking is important - and why I believe there needs to be more communication between like-minded folks if we hope to have real impact.  But I reckon that’s a different story.

Rocky Mountain Wild started this petition to 

Rio Grande National Forest Service Supervisor Dan Dallas

For 30 years conservation groups, outdoor enthusiasts, and local residents have fought to protect Wolf Creek Pass in southwestern Colorado. 

At over 10,000 feet in elevation, the pass connects two wilderness areas and is a hot spot for biodiversity. Wildlife, including black bear, elk, and the rare Canada lynx use this area to move between large undeveloped swaths of forest. Irreplaceable fen wetlands are the home to hundreds of plant and bird species. And, the deep winter snowpack provides much-needed water to downstream communities and agriculture.

The pass is also the home of Wolf Creek Pass Ski Area, one of Colorado's last remaining family-owned ski areas. Wolf Creek is cherished for providing a nostalgic ski experience. Free from traffic, long lines, condos, nightclubs and chain restaurants, skiers at Wolf Creek are treated to deep powder at affordable prices.

Unfortunately, a questionable land exchange in 1987 gave Texas billionaire B.J. "Red" McCombs a private parcel at the base of the ski area. Mr. McCombs and his business partners have repeatedly tried to develop a massive "village" for 10,000 people on this site. They have been stopped by the Courts, who have consistently found that the developers have not conducted a complete environmental analysis of their scheme.

Now, however, hidden from public view and input, the developers are attempting to brush Federal Court decisions and environmental laws aside and pressure local Forest Service staff into granting them increased access to their parcel. Their goal is to start construction this summer.

You can help us keep Wolf Creek Pass wild! Please sign the petition urging Rio Grande National Forest Supervisor Dan Dallas to uphold Federal Court decisions and stand up to back channel pressures. Together, we can stop the bulldozers on Wolf Creek Pass.

Sign at https://www.change.org/p/dan-dallas-keep-wolf-creek-wild

_________________________________________________

Some important background information can be found at:

http://www.friendsofwolfcreek.org/background/

Questioning ANILCA and Village at Wolf Creek

Since I want to help a new generation become familiar with what's happening up at Wolf Creek Pass regarding the LMJV land swap with the Rio Grande National Forest - and to question certain assumptions they based their decision on, I'm sharing a few paragraphs Joe Hanel of the Durango Herald wrote in his February 15, 2014 article "Delayed but not derailed."  It deals with how ANILCA (Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980) has been interpreted to create a legal right to access... even for a heavy traffic.

Delayed but not derailed 

Joe Hanel, Durango Herald, February 15, 2014  

http://durangoherald.com/article/20140215/NEWS01/140219691/Delayed-but-not-derailed  

(...) Roadblocks 

"… McCombs obtained his property in a 1986 land swap with the Forest Service. Its only access is a dirt road that doubles as a ski trail in the winter.The lack of road access has kept the Village at Wolf Creek stalled for the past decade.  

Forest Service officials say they are bound by law to give McCombs access to his land one way or another. A 1980 law called the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act contains a provision that requires owners of inholdings to be given reasonable access to their property. The Forest Service has interpreted that to mean year-round access to accommodate McCombs’ development plans.