VWC Developer Gets Greenlight

 NEWS FLASH - April 19, 2024 - Alberta Park, Wolf Creek, CO.

To quote,

Bloomberg Law.com / Shayna Greene, April 19, 2024

US District Court finds

* District court was wrong to vacate agency authorizations

* Federal Alaska conservation act (ANILCA) supports access to parcel

"The Tenth Circuit on Friday overruled a lower court and reinstated federal agencies' authorizations for a right-of-way easement to develop a ski resort village in Colorado.

A federal district court has sent the approvals back to agencies, saying they were based on the same deficient documents as previously vacated authorizations - but the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit said that decision was wrong because the agencies proposed different options for the project. ..."

_______________________________________________________

Quoting, JUSTIA US LAW:

Rocky Mountain Wild v. Dallas, No. 22-1438 (10th Cir. 2024)

Justia Opinion Summary

Red McCombs, Can You Hear Us Now?... NO Village at Wolf Creek! (update 10/25/22)

 

The Wolf Creek Village speculator loses third legal fight for access road atop Wolf Creek Pass.                                        Update:  Jason Blevins, The Colorado Sun

It's an essential watershed !

     

LEAVE IT ALONE !

Texas billionaire Red McCombs has spent 36 years vying for access to an inholding where he plans a resort village for 10,000 residents in the middle of this Rio Grande watershed.

Monday, Oct 24, 2022

Excerpts Via the Durango Herald

“Judge Arguello on Thursday ruled that the Forest Service should not have relied on its “flawed” and “legally deficient” 2015 environmental review of Wolf Creek Village to make its 2019 access decision. She ruled both the 2019 right of way decision by the Forest Service, just like the agency’s 2015 approval of the land exchange, was “arbitrary and capricious.”

“… confirmed an earlier ruling that the Forest Service “failed to consider important aspects of the issues before them, offered an explanation for their decision that runs counter to the evidence, failed to base their decision on consideration of the relevant factors, and based their decision on an analysis that is contrary to the law. …”

“We’ve never seen an honest evaluation of the environmental impacts of constructing a city of 8,000 people at over 10,000 feet atop one of snowiest locations in Colorado, probably because the impacts if revealed would be staggering,” Mark Pearson, executive director at San Juan Citizens Alliance, said in a statement.

UPDATE Oct18th, they're baaack. Red appeals Judge Matsch's VWC decision.

So sad, nothing is ever learned.  

The McCombs have turned a deft ear to all the reasoned arguments.  Facts don’t seem to matter.  Objectively speaking, considering the community, the Rio Grande River, the Alberta Park watershed, all would best be served by that Alberta Park parcel being left alone to continue fulfilling it’s biological and hydrological services as the keystone to the Wolf Creek watershed and wilderness and an integral part of the Rio Grande National Forest from which it was absconded through a 1980s game of shady land grab poker.

Only obsessive greed and some bizarre need to despoil land for the sake of proving one’s own mastery can explain such obsession.  Here we go again.  

For a look at Senior Judge Matsch’s Order May 21, 2017 see the end of this post.

_____________________________________________________________

Village at Wolf Creek appeals decision blocking access

Opponents say Forest Service skirted its duties

By Jonathan Romeo Herald staff writer, the DURANGO HERALD, October. 16, 2017

Leavell-McCombs Joint Venture – spearheaded by Texas billionaire B.J. “Red” McCombs – has filed an appeal with the next tier of the federal court system, challenging a previous federal judge’s decision that the massive development atop Wolf Creek Pass was approved “contrary to law.”

“The Joint-Venture believes strongly the project is a good project and the Forest Service did everything it needed to do to study the environmental impacts of that project,” said Bill Leone, an attorney representing the developers. The appeal was filed Friday.  …

In May, Judge Richard P. Matsch, a senior U.S. district judge for the District of Colorado, in no uncertain terms, agreed.

“What NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) requires is that before taking any major action, a federal agency must stop and take a careful look to determine the environmental impact of that decision, and listen to the public before taking action,” Matsch wrote in his decision. “The Forest Service failed to do that.”

In September, Matsch denied a request from Leavell-McCombs Joint Venture to reconsider the May decision.

“The Forest Service cannot abdicate its responsibility to protect the forest by making an attempt at an artful dodge,” Matsch wrote in that decision. …

Judge Has Ruled - Red McCombs and LMJV land swap nullified. Text of Ruling.

US District Court Colorado, Judge Matsch's ORDER: 

"Where an agency action is found to be arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, or 39 otherwise not in accordance with law, the Court must “hold [it] unlawful and set [it] aside.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2). The Court finds and concludes that Defendants‟ actions violated the APA in the respects specified in this decision.  

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Record of Decision dated May 21, 2017, is SET ASIDE.”

___________________________________________________________

I recall back in January 2016 having Mike Blakeman (Public Affairs Specialist RGNF) advise against speculation and to let the judge judge based on the merits of the case.  He reminded us that Judge Matsch had a distinguished record and could be trusted to take the time to wade through the documents and sort out the facts, then to make a reasoned and fair decision.  It's now May 20th, 2017 and the judge's considered and legally binding decision was released yesterday.  In essence Red McCombs' Village at Wolf Creek land swap deal has been rejected by the Federal Court.

Without comment, though I did add emphasis, I'm sharing the text of Judge Matsch's full decision, I thank FriendsofWolfCreek.org for posted it at:

 http://friendsofwolfcreek.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Order-on-Merits.pdf

___________________________________________________________________

Case 1:15-cv-01342-RPM Document 67 Filed 05/19/17 USDC Colorado

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch

Civil Action No. 15-cv-01342-RPM

Plaintiffs, 

ROCKY MOUNTAIN WILD;

SAN LUIS VALLEY ECOSYSTEM COUNCIL; 

SAN JUAN CITIZENS ALLIANCE; 

WILDERNESS WORKSHOP, 

Defendants

DAN DALLAS, in his official capacity as Forest Supervisor;

MARIBETH GUSTAFSON, in her official capacity as Deputy Regional Forester; 

UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, 

a Federal Agency within the U.S. Department of Agriculture; 

UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, 

a federal agency within the Department of the Interior,

Intervenor,

LEAVELL-McCOMBS JOINT VENTURE. 

___________________________________________________________

ORDER SETTING ASIDE AGENCY ACTION 

 ___________________________________________________________

Canada lynx factor in lawsuits over Village at Wolf Creek

On account of the Village at Wolf Creek development once again being engulf in a legal quagmire, (where the process grinds along at a glacial pace), it seems nothing has been happening.  

But, as Gail Binkly, editor of the Four Corners Free Press, reports in their October issue some significant things are happening.  

Since she's done such a clear job of explaining, I asked permission to reprint her article and she said sure.  I've added the highlights.  Not much to add, except for thank you Gail.

___________________________________________

Cat fight: 

The threatened Canada lynx is a factor in lawsuits over the Village at Wolf Creek

Gail Binkly, October 10, 2016, FourCornersFreePress.com

The future of a seldom-seen feline and the fate of a luxury development on Wolf Creek Pass, seemingly distinct issues, are inextricably entangled.

The status of the shy, snow-loving Canada lynx, listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, influences discussions about the proposed resort, while the final decision about the project – whenever it comes – will certainly impact the animal.

The lynx, a threatened species,
is a factor in discussions about the controversial 

Village at Wolf Creek proposal in Colorado’s southern San Juan Mountains.

photo credit: Colorado Parks and Wildlife

A recent court decision has complicated the picture. On Sept. 7, a U.S. District Court in Montana ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had wrongly decided not to include southern Colorado when it designated critical habitat for the rare animal. 

In a lawsuit brought by five environmental nonprofits including WildEarth Guardians, Chief District Judge Dana L. Christensen ordered the service to reconsider its “final rule” regarding lynx habitat, issued two years previously.

Court proceedings are also a big part of the picture regarding the “Village at Wolf Creek,” a Texas billionaire’s proposed development high on the snowy pass, south of U.S. Highway 160. 

Appreciating Wolf Creek's ‘old-growth’ fens. Part one

Here is a Durango Telegraph article from December 2005, written by Adam Howell, it examines an interagency conflict that was triggered by the Army Corps of Engineers interfering with the Environmental Protection Agency's mandate to survey the Alberta Park wetlands, site of the proposed Village at Wolf Creek.

I share it because it highlights the conflicts between blindly pro-development where everything is viewed through the Land Developer's Lens - while those who are trying to assess landscapes for their own intrinsic values are rejected as valueless and ignored despite their own statutory mandates.

Though the article is ten years old, nothing has changed about the value of that wetlands, just as it is, nor about the inevitability of any development in Alberta Park at ±10,300' causing irreparable damage who's cascading consequences will negatively impact the entire watershed and the interstate international Rio Grande River plus it's stakeholders!

The fact that LMJV is moving the project a few hundred yards and slightly uphill and closer to the highway will not mitigate the unavoidable destruction.

Think before digging!

Reprinted with permission from The Durango Telegraph 
and posted here to information the interested.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Durango Telegraph

» December-29-2005 » Wetlands heat up Wolf Creek debate more at: http://no-villageatwolfcreek.blogspot.com/2012/05/durango-telegraph-village-at-wolf-creek.html Wetlands heat up Wolf Creek debate Agencies clash over mapping of ‘old-growth’ fens Skiers and snowboarders meander through the base area of Wolf Creek on Monday.  The Village at Wolf Creek, proposed not far from the current base area, is continuing  to stir up controversy. The Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental  Protection agency are currently at odds over wetlands regulation. /Photo by Todd Newcomer.  by Adam Howell   Wetlands are currently boiling with controversy in the vicinity of Wolf Creek Ski Area. According to recently obtained e-mails, two agencies are throwing jabs in a recent bout over the regulation of wetlands as they relate to the proposed Village at Wolf Creek. According to the exchange, the Army Corps of Engineers’ Albuquerque District has prevented the Environmental Protection Agency from verifying the locations of wetlands at the site of the proposed developed.

UPDATE 3/26/2015 - Looks like a done deal.

For immediate release from the Rocky Mountain Regional Office. 

Please direct objection response questions to Lawrence Lujan.

Regional Office Contact: Lawrence Lujan, 303-275-5356

Rio Grande National Forest Contact: Mike Blakeman, 719-852-6212 

Forest Service Responds to Village at Wolf Creek Access Project Objectors

GOLDEN, Colo. – The Rocky Mountain Region has completed the review of objections received on the proposed Village at Wolf Creek Access Project. 

Reviewing Officer Deputy Regional Forester Maribeth Gustafson has affirmed the original decision and offered instruction to the Rio Grande National Forest on how to proceed.

Objections were reviewed from individuals and organizations who had previously submitted specific written comments on the proposed project during scoping or other designated public comment opportunities.

Last November, a decision approved the land exchange to meet the legal obligation of the U.S. Forest Service to provide access to private property owned by Leavell-McCombs Joint Venture. 

Upon addressing the Reviewer’s instructions, the forest can sign a final Record of Decision and the land exchange can occur.

Project information, including the objection letters and responses can be found online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=35945.

Blast from the past: The Village at Wolf Creek, It’s A Scandal

I stumbled acrose this today and reread it and feel OK about what I was trying to get across.  Parts of it are dated so I won't drag it up to the top of the pile, but I will link to it.  And yes, the original swap did turn out to be plenty up and up... still McComb's changing his intentions and sneaking in that Village monstrosity, none of that was right - and soured the entire deal. 

And this thing should have been settled long ago in favor of Alberta Park being left alone to continue functioning as the invaluable productive biological national resource that it is. 

Leave it as it is!  A productive habitat, wetlands, fens, storage and filter to source waters of the international Rio Grande River.  

Why not McCombs enterprises?

March 21, 2012

The Village at Wolf Creek, It’s A Scandal

http://no-villageatwolfcreek.blogspot.com/2012/03/village-at-wolf-creek-its-scandal.html

April 2013 - Village At Wolf Creek EIS Update...

I had the opportunity to see Mike Blakeman while attending the Bark Beetle Workshop in Durango, he explained to me where the EIS process for the Wolf Creek Village was at and about the next steps in this process.  

It's fairly complicated and I asked if he might be able to send me an email outlining what he'd told me.  
Mr. Blakeman went me one better and had a Forest Service wildlife biologist do a detailed write-up.

Below I include Mike's cover letter along with the write-up.

================================================

Hi Peter, Below is a detailed write-up about the BA/BO process written by our wildlife biologist. People would never get to read such a thorough explanation in mainstream media, so feel free to post it on your blog if you feel it would be beneficial.  

To summarize the targeted timeline (something could always impact this): Biological Assessment completed on May 1. Fish and Wildlife Service reviews the Biological Assessment (BA) (90 days) and then completes a Biological Opinion (BO) (45 days), which puts us at about mid-September. The land exchange Final (Wolf Creek Village) Environmental Impact Statement and record of decision would most likely come out sometime in the autumn or early winter. 

January 30 2013 - Village At Wolf Creek EIS Update

Out of curiosity I wrote Mike Blakeman the Public Affairs Officer at the Rio Grande National Forest asking him how the Village at Wolf Creek Environmental Impact Statement was progressing.  He replied with the following, which I pass along with his blessing:

Quite frankly, we aren’t sure when the Village EIS will be completed because the proponent and the Fish and Wildlife Service are negotiating the conservation measures that will address the anticipated adverse effects to the lynx.  

Once agreed upon, these will be incorporated into a final Biological Assessment, which is part of the analysis of effects in compliance with the Endangered Species Act.  

Once this BA is finalized, the FWS uses it to complete a Biological Opinion, which we must have before making a decision about the proposed land exchange.  

What is important to understand is this process is required and in no way means any decision has been made.       

[M.B. - 1/29/2013] 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Thank you for the information Mr. Blakeman.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As a footnote.

In putting together this post I looked over the visits to these various blog-pages over the past few months and noticed a few have received over one hundred hits.  But, I bring this up because one blog-post sky-rocketed past the others with over 750 hits.  Needless to say, I hope the powers that be take notice; this is a crucial issue and people are paying attention.

SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2012
The Impact of Climate Change on Ski Resort Operations and Development: Opportunities and Threats
To support my claim in yesterday's VWC-DEIS Comment, namely, that the future bodes ill for such grand speculations as Mr. McCombs dream of bulldozing the Alberta Park Watershed into a luxury vacation village.   I submit a few highlights from the following report, but encourage you to view the entire study at: continue here

Climate Change's broader effects cause more worry

I would like to offer some more background supporting my claim that VWC-DEIS authors - and in fact, Mr. McCombs and his developer Clint Jones - need to start paying attention to the complex realities that climate disruption will be forcing on us.  

Whether you want to admit it, or deny it, we are entering a brave new world where global warming driven changes are going to overwhelm those who choose to continue ignoring it!

Destroying the integrity of the Albert Park Watershed for an unfeasible speculative scheme is not in the best interests of anyone.  

An essay concerning Red McCombs' long and winding road

“You believe what you believe, I believe what I believe and we will never convince each other” period!

Those were the sage words of Clint Jones, the developer for Red McCombs’ speculative luxury Village at Wolf Creek when we spoke at last month’s Del Norte open house for the Land Exchange Proposal’s Environmental Impact Statement.

What a chilling attitude. It implies the impossibly of learning anything new. It also explains how the 1980s dream of a billionaire could get hardened into an obsession no matter how the winds of time have changed the physical and financial landscape.

A dream that started in those halcyon 80s when Red partnered with Charles Leavell owner of property the Rio Grande National Forest coveted. With that temptation and announced plans for a low key development of perhaps 200 homes a land trade for nearly 300 acres of Alberta Park was arranged.

Then Charles Leavell passed away and McCombs hired developer Bob Honts who announced a plan ten times that size. This at over 10,300 feet elevation where the air we breath contains 70% the oxygen it does at sea level. Incidentally, it is one thing to spend your days playing up there; but to play up there all day and then spend all your nights at those elevations sets up people for a variety of altitude related health issues.

In his zeal Bob Honts crossed various ethical and legal boundaries. Worse, he got caught, scuttling Red’s first drive to develop Alberta Park some twenty years after his speculative adventure began. It also ended his association with Honts. There’s too much to tell here, but Mike Soraghan of the Denver Post wrote a most informative article “Wolf Creek development tangled with political ties” (2/5/06).

Given a development of a couple hundred homes the Forest Service was under the impression that road access issues could be resolved. But, a village for ten thousand people blindsided officials and created a whole new set of complications, since the US Forest Service has every desire of keeping the only access road, FSR391, a seasonal light traffic dirt road.

In time, McCombs’ lawyers found the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980. The property owner’s road access provisions in this Act were codified because huge expanses of Alaskan land was being acquired and placed into the National Trust. This left many private land owners surrounded by Federal lands. This law ensured them road access rights to their newly landlocked property. What is striking is that McCombs traded into his “landlocked” situation.

But, because he is a billionaire, Red can force his will. Now the US Forest Service is in a position of thinking they owe McCombs a high volume all-year road or they owe him damages. This doesn’t make any sense considering that Red knew exactly what he was buying. Still, his demand is: either a high traffic all year road or we owe him big. 

In this case big being a swap of 178 acres of land for 204 acres of prime grade A US Highway accessible real estate. 

Incomprehensible though it seems, this is exactly the rationale driving this current pro-development Environmental Impact Statement and potential land swap. An Environmental Impact Statement that remains blind to the many cascading damages that bulldozing of this watershed will inflict. 

During my discussion with Mr. Jones at the Del Norte open house, I asked Clint: what about the changing world, both business and environmental, that are making this 1980s dream look increasingly financially hopeless? “None of us can predict the future” was his easy salesman’s reply.

I asked, what about Climate Change and scientist’s projections that current drought conditions are a sign of more to come; or the bark beetle epidemic that’s ravaging those mountains and is spreading right into Alberta Park as we spoke? Is it really that hard to predict prospective million dollar home buyers will be turned off by a standing dead forest? 

“None of us can predict the future” seems a feeble response when it comes to the importance of an unmolested watershed for downstream stakeholders. After all, we are discussing the health of source waters for the Rio Grande River Basin during increasingly difficult times.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Village at Wolf Creek Land Exchange Proposal #35945

https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public/CommentInput?Project=35945

Commenting on This Project
The Forest Service values public input. Comments received, including respondents’ names and addresses, will become part of the public record for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered; however, anonymous comments will not provide the agency with the ability to provide you with project updates. The Forest Service wishes to provide you with as many opportunities as possible to learn about our activities.

Official Deadline for comments: 9/30/2012. (or is that Friday the 28th, or Monday the 1st?)

Wolf Creek Needs Friends Now!

I received the following Email from
Friends of Wolf Creek this evening.

Please pass it on. Action is needed immediately,
September, 2012 is all the time we have to comment on this
Village at Wolf Creek land swap -
with it's proposed speculative luxury resort village.

Here's the deal sitting on the public land swap block:
177.8 acres of Leavell-McCombs Joint Venture's 
turned nightmare to develop land for...
204.4 acres of Prime Grade "A" US Highway Access -  
{elevation 10,160 to 10,880 feet above sea level}
Rio Grande National Forest, real estate.
Sweet deal if we allow him to swing it.

We only have September to influence the Final Environmental Impact Statement!

Here's our challenge:

Why do you think developing Albert Park should be rejected outright?

Can you explain it in a thoughtful constructive manner?

Do you have a speciality giving you insights into an aspect of this question?

County finances and liabilities,
Real estate appraisal,
Urban planning,
Recreational,
Biological,  
Economic,
Scientific,
Medical,
ANILCA
Legal, 
Fens,
etc.
?


psst...
Latitude 37°28’20”N
Longitude 106°47’00”W

Elevation approximately 10,160 to 10,880 feet above sea level.
{Air pressure and available oxygen a touch under 70% of what it is at sea level.}

Can you list thoughtful reasons for why the VWC should not be attempted?


Now is the time to explain it!

link here

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Read the DEIS here:

http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/fs-usda-pop.php/?project=35945
             
Overview of the DEIS:
The proposed land exchange involves approximately 204 federal acres and 178 non-federal acres within the boundaries of the Rio Grande National Forest. Part of the federal land proposed for exchange would connect the private land to U.S. Highway 160, thus precluding the need for securing access across the national forest.  
 
There are three alternatives considered:
               --The NO ACTION alternative,
               --the land exchange briefly described below, and
               --The Forest Service building an (Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act)  ANILCA-compliant road over their own property to provide legal access to the inholding.
 
The Forest Service believes it is not responsible for and cannot directly analyze development on private property, but they do acknowledge that the point of the proposed land exchange is to facilitate some level of residential/commercial development on private land.  Therefore, in order to be able to analyze the indirect impacts, the Forest Service considers three versions of possible development of the so-called “Village at Wolf Creek.”
 
The range of environmental and social/economic impacts analyzed in the DEIS gives a picture of how broad and far-reaching the effects of a 10,000 or even a 5,000 person city on top of a 10,000 foot mountain pass would be.  The DEIS finds measurable impacts from the Village on
    •    endangered lynx and other wildlife
    •    wetlands
    •    water quality and loss of soil
    •    greenhouse gas emissions
    •    long-term population trends in the surrounding region
    •    public safety and emergency services
    •    local schools

According to ColoradoWild:


Talking Points
    •    a large commercial development on top of Wolf Creek Pass is still a bad idea that doesn’t fit with the character of the local area, even if the Forest Service is required to analyze it
    •    The Forest Service is right to acknowledge that construction of a big commercial development with hotels, condos, and parking garages is the point of the land exchange to begin with
    •    The effects on a critical wildlife corridor—which provides essential linkage for endangered lynx as well as mule deer, elk, and other wildlife—could be serious
    •    Wolf Creek Pass is too important environmentally to be sacrificed to the ambitions of one absentee landowner, whose plan is out of step with the surrounding communities

 
Your voice is essential!
The Forest Service and elected officials will read a lot into the number of people who show up for the open house meetings and the kinds of questions they are asking about environmental impacts and whether a land exchange like this is in the public interest.  So please do 1) show up for one of the open house meetings if you can, and 2) send a written comment to the Forest Service by
 
Public Comments are to be emailed to: 

comments-rocky-mountain-rio-grande@fs.fed.us.
Please include “Village at Wolf Creek Access Project DEIS” in the subject line of the e-mail.     

Hardcopy comments should be addressed to:
Village at Wolf Creek Access Project
c/o Tom Malecek, Divide District Ranger
Rio Grande National Forest
13308 West Highway 160
Del Norte, CO  81132
 
Stay tuned for more information at:
    •    http://friendsofwolfcreek.org
    •    http://rockymountainwild.org
    •    http://slvec.org
    •    http://sanjuancitizens.org

It would also be good to send a copy of your comments to our Congressional delegation - let them know you object to this Land Swap Deal:

Wanda_Cason@MarkUdall.Senate.gov
John_Whitney@bennet.senate.gov
Adam.Eckman@mail.house.gov
Scott.Streit@mail.house.gov

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  

Dear Friends of Alberta Park and Wolf Creek, 
we have this one moment to tell the Rio Grande Forest Service and the US Department of Agriculture's powers-that-be what a destructive boondoggle this luxury Village at 10,500± elevation would be.


But, they'll never listen to you, if you don't contact them!

Here's where to do that, but you need to do it now, September:

Village at Wolf Creek Land Exchange Proposal #35945

https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public/CommentInput?Project=35945

Commenting on This Project
The Forest Service values public input. Comments received, including respondents’ names and addresses, will become part of the public record for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered; however, anonymous comments will not provide the agency with the ability to provide you with project updates. The Forest Service wishes to provide you with as many opportunities as possible to learn about our activities.

Official Deadline for comments: 9/30/2012. (or is that Friday the 28th, or Monday the 1st?)

VWC - Alberta Park Needs Friends. Can you help?

Since the Rio Grande Forest Service seems mandated with being pro-development and turning a blind eye* to the cascading damages the proposed Village at Wolf Creek Speculative Development will inflict on this watershed and quite probably local governments and economy - it's up to citizens to use their one short window of opportunity - which closes at the end of September! - to convince the powers-that-be that this speculative luxury development is out of step with time and reality.

Without your help, this

US Forest Service Photo

Will become this - 

The Durango Telegraph

Except the pretty picture hides all the damage that bulldozing Albert Park will inflict.
(Please note the lower portion of this image is the existing Wolf Creek Ski Area and parking lot)

 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

For more on the story here are links to the recent news:

Village at Wolf Creek Land Exchange Proposal - official information

{Since the Rio Grande National Forest Service is mandated with being pro-development and turning a blind eye to the cascading damages the proposed Village at Wolf Creek Speculative Development will inflict on this watershed and local governments and economy - it's up to citizens to use their one short window of opportunity - which closes at the end of September! - to convince the powers-that-be that this speculative luxury development is out of step with time and reality.}

The “Moderate Density Development” option for the access road alternative called for 523 units, including 244 condos, 168 townhomes and almost 50,000 square feet of commercial space. This rendering was prepared by SE Group, a mountain planning and design firm, for the U.S. Forest Service in May 2012./Photo Illustration by SE Group

Courtesy of The Durango Telegraph

see their informative story at

http://www.durangotelegraph.com/index.cfm/news/it-takes-a-village/

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

The following is copied off of the Rio Grande National Forest's website:
http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/fs-usda-pop.php/?project=35945

Village at Wolf Creek Land Exchange Proposal

The Rio Grande National Forest is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement to analyze the effects of the proposed Village at Wolf Creek land exchange.

Village at Wolf Creek Access Project - Forest Service seeks comments

Contrary to assurances that I was on the mailing list I received no notice from the Rio Grande National Forest - and due to being out of state I'm out of the loop.  I'm glad my curiosity about the continued delay got the better of me this morning. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/riogrande/news-events/?cid=STELPRDB5386742 Forest Service seeks comments on Village at Wolf Creek Access Project Release Date: Aug 17, 2012    Monte Vista, Colo., August 16, 2012 –TheRio Grande National Forest (RGNF) is seeking comments on the Village at Wolf Creek Access Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) during a 45-day public comment period upon publication in the Federal Register on Friday, August 17.  The analysis was initiated as a result of a land exchange application submitted by Leavell-McCombs Joint Venture (LMJV).

Alberta Park Openhouse ~ Recalling the RGNF Sept. 20th, 2011 Field Trip

September 20th, 2011 the Rio Grande National Forest sponsored a 
four hour field trip/hike through Alberta Park, 
site of the proposed VWC development. 

Led by District Ranger Tom Malecek the tour was intended 
to inform the interested public about the project.  
Below is a report I filed with the Four Corners Free Press on the event.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Printed in the Four Corners Free Press 

November 2011 issue

page 28

"Moving The Village" 

It appears Billy Joe “Red” McCombs’ longtime dream of constructing a luxury resort town in the middle of Alberta Park (elevation: 10,300 feet), nestled against the Continental Divide on Wolf Creek Pass Colorado and coincidentally home to some forty feet of annual snowfall, burns hot as ever.

After having over a decade's worth of development preparations thwarted McCombs dumped Bob Honts, his developer, regrouped his Leavell-McCombs Joint Venture and has hired a new developer, Clint Jones, to spearhead a new plan of attack.