ANILCA - Village at Wolf Creek's Trump Card.

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

UPDATE Village at Wolf Creek - May 28, 2019 - Back to Court.

Here we go again, news from :

We filed suit on Tuesday to challenge the US Forest Service's approval to grant increased road access to the Village at Wolf Creek

As you may remember, last year, the Rio Grande National Forest Supervisor Dan Dallas signed a Final Record of Decision that provided expanded access across National Forest System lands to the private parcel created during the controversial 1986 land exchange. That private parcel, proposed home to the "Village" at Wolf Creek, is in the middle of a critical widllife corridor between two wilderness areas vital to threatened Canada lynx and home to rare fen wetlands and the headwaters of the Rio Grande.

The decision was based on the same environmental analysis that the late Judge Matsch deemed "an artful dodge" and ruled was arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law on Endangered Species Day in 2017. In fact, Courts have repeatedly blocked attempts to fast track approvals and skimp on environmental analysis and public input.

We had called for the Forest Service to conduct a new environmental impact statement that fully considered the impact to species like the Canada lynx, but the Forest Service decided instead to give the developers increased road access. 

Well, on Tuesday, we, along with our partners, once again filed a lawsuit seeking to invalidate that Final Record of Decision.

To help fund further efforts to protect Wolf Creek Pass, please visit our donation webpage and select "Friends of Wolf Creek" under "Direct My Donation."

For the wild!

Chris Talbot-Heindl

For more information about the battle to keep Wolf Creek Pass wild, visit the Friends of Wolf Creek website

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

PRESS RELEASE: Conservation Groups Challenge Forest Service Again Over Approval of Village at Wolf Creek

Published by Chris Talbot-Heindl on May 28, 2019

http://www.friendsofwolfcreek.org/press-release-conservation-groups-challenge-forest-service-again-over-approval-of-village-at-wolf-creek/
     

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

Conservation groups challenge road access for Village at Wolf Creek

Forest Service says environmental reviews sound

By Jonathan Romeo, County and environment reporter

Tuesday, May 28, 2019

https://durangoherald.com/articles/278902

A coalition of environmental groups Tuesday filed a challenge of the U.S. Forest Service’s approval last year to grant road access to the Village at Wolf Creek, a decision that ultimately paves the way for the proposed massive development atop Wolf Creek Pass.

“Once again, it falls to the public to demand protection of Wolf Creek Pass, a place long cherished by generations of visitors and residents alike,” said Jimbo Buickerood, lands program manager at San Juan Citizens Alliance, in a prepared statement. “Though the Forest Service might be inclined to renege on its stewardship responsibilities, we are ready to insist on compliance with the law and the public’s will.” …

Mr. McCombs and Ms Shields, please reconsider your intentions, VillageWolfCreek speculation. (an open letter)

Today I was doing some clean up and came across an open letter I'd sent by US Post to both Red McCombs and his daughter Marsha M. Shields along with posting it here.  What shocked me is that in a few days it'll be year since I sent it.  Never did get a response, still it list issues and reasons that can't be ignored and it's as timely today as it was a year ago and it's also worth posting again. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

I believe it is appropriate to personally petition Mr. McCombs and his daughter Marsha M. Shields, asking them to completely reconsider their out of date plans for a mountain village at Alberta Park. I encourage others to send their own thoughtful and constructive petitions on behalf of yourself, Alberta Park and all the wildlife and biology going on that can’t speak for itself.  

Open letter to Mr. McCombs and family, 

written while visiting Alberta Park mid June 2017.

____________________________________________________

Dear Mr. McCombs and Marsha Shields,

We’ve met a couple times. Once was in Creede, at your 2005 Village at Wolf Creek presentation. I was passing out my No-VWC pamphlet and though we never got close, we did share a couple eye-to-eyes during the many speeches. Then at Congressman Salazar’s 2010 (Adam's State College) roundtable in Alamosa.  You walked up to me and accepted my flier, then you surprised me by extending your hand.

I was honored to shake it. Not much was said, just two guys sizing each other up and walking away. I honestly cherish the memory since it made you a real person to me and not some distant cartoon. 

Given Judge Matsch’s decision and the Village at Wolf Creek land trade being nullified, I feel it’s a good time to personally explain why I’ve been dogging your project and to ask that you and your daughter stop to consider Alberta Park as the irreplaceable biological treasure that it is.

Village at Wolf Creek Poker update: USDA/USFS Folds, Red Holds.

With a tip of my hat to Jimbo Buickerood, at the San Juan Citizens Alliance, for alerting me to Jonathan Romeo's report in the May 10th Durango Herald on the latest Village at Wolf Creek development.  Namely, as the time limit ran out the USFS appears to have decided not to appeal Judge Matsch's decision of last May.  

Leavell-McCombs Joint Venture's Attorney Bill Leone defiantly announced that it doesn't matter to them what the USFS does.  They have gone ahead on their own and filed an appeal on Wednesday, arguing that "the environmental review was done according to the law and the land swap should be approved."

May 14th Update - USDA/USAF filed an "Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Appeal by Appellant United States"

But Judge Matsch sets this lawyerly 'misrepresentation' straight, when he clearly explained in his decision:

(Page 21 of 40)

ANALYSIS

The following aspects of the Record of Decision and the Biological Opinion that forms part of the basis for the ROD require relief under the APA. Defendants 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 law.

(Page 39 of 40) 

The 900 public comments in the record show this heightened public awareness of the effects of human disruption of the native environment. The Rio Grande National Forest has two designated wilderness areas near the area involved in this action. It has unique features. 

Notably, responses to the public comments were prepared by the contractors who did the work. 

They would not be expected to find that work to be flawed.

What NEPA 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. The Forest Service failed to do that in the Record of Decision. The duty of this Court is to set it aside.

VII. ORDER

Where an agency action is found to be arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law,

(Page 40 of 40)

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.  

News Release: Forest Service Declines to Appeal Decision Nullifying Wolf Creek Land Exchange

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 10, 2018

   

Forest Service Declines to Appeal Decision 

Nullifying Wolf Creek Land Exchange

Denver, CO – The United States Forest Service and Fish and Wildlife Service has declined to appeal an Order issued last May by Senior Judge Richard P. Matsch setting aside decisions approving a land exchange that would provide necessary road access for the long-sought Village at Wolf Creek development. The agency failed to file the required appeal brief by the May 9th deadline despite having originally notified the court last November of its intent to appeal.

Open Letter to Mr. McCombs and Marsha Shields, please reconsider your intentions.

I believe it is appropriate to personally petition Mr. McCombs and his daughter Marsha M. Shields, asking them to completely reconsider their out of date plans for a mountain village at Alberta Park. I encourage others to send their own thoughtful and constructive petitions on behalf of yourself, Alberta Park and all the wildlife and biology going on that can’t speak for itself.  
(It was suggested that my letter lacked an appropriate ending.  Upon reflection, they were right.  Revised June 20th.)

Open letter to Mr. McCombs and family, 

written while visiting Alberta Park earlier this week.

____________________________________________________

Dear Mr. McCombs and Marsha Shields,

We’ve met a couple times. Once was in Creede, at your 2005 Village at Wolf Creek presentation. I was passing out my No-VWC pamphlet and though we never got close, we did share a couple eye-to-eyes during the many speeches. Then at Congressman Salazar’s 2010 (Adam's State College) roundtable in Alamosa.

You walked up to me and accepted my flier, then you surprised me by extending your hand and I was honored to shake it. Not much was said, just two guys sizing each other up and walking away. I honestly cherish the memory since it made you a real person to me and not some distant cartoon. 

Given Judge Matsch’s decision and the Village at Wolf Creek land trade being nullified, I feel it’s a good time to personally explain why I’ve been dogging your project and to ask that you and your daughter stop to consider Alberta Park as the irreplaceable biological treasure that it is.

Letter to Mr. McCombs and LMJV - supplemental information

List of links and other supporting information for my letter to LMJV’s Red McCombs and his daughter Marsha McCombs Shields pleading with them to consider abandoning all their development dreams for Alberta Park, in favor of leaving that precious landscape unmolested to continue serving the many biological and wildlife support functions it currently fulfills.

_________________________________________________

“Creede, at your 2005 Village at Wolf Creek presentation”

www.denverpost.com/2005/05/01/wolf-creek-braces-for-battle/

____________________________________________

“2010 (Adam's State College) roundtable in Alamosa"

www.chieftain.com/news/local/salazar-seeks-consensus-over-wolf-creek-study/article_7c1a071b-abf8-5017-ab60-4cbc47a45137.html

____________________________________________

“surrounding watershed”

www.cnhp.colostate.edu/download/documents/2012/RGNFWetlandAssessmentReportFINAL.pdf

____________________________________________

Fens “provide a real service”

https://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/es/fen/FWSRegion6FenPolicy1999.pdf

____________________________________________

“La Garita Wilderness Area”

www.coloradowilderness.com/wildpages/lagarita.html]

____________________________________________

“Weminuche Wilderness Area”

www.coloradowilderness.com/wildpages/weminuche.html

____________________________________________

“Silverton” 9,813 feet above sea level

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silverton,_Colorado

____________________________________________

WOLF CREEK PASS, COLORADO

Elevation: 10326 feet     Latitude: 37 29N     Longitude: 106 52W

Köppen Classification: Continental Subarctic Climate

www.weatherbase.com/weather/weather-summary.php3?s=381950&cityname=Wolf+Creek+Pass,+Colorado,+United+States+of+America&units=

____________________________________________

“the wind blows incessantly”

https://www.windfinder.com/report/pagosa_springs_wolf_creek_pass

____________________________________________

“Why would we expect calm days”

https://wcc.sc.egov.usda.gov/nwcc/site?sitenum=874

____________________________________________

Defining “subarctic weather conditions”

https://www.britannica.com/science/continental-subarctic-climate

____________________________________________

Federal Judge Has Ruled - Red McCombs and LMJV land swap nullified.

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, 2015, is SET ASIDE.”

For Text of Ruling:

http://no-villageatwolfcreek.blogspot.com/2017/05/red-mccombs-lmjv-land-swap-nullified.html

RGNF asks for patience, wait for the judge to judge.

Mike Blakeman (Public Affairs Specialist RGNF) whom I have great respect for, responded to my email.  He didn't have much to share considering this is an active court case.  He did make a request:

 "I would ask that you look at my quotes in the Durango Herald article and really think about it."

Here is what he and Dan Dallas, had to say in the Durango Herald article, followed by a few thoughts in response.

_________________________________________________

"When asked about Malecek’s “swimming with sharks” email that claims Dallas was concerned about potentially damaging information and the need to hide correspondences from FOIA, he said: 

“It’s an unfortunate use of words, certainly, but there is no, again, I was asking folks to be disciplined about working out internal questions between each other.

“I’m not interested in throwing employees under the bus, but Malecek said what he said, and that wasn’t my intent. There is no cover-up.”

Mike Blakeman, public affairs specialist for the Rio Grande National Forest, said the local Forest Service is frustrated because it is easy to pull out emails and develop stories around them.

“You have groups that want to present a particular view that supports them, so they will obviously provide emails that prove that,” Blakeman said. “And I feel like that’s what’s occurring here.”

Both men contend any claims of a cover-up or collusions with McCombs will be proved false once hearings start for the Friends of Wolf Creek’s legal complaint against the Forest Service about the most recent EIS.  

Short history of the Leavell-McCombs Joint Venture - Village at Wolf Creek. part two

Ryan Bidwell, then Executive Director of Colorado Wild reviews the Village at Wolf Creek's first Environmental Impact Study - 2009

Ryan Bidwell, Executive Director of Colorado Wild, provides his group's position on the proposed Village at Wolf Creek.  The talk was at the Riverwalk Cafe, in downtown Pagosa Springs, during business hours, so please excuse the side noise and cell phones.  Fortunately Ryan is a good speaker so he's easy to follow.

These videos were filmed and uploaded onto YouTube by D. West Davies, http://www.dwestdavies.com  Oct 22, 2009

I tip of my hat to West for his efforts and for his encouragement.

I have added rough notes to give an outline of what each segment contains.

If you're new to the Village at Wolf Creek preservation struggle and trying to figure out just what's going on this talk offers some valuable background.  It was given not long after LMJV's unveiled his nifty new land swap offer that would get him right next to the highway. 

___________________________________________________

Wolf Creek Village Presentation 

by Ryan Bidwell from Colorado Wild, 2009 - Part 1/9 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpfNGqVY9hI

D. West Davies

Paul Bauer, "The Rio Grande - A Guide To The River's Geology"

A little something about the Rio Grande River,

with appreciation to http://JourneySantaFe.com.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Paul Bauer, "The Rio Grande - A Guide To The River's Geology" (2/10/2013)

Published on Feb 10, 2013 by OccupyNewMexico

Presented at Collected Works Bookstore in Santa Fe, NM 

as part of the Journey Santa Fe weekly lecture series -- http://journeysantafe.com

Paul Bauer is a principal geologist and associate director at the New Mexico Bureau of Geology & Mineral Resources at New Mexico Tech. He received a Ph.D. in geology from New Mexico Tech in 1988. He served as manager of the state's Geologic Mapping Program for 12 years, and was coordinator for the New Mexico Decision-Makers Field Conferences for 10 years, a program designed to bridge the gap between earth scientists and policy makers in New Mexico.

Since his first Taos Box rafting trip in 1980, he has spent much of the last 30 years investigating the geology and hydrogeology of north-central New Mexico. He has led many field trips to the area, including educational whitewater rafting tours. His current research is focused on using geologic field studies to describe the evolution of the mountains and basins of northern New Mexico, and the hydrogeologic conditions of the Upper Rio Grande region.

He has co-authored a series of geologic quadrangle maps of Taos County, has written a wide variety of books and articles on the geology of the region, and in 2007 completed a study of the springs of the Rio Grande gorge.

In 2011, he combined an enthusiasm for whitewater adventures with an interest in earth science education by publishing the award-winning book The Rio Grande: A River Guide to the Geology and Landscapes of Northern New Mexico. 

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

Freedom to inform refused by the USDA Forest Service [updated!]

There it is.  

The Gag Order stands firm and I may not share excerpts from the revealing pages 50 and 51 "Highest and Best Use Analysis" section.

Read on for The Rest Of The Story. . .

VWC Land Exchange Real Estate Appraisal - p50 - Local Market Conditions

Open letter to the authors of the Village at Wolf Creek Land Exchange - Environmental Impact Study.

Earlier this month I made a Freedom of Information request for a copy of the Village at Wolf Creek land exchange Appraisal Report.  I received it this past Tuesday (9/25/12) along with a cover letter that is pretty much a Gag Order.  Considering the late date I actually set it aside.  But now that the comment period has been extended by ten days I felt an obligation to at least open it up and try to wade through the two volume, 200 some page report. 

So, I’m reading along in the “VWC LEX - Non-Federal Parcel volume underlining a provocative paragraph here and there, but moving along just the same, considering I’m under a gag order.

But, then I came to page 50: ”Local Market Conditions,” and "The Village at Wolf Creek."  I’m sorry but it hit me like a slap in the face and makes me want to scream: “I told you so!”  

Come on, even the appraiser, who clearly believes that development is the “highest and best use” of this land - admits that the project is not financially feasible in the current market... and does anyone actually believe the market will be improving?

What in the world is the point of facilitating this out-of-reality scheme of a billionaire - {who builds a Formula One race track for fun and thinks it’s a civic improvement} - in the face of the economic reality of our area - as spelled out on page 50?  Keep in mind we are talking about source waters to the Rio Grande River Basin.  

For one, please consider the creeping impacts of the global warming, you authors so glibly wrote off.  After all the crop failures and other economic losses from this summer’s heat waves and drought will have far reaching economic impact.  Furthermore, the physics of global warming guarantee that this is just the beginning of the pain our economy will be feeling - at all levels.

Can we get real?  The happy dreamy days of the 80s, when this obsession was born are over, never to return.   

The details of the Village at Wolf Creek Proposed Land Exchange Real Estate Appraisal Review’s “non-federal” volume, page 50, regarding our local conditions is chilling to the bone.  But, I’m not allowed to share any of the details with others.  However, you authors of the EIS can read every word of it... please don’t ignore it, {the way you’ve tried ignoring the cascading consequences of our planet’s climate situation}, in your deliberations.

It is time to turn this McCombs’ Village at Wolf Creek versus Alberta Park Watershed discussion around and find some way to convince Mr. McCombs that it is in the best interest of everyone involved, including the empire he will be leaving his daughter, to find some way to return his current holding to the USDA Forest Service, or a nature conservancy arraignment.

[ “Dear EIS authors imagine my surprise, and relief, this morning when I pulled out the “second” volume of the VWC LEX Appraisal only to discover that I was sent two copies of the same report.  I wonder if that means the second was given to me for sharing?  In any event, I stand corrected, the Appraisal appears to be one volume of about a hundred pages.” ~ ~ ~ 

Nope wrong again.  Rereading my cover letter, I see that yes indeed Mr. McClure did indicate there should be two separate reports.  So since I have two copies of the volume marked “non-federal” I wonder if someone is looking at two copies of “federal” or whatever the other report was titled. ]

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

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

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

Dear Friends of Wolf Creek, the United States Forest Service will never listen to you, if you don't contact them!

Here's where to do that, but you need to do it before Thursday, October 11th

Village at Wolf Creek Land Exchange Proposal #35945
https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public/CommentInput?Project=35945 

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.

Forest Service extends comment period on Village at Wolf Creek Access Project to October 11th

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

News Release
--FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE—
September 27, 2012
Forest Service extends comment period on Village at Wolf Creek Access Project
Monte Vista, Colo., September 27, 2012 –The Rio Grande National Forest (RGNF) is extending the 45-day comment period on the Village at Wolf Creek Access Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) ten more days to October 11.  

VWC-DEIS 4.7.1 (Wetlands) Direct & Indirect Consequences

{updated 9/2/12}

Reviewing the VWC-DEIS you'll notice a number of points worth a closer look. To facilitate that I will use this blog for my study notes, organized into single issue threads. Each will quote the USDA Forest Service - Village at Wolf Creek Access Project - Draft Environmental Impact Statement section in question.
 
{For clarity I have added breaks between sentences and highlights where appropriate.  Wording has not been altered.}

~ ~ ~

Draft Environmental Impact Statement - Village at Wolf Creek Access Project 

Page 4-73 - Chapter 4. Environmental Consequences  

4.7 Wetlands and Waters of the U.S.
4.7.1 Direct and Indirect Environmental Consequences

VWC-DEIS 1.7.1 Health & Human Safety at a High Altitude Resort

{updated 9/2/12}
{update 8/31/12 - see elevation ?}

Reviewing the VWC-DEIS you'll notice a number of points worth a closer look. To facilitate that I will use this blog for my study notes, organized into single issue threads. Each will quote the USDA Forest Service - Village at Wolf Creek Access Project - Draft Environmental Impact Statement section in question.
 

{For clarity I have added breaks between sentences and highlights where appropriate.  Wording has not been altered.}

~ ~ ~

Draft Environmental Impact Statement  Village at Wolf Creek Access Project 

Page 1-13   Chapter 1.  Purpose and Need for Action

1.7 Issues Not Analyzed in Detail 
Numerous additional issues as identified below were raised by the public during the scoping process.  The Rio Grande NF considered these, and dismissed them from further analysis in the DEIS

1.7.1 Health and Human Safety at a High Altitude Resort
Numerous commenters were concerned about the health and safety of people at a high altitude development.  Individuals are responsible for their own health, and living, working and recreating at high altitude is an individual choice and responsibility.

VWC-DEIS 3.7.5 Wetland Functions and Values

Reviewing the VWC-DEIS you'll notice a number of points worth a closer look. To facilitate that I will use this blog for my study notes, organized into single issue threads. Each will quote the USDA Forest Service - Village at Wolf Creek Access Project - Draft Environmental Impact Statement section in question.
 
{For clarity I have added breaks between sentences and highlights where appropriate.  Wording has not been altered.}

~ ~ ~

Draft Environmental Impact Statement - Village at Wolf Creek Access Project

Page 3-49  -  Chapter 3.  Affected Environment 

3.7.5 Wetland Functions and Values
Wetlands are often described in terms of their functions and values.  Functions refer to the ecological role or processes that a wetland performs.  Values refer to the importance of these functions to the environment or to humans.