Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26
  1. #1
    A guy on a bike Moderator
    Reputation: TobyGadd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    901

    Colorado Trail Access Issues

    I just received this from a friend:

    A 30 day comment period has just begun regarding the re-location of 32 miles of the co-located CT/CDNST from Lujan Creek to the La Garita Wilderness. This part of the trail is currently on motorized routes. The USFS preferred alternative would make the new trail "Non Mechanized", effectively closing a large piece of non-wilderness trail to bicycles.
    USDA Forest Service - Saguache Ranger District NEPA Projects - Continental Divide National Scenic Trail Addition

  2. #2
    007
    007 is offline
    b a n n e d
    Reputation: 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    5,244
    Subscribed.
    Alcohol may lead nowhere, but it sure is the scenic route!

  3. #3
    Stiff yet compliant
    Reputation: Moustache rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,901
    The current preferred plan would close a section of the old trail so you couldn't even bike the old route if you wanted to.
    This is a bum deal.

  4. #4
    fresh fish in stock...... SuperModerator
    Reputation: CHUM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,138
    watching this fer sure...
    Visit these 2 places to help advance trail access:
    http://www.sharingthepct.org/
    http://www.facebook.com/SharingThePct

  5. #5
    fresh fish in stock...... SuperModerator
    Reputation: CHUM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,138
    Here's how/where to comment:
    https://cara.ecosystem-management.or...?Project=31283

    Continental Divide National Scenic Trail Addition #31283
    Commenting on This Project
    The Forest Service values public input. Comments received, including respondentsí 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.

    Submitting Comments
    If you wish to submit a comment, please send it to:

    Mary Nelson

    46525 State Highway 114 , Saguache, CO, 81149
    mnelson02@fs.fed.us
    Do they accept email only comments?
    Are there a few 'bullet' points that would be good to include?
    How about an example email - make it easy to write and send?

    These comments really really do impact the decision making regarding these new "rules"....and once a "rule" is in place, it is damn hard to remove.
    Visit these 2 places to help advance trail access:
    http://www.sharingthepct.org/
    http://www.facebook.com/SharingThePct

  6. #6
    old skool newbie
    Reputation: goldenboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    795
    email sent. thanks for the heads up

  7. #7
    fresh fish in stock...... SuperModerator
    Reputation: CHUM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,138
    sent mine in
    Visit these 2 places to help advance trail access:
    http://www.sharingthepct.org/
    http://www.facebook.com/SharingThePct

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    112
    I would like to send comments in but I am too lazy to write it from scratch. Would someone like to post or send me their comment? Thanks!

  9. #9
    fresh fish in stock...... SuperModerator
    Reputation: CHUM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,138
    Quote Originally Posted by FTC Rider View Post
    I would like to send comments in but I am too lazy to write it from scratch. Would someone like to post or send me their comment? Thanks!
    I just wrote this to Mary Nelson:
    mnelson02@fs.fed.us

    Subject Line:
    Continental Divide National Scenic Trail Addition #31283

    Email:
    Hi Mary,

    In reference to Continental Divide National Scenic Trail Addition #31283.

    I am for Alternative 3 (Alternative preference in favor of mountain bike use for this portion of CDNST):
    "Under Alternative 3 approximately 31.2 miles of new trail construction would occur from the Skyline Trail (#465) in the La Garita Mountains to Lujan Pass with the purpose of re-routing the CDNST and Colorado Trail from the current location. One spur trail of 0.9 miles would be constructed to connect the CDNST and Colorado Trail to Luderís Campground. Allowable uses on this trail would include horseback riding, hiking and mountain biking (mechanized use). Motorized use would not be permitted. Approximately 2.0 miles of non-motorized trail on the GMUG NF would be decommissioned following construction of the new trail."

    Thank You,
    Name
    address
    email


    I'm new to this....so critique/advice is welcome....but I think it gets the point across
    Visit these 2 places to help advance trail access:
    http://www.sharingthepct.org/
    http://www.facebook.com/SharingThePct

  10. #10
    A guy on a bike Moderator
    Reputation: TobyGadd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    901
    Howdy all,

    If you haven't already submitted your letter, there's still time. The deadline has been extended until 12/17/2012. So get it done!

  11. #11
    A guy on a bike Moderator
    Reputation: TobyGadd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    901
    Also, we've got to love the Colorado Trail Foundation. They voted UNANIMOUSLY to support bike access on the new trail. Awesome folks. THANK YOU!

    That said, that mountain bikers haven't exactly been well-represented on Colorado Trail trail-building crews. Yeah, I'm guilty too--but I try to send them some money every year instead. Either way, please support these guy. They're supporting us, right??!
    The Colorado Trail Home Page

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: woody.1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    240

  13. #13
    ColoradoCoolBreeze
    Reputation: SingleTrackLovr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    673
    Quote Originally Posted by woody.1 View Post
    Great Article thanks woody.
    It sure sounds like joining and supporting groups like the Colorado Trail Foundation, International Mountain Biking Association and the Colorado Mountain Biking Association would be a good way to help get our voice at the table.

    04 Azonic Saber
    08 Yeti AS-x
    12 Rocky Mtn 29er Alt 970



  14. #14
    A guy on a bike Moderator
    Reputation: TobyGadd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    901
    Quote Originally Posted by SingleTrackLovr View Post
    Great Article thanks woody.
    It sure sounds like joining and supporting groups like the Colorado Trail Foundation, International Mountain Biking Association and the Colorado Mountain Biking Association would be a good way to help get our voice at the table.
    I'm a member of two of those!

  15. #15
    A guy on a bike Moderator
    Reputation: TobyGadd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    901

  16. #16
    Climbs = necessary evil
    Reputation: rogerfromco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by CHUM View Post
    Here's how/where to comment:
    https://cara.ecosystem-management.or...?Project=31283



    Do they accept email only comments?
    Are there a few 'bullet' points that would be good to include?
    How about an example email - make it easy to write and send?

    These comments really really do impact the decision making regarding these new "rules"....and once a "rule" is in place, it is damn hard to remove.
    The Environmental Assessment also included an e-mail address to send comments into so I sent it to both.

    comments-rocky-mountain-gmug@fs.fed.us,
    mnelson02@fs.fed.us

    I added a bit more to the letter suggested above, which by the way I liked....

    As a Colorado resident for more than 20 years and an environmental engineer, I am greatly concerned about the proposal to reduce access to this section of the CO Trail using proposed Alternative 2. I am an avid backpacker, hiker, and mountain biker and value the access to our natural resources for all users. My wife is also an equestrian and trail runner, so we as a family understand the needs of all non-motorized trail users and believe that all can live in harmony using the same trails when they show mutual respect.

    In reference to Continental Divide National Scenic Trail Addition #31283, I strongly prefer Alternative 3 (Alternative preference in favor of mountain bike use for this portion of CDNST): "Under Alternative 3 approximately 31.2 miles of new trail construction would occur from the Skyline Trail (#465) in the La Garita Mountains to Lujan Pass with the purpose of re-routing the CDNST and Colorado Trail from the current location. One spur trail of 0.9 miles would be constructed to connect the CDNST and Colorado Trail to Luderís Campground. Allowable uses on this trail would include horseback riding, hiking and mountain biking (mechanized use). Motorized use would not be permitted. Approximately 2.0 miles of non-motorized trail on the GMUG NF would be decommissioned following construction of the new trail."

    This alternative, allows all access to all non-motorized users and will allow a broader spectrum of our population to enjoy the trail. Please reconsider the selection of Alternative 2 in favor of Alternative 3.

    Thank You,
    Name
    Address
    City, State, Zip
    Phone

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: alanthealan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    42
    What is the purpose of the reroute, i.e. why is it necessary? I read/skimmed through the EA but did must have missed it.

  18. #18
    Climbs = necessary evil
    Reputation: rogerfromco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by TobyGadd View Post
    I just received this from a friend:

    A 30 day comment period has just begun regarding the re-location of 32 miles of the co-located CT/CDNST from Lujan Creek to the La Garita Wilderness. This part of the trail is currently on motorized routes. The USFS preferred alternative would make the new trail "Non Mechanized", effectively closing a large piece of non-wilderness trail to bicycles.
    USDA Forest Service - Saguache Ranger District NEPA Projects - Continental Divide National Scenic Trail Addition
    Quote Originally Posted by alanthealan View Post
    What is the purpose of the reroute, i.e. why is it necessary? I read/skimmed through the EA but did must have missed it.
    To take it off a "motorized path" but at the same time their preferred alternative will also close it to "mechanized" (read bikes) vehicles as well.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ironbrewer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    273
    I think they should ban MTB's if they are going to ban motorcycles. I just don't understand why mountain bikes and motorcycles don't work together.

  20. #20
    A guy on a bike Moderator
    Reputation: TobyGadd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    901
    Quote Originally Posted by ironbrewer View Post
    I think they should ban MTB's if they are going to ban motorcycles. I just don't understand why mountain bikes and motorcycles don't work together.
    Self-propelled sports are in a totally different category than motor sports. About the only thing that bikes have in common with motos is that they both have two wheels.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ironbrewer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    273
    And slide down trails to make groves to increase erosion, but more trails are built and maintained by motorcycle advocacy groups. Also motorcycle advocacy groups put a self imposed tax ( OHV stickers) on themselves for trail maintenance.

  22. #22
    A guy on a bike Moderator
    Reputation: TobyGadd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    901
    Quote Originally Posted by ironbrewer View Post
    And slide down trails to make groves to increase erosion, but more trails are built and maintained by motorcycle advocacy groups. Also motorcycle advocacy groups put a self imposed tax ( OHV stickers) on themselves for trail maintenance.
    Please, let's not derail this thread. If you want to argue about motos, start a new thread in "General." Thanks!

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    112
    Sent email in. Hope for the best!

  24. #24

  25. #25
    A guy on a bike Moderator
    Reputation: TobyGadd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    901
    Terrific news. Thanks for posting this.

    THANKS to everyone who wrote letters, made calls, and otherwise advocated on behalf of bikes. THANKS to the land-use agencies for making a great call.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •