Results 1 to 24 of 24
  1. #1
    STRAVA!!!!!!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    490

    Interesting facts about the Bear creek trail closures and lawsuit

    Interesting article in the Cheyenne edition this week on page 4 by the President of Medicine Wheel Trail Advocates about whats really going on.

    chey

  2. #2
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,122
    I only had to crash my browser about 6 times to read it but good to see MWTA is catching on.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ispymtnbikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    82
    Thanks for posting this. Never thought it would come to this. Here Colorado Springs is a top mountain biking area and you would think the city would be working on a solution to stop this stupid madness. But then I believe they are part of the problem.

  4. #4
    STRAVA!!!!!!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    490
    Really want to get sick? Read the official USDA Bear Creek FAQ sheet.
    Read their answer to the question, I heard that the fish really doesn't belong there?!!. Some serious BS people, this whole thing is so wrong!

    http://webmail.q.com/service/home/~/...19717&part=2.2

  5. #5
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,122
    Quote Originally Posted by Waafoo View Post
    Really want to get sick? Read the official USDA Bear Creek FAQ sheet.
    Read their answer to the question, I heard that the fish really doesn't belong there?!!. Some serious BS people, this whole thing is so wrong!

    http://webmail.q.com/service/home/~/...19717&part=2.2
    Better link.

    http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_...prd3792820.pdf


    ...the "most genetically diverse population" of trout in Colorado...

    Unbelievable. So much bad science and flat out lies.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    27
    The ESA strikes again!

    "However, at this time greenback cutthroat trout are a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act and the entire State of Colorado is designated as the native range. It is required by the federal Endangered Species Act that the fish in Bear Creek and the habitat be protected."

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by SSChameleon View Post
    The ESA strikes again!

    "However, at this time greenback cutthroat trout are a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act and the entire State of Colorado is designated as the native range. It is required by the federal Endangered Species Act that the fish in Bear Creek and the habitat be protected."
    Jesus...cutthroat trouts are NOT a species...they basically amount to being a naturally occurring breed of fish, which is why they only exist in places cut off from the rest of the trout population.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    159
    (copy / pasted from the "Capt Jack's" thread because I'm lazy):

    There is another meeting Wednesday, 3/19 at USACycling's location. The USFS is accepting "votes" on one of three final solutions. As cyclists, I believe we want "option B", which is the only option that would see the trails re-opened at all (albeit with some trail building involved). It's important that we are heard and this meeting will help coordinate our voice. The USFS deadline is 3/27.

    Here's a link to the Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/events/247341715438949/

    Here's a link to the USFS site: Pike and San Isabel National Forests Cimarron and Comanche National Grasslands - Home

    Several local shops are involved, so you can stop in and discuss the situation with them. Try to make it to Wednesday's meeting (Bristol is involved, if that helps motivate you!).
    2004 Specialized FSR Pro
    2011 Specialized Stumpjumper Comp 29er
    Civilian Luddite 29er SS

  9. #9
    thread crapper
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    778
    I've been following this for the last year or so, and it really pisses me off, but I have a question about IMBA. Are they involved with this at all, or have we been told to figure it out on our own without their backing? I mean, they're headquartered right up the road a little ways. Don't ya think they could look at this and say, "hey, maybe we should get involved and try to protect some of our people."

  10. #10
    STRAVA!!!!!!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by Shytie View Post
    I've been following this for the last year or so, and it really pisses me off, but I have a question about IMBA. Are they involved with this at all, or have we been told to figure it out on our own without their backing? I mean, they're headquartered right up the road a little ways. Don't ya think they could look at this and say, "hey, maybe we should get involved and try to protect some of our people."
    I have not heard anything from the IMBA on this. When you get huge liberal backed organizations like the CBD and lawsuits involved I think they know to step away. What a shame!

  11. #11
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,122
    Quote Originally Posted by Waafoo View Post
    I have not heard anything from the IMBA on this. When you get huge Marxist Progressive backed organizations like the CBD and lawsuits involved I think they know to step away. What a shame!
    fixed.

  12. #12
    STRAVA!!!!!!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    fixed.
    LMAO, Yeah, what he said!

  13. #13
    thread crapper
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    778
    I truly don't get the "roll over and play dead" approach that's been taken. They lawyered up and the USFS just caved, and our group (the IMBA) never even showed up. Are they too busy building trails in Africa or something?

  14. #14
    STRAVA!!!!!!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by Shytie View Post
    I truly don't get the "roll over and play dead" approach that's been taken. They lawyered up and the USFS just caved, and our group (the IMBA) never even showed up. Are they too busy building trails in Africa or something?
    Money talks, BS walks! and the massively underfunded Forest service runs! We created the system.....Kewl

  15. #15
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,122
    Quote Originally Posted by Waafoo View Post
    Interesting article in the Cheyenne edition this week on page 4 by the President of Medicine Wheel Trail Advocates about whats really going on.

    chey

    Food for thought.

    Trail on Pikes Peak still closed despite not being home to native trout

  16. #16
    Awesomist™
    Reputation: Full Trucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,523

    Provide Your Input on Forest Service Plan in Bear Creek Watershed​

    Got this in my email this morning:

    Today is the last day to comment on proposed changes to the trails in the Bear Creek watershed.

    The Pikes Peak Ranger District is seeking public input on proposed changes to the popular trails in the Bear Creek watershed about five miles southwest of Colorado Springs, Colorado. The purpose of the changes is the protection of Colorado's State Fish, the greenback cutthroat trout. Recent genetic evidence indicates that the remaining population of genetically pure greenback cutthroat trout may exist solely in Bear Creek.

    IMBA's chapter Medicine Wheel Trail Advocates (MWTA) has advocated for continued mountain bike access in the watershed throughout the multi-year Bear Creek Watershed Assessment process. MWTA and IMBA support the efforts to protect the greenback cutthroat trout and believe that mountain bikers, the trails we ride, and sensitive species can co-exist with proper planning.

    The Forest Service has proposed three alternative plans of action and your comment is needed. MWTA and IMBA support “Alternative B”, which balances recreation with protection of the trout habitat, with some modifications. Comment deadline is March 27th, 2014.

    Please read MWTA and IMBA's full comment letter or find out more at about the Bear Creek Watershed Assessment at the Forest Service's website.

    Comments may be directed to bcc@fs.fed.us.

    Here are talking points you might include in your message:

    Mountain bikers have a strong connection to the environment in which we recreate and believe sensitive species can co-exist with recreation with proper planning.
    "Alternative B" appropriately balances recreation and greenback cutthroat trout protection, with some modification. Specifically...
    Trail 720 is a unique trail in the system which does not contribute to sediment loading into Bear Creek and should remain open.
    No trails should be decommissioned prior to the new routes being completed and opened to public use.
    Reopening of the Palmer Trail and Captain Jacks loop–closed due to flooding and not the assessment–should not be delayed until the completion of the NEPA process.
    Most importantly, let the Forest Service know why the trails the in Bear Creek watershed are personally important to you. MWTA and IMBA encourage your comments to help represent mountain bikers' interests Bear Creek watershed assessment.

    https://www.imba.com/sites/default/f... Watershed.pdf
    https://www.imba.com/alert/provide-y...rshed-colorado
    Pike and San Isabel National Forests Cimarron and Comanche National Grasslands - Home
    The older I get, the faster I was.





    Punch it, Chewie.

  17. #17
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,122
    Quote Originally Posted by Full Trucker View Post
    Got this in my email this morning:

    I have trouble supporting Alternative B. I believe the scope of work is too large, unneeded and unrealistic. It could take 20 years to get all that work done at current USFS funding levels and the trails will remain closed during that time. Besides, the trout will be re-established in their native habitat before Alt B can be completed. (By their own admission they already have many thousands of these trout in the hatchery and will stock them this year.)
    I support "no action" Alternative A.


    I respectfully request that all trails in question be reopened for public access. Please accept this letter as evidence of my support for the USFS Bear Creek Watershed Restoration EA - Alternative A, for the following reasons.

    1. The Greenback Cutthroat Trout is non-indigenous to Bear Creek and as such should be treated as an invasive species and relocated to their native habitat.

    2. The cited study "Historical stocking data and 19th century DNA reveal human-induced changes to native diversity and distribution of cutthroat trout", is based heavily on assumptions, has poor controls, and relies on a single pool of genetic material for sampling.

    3. Having used the trails in question on almost a weekly basis for over 20 years, my experience has been that trail conditions, erosion and sedimentation rely much more heavily on annual weather patterns than the amount and type of current use.

    4. The Pikes Peak FS office should dedicate its' funding and resources to issues of more immediate public safety concern such as wildfire mitigation efforts and flood preparation efforts related to the Waldo Canyon Fire.

    While I do not question the motives of those who believe the Bear Creek Greenback Cutthroat trout are in danger the evidence that trail use places their survival in jeopardy simply is not there. The fact of the matter is that the trout in Bear Creek have survived well over 100 years with human interaction along Bear Creek. There is no fire that needs to be put out other than the one in which the location of the trout has now been made public knowledge thanks to the very people who profess they are attempting to protect them.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    59
    I completely agree that Alternative A is the best choice. On paper the USFS may accept Alternative B but in reality there is no money to even supervise volunteers to build new trail. Second, what would stop the CBD from suing to halt construction of new trails? From the USFS perspective it is easier to abandon plans for new trails than to decommission existing trails. I can't understand how building new trails is less impactful than allowing volunteers to stabilize existing trails and remediate excessive sedimentation in the Bear Creek waterways. I'm pessimistic but litigation always triumphs science.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    145
    MedWheel and IMBA have been involved with this issue since the CBD brought the threat of a lawsuit to the the USFS in May of 2012. What the USFS is now calling alternative A was always the preferred and lobbied for answer to the sedimentation problem. Unfortunately, the USFS has never considered it a valid option, even without any conclusive data to back up that position.

    As I see it:

    The reality is that the CBD has succeeded in scaring the USFS into abandoning the drainage, the city of CS will go along with the USFS because they are partners in many parcels of land and CSU is never in a hurry to allow recreation on it's land. They are all afraid of being sued and if/when the trout are declared an endangered species, the drainage would be closed permanently anyway. Alternative A is only included to provide the general public with a feel good choice, don't expect the USFS to take any poll seriously, IMO the choice has already been made.

    Given the realistic limited choices, Alternative B is the best solution because it's likely that the trout will be declared endangered and the drainage closed in the future. Let's get started on new trails and have them in place when it happens. It sucks that we will lose those trails, the new ones while fun, won't be at the same level. We can ***** and moan about what should've happened, but these are not decisions being made based on what we want, they are political decisions made by people who have probably never been here and could care less.

    I don't know how much money any of these agencies have, it's primarily USFS and CSU land, I do expect that they are in the passing the hat stage and it will go to bid soonish.

  20. #20
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,122
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    I don't know how much money any of these agencies have, it's primarily USFS and CSU land, I do expect that they are in the passing the hat stage and it will go to bid soonish.
    Passing the hat? you haven't even gotten to the permitting stage. The permitting could easily take 10 years and no doubt the CBD will oppose those also. Has anyone thought about that?

    Ans i'll have to check my old maps, but if I recall correctly, Alternative B will mean you are relocating trails into an area managed under CSU's South Slope Watershed Access Policy. I would expect many years of delays before anything goes out to bid.

  21. #21
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,122
    If there were any questions about where the CBD stands on the trout and just how radical a group of eco-fascist they are I think that is being answered today.


    Last Man Standing
    Rancher: armed feds are surrounding my farm
    http://freebeacon.com/issues/last-man-standing/

    "Environmentalists are praising the government’s forceful actions, which are being taken to protect the “desert tortoise.”

    We’re heartened and thankful that the agencies are finally living up to their stewardship duty,” said Rob Mrowka, a Nevada-based senior scientist with the Center for Biological Diversity. “The Gold Butte area has been officially designated as critical habitat for threatened tortoises—meaning the area is essential to their long-term survival as a species.” i.e. off limits to anyone other than government approved scientist and CBD staff.

  22. #22
    STRAVA!!!!!!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    If there were any questions about where the CBD stands on the trout and just how radical a group of eco-fascist they are I think that is being answered today.


    Last Man Standing
    Rancher: armed feds are surrounding my farm
    Last Man Standing | Washington Free Beacon

    "Environmentalists are praising the government’s forceful actions, which are being taken to protect the “desert tortoise.”

    We’re heartened and thankful that the agencies are finally living up to their stewardship duty,” said Rob Mrowka, a Nevada-based senior scientist with the Center for Biological Diversity. “The Gold Butte area has been officially designated as critical habitat for threatened tortoises—meaning the area is essential to their long-term survival as a species.” i.e. off limits to anyone other than government approved scientist and CBD staff.
    There you go people! Thank a liberal! HOO LEE SHIIT!!!!

  23. #23
    ..ouch
    Reputation: thump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,960
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    If there were any questions about where the CBD stands on the trout and just how radical a group of eco-fascist they are I think that is being answered today.
    I wonder if anyone still actually believes the CBD is in this because trout matter to them?

    Opinion: Center for Biological Diversity is a Stain on Green Efforts | adventure journal

    http://www.esablawg.com/

  24. #24
    Frt Range, CO
    Reputation: pursuiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,405
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    ...The reality is that the CBD has succeeded in scaring the USFS into abandoning the drainage....
    The CBD doesn't have to scare the USFS, they are like-minded travelers working in lockstep, the lawsuits are a charade. The USFS admin folds and reimburses the CBD for their legal expenses. Last year the CBD reported almost $1.5million revenue for legal fees, most of that from government agencies. The USFS is being run by the Sierra Club, they hate mountain bikes, we're screwed.

Similar Threads

  1. bear creek trail gps
    By tep in forum California - Socal
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-15-2013, 03:54 PM
  2. Jones Park / Bear Creek Closures - Fight Back
    By pko142 in forum Colorado - Front Range
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-06-2013, 09:22 PM
  3. Jones Park/Bear Creek, trout and the lawsuit - PLEASE READ -
    By 32x18 in forum Colorado - Front Range
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 12-04-2012, 02:40 PM
  4. Bear Creek Cutthroat Trout - Trail Changes might be coming
    By pastajet in forum Colorado - Front Range
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 09-29-2012, 06:54 AM

Posting Permissions

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