Posted on 04/11/2006 4:03:01 AM PDT by NativeNewYorker
People might have to yield to elk and other wildlife on part of the Rio Grande Trail.
The Roaring Fork Transportation Authority will consider banning human use from Dec. 1 to May 1 on the next portion of trail it plans to build on the railroad corridor. RFTA is scheduled to construct 4.5 miles of trail this summer from Hooks Lane, in the Emma area, to the Catherine Bridge.
Limiting use of the $1 million trail to seven months of the year is one concession RFTA is contemplating to make the trail more compatible with wildlife using the area, according to Mike Hermes, who oversees trail construction for the transit agency. RFTA is also considering banning dogs year-round on at least part of the 4.5-mile stretch.
Hermes said RFTA doesn't want to ruin the very qualities that make that stretch of the corridor attractive for a trail. He is working on recommendations RFTA's board of directors will review later this spring.
"The final rules and regulations will be up to the board," he said.
Part of the new trail segment will run through Rock Bottom Ranch, a working ranch and wildlife sanctuary that the Aspen Center for Environmental Studies owns. Everything from bear to birds uses the portion of the corridor from Rock Bottom to the bridge heavily. No trains have run on that section of the track for decades.
"This section of the Rio Grande railroad corridor has been relatively unused and free from disturbance in the past, which has caused its wildlife usage, diversity and value to increase," said a letter from the Colorado Division of Wildlife to RFTA.
Deer and elk spend winters on federal land known as the Crown, adjacent to the railroad corridor. There is "considerable movement" into the corridor by the ungulates throughout the winter," according to the DOW's letter. The agency noted that a great blue heron nest colony is located along the corridor, and many small mammals and songbirds use it as well.
"The Division would recommend and strongly encourage RFTA to adopt a seasonal closure from Dec. 1 to May 1," the DOW letter said. "This area has considerable use by deer and elk during the critical winter months when they are most susceptible to disturbance."
Blue herons also arrive at the nesting site from mid-February to early March. They lay eggs during March and April
"During this time great blue herons are very susceptible to disturbance and flush easily. Repeated disturbance may cause discontinued use of the nest site or abandonment of young herons before they fledge," said the DOW letter, signed by former Area Wildlife Manager Pat Tucker, who was promoted within the agency since he sent the letter last winter.
The agency also urged RFTA to ban dogs on the new section of trail, citing ineffective leash laws and potential harassment of wildlife.
Hermes said he is still determining whether to recommend banning dogs along the entire 4.5-mile stretch or just from the bridge to the upvalley end of the ranch. That would allow owners to walk their dogs from Hooks Lane to the ranch boundary.
Rock Bottom Ranch manager Matthew Early Coen would welcome the dog ban. "We've had problems with dogs chasing herds of elk and killing chickens," he said.
Coen and representatives of the Roaring Fork Conservancy and wildlife division expressed their concerns to Hermes in a February meeting. They submitted formal letters with suggestions for consideration by the RFTA board.
Even if it is closed for nearly half of the year, the Rock Bottom segment of the trail is a milestone in the development of the corridor. This segment will complete the link for roughly 30 miles between Aspen and Carbondale.
The old rails and ties will be torn out and salvaged from the Rock Bottom stretch sometime in April, Hermes said. The trail construction job will go out to bid, and work will commence on or around June 1 and finish in the fall.
The next step in the enviro whacko playbook. Ban humans from the wilderness and confine them to the cities.
Illeagal aliens excepted.
Doh Doh
Fine by me. I've seen what developers of vacation homes have done to the wildlife here. Nesting areas were totally wiped out and for what? Fancy smancy weekend getaways for city folk who want to get out of the city, but have succeeded in bringing the city with them.
also excepted, the political elite and their friends.
where is "here"?
Part and parcel of the Luddite Green, lunatic fringe of the environmental movement is the notion that human life constitutes a scourge on Gaia (that's planet earth to you regressed types), and the best thing that could happen is for human beings to vanish and let the birds and animals repossess their rightful habitat. It's a very popular idea with a certain variety of suburban matron who features large-format, pictorial nature books on the living room coffee table of her million dollar "cottage" and rides a bike to work so she won't have to gas up the SUV more than once a week. Such people will no doubt be cheered that this publicly funded land is off limits to... well... the public.
This will give the wolf packs the peace and quiet they need to eat up the elk before moving on to rancher stock, cats and dogs and then people.
Heck, I think it's a good idea. I also think they should station rangers out there to shoot any dogs they see harassing the elk and killing chickens. If Fido can't behave, you'd better keep him on a leash.
Dogs are political prisoners, and, as such, they should be re-educated and then freed to return to Gaia.
"Federal land?" The only federal land should be in DC. This is proof again that the federal government is out of control, and not bound by the constitution.
"The next step in the enviro whacko playbook. Ban humans from the wilderness and confine them to the cities."
Here in Boulder county, CO. it seems half the land is "open space". My favorite sign is "BOULDER COUNTY OPEN SPACE, KEEP OUT!". Once the enviro termites get their hands on something it becomes their personal playground. They eat tax money and lottery proceeds. The Open Space bureaucrats just built themselves a new Palace of the People down the road from me which is very nice. Stonework and timber offices look pretty cool with the Rockies as a backdrop.
"Part and parcel of the Luddite Green, lunatic fringe of the environmental movement is the notion that human life constitutes a scourge on Gaia (that's planet earth to you regressed types), and the best thing that could happen is for human beings to vanish and let the birds and animals repossess their rightful habitat."
I used to belong to the Sierra Club and Earth First back in the early eighties. Many of those folks are genuinely nuts. I even had a butch woman from New York City tromping around the Tennessee woods in sandals telling me that Copperheads won't hurt you if you just know how to communicate with them. I was enlightened. Up to that point I had always communicated with them via 12 guage.
Limiting use of the $1 million trail...
Constructing a trail on a railroad right-of-way can't cost that much. Throw some planks on the trestles and maybe a hand rail. Even if the tracks are still there, companies will pay you to take them away.
I'm a trail rider who enjoys and depends on access to public lands to ride, yet I see no problem with some limitations and seasonal closures to reduce our impact if they make sense.
We have some rails-to-trails here, and they do more to it than you might think to make it a good useable surface. RR track is layed on pea gravel, not crushed rock, so it doesn't compact and is very difficult to walk on.... like walking on constantly shifting marbles. So they usually pave a path.
They're good for walkers and bike riders who want a nice, paved level surface, but I didn't care for the experience on my horse, it was just traveling on a perfectly straight, perfectly level road.
You're certainly welcome to your opinion; I don't see, however, that your opinion should dictate how my tax dollars are spent. Furthermore, if I'm being billed to create trails, then I think I should be the one to decide when I may or may not utilize those trails.
Well you're certainly allowed to think that because you pay taxes amounting to a fraction of the costs involved here that you should have unfettered access to do what you want!
Baloney. That's not the way it works.
I don't make excuses for the cost of this, but I think reasonable people can come up with reasonable scheduling of opening trails to both preserve the wildlife as well as provide access to the citizenry.
Here, the trails close in winter when it's wet. They close because horses traveling on the wet trails make thick sinking suck MUD that makes the trail unpleasant and risky for everyone, and that suck mud will remain bad all summer if the trail surface is ruined that way. Closing it in winter preserves the surface so it can be used by all. Is that fair or is that terribly unfair?
Good thing I'm not human.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.