PDA

View Full Version : Crystal Mountain Closed?



Aaron
May 5th, 2011, 12:41 PM
http://www.coloradoan.com/article/20110430/NEWS01/104300358/Crystal-Mountain-trail-may-soon-off-limits?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

Four-wheeling up to the summit of Crystal Mountain is one of the classic off-highway vehicle rides in Roosevelt National Forest, drawing thousands of riders each year.

For the Horsetooth Four-Wheelers, the Crystal Mountain ride is part of a big annual campout and trail cleanup, said the group's vice president, Bob Paul.

But the cleanup and campout might not go as planned this year because the state may prevent off-highway vehicle riders from accessing the trail leading to Crystal Mountain from the south.

"We feel pretty rough about that," said Paul, adding that the road has been open for decades. "It's kind of like a land grab. It's kind of like we were just shut off."

The road leading to Crystal Mountain, Larimer County Road 344, crosses a 1-square-mile parcel of state institutional trust land managed by the Colorado State Land Board as a revenue stream for public schools.

The parcel is one of many 640 acre tracts of state land scattered throughout Colorado, but the Crystal Mountain parcel is unique in the area because it’s surrounded on all sides by public national forest land.

The public isn’t allowed onto state trust land, and trespassers can be reported to the Larimer County Sheriff’s Office, said State Land Board spokeswoman Melissa Yoder.

“Public use will be a disturbance or harm our ability to make a revenue stream,” she said. “We can’t allow public use.”

Only those who lease the land have a right to be there, she said, unless they have a special state permit for a right of way, which costs up to $5,000.

So, when business partners Dennis Houska, of Houska Automotive in Fort Collins, and Paul Duffy signed a five-year recreational lease last year for the part of the Crystal Mountain parcel from the state that includes the road access to the peak, the lease stipulated that they are required to install a gate on the road to keep trespassers out.

Yoder said the State Land Board requires its lease holders to keep visitors away because off-road vehicle damage to the land is widespread, with new two-track roads appearing all over the property causing unnecessary and unwelcome erosion.

“In some places, the roads are getting so deep it’s rutting out,” Yoder said.
So, she said, the state is relying on lease holders to control access to the parcel.

Duffy said Thursday he hasn’t yet put up a gate, but he’s required to do so.

“It’s really not up to us,” he said. “I don’t want to spend the time and energy to put a gate up there, especially because it’s probably going to be torn down.”

Paul said most OHV users on the trail are responsible and wouldn’t touch a gate, but he said a few “vigilantes” might be inclined to tear it out.

Part of the problem, Yoder said, is that most people don’t know what state trust land is and that they’re not allowed on it, even though signs might warn them to keep off.

She said that state trust land is publicly owned, but “public” in this case doesn’t mean the public has access to it in the same way people have free access to the surrounding public Forest Service land.

“There’s a tacit assumption made by a lot of people that if they see a road, they can use it,” she said.

Paul said he’s been using the Crystal Mountain Road for years, and just thought it was part of the trail system in the area.

“The communication has not been clear to everyone,” he said. “No signs, just signs (marking a) private road. Keep off.”

He said he thinks the State Land Board could have explored options for keeping the route through the Crystal Mountain parcel open to everyone, but “the door was slammed shut.”

Regardless, Yoder said, the state is adamant that unpermitted visitors must stay off the land.

Duffy said he feels caught in the middle of the controversy and has no intention of getting into any conflict.

“Our intent was to manage that land in a way that minimizes the spread of noxious weeds and the impact of people going off trail,” he said. “We definitely don’t want to cause any hostility.”

The U.S. Forest Service has no position on the issue, Roosevelt National Forest spokeswoman Reghan Cloudman said.

“While we appreciate and support reasonable access to National Forest System lands, this is a state decision,” she said.

Brad
May 5th, 2011, 01:00 PM
Once again. Colorado government proving how inept they really are. :rolleyes:

RockyMtnHigh
May 5th, 2011, 01:31 PM
Once again. Colorado government proving how inept they really are. :rolleyes:

They're just as bad with river access too, I don't see how someone can buy land that borders a state/national water way and can restrict access to it. Most of the surrounding states allow fisherman access to the river itself and up to the high water mark, NOT HERE!

Mr6dwg
May 5th, 2011, 01:43 PM
I have been driving that road for 11 years! This is my favorite road, due to its location and 4WD level of skill. I will be upset if that road is closed. I guess it is a good thing I am a motorcycle rider. They can't take that away from me. Well, maybe they can start shutting down the road from Lyons to Estes Park, Peak to Peak Highway, etc, because those are fun roads.

Brody
May 5th, 2011, 06:46 PM
I hope nobody is very surprised. This is typical of the State government, the FS, etc. and has actually been in the works for a long time. Piss on all of those entities...."concerned about the spreading of noxious weeds" my pasty white ass....