Anyone know a good lawyer ;-(  ? ...  Wolf Creek~Alberta Park, Colorado Needs Friends Now!
Posted: 25 August 2012 12:17 AM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
Total Posts:  6516
Joined  2010-08-15

November 20, 2014 UPDATE

Hope that got your attention.  {looks like Alberta Park could still use some good lawyers, see below}

Actually I am looking for a good lawyer and man am I in a hurry
(the Draft Environmental Impact Statement comment period for the speculative Wolf Creek Village (10,300’) at Wolf Creek Pass, Colorado Land swap -comment period cut off is end of September! )

Specifically a lawyer experienced in USA Public Lands Laws. ~ perhaps even from Alaska

In particular the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act ANILCA

In compliance with its statutory obligations under Section 1323(a) of the Alaska National Interest
Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA, discussed in detail in Section 1.10, below), the Rio Grande NF
had determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was required to analyze the request
for access to the private inholding.

{let me try that again… I have sort of a three ring circus going on right now.}

My question specifically would be to verify what a lawyerly guy told me:
Can it be argued that ANILCA’s previsions regarding road access were passed because of the massive amount of Federal acquisitions - so that the many people who suddenly found themselves surrounded by US Forest Service had legal recourse to road access to their land.

Therefore it could be argued that it is inappropriate for a speculator who knowingly swapped/purchased a prime parcel of landlocked US Forest Service real estate within the boundaries of an established (Rio Grande) US National Forest - to claim that ANILCA gives him a legal right to demand access for a high traffic road to said parcel?
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980

Wolf Creek needs Friends now!

If anyone should know someone, but don’t want to broadcast, please consider a PM to me or simply forward this to them.

[ Edited: 20 November 2014 12:46 PM by ]

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Posted: 28 August 2012 08:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
Total Posts:  6516
Joined  2010-08-15

Heyya, you know in it’s way I consider some of you folks friends so I hope you don’t mind me decompressing over here… a little.

I’ve finished* one of the most productive weekends of my life, a genuine marathon.
A wonderful perfect storm of timing… plus a weekend totally alone to produce something… many things, in writing.
Something that’s hopefully good enough to make an impact in the outcome of an important local issue. 
More fun than installing stairs & windows… not that that isn’t fun and fulfilling in it’s own way.    :red:
And now I’m finished with both the marathon posting at and my Memes Courier summarizing all those VWC-DEIS blog posts, and ok a bit gloating… glowing…  Er, having a couple beers.  :coolsmile:

Check it out.  If’n you’re curious   :cheese:

*Still some {always some} mopping up, of course, but excepting for one sort of epilogue post it’s finished and it feels good.


We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Posted: 28 August 2012 09:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
Total Posts:  1648
Joined  2010-04-22

Wow, that is indeed a lot of work.

I didn’t chime in here because I know nothing of these laws (I’m not even frmo Canada) and I don’t know anyone who is. But, it’s always nice to see people who actively oppose apparent sociopaths who are willing to destroy resources to get ahead. After watching some of Ken Burns’ National Parks series, I have a bit better inkling of just how much there has been a constant push-and-pull between people who exploit natural resources without care, and people who want to preserve and share them with future generations.


“All musicians are subconsciously mathematicians.”

- Thelonious Monk

Posted: 20 November 2014 12:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
Total Posts:  6516
Joined  2010-08-15

Delaying decisions is all fine and good - but the final decision is what matters.
The people loss big once again.

. November 20, 2014
. Draft decision released for Village at Wolf Creek Access Project

. MONTE VISTA, Colo. – The Rio Grande National Forest has completed the Village at Wolf Creek Access Project analysis
and draft record of decision. Forest Supervisor Dan Dallas selected Alternative 2, the proposed land exchange between
the United States and Leavell-McCombs Joint Venture (LMJV). The land exchange will provide the opportunity for LMJV to
develop year-round access to their property.

“After a thorough review of the final environmental impact statement and public comments, I have decided to approve Alternative 2,
the land exchange,” said Dallas. “I believe this is the best decision for the land and the public while providing the access to which
the proponent is legally entitled.”
Alternative 2 conveys approximately 177 acres of privately held land to the Rio Grande National Forest in exchange for
approximately 205 acres of National Forest System land managed by the RGNF.  The land exchange would create a private
land parcel of approximately 325 acres extending to U.S. Highway 160 and will accommodate year-round vehicular access.

The existing Tranquility Road would be extended east across NFS land to the private land. This road would provide restricted
seasonal access between Wolf Creek Ski Area and the private land.
The primary benefits of the land exchange proposal over the previous right-of-way proposal include relocation of most of the
proposed private land development to an area farther away from the ski area and Forest Service acquisition of wetlands and a perennial stream.

LMJV previously sought a right-of-way access across RGNF from U.S. Highway 160 to their private land. 
Since their private land is surrounded by National Forest System land, LMJV is entitled by federal statute to have
granted to them by the Forest Service a right-of-way for access commensurate with the reasonable use and
enjoyment of their property. {I wonder how RGNF finesses the fact the Red McCombs knew dang
well that land was landlocked before his purchase! - Or does the RGNF ignore that detail - we shall see?}

The publication of the draft record of decision in the Valley Courier starts a 45-day objection period. The final decision
will be signed if no objections are received. A 45-day resolution period ensues if objections are submitted by individuals
who previously provided comments.
The resolution period may be extended an additional 30 days for a total of 75 days.
The final decision is signed following this resolution period.

For more information about the proposed Village at Wolf Creek Access Project, visit the Rio Grande National Forest website at


Public Affairs Specialist
Rio Grande National Forest
719-852-6212 (o)


We need each other, to keep ourselves honest