That additional flexibility will allow local communities to protect themselves from wildfires, ski areas to expand and coal mining companies to construct venting for methane in the North Fork Valley.

Many residents oppose the Colorado rule, saying it opens too much of the state’s best backcountry to coal mining, drilling, and other large-scale activity. The state rule, they argue, is unnecessary after the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the 2001 National Forest roadless rule earlier this year.

Colorado is unique, supporters of the state rule say, and deserves its own rule.

A map of the Colorado roadless rule (via the U.S. Forest Service)

“The new Colorado roadless rule achieves a responsible balance between the development of our public lands and the conservation of Colorado’s backcountry,” said Gaspar Perricone, co-director of Colorado-based Bull Moose Sportsmen’s Alliance. “The protections offered under this new rule will ensure the conservation of pristine habitat and robust fish and game populations that have made Colorado’s public lands a destination for generations of sportsmen.”

The Colorado rule was deemed the preferred alternative in a final Environmental Impact Statement that was announced this morning in Denver’s City Park.

“The new rule represents a characteristically Colorado achievement,” Gov. John Hickenlooper said. “The rule adds landmark protections to millions of acres of our state’s spectacular national forests by incorporating the diverse views of people and businesses across Colorado. The rule enhances all that makes Colorado special while at the same time providing a measure of flexibility that supports local economies and ensures communities can take steps to protect themselves from threats of wildfire.”

Forest Service Chief Tom Tidwell said when the new rule is finalized it will increase protection for Colorado’s roadless areas “while providing flexibility in management to address the state’s interests.”

The new rule has more protections than the 2001 version, including the designation of 1.2 million acres as “upper tier” that will be managed with an increased level of protection for critical wildlife populations and quality wildlife habitat, its supporters say.

There are 363 roadless areas across 4.2 million acres throughout Colorado located in eight national forests that would now be managed under the Colorado roadless rule.

From July 2006 to April 2011 there were five public comment periods resulting in more than 310,000 comments from citizens nationwide. The rule will be finalized a minimum of 30 days after the Final Environmental Impact Statement is published in the Federal Register.

“The rule announced today is an improvement over previous Colorado proposals,” said Ted Zukoski, the Denver-based attorney for Earthjustice. “But the Colorado Rule still contains a loophole that allows coal companies to bulldoze roads on 20,000 acres of roadless forests and meadows, and it permits logging in remote areas far from communities. The Colorado rule leaves nearly three million roadless acres vulnerable to more road-building than was allowed under the 2001 national roadless rule. So taken on balance it is a step in the wrong direction.”

U.S. Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., sent a letter to President Obama last week urging him to quickly approve the Colorado rule to alleviate uncertainty for communities and businesses.

“Past delays have led to uncertainty for local businesses and communities, and this should help provide some stability going forward,” Udall said Wednesday. “This is a great example of a very thorough process, where thousands of Coloradans and stakeholders came together to work out a framework that makes sense for Colorado. I look forward to taking a closer look at the rule being published today, and to ensure its future implementation continues to benefit Coloradans.”

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

The Thompson Divide Coalition sent a letter to six companies that own undeveloped natural gas leases Tuesday offering to reimburse any direct investments to date, which it estimated at $2.5 million.

“We believe this is a reasonable proposition,” Thompson Divide Coalition President Chuck Ogilby said in a prepared statement Wednesday. “It acknowledges the investments these companies have made, and gives them a way to support an initiative that has broad community support.”

The disbursement of funds would be contingent on Congress passing legislation that would prevent energy development in Thompson Divide, made up of White River and Gunnison National Forests.

Thompson Divide near Carbondale (Image: Thompson Divide Coalition)

An Encana spokesperson said the company is reviewing the letter.

Representatives from the other companies could not be reached.

The Thompson Divide Coalition is composed of ranchers, environmentalists, local governments and other local residents. The group said it hopes its good-faith resolution puts the question of whether to drill in the area to rest.

“We’ve said all along that we want to protect these lands in a way that compensates the leaseholders for their investments,” Ogilby said.

Last fall, U.S. Sens. Michael Bennet and Mark Udall sent a letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar calling for “robust and meaningful” stakeholder input before the Bureau of Land Management decides whether to let oil companies bundle federal lands where it holds leases that are set to expire in 2013 into a specially designated unit.

Environmentalists and other interested parties have been calling for U.S. Rep. Scott Tipton, R-Colo., to help broker a deal with the energy companies in Thompson Divide, where there is a vigorous anti-drilling sentiment. Oil and gas companies are major donors to Tipton’s re-election campaign.

The festive holiday ad running in Politico and the National Journal Daily (pdf) was produced by the Pew Environment Group and 11 other groups, including the Colorado Environmental Coalition. It’s aimed at maximum wildlife, water and climate protections and the strongest possible plan from the Obama administration as it nears release of new forest management rules under the National Forest Management Act (NFMA).

That law governs most Forest Service activity, and the new rules could be ready as early as January. The original NFMA rules were developed in 1982.

“President Obama has an opportunity to present the American public with a legacy that will stand the test of time: strong protections for our national forests,” Jane Danowitz, U.S. public lands program director for the Pew Environment Group, said in a release. “If well-protected, our national forests will be the gift that keeps on giving – providing clean water for millions of people, a safe home for fish and wildlife, and a natural resource for future generations.”

A new U.S. Department of Agriculture report found that national forests and grasslands are responsible for 223,000 jobs in rural areas and contribute $14.5 billion a year to the U.S. economy.

Sixteen Colorado conservation groups joined in the campaign, sending a letter last week to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack (see below), who said “developing a new planning rule provides the opportunity to manage national forests and grasslands for the benefit of water resources, the climate and local communities.”

Thousands of holiday cards requesting better forest planning rules have been sent to the White House as a result of the campaign.

Dear Secretary Vilsack,

Sweeping new national forest management rules set to be released by the Obama administration in early 2011 provide a unique opportunity to continue the conservation legacy of President Theodore Roosevelt, who had the foresight to protect these treasured lands more than a century ago. Because of this vision, America enjoys 193 million acres of national forests and grasslands – including 14.5 million acres in Colorado. These are public lands that provide vital protection for fish and wildlife and clean drinking water for millions nationwide.

Today, our national forests and the wildlife and water resources they support, including those in Colorado, face unprecedented threats that even a visionary leader such as Roosevelt could not have anticipated. Our forests, wildlife and watersheds, which require comprehensive restoration to remedy the effects of mismanagement, also face new challenges associated with climate change and encroaching development.

The new National Forest Management Act regulations must effectively protect and restore our national forests as we face the challenges of the 21st century. They must serve to anchor Forest Service management by giving the agency clear non-discretionary direction, as has been the case with the current regulations which were developed in 1982. At the same time, the new regulations must use sound and current science to safeguard healthy fish and wildlife populations and their habitats, and secure safe, clean water by creating management standards to protect and restore streams, rivers and watersheds.

We see the development of these comprehensive national forest management rules as one of the most important environmental actions that the administration will take during this term. The course set by these critical rules will determine the future of our forests, wildlife and watersheds for generations to come.

We look forward to working with you to develop a new framework for managing our national forests in this century of which President Roosevelt would be proud.

Sincerely,

Josh Pollock
Conservation Director
Center for Native Ecosystems

Pete Maysmith
Executive Director
Colorado Conservation Voters

Elise Jones
Executive Director
Colorado Environmental Coalition

Bryan Martin
Director of Conservation
The Colorado Mountain Club

Ryan Demmy Bidwell
Executive Director
Colorado Wild

Caitlin Balch-Burnett
Colorado Outreach Representative
Defenders of Wildlife

Veronica Egan
Executive Director
Great Old Broads for Wilderness

Matt Reed
Public Lands Director
High Country Citizens’ Alliance

Tom Sobal
Director
Quiet Use Coalition

Roz McClellan
Director
Rocky Mountain Recreation Initiative

Megan Graham
Executive Director
San Juan Citizens Alliance

Christine Canaly
Director
San Luis Valley Ecosystem Council

Hilary White
Director
Sheep Mountain Alliance

Jean C. Smith
Associate Director
Wild Connections

Suzanne Jones
Regional Director
The Wilderness Society

Peter Hart
Conservation Analyst/Staff Attorney
Wilderness Workshop

Polis said his scaled-down alternative to the massive four-county Hidden Gems proposal has garnered broad consensus and is ready for legislative action.

“Our mountain landscapes are something that we take great pride in here in Colorado,” Polis said in a release. “These areas are essential to our economy and our environment, and through this legislation we can ensure that more of our beautiful areas are preserved and can be enjoyed by our children for years to come.”

The discussion draft (pdf), entitled the Eagle and Summit County Wilderness Preservation Act, would protect a number of pristine Colorado wild areas by designating some areas as wilderness – in which motorized travel and industrial development such as mining, logging and oil and gas production is prohibited – and designating others that have outstanding community needs as special management areas.

The special management areas include public lands used by the Colorado Army National Guard’s High-Altitude Army Aviation Training Site (HAATS) at the Eagle County Regional Airport, where military helicopter pilots from around the world learn to fly in hot, high altitude conditions similar to areas of Afghanistan and Iraq.

This bill would designate nearly 90,000 new acres of wilderness and preserve an additional estimated 80,000 acres as special management areas or companion designations. Click here for a topographic map (pdf) and here for a section-by-section description of the draft plan (pdf).

“This discussion draft is the result of many long hours spent bringing stakeholders together, poring over maps, and finding and building consensus within the community,” Polis said. “We went to great efforts to take into account the reasonable needs of users and residents on all sides, and have produced a product that is ready to advance through the legislative process.”

Polis emphasized the draft is not final and he’s still open to changes, but he hopes to introduce a bill this fall preserving areas ready for legislation while working on other areas that still need broader consensus.

In discussing the history leading up to the current draft, Polis said the much larger Hidden Gems proposal (more than 300,000 acres in four counties) started the process, but Polis added said public input really shaped the current draft and he reserves the right to introduce additional wilderness legislation at a future date.

“This proposal should by no means be considered a ‘comprehensive’ or ‘Hidden Gems’ wilderness bill,” Polis said. “There is still an ongoing discussion about other potential wilderness areas, and I will continue working with local governments, residents, and stakeholders on issues and areas that this legislation doesn’t address.”

Got a tip? Freelance story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

“The Hidden Gems Wilderness Proposal would counteract the increasing pressures of extractive development and motorized use,” Ralston said Monday at a fly fishing outfitter in this mountain town at the base of Beaver Creek ski area. “It would protect our last remaining unspoiled places, while still permitting development and motors in places where they are appropriate.”

Proponents of Hidden Gems, which would protect as wilderness more than 400,000 acres of U.S. Forest Service and BLM land, point to Forest Service statistics they say show non-motorized users far outnumber motorized users in the state’s increasingly popular White River National Forest. Wilderness designation prohibits motorized and wheeled uses such as mountain biking, motorcycles, ATVs and snowmobiles.

Hikers, backpackers, climbers, kayakers, cross-country skiers and snowshoers outnumber motorized users by a 4-to-1 margin, according to 2007 user statistics compiled by the Forest Service. Downhill skiing and snowboarding at developed ski resorts, which are not in designated or proposed wilderness areas, are by far the most popular uses in the White River, but Hidden Gems backers exclude those statistics.

A political battle is shaping up over the proposal, which backers are shopping for congressional support. A group calling itself the White River Forest Alliance, comprised of motorized users, claims to have collected more than 700 signatures from people opposing the proposal, and a group called the Roaring Fork Mountain Bike Association also opposes the plan, although it doesn’t want to be associated with motorized users.

According to the Aspen Times, the White River Forest Alliance backs the Forest Service finding that approximately 82,000 acres of the White River are suitable for wilderness designation. Representatives also say they would be more supportive if proponents were merely looking to block extractive industries such as mining and logging rather than broadly prohibit motorized recreation as well.

Got a tip? Freelance story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

Private development adjacent to U.S. Forest Service property will increase dramatically over the next 40 years, potentially imperiling water sources, wildlife habitat and recreational opportunities, according to a recent report from the U.S. Forest Service.

According to the report National Forests on the Edge:

“In the East, almost all national forests are projected to experience moderate or high increases in residential development. In the West, moderate and high increases in residential development are projected around national forests located in Colorado, California, Oregon, Idaho, and Montana.”

In addition to the tensions over environmental concerns, increased development along this border with the national forests will probably result in more fire danger. Sixty percent of the houses built in the U.S. in the 1990s were built at the interface between urban and wild lands. There are more fire ignitions when housing density increases, and financial losses from fires are greater.

According to the report, Colorado will experience moderate growth of development near national forests on the Front Range and in southwestern Colorado. “Moderate” is defined as development on 10 to 29 percent of adjacent private land.

The USFS report is available here.

Martian Rocktober

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration got the jump on the World Series by naming a platform being explored within the Gusey Crater on Mars “Home Plate,” and the attendant Martian monoliths around them the “Colorado Rockies.”

There is no word as yet on whether the Martian rocks have had any better success against Boston’s pitching.

In a release, Rep. Mark Udall said:

“I thank NASA for recognizing Colorado’s prominence by naming formations on Mars after our world-renowned peaks and our pennant winning Rockies team. Colorado already has the best mountain range in the country, our aerospace economy is a national leader, and the Colorado Rockies are fighting to establish our state as home to the best team in baseball.  Anyone who has tried to summit a challenging peak knows that you are defined most by how you overcome the setbacks on the way.  Everyone who has followed the Rockies this far knows that these guys have the heart and the fight to chart a path to victory.  The entire state of Colorado – and some parts of Mars – are behind them.  Have faith and keep climbing, fellas.”

_{Humboldt Peak. As it finished its second Martian year on Mars, NASA’s Mars Exploration Rover Spirit was beginning to examine a group of angular rocks given informal names corresponding to peaks in the Colorado Rockies. Image Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech}

So why is this bug getting to be a big political deal? A scientific solution for the eradication of MPB is also going to be a political one.
Read in between the lines from this Colorado State University report:

Another method of prevention involves forest management. In general, the MPB likes forests that are old and dense. Thinning out excess trees reduces forest density, lessens fire hazard and improves individual tree vigor. Most mature Colorado forests have about twice as many trees as forests more resistant to MPB.

Thinning means logging. Logging means controversy. And for Summit County residents, all of this may mean a change of lifestyle as well as a change in their landscape.

Photo of trees affected by a pine beetle infestation is from the Colorado State University Cooperative Extension web site.