Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

  • Don't miss out on all the fun! Register on our forums to post and have added features! Membership levels include a FREE membership tier.

IMPORTANT!! Hidden Gems Awareness information.

Aspen Times today,

http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20090830/ASPENWEEKLY/908289973/1077&ParentProfile=1058

As a youngster in Crested Butte in the late 1970s and early '80s, Paul Andersen had a foot on the pedal in the early days of mountain biking.

The sport was new and the U.S. Forest Service hadn't yet clarified its rules on the presence of the machines in specially protected Wilderness areas. Andersen, now a Basalt resident and Aspen Times columnist, recalls riding his bike in some of the most gorgeous mountain passes and valleys in the Aspen area, places like West Maroon Pass in the Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness.

But the Forest Service tightened up its Wilderness rules in the 1980s, banning mountain bikes just as the sport was exploding in popularity.

“There was sort of a mood of upset among my mountain biking brethren,” Andersen said.

He initially shared those sentiments. But as Andersen spent more time out of the saddle and on his feet, he said he saw the “wisdom” of the ban on mountain bikes. They have a greater impact on trails and ecosystems than foot traffic, according to Andersen.

“The lighter the use of wild lands, the better,” he said.

Andersen was willing to “sacrifice” some of the trails he was able to ride prior to the mid-1980s. And now he is willing to sacrifice additional routes on federal lands in return for the Wilderness designation.

But his willingness to convert isn't shared by a lot of mountain bikers. They see the efforts to lock them out of more lands as a stab in the back by conservation groups. Mountain bikers are outdoor lovers who, by-and-large, want beautiful landscapes protected from threats of development, mining, and oil and gas production.

The common ground that cyclists and wilderness advocates share is immense, said Mike Pritchard, a member of the board of directors of the Roaring Fork Mountain Bike Association, an advocacy group formed two years ago.

“We're both looking to protect the land,” he said. “There's a minor conflict of no two wheels in the Wilderness.”
 
Hidden Gems testing ground
The ability of the two groups to work together is being put to the test during the campaign to protect between 400,000 and 450,000 acres of public lands in western Colorado, dubbed “the Hidden Gems.” Those lands are located in Pitkin, Garfield, Eagle, Summit and Gunnison counties — resort meccas for mountain biking. Roughly 217,000 of the acres targeted for protection surround the Roaring Fork Valley.

Wilderness Workshop, a renowned wilderness advocacy group founded in Aspen in the 1960s and now based in Carbondale, is heading the Hidden Gems Wilderness Campaign with heavyweight partners — the Colorado Environmental Coalition, Colorado Mountain Club and The Wilderness Society.

The roots of their effort trace back to earlier this decade, when a new management plan for the White River National Forest was released by the Forest Service. The agency recommended adding 82,000 acres of Wilderness to the 750,000 acres already with that management designation.

“We said, ‘That's a good start, but there's a whole lot more out there'” that deserves the protection, said Wilderness Workshop Executive Director Sloan Shoemaker.

The environmental groups performed their own inventory to determine what additional lands should be protected. What they came up with are lands Shoemaker called the Hidden Gems. For the most part, those lands aren't the jaw-dropping, “marquee” sites like the Maroon Bells or Snowmass Lake. Their beauty is more subtle.

While the Gems might not be stunning compared to the high ground that usually gets Wilderness protection, they are important as wildlife habitat, Shoemaker said. “From an ecological standpoint, the lower lands are more valuable.”

After identifying the lands they want protected, the conservation groups are now working to get a Wilderness proposal bill introduced during this session of Congress. “We're in full-fledged campaign mode,” Shoemaker said.

U.S. Rep. John Salazar, whose district includes Pitkin and Garfield counties, is viewed as a prime potential candidate to sponsor a bill. But Salazar wants the Wilderness advocates to build support and reduce opposition in the affected counties before he attaches his name to the effort.

“We're trying to work out the conflicts before we get to Congress,” Shoemaker said.

That's why the schism with the mountain biking community looms large.



The heart of the conflict
The mountain bike association, which has about 400 members, said it will support Wilderness designation on about 29,000 acres targeted by the Hidden Gems campaign around the Roaring Fork Valley. It wants a slightly lower level of protection on other lands so its members won't lose existing trails or potential routes they hope to see developed.

Representatives of the mountain bike association began meeting with Shoemaker in May to try to find solutions that would provide protections for other lands without excluding mountain bikers.

The association believes the National Conservation Area and National Recreation Area designations should be used to protect some of the wilderness-quality lands. Those designations essentially act as “wilderness with bikes” but still provide strong protections, Pritchard said.

The environmental coalition is wary of using those tools for most of the Hidden Gems because they want the strongest protection possible.

So the two sides are at a stalemate. To call it a battle would overstate it, but the two groups are in conflict over what they each see as the best interests of their constituencies.

Wilderness Workshop and its allies want the strongest protection possible, utilizing the Wilderness Act of 1964 and its “wild for good” promise. They believe it is necessary to sacrifice most recreation opportunities for the good of the special lands.

“Everybody says, ‘We like Wilderness, just don't do it where it affects my pursuit, my adrenaline rush, my activity,'” Shoemaker said. “I just ask people to look at higher values than our recreational pursuits.”
 
Bikers call for balance
Pritchard countered that mountain bikes don't pose a threat to the lands that Wilderness Workshop wants to protect. Cycling is a clean and quiet sport that brings riders closer to nature and reinforces their environmental ethic, he said.

Many mountain bikers don't understand why conservation groups would risk alienating them when they share so much in common. Other bikers just don't buy the assertion that the conservationists' vision of the land should trump their own.

Longtime mountain biking enthusiasts Glenn Horn of Aspen said he is concerned about the conservation groups' intent to close trails near populated areas. Additional Wilderness lands should be located far out in the backcountry, he said.

“There needs to be balance. There needs to be multiple use in the close-in areas,” said Horn, who doesn't belong to the mountain bike association or Wilderness Workshop.

He wants different forest users to respect the rights of other groups. He doesn't believe the conservationists working on the Hidden Gems proposal are honoring that code.

Horn also feels the environmental groups are employing an old political ploy as part of their campaign — they have asked for the Wilderness designation on more lands than they really hope to protect.

“They've taken an extreme position thinking it will get watered down in the process,” he said.

The Roaring Fork Mountain Bike Association has prepared a draft letter to Colorado's Congressional delegation and the Pitkin, Eagle and Garfield county commissioners that bluntly outlines its problems with the Hidden Gems proposal. The letter states that it tried to work out a compromise with Wilderness Workshop and its partners.

“During our negotiations we discussed compromises and boundary adjustments, as well as the potential that we'd be willing to lose a trail here and there along the way,” that draft letter said. “Unfortunately, Wilderness Workshop's mission to see the designation of as much Wilderness as possible is in direct conflict with RFMBA's core mission.”



Examples of conflict, compromise
The conflict between Wilderness and cycling advocates has been low-key, thus far, in large part because it doesn't involve the most popular trails. Wilderness Workshop avoided the well-traveled Smuggler Mountain, Hunter Creek Valley, Four Corners, Van Horn Park network, for example.

But the mountain bike association's analysis of the Hidden Gems proposal showed there are numerous trails already in use that would be closed to cyclists, and the possibility of new trails nixed. In many cases, existing spurs off more popular routes would be made “off-limits” by the Wilderness proposal. For example, there are a handful of lung-scorching spurs off Hay Park to the south and west of the main trail that cyclists say would be closed. They don't want to lose those trails.

Elsewhere in the valley, adventurous cyclists have dreamed for years of making a loop out of Braderich Creek and Dexter Creek. Both drainages are located between Coal Basin above Redstone and the Thompson Creek area southwest of Carbondale. Braderich Creek experiences a fair bit of use. Dexter Creek is less utilized, but hard-core cyclists are eyeing it and riding it, and see potential for future development. The Hidden Gems proposal would turn the Dexter Creek terrain into Wilderness.

“The more we investigated [the Hidden Gems proposal], we saw those areas are loaded with trails,” Pritchard said.

The association contends that areas close to towns and population centers, and adjacent to existing recreation areas, should remain open to bicycles to meet growing demands. As the population of the midvalley has grown in the last two decades, the use of trails by mountain bikers has grown. Trails that used to see light use are now experiencing heavier use, and there is always demand for new routes.



Turf battle or compromise?

Wilderness Workshop and the Rocky Mountain Bike Association have already proven they can compromise. Shoemaker said the conservation groups listened to concerns from mountain bikers early in its process and redrew Wilderness boundaries to exclude some heavily used trails. “We made exclusions right off the top,” he said.

Three examples are the Braderich Creek Trail, the main Hay Park Trail and a 20,000-acre ridge known as Sloan Peak. That ridge contains parts of the Arbaney Kittle Trail, a grueling but epic route, and part of the Rocky Fork Trail.

Pritchard said Sloan Peak can become a “test case” for greater cooperation between the groups. The bike association would like to see the area designated either as a National Conservation Area or National Recreation Area, to give it protection without excluding bikes. It could serve as a model for protecting other areas without closing them to mountain bikes.

But both sides admit they won't be able to settle all conflicts. The issue has the potential to become a “locals' turf battle,” Andersen said.

Shoemaker said the goal is to minimize conflict as much as possible, but a new Wilderness proposal is bound to generate opposition. “I don't think all conflict is avoidable.”

His coalition is concerned about making too many concessions to cyclists or any other stakeholder group because it waters down the Wilderness proposal too much.

“It's not just about us versus mountain bikes,” Shoemaker said. “There are a whole bunch of other players, too.”

Representatives of the two sides met Aug. 24 to explore further compromise before the Hidden Gems campaign heats up. Shoemaker agreed to raise the idea of the alternative protections for some areas with his coalition. However, both sides suggested they have compromised as much as they can.

“In general, we had to agree to disagree on most of what we're each trying to achieve,” said Pritchard. “We'll continue discussions with Wilderness Workshop as the next few weeks go on, but we'll also be speaking up for the mountain bikers of the valley while there is still time to publicize our views.”

scondon@aspentimes.com



Learn about the Gems and bikers' concerns
To learn more about the Hidden Gems Wilderness Campaign go to www.whiteriverwild.org/. The website has detailed descriptions of the targeted areas, including size, location, access and “potential threats.” Maps locate the areas within the Roaring Fork Valley and show where proposed Wilderness boundary lines would be.

To learn more about the Roaring Fork Mountain Bike Association's assessment of the Hidden Gems Wilderness Campaign go to www.rfmba.org/mtb/advocacy.aspx. The website provides the full draft letter to Colorado's Congressional delegation, outlines trails that would become off-limits and pinpoints affected areas on maps. Hidden Gems in the Roaring Fork Valley
Following is a list of the properties in the Roaring Fork River drainage that a coalition of environmental groups wants protected as part of the Hidden Gems Wilderness Campaign.
Assignation Ridge, 6 miles south of Carbondale, 25,537 acres
Basalt Mountain, portion of the massive midvalley mountain, 12,855 acres
Crystal River, 17 miles on the east side of Highway 133, 6,503 acres
Eagle Mountain, 1.5 miles west of Snowmass Village, 316 acres
East Willow, 20 miles southwest of Carbondale, 8,514 acres
Gallo Hill, northwest of Marble, 1,651 acres
Hay Park, 5 miles southwest of Basalt, 5,011 acres
Hayes Creek, 16 miles south of Carbondale, 9,927 acres
McClure Pass, just south of the divide, 1,684 acres
Mormon Creek, northwest of Thomasville, 4,115 acres
North Independent & Hunter, east of Aspen, 9,278
Red Table, north of middle Fryingpan Valley, 63,933 acres
Ruby Lakes, 17 miles southeast of Aspen, 2,428 acres
Thompson Creek, 8 miles southwest of Carbondale, 32,151 acres
Treasure Mountain, 3 miles southeast of Marble, 3,866 miles
Wildcat Mountain, 10 miles northeast of Aspen, 15,337 acres
Woods Lake, north of Fryingpan Valley, 13,718
Total acres: 217,000
 
I just went on to the whiteriverwild site and it is pretty shocking how much land in colorado they are trying to lock up....this is scary. And they have a automated form letter function so people living in big cities far away from colorado can send mass emails in support of this BS. I live in Vail and these people are trying to change our way of life.

I just wrote a letter and emailed it to Local senator Polis, and U.S. Senators Bennet and Udall. it was so easy to go on their websites and send an email. hopefully if many people do this it will help. And hopefully when you get the website all finished it will make it even easier! Website looks good!

THANK YOU!!!! Make some phone calls also if you get time, we were told hit helps!!! Also follow the web site we will be doing some MAJOR updates this week we hope!!! www.whiteriverforestalliance.com
 
Farmer i sent you a pm. i have been emailing with eagle county comissioner jon stavney and he seems open to my concerns about snowmobile closures with hidden gems proposal. his email is:

Jon.Stavney@eaglecounty.us



i would encourage anyone in eagle county to send him an email.

I also emailed us house of representative jared polis:

Jared.Polis@mail.house.gov

and colorado senators michal bennet and mark udall. it is very easy to send comments through their websites.

http://bennet.senate.gov/

http://markudall.senate.gov/
 
Mesa, Delta, Gunnison, Summit counties Hidden Gems effects you too!!!

Hello,
Mesa, Delta, Gunnison, Garfield and Summit county residents Hidden Gems wilderness has proposals in your counties too! THis thing is way bigger than Pitkin and Eagle County. We are all effected by this. Please contact your County Commsioners and get them informed of what is going on in their very own counties.
Thanks to Blue Ribbon we now have the abilty to make it easy for everyone to look up the contact info for their elected officials. Please take 5 minutes and either call or email your officials. We need all the calls and letters we can get. Thank you for your time.

Contact info

http://www.sharetrails.org/alerts/?alert=1065


Blue Ribbon Article
http://www.sharetrails.org/public_lands/?section=Hidden_Gems
 
keep it up Snowesters!!

thanks Mark! keep those emails and phone calls coming! They are getting an earful and we've just started.

ASPEN — Pitkin County commissioners are tentatively scheduled to hear a presentation on the Hidden Gems Wilderness Campaign in November. In the meantime, they're getting a cyberspace earful on the topic.

Commissioners reported Tuesday receiving loads of e-mails — mostly from people who are opposed to the expansion of Colorado wilderness areas, and mostly from people outside of Pitkin County.

All of the correspondence that comes to the county is being compiled, and shared with Sen. Mark Udall's office, according to Commissioner Patti Clapper, who offered to check with Rep. John T. Salazar's office to see if the congressman would also like to be copied on the e-mails.
The Hidden Gems campaign, which will seek congressional approval for added wilderness in western Colorado, has mapped various proposed areas in the Roaring Fork Valley and elsewhere. In all, between 400,000 and 450,000 acres of public land would gain wilderness protection if the effort is successful. Those who advocate uses that aren't allowed in wilderness — mountain biking, motorized uses and even the use of power drills to set climbing hardwear — are fighting components of the initiative. Proposed wilderness lines are being redrawn as the campaign works with those user groups.

“There are a lot of misunderstandings out there on all sides,” said Commissioner Patti Clapper.

Commissioners are tentatively scheduled to hear a presentation on Nov. 17 at 2 p.m.

Go to www.whiteriverwild.org for more on the campaign.
 
Last edited:
I posted it on our club website. I'll be sending reminders to all of our club members.

www.holycrosspowderhounds.com

This meeting is more crucial than the Carbondale meeting! The Wilderness Workshop is sending emails in a plea to find more people in favor of the Hidden Gems to come to the meeting. They got obliterated at the Carbondale meeting and will be looking to level the playing field. Also, Eagle County is a little more liberal than Garfield, so we need to be overly convincing in Eagle County to get the Eagle County Commissioners to decline support for the Hidden Gems Campaign.

Bring family, bring friends, bring anyone you can.
 
Just A Simple Thanks For All The Support.

I just wanted to thank everyone for all the help and support thru this Hidden Gems Deal. You guys have no idea how much help you have all been. There is no way we could of done this on our own or had this kind of effect. I wanted to thank all you of individually but there is so many people helping I just didn't think I could and do it right. I also apologize for falling behind on my updates and pms, I am totally buried in this stuff right now. Once again thank you guys for your continued support. :beer;:beer;:beer;:)
 
Once again to make it simple for ya....

I'm going to make it even easier for you to comment. This link will take you directly to the comment section of his webpage! Please take 5 minutes of your day it could make a difference!

http://bennet.senate.gov/contact/

http://markudall.senate.gov/?p=contact

Sample comment it's not pretty but it's better than sitting on your couch doing nothing!

Please vote against this closure of lands to our local Colorado people. We enjoy our freedom in this great beautiful state that's why we live here. The middle class support this state and that's the kind of people i run into while using the land that's available to us. As a Colorado taxpayer and voter I want to encourage you listen to the people that live here and keep these areas open for us.
 
Please remember we need to write letters a couple times, not just once. You never know if your first or second may get there so do a third....thanks I know it is time, but if they get this closure that is all we will have is TIME!!!

White River Forest Alliance
 
http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20090918/NEWS/909179969/1001/NONE&parentprofile=1058


ASPEN — Leaders of an effort to add Wilderness protection to 400,000 acres of public lands in western Colorado unveiled a new strategy Thursday to win the hearts, mind, legs and lungs of mountain bikers.

Wilderness Workshop, a Carbondale nonprofit organization, launched an advertising and information campaign to try to show mountain bikers in the Roaring Fork Valley that the Hidden Gems proposal will have a minimal impact on the trails the vast majority of them ride.

Many mountain bikers are basing their opinions on “misconceptions” about the plan, said Sloan Shoemaker, executive director of Wilderness Workshop.

“We are on a footing now to try to correct those misconceptions,” he said. “Let me say very clearly that we think there is tremendous common ground between those of us working on the Hidden Gems and those folks who mountain bike in the Roaring Fork watershed.”

Wilderness protection prohibits mechanized uses, from Jeeps and sport utility vehicles to ATVs, dirt bikes and bicycles. The creation of more Wilderness must be approved by Congress.

The Hidden Gems proposal to add more Wilderness lands in Pitkin, Eagle, Garfield, Gunnison and Summit counties hit solid opposition last week from an advocacy group called Roaring Fork Mountain Bike Association. The group endorsed Wilderness protection for 30,000 acres surrounding the Roaring Fork Valley, but leaders left the door open to broadening their support.

Wilderness Workshop officials said the bike association's position is based on the opinions of a few hard-core riders and isn't necessarily indicative of the feeling of mountain bikers as a whole. Wilderness Workshop expects that once riders get educated on the facts, the “vast majority” will realize that Hidden Gems won't affect their favorite trails and they will support the proposal, said Michael McVoy, a member of the organization's board of directors.

Hidden Gems is facing strong opposition from motorized forest user groups. It might be critical for Wilderness Workshop to earn the support of the large ranks of mountain bikers to earn congressional approval of a Wilderness bill.
 
Last edited:
A full-page ad prepared by Wilderness Workshop lists more than 60 trails that will remain open to cyclists or are being closed by U.S. Forest Service action separate from the Hidden Gems campaign. The group is essentially saying, “We don't have anything to do with the status of those trails.” Some of the most popular mountain bike routes in the valley — like the primary routes on Smuggler Mountain and in the Hunter Creek Valley, and Basalt Mountain — won't be affected by Hidden Gems.

Wilderness Workshop claimed it has already compromised with mountain bikers by “giving up more than 35,000 acres of proposed wilderness to preserve 18 different mountain bike routes totaling 74 miles” in the Roaring Fork watershed. Routes that were given up include the Arbaney Kittle Trail between Lenado and Basalt, and Hay Park in the shadow of Mount Sopris.

The status of only six trails is unresolved, Shoemaker said. He said they are obscure trails that relatively few bikers ride. There are two trails in Coal Basin above Redstone; three trails in the Thompson Creek area southwest of Carbondale; and some spurs off the Rocky Fork trail in the Fryingpan Valley.

The Wilderness Workshops ad asks: “So, we're throwing the question out to everyone who mountain bikes in our valley: Do you ride any of those six trails? And, if so, is being able to ride them more important to you than protecting the surrounding area from the encroachments of resource extraction, roads and motorized vehicles?”

Roaring Fork Mountain Bike Association board of directors member and spokesman Mike Pritchard had a mixed reaction to what he heard about Wilderness Workshop's new focus. On one hand, he welcomed Wilderness Workshop's suggestion that it will continue to talk about its proposal. “There's definitely still room to negotiate,” Pritchard said.

On the other hand, there is a wider gulf than Wilderness Workshop portrays. “I think it's more than six trails,” Pritchard said. “I don't have a number, but it's definitely more than six.”

There are two primary reasons for the different assessment of how much terrain is in dispute. First, the bike association believes the Forest Service will closer fewer trails than Wilderness Workshop believes. The Forest Service will release a travel management plan for the White River National Forest next year that determines the closures.

Second, the bike association wants some lands left available for future trail development. “We're here to advocate for the best trail system possible,” Pritchard said.

Wilderness Workshop believes enough public land is dedicated to trails and roads — more, in fact, then the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management can maintain. The Forest Service's proposed travel management plan would allow mountain bikes to use 2,233 miles of roads and trails in the 2.3 million-acre White River National Forest. The Hidden Gems proposal would remove 50 miles of those routes.

The Roaring Fork Mountain Bike Association is part of a coalition that wants some of the Hidden Gems lands preserved as a National Protection Area, a designation also dubbed “Wilderness with bikes.” That designation would provide protection against natural gas extraction and logging, and prohibit motorized uses to enhance wildlife habitat, but would allow mountain bikers to use the areas.
 
Sort comments by: Newest | Oldest | Recommended taxpayingcitizen wrote:
How about a public vote on this proposed "land grab"? Or an impact study that is recognized by the USFS?
Instead of padding the pockets of Polis, Salazar, and other elected officials.

Currently, this protection group refuses to meet with any public land lovers unless you agree with THEIR stance. If their was a public meeting, I dare to say this newspaper would not announce the date and time.
In fact, the last time the Gems met with the communtiy in Carbondale, the show of support was 4 people for the closure and 200 people AGAINST. And that was with 3 days notice, not announced to the public. The 2nd public meeting to be on the 22nd was just canceled by the Gems. I wonder why?

We the people of Colorado have the right to enjoy OUR public lands. That would include our kids today, and generations to come. Stop the Land Grab!!
9/20/2009 12:47:52 PM on aspentimes.com
Recommend Report abuse

zg2 wrote:
This is a lie! There are many trails and areas that will be closed to recreationalists. Just look at the facts. Sloan is just trying to cover this up. Once this happens, it is too late to change it. These trails will be closed to you, your kids, your grand kids etc.... Stop the madness!
9/18/2009 3:11:18 PM on aspentimes.com
Recommend (2) Report abuse

1digger wrote:
Please do not take away any more land that I use for recreation! Enough already!
9/18/2009 9:32:44 AM on aspentimes.com
Recommend (1) Report abuse

lifelonglocalgirl wrote:
Again why is it that the Wilderness Workshop will not do an economical impact study in the valleys this will effect...because they don't want the ugly truth pointed out. This has the potential to kill business from sporting companies, ATV/snowmobile shops, effect tourism with then has the total domino effect of hotels, supermarkets, retail...and the list goes on. This will effect more than just what activity people choose to participate in on a Saturday but also if people can keep food on their families plate.
9/18/2009 9:16:17 AM on aspentimes.com
Recommend Report abuse

fcg wrote:

Nice try Sloan .

Death by a thousand cuts.

Close some now, close more later.

An old trick.



bubba55 wrote:
And yeah FCG, Wilderness Workshop and their cohorts have nothing less than more more more locked wilderness as their long term objective. We need to stop this in its tracks. Now.
9/18/2009 3:17:13 PM on aspentimes.com
Recommend (1) Report abuse

bubba55 wrote:
These guys say they are "grass roots" then they buy a full page ad in the newspaper to try and sway public opinion. Makes me sick.

Also, the dangerous idea they're trying to sweep under the rug is that we need these lands for FUTURE recreation, so our children and their children have plenty of places to ride mountain bikes and yes, even do something motorized (perish the thought of such sin).

And what's with this biased reporting? Why do the Times writers use the word "protect" over and over again like some kind of chant? How about, for once in their lives, writing something like "the lands Hidden Gems is trying to block off from numerous forms of recreation..."
9/18/2009 3:11:59 PM on aspentimes.com
 
Last edited:
Please post all information here. Keep it professional and only use the necessary and pertinent information needed for the fight. I will Sticky this as I PERSONALLY FEEL THAT IT IS IMPORTANT.

Please PM me or report any posts heading in the wrong direction. I hope and pray that we can actually win one this time.

*I will be sorting through the many different threads and transferring the good info and deleting the ones in poor taste. Take no offense.*
 
Last edited:
County Commissioner contact info

Hello folks,
I just wanted to drop everyone a quick line saying thank you for your support. We are defiantly having a positive effect on the county commissioners. Eagle and Pitkin especailly are feeling the pressure from us. We need to hit Gunnison and Summit counties as well. In Garfield County we have the support of Commissioner's Martin and Sampson for sure. Below is some updated info for the various counties commissioners. If you have sent them a letter thank you very much, if you haven't sent one yet please do so. We need to get our voice heard and we need all the help we can get. Every letter or phone call counts. Thank you
Sean Martin

County Commissioner contact info


Pitkin County

Patti Clapper
530 E. Main Street, 3rd Floor
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-1990
pattic@sopris.net

Jack Hatfield
530 E. Main Street, 3rd Floor
Aspen, CO 81611
970-923-4680
hatfield@sopris.net

Michael Owsley
530 E. Main Street, 3rd Floor
Aspen, CO 81611
970-379-8933
michaelo@co.pitkin.co.us

George Newman
530 E. Main Street, 3rd Floor
970-920-5158
george.newman@co.pitkin.co.us

Rachel Richards
530 E. Main Street, 3rd Floor
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-5366
rachelrichards@comcast.net

Eagle County

Sara Fisher
P.O. Box 850
Eagle, CO 81631-0850
Phone: 970-328-8605 (commissioners’ office)
Fax: 970-328-8629
sara.fisher@eaglecounty.us

Peter Runyon
P.O. Box 850
Eagle, CO 81631-0850
Phone: 970-328-8605 (commissioners’ office)
Fax: 970-328-8629
peter.runyon@eaglecounty.us


Jon Stavney
P.O. Box 850
Eagle, CO 81631-0850
970-328-8605 (commissioners’ office)
Fax: 970-328-8629
jon.stavney@eaglecounty.us

Gunnison County

Hap Channell
601 North Wisconsin
Gunnison, CO 81230
970-209-5259
hchannell@gunnisoncounty.org

Paula Swenson
350 Fairway Lane
Gunnison, CO 81230
970-209-6920
paula@gunnison.com

Jim Starr
P.O. Box 1167
Crested Butte, CO 81224
Work Fax: 970-349-5017
970-209-2910
jim@starrattorneys.com

Summit County

Bob French
PO Box 68
Breckenridge, CO 80424
970-453-3411
bobf@co.summit.co.us

Thomas Davidson
PO Box 68
Breckenridge, CO 80424
970-453-3413
thomasd@co.summit.co.us

Karn Stiegelmeier
PO Box 68 Breckenridge, CO 80424
970-453-3412
karns@co.summit.co.us
 
Jared Polis's info

This is Congressman we really need to work on the most. Right now it looks like he will be the one to carry the bill once the get it prepared.

Congressman Jared Polis
His home pagehttp://polis.house.gov/

His contact info. http://polis.house.gov/Contact/

These are his offices. This is a great way to call with a comment.

Washington, DC Office
501 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515
p. 202.225.2161
f. 202.226.7840
Get Directions

Boulder Office
4770 Baseline Rd, #220
Boulder, CO 80303
p. 303.484.9596
f. 303.568.9007
Get Directions

Frisco Office
West Main Professional Building
101 West Main Street, Suite 101D
P.O. Box 1453
Frisco, CO 80443
p. 970.668.3240
f. 970.668.9679
Get Directions

Thornton Office
1200 East 78th Avenue, Suite #105
Thornton, CO 80229
p.303.287.4159
f. 303.287.4385
Get Directions
 
Letters to the editors

If you have a letter you really like it doesn't have to be just for the Congressman, Senators, and County commssioners. Just mail right on to the local papers here. You do not have to live in the area to write a letter to editor. If you recreate and spend money here that is more than enough.

Where to send letters to the editor

If you are forwarding a letter that you originally wrote to your county commissioners or members of Congress, you should preface it with a sentence to that effect.


Vail/Eagle River Valley


Eagle Valley Enterprise: pboyd@eaglevalleyenterprise.com, P.O. Box 450, Eagle, CO 81631
Vail Daily: letters@vaildaily.com, P.O. 81, Vail, CO 81658
Vail Mountaineer: editor@vailmountaineer.com, 295 Main St., Suite C103, Edwards, CO 81632

Gunnison County


Crested Butte News: editorial@crestedbuttenews.com, P.O. Box 369, Crested Butte, CO 81224
Crested Butte Weekly: info@cbweekly.com, P.O. Box 1609, Crested Butte, CO 81224
Gunnison Country Times: editor@gunnisontimes.com, 218 N. Wisconsin, Gunnison, CO 81230
North Fork Times/Delta County Independent: editor@deltacountyindependent.com, P.O. Box 809, Delta, CO 81416

Roaring Fork Valley


Aspen Times: mail@aspentimes.com, 310 E. Main, Aspen, CO, 81611
Aspen Daily News:letters@aspendailynews.com, 517 E. Hopkins, Aspen CO 81611
Glenwood Springs Post Independent: letters@postindependent.com, 2014 Grand Ave., Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Snowmass Village Sun: mosberger@snowmasssun.com, P.O. Box 5770, Snowmass Village, CO 81615
Sopris Sun: letters@soprissun.com, P.O. Box 399, Carbondale, CO 81623

Summit County

Summit Daily News: letters@summitdaily.com, P.O. Box 329, Frisco, CO 80443
 
How to write a letter.

We realize that writing a letter (a term we use here to include emails) to your elected officials can seem like a daunting task, and writing a letter to the editor (known as an LTE in the biz) all the more so because it's such a public undertaking. But letter writing is an integral part of this campaign. LTEs are an especially good way of getting the word out about your support to the community at large, to your local elected officials and to your members of Congress. They grab the attention of decision-makers.

In order to help make it easier, we’ve compiled a few tips below to help out if you choose to send a letter.

1. Keep it short. Letters between 200 and 400 words are a great length for the writer and the reader. In the case of letters to the editor, short, pithy letters - sometimes just a single paragraph - are often the most effective, and have a greater chance of getting published.

2. Write about your feelings and from your experience. Why do you think wilderness protection is important? It’s much easier to write about what you think and feel.

3. As long as you're making the effort to write a letter, you might as well get as much mileage out of it as you can. If you send it to one newspaper, send it to the other papers in your area. If you send it to one county commissioner, send it to the others. Heck, send it to all the papers AND all the commissioners. Don't forget to copy and save it before you send it through a website, so that you can keep reusing it!

4. Keep it positive. This letter campaign is about the reasons we support protecting our wilderness. Negative letters only preach to the converted. Positive letters capture imaginations and get new people involved.

5. Include your name, hometown and phone number. Papers won’t publish letters from anonymous sources or with pseudonyms, and the phone number is necessary for confirmation. If you e-mail your letter, put “ Letter to the Editor” in the subject line. Elected officials need your address so that they know you're a constituent.

6. Use the available resources.
 
Premium Features



Back
Top