Thursday, March 23, 2006
Massive Elk Invasion
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
[puma-news] plants website
I'm glad you listened and finally put up that site Thankyou.
Here's the announcement email.
Dear Friends,
Dan finally succeeded, and here is the first part of this project. He
made me do it --- otherwise I'm sure I'd still be talking about it ten
years from now. Anyway, It isn't finished, probably never will be, and
it may contain inaccuracies which I hope to correct as time goes by. I'm
only up to the Mint family, and have to go all the way to Violet. I
think the Noxious Plant part is pretty much done. We plan to add a color
guide, but haven't gotten to it yet.
As you will notice, the accompanying text isn't in scientific jargon.
This is for two reasons. 1) I can't seem to stay serious, and 2) Dan
said he thought it would be more useful to more people if it isn't
strictly scientifically rigorous.
So, here's a beginning! Thanks to all of you who requested this. Send
me any comments, pro or con, that you wish. I'm moving to Africa now.
http://www.plantsofmagnolia.net
Best,
Jennifer
Saturday, March 11, 2006
[puma-news] Comments on USFS Rural School land sale
Wednesday, March 08, 2006
[puma-news] Land Sales Initiative in Boulder County
To Whom It May Concern:
County Road 68) for 18 years, I feel obligated to speak out against your
land sale proposal (Land Sales Initiative in Boulder County). First of
all, let me express my disappointment in the limited time that has been
alloted for community feedback, as well as the cumbersome and poorly done
online map provided as a resource for this comment period.
inaccuracies due to difficulty of interpretation of online map ):
Township 1S Range 72W
Section 19 - 40 acres
Section 20 - 193 acres Map shows 233)
Section 21 - 160 acres
Section 40 - 40 acres (Map shows 200 acres)
Total Acreage: 473 in the list, 633 on the map
natural movement corridors for ungulates (specifically elk), bear, mountain lion,
bobcat, fox and coyote. Increased disturbance as a result of
development, will undoubtedly increase the stress on the species living in these
something as seemingly well intentioned like funding for rural schools,
is a disgrace. Once these lands are sold, it is rather evident that new
ones will be proposed in the name of some other manipulative cause. The
justification for selling them as "not being able to be sufficiently
managed" speaks volumes as to priorities. Instead, might it be a better
choice to consider something much greater than ourselves, the need for
space for all the non-human creatures that exist here and to offer ways
to conserve that space. No matter how small or seemingly insignificant
these lands might appear on a map, they all serve an important and necessary
function for wildlife and native plant species.
even the smallest bits and pieces of land that have been set aside such
as our nation's Roosevelt National Forest, along with wildlife, we as a society
suffer. If anything, as a People, we should be doing everything we can
to protect and preserve by purchasing additional lands not selling them off.
Forest for the future generations, it is time to act in a thoughtful,
visionary way that holds the faith of the public that our National
Forests will remain the last haven for that herd of elk that passes
through on its journey to summer grounds, seven generations from now.
these lands listed above, as well as all others being considered.
72 Meadowland Ct., Nederland, CO
(303) 449-1789
Monday, March 06, 2006
Instantly transport yourself to a ridge right next to the continental divide
But let me digress for just a moment.
A few years ago, I used to live in a town outside Boulder Colorado called Niwot. There's a lot of history that goes with the name that I won't get into right here. But suffice it to say that living in the town of Niwot endeared me to the name. There's another Niwot around as well. In fact, I and a somewhat supernatural experience right at the base of the other Niwot, which is Niwot Rigdge. Again, I'm trying to not get of on to many tangents.
Anyway, I've had a few enjoyable hikes up on Niwot Ridge. I've never gotten all the way to the end of it, and I've always wondered what the view from there would be. Well, (my point, finally) I now have a way to visit the far western end of Niwot Ridge any time I want.
You see, they've got a web cam up there.
So What? I've got a webcam right here at Lazy Z Web Cam.
But this is not just any old web cam.
No.
You'll get a kick out of it. This is a fully weather proofed pan and tilt cam. This means that you an look ALL around and zoom in and out as well.
Really. Try it. Click the link. Niwot Ridge Web Cam
Thanks Niwot Ridge LTER for making this available to us all!
[puma-news] Hopefully helpful map plus coordinates
Here is more info. I have given local descriptions to the parcels in hopes of clarifying locations.
Also, here is Dave Hallock's input on Magnolia parcels: My editorial comments are in italics.
Magnolia Road
Township 1S Range 72W
Section 19 - 40 acres {I, Jennifer, believe he means Section 15, not 19. It would include the Turtle Rock, Range Road, and (Bennett/Spangler Parcels. My estimate shows 200 acres. Descriptions: Turtle Rock Parcel - NE1/4 of NE1/4 of Section 15, T1S, R72W; Range Road Parcel - NE1/4 of SW1/4, NW1/4 of SE1/4, and SW1/4 of SE1/4 of Sectrion 15, T1S, R72W; Bennet/Spangler Parcel - NW1/4 of NW1/4 of Section 15, T1S, R72W.)
Section 20 - 193 acres Map shows 233. (Reynolds Open Space and Loop Trails Parcel. Descriptions: Reynolds Open Space - SE1/4 of Section 20, irregular pieces of SW1/4 of Section 20, T1S, R72W. Loop Trail Parcel - NE1/4 of NW1/4 of Section 20, T1S, R72W.)
Section 21 - 160 acres ( Lazy z Parcel, 40 acre parcel southwest of Boy Scout Trails, and Rt 97 Parcel. Descriptions - Boy Scout Parcel - NW1/4 of NE1/4 of Section 21, T1S, R72W. Lazy z Parcel - SE1/4 of NE1/4 of Section 21, T1S, R72W. Rt. 97 Parcel - SW1/4 and SE1/4 of SE1/4 of Section 21, T1S, R72W.)
Section 40 - 40 acres (Map shows 200 acres) (Sections only go from 1 to 36, so I'm not sure what he means.)
Total Acreage: 473 in the list, 633 on the map
Values and Conservation Context: These lands are part of an elk/wildlife movement corridor between Winiger Ridge and lands west of the Peak-to-Peak Highway, and within elk winter range. They are designated as an Overland Habitat Connector on the Environmental Conservation Areas map of the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan. Some of the parcels (those in Sections 19, 20, and a portion of 21) are adjacent to Reynolds Ranch Open Space and other County Open Space acquisitions in the area. Some of the parcels in all four sections are adjacent to other National Forest lands. The parcels in Section 19 south of Nederland contain public trails.
Me speaking again ---
Our local concerns are with our elk habitat, fragmentation of habitat for birds and small mammals, including bobcats, plus our personal reasons for living here.
Funding for rural schools needs to come from a source more consistant than a one-time land sale of parcels that have local importance to their surrounding communities and wildlife.
All our parcels are in T1S, R72W. When referring to them, you must also use the description I have listed for each, i.e., SW1/4 of NW1/4, etc, including the Section number and Township and Range.
I really couldn't send out a smaller map, so I apologize to anyone whose computer burps and falls over. Dan says the official maps from USFS, etc, are "junk." What ridiculously cumbersome mapping programs!
Please also read Dave Halleck's complete comments in Scott's email about USFS Secure Rural Schools Land Sales Initiative. And, for extra oomph, follow the "discussions" on Puma-news!
Best to all,
Jennifer
Here are people to contact, including the USFS email address:
Senator Wayne Allard
Washington D.C. telephone 202-224-5941
District telephone 303-220-7414
Senator Ken Salazar
Washington D.C. telephone 202-224-5852
District telephone 303-455-7600
Rep. Mark Udall
Washington D.C telephone 202-225-2161
District Office telephone 303-650-7820
SRS_Land_Sales@fs.fed.us
[puma-news] land sale
I was concerned, when I first wrote, that this had slipped under the radar, even of PUMA news-readers, but I see that has changed.
I think Dave Hallock’s assessment is a very valid one for this area, in terms of the overall picture of the value of small parcels of national forest. One does have to look at the surrounding land ownership, animal migration patterns and other uses of the land to assess whether there is more value to a small portion of national forest than appears on the map. It was also quite obvious, from the original map Dan sent out, that some of the ‘small parcels’ are actually contiguous with larger parcels and those ‘small parcels’ are what provide access to the larger portion of national forest (note how many parcels cross or touch roads). The next round of land sales will probably put those larger parcels on the block, because they are inaccessible. When you consider management & maintenance expense, be aware that many of these parcels have just been ‘maintained’, at considerable expense to the taxpayers. Many of the parcels marked for sale are the same parcels, which were just thinned (over many objections- including the USFS track record of cutting & running), and which the USFS promised to monitor and use as models for further projects. Is it any wonder that many of us have little faith in the judgment of the USFS.
Terry is right that our National Forest is our land for the future. If there were truly a good reason for selling certain parcels to gain other parcels, which would add to the value of the forest, as a whole, then it may make sense to sell certain parcels. This issue is not a matter of forest management, no matter what whitewash the USFS uses; the National Forest does not even get the money.
The issue here is whether we should sell our land to fund our schools. What are we leaving for our children? Our schools should be funded by our taxes. If we weren’t spending so much in Iraq or on “congressional pork”, perhaps we could afford to fund our schools. Should we sell the Lincoln memorial to the Chinese to fund school lunches? Or, perhaps we could sell the White House to raise money for Social Security… The point is we shouldn’t be selling off our precious, finite forests to make up for budget shortfalls. This is what I meant by lambasting the proposal.
This has not yet been approved by Congress, so write your Senators and Congressmen. If enough voices speak out, we might actually be heard.
Vivian
[puma-news] Fw: [nature-net] USFS Secure Rural Schools Land Sales Initiative
This commetary is preliminary. From Dave Hallock of the County Open Space
research and management...Dave has worked alongside PUMA on many previous
projects. He is a top notch scientist and intelligent analyst. Below are
his initial comments regarding the Forest Service proposed land sales --
PUMA should study this as a way to build our own commentary. By the way,
the previous email regarding the map of land sales still has some
innaccuracies and problems, due mostly to inaccuracies and inconsistencies
in FS data. On that map web page are some additional comments regarding
this proposed sale. Letters, call, emails and faxes should start to go out
from willing participants and PUMA as a whole by the end of this week.
Here's a preliminary list of contacts for those who would like to get
started.
Their numbers are:
Senator Wayne Allard
Washington D.C. telephone 202-224-5941
District telephone 303-220-7414
Senator Ken Salazar
Washington D.C. telephone 202-224-5852
District telephone 303-455-7600
Rep. Mark Udall
Washington D.C telephone 202-225-2161
District Office telephone 303-650-7820
Comments on the proposed list must be received by March 30 and may be sent
by e-mail to SRS_Land_Sales@fs.fed.us. Written comments may be sent to: USDA
Forest Service, SRS Comments, Lands 4S, 1400 Independence Ave., SW, Mailstop
1124, Washington, DC, 20250-0003. Send faxed comments to (202) 205-1604.
Hallock's letter below.
Scott
******************************
Scott Campbell Reuman
Artist/Writer
Conundrum Designs, Inc.
Nederland, CO
http://www.conundrumdesigns.com
scottreuman@conundrumdesigns.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "David H Hallock" <eldoradh@rmi.net>
To: "BCNA Nature Net" <nature-net@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 7:30 AM
Subject: [nature-net] USFS Secure Rural Schools Land Sales Initiative
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Secure Rural Schools Land Sales Initiative in Boulder County
These are my initial comments on the proposed land sale in Boulder County.
I have focused on land use issues.
Dave Hallock
Background
The Forest Service is seeking comments from all interested individuals and
organizations on the list of National Forest System land parcels in the FY
2007 President's Budget proposal to be sold for the purpose of funding
payments to Secure rural Schools. These funds will be used to offset
declining revenues that historically were derived from timber sales.
Comments should be submitted by March 30, 2006. They should pertain to the
list of land parcels proposed for sale. Comments should be submitted by
e-mail to SRS_Land_Sales@fs.fed.us, by facsimile to (202) 205-1604, or by
mail to USDA Forest Service, SRS Comments, Lands 4S, 1400 Independence Ave.,
SW., Mailstop 1124, Washington, DC 20520-0003. Electronic submission is
preferred.
Additional information about the Secure Rural Schools Land Sales Initiative
can be found at: http://www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/disposal.html. For maps of
the lands proposed for sale, go to:
http://www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/rural_schools.shtml. Go into
Geocommunicator.gov for the maps. (Note: the Geocommunicator.gov map site
had been problematic in correctly running and pulling up the maps).
Land Sales Initiative in Boulder County
The parcels proposed for sale in Boulder County lie within 10 geographic
areas, which I have used for description below. The spreadsheet list of
parcels on the USFS web site totals approximately 2,120 acres, while the map
indicates approximately 3,120 acres. And, there are some discrepancies on
the list between the legal descriptions and the acreages.
The overall justification for selling these parcels by the Forest Service is
that they are isolated from other contiguous National Forest System lands,
and because of their location, size, or configuration are not efficient to
manage as a component of the National Forest System. The isolation and
small size for some of the parcels appears true, but not for all.
My greatest concern is that there appears to be no recognition of the
conservation context of the parcels. When you look at all conserved lands
in western Boulder County, including Boulder County Open Space and other
private conservation easements (including some held by Colorado Open Lands
and The Nature Conservancy), then these parcels appear isolated and small
only in terms of ownership but not in terms of function. Some of the
parcels border Caribou Ranch Open Space, Reynolds Ranch Open Space, and Hall
Ranch Open Space. Some of the parcels are adjacent to lands with
conservation easements, such as Arapaho Ranch Wildlife Preserve and the
Welch Ranch. In some places, Boulder County Open Space has been filling in
the gaps between smaller parcels of Forest Service Land by purchasing the
intervening mining claims, such as on Spencer Mountain in Eldora and in
Lefthand Canyon. Two of the parcels have the Peak-to-Peak Scenic Byway
running through them, including one in Allenspark. Several parcels along
Magnolia Road are important wildlife movement corridors as are parcels near
the top of Spencer and Ute Mountains near Eldora. One group of parcels
appears to contain golden eagle nest sites and is popular for rock climbing
in Boulder Canyon. Another parcel contains a portion of the South St. Vrain
Creek and a portion of the South St. Vrain trail. Several of the parcels
near Nederland contain trails.
The result of this land sale is an increased fragmentation of the landscape.
The County and other property owners and land trusts have been filling in
the gaps within the National Forest Boundary and conserving lands; this is
good ecosystem planning This proposal creates new in-holdings within the
overall conservation context of western Boulder County; this is bad
ecosystem planning.
Additionally, the process appears very rushed. We have one month to make
comments for something that has some significant long-term land use impacts.
And it has not been easy accessing the Forest Service maps on their web
site. And there are discrepancies between the legal descriptions on the
USFS list and acreages, as well as what is presented on the maps.
What follows are geographic area descriptions of the parcels proposed for
sale, their conservation context, and some of their conservation value. The
geographic area descriptions are mine. When commenting to the Forest
Service you need to use National Forest Name (Roosevelt),
Township/Range/Section.
Magnolia Road
Township 1S Range 72W
Section 19 - 40 acres
Section 20 - 193 acres Map shows 233)
Section 21 - 160 acres
Section 40 - 40 acres (Map shows 200 acres)
Total Acreage: 473 in the list, 633 on the map
Values and Conservation Context: These lands are part of an elk/wildlife
movement corridor between Winiger Ridge and lands west of the Peak-to-Peak
Highway, and within elk winter range. They are designated as an Overland
Habitat Connector on the Environmental Conservation Areas map of the Boulder
County Comprehensive Plan. Some of the parcels (those in Sections 19, 20,
and a portion of 21) are adjacent to Reynolds Ranch Open Space and other
County Open Space acquisitions in the area. Some of the parcels in all four
sections are adjacent to other National Forest lands. The parcels in
Section 19 south of Nederland contain public trails.
Ridge Road
Township 1S Range 72W
Section 5 - 117 acres
Section 8 - 160 acres
Total Acreage: 277 acres on both list and map
Values and Conservation Context: In section 8, lands are adjacent to Rogers
Open Space and are part of the Open Corridor designation for Boulder Canyon
Highway (Boulder County Comprehensive Plan Open Space Element). Several of
the parcels in Section 5 are adjacent to USFS lands.
Caribou Ranch
Township 1N Range 73W
Section 34 - 30 acres
Section 36 - 80 acres (Map shows 160 acres)
Township 1S Range 73W
Section 1 - 20 acres
Total: 130 acres on list, 210 acres on map
Values and Conservation Context: These lands are integral parts of the
Caribou Ranch montane parkland, an area of exceptional biodiversity in
Boulder County, and winter, transitional range, and calving grounds for elk.
The lands in Sections 34 and 36 are within the Indian Peaks Environmental
Conservation Area, as designated on the Environmental Conservation Area Map
of the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan. The parcel in Section 34 is
totally surrounded by other conserved lands, including Boulder County Open
Space, City of Boulder, other Forest Service lands, and a conservation
easement on the only mining claim in the section. A portion of the lands in
Section 36 (E1/2 of SE ¼) is adjacent to other conserved lands (Conservation
Easement on Caribou Ranch) and other Forest Service lands. It contains an
existing trail along the Switzerland Trail railroad grade. A portion of the
lands in Section 36 (E1/2 of SE ¼) are adjacent to other conserved lands
(Caribou Ranch Conservation Easement) and are important for elk winter range
and as a movement corridor. The parcel in Section 1 is adjacent to the
Peak-to-Peak Scenic Byway.
Eldora
Township 1S Range 73W
Section 20 - 20 acres (Map shows all USFS lands in Section 20, which are
approximately 300 acres)
Total: 20 acres on list, approximately 300 acres on map
Values and Conservation Context: This is part of the entrance to the Indian
Peaks Wilderness Area, so the viewshed is of importance. Boulder County
Open Space has been acquiring many of the intervening mining claims on
Spencer Mountain. The ridgeline atop Spencer and Ute Mountains is an
important wildlife movement corridor. Portions of the parcels slated for
sale are adjacent to other Forest Service lands. Lands north of Middle
Boulder Creek are within the Indian Peaks Conservation Area, as designated
on the Environmental Conservation Area Map of the Boulder County
Comprehensive Plan.
Boulder Canyon to Sugarloaf Road and Sugarloaf Road East
Township 1N Range 72W
Section 25 - 120 acres
Section 35 - 240 acres
Section 36 - 240 acres (the legal in the list does not match the acreage,
which matches the map)
Township 1N Range 71W
Section 29 - 120 acres
Total: 720 acres on both list and map
Values and Conservation Context: Sections 35 and 36 are part of the scenic
backdrop to Boulder Canyon Highway and designated as an Open Corridor on the
Open Space Plan of the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan. The eastern
portion of Section 36 is within potential golden eagle nesting habitat (and
within the Wildlife Closure Area). There are popular rock climbing areas in
Section 36 (Security Risk). Portions of the parcels in Sections 35 and 36
are adjacent to Boulder Falls Open Space and within the Boulder Falls
Natural Area, as designated within the Boulder County Environmental
Resources Element of the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan.
Nederland
Township 1S Range 73W
Section 14 - 40 acres (Map shows 120 acres)
Total: 40 acres on list, 120 acres on Map
Values and Conservation Context: The NE ¼ of the SE ¼ of Section 14 is
adjacent to and functionally part of the Arapaho Ranch Wildlife Preserve, a
montane parkland that has exceptional biodiversity. The Arapaho Ranch is
under a conservation easement with Colorado Open Lands. Elk use the area as
transitional range and for calving. The parcel provides a buffer between
the Town of Nederland and the Arapaho Ranch. The parcel is designated
within the Indian Peaks Environmental Conservation Area on the Environmental
Resources Map of the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan.
Lefthand Canyon
Township 1N Range 72W
Section 1 - 240 acres
Total: 240 acres on list and map
Values and Conservation Context: Portions of these parcels are adjacent to
other National Forest lands on their north and west sides. Boulder County
Open Space has purchased almost all the mining claims within Section 1, as
well as other lands to the east and south. Lefthand Canyon is designated as
an Open Corridor on the Open Space Map of the Boulder County Comprehensive
Plan. Lands north of Lefthand Canyon Road are designated as part of the
Walker Mountain Environmental Conservation Area, as designated on the
Environmental Conservation Area Map in the Boulder County Comprehensive
Plan.
Overland Road and South St. Vrain
Township 2N Range 72W
Section 20 - 40 acres
Section 21 - 40 acres (80 acres are shown on the map)
Section 29 - 40 acres
Section 30 - 40 acres
Total: 160 acres on list, 200 acres on map
Values and Conservation Context: The parcel in Section 20 is adjacent to the
Peak-to-Peak Scenic Byway and is also adjacent to conservation easement
lands held by Boulder County and The Nature Conservancy. The South St.
Vrain Creek flows through the northwest corner of the parcel, designated as
an Open Corridor on the Open Space Map the Boulder County Comprehensive
Plan. The two parcels in Section 21 are adjacent to Conservation Easement
held by The Nature Conservancy. The Peak-to Peak Scenic Byway runs through
the parcel in Section 29. The parcel in Section 30 contains a portion of
the South St. Vrain Creek, designated as an Open Corridor on the Open Space
Map of the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan; this parcel also contains the
beginning of the South St. Vrain trail.
Allenspark
Township 3N Range 73W
Section 26 - 40 acres (120 acres shown on the map)
Total: 40 acres on list, 120 acres on map
Values and Conservation Context: The Peak-to-Peak Scenic Byway passes
through one of the parcels in Section 26. The parcel in the SE ¼ of the SW
¼ is adjacent to other National Forest lands.
Coffintop Mountain
Township 3N Range 71W
Section 21 - 40 acres (360 acres are shown on the map)
Total: 40 acres on list, 360 acres on map
Values and Conservation Context: These are some of the most important
ecological lands in Boulder County, being within the North St. Vrain
Ecological Conservation Area (Ecological Conservation Area Map, Boulder
County Comprehensive Plan), and designated as Core Habitat in the Forest
Plan. These lands are adjacent to Hall Ranch Open Space and Riverside Ranch
Open Space, and are adjacent to other National Forest lands on their south
side. This is habitat for bighorn sheep.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
======================================================
Boulder County Nature Association's Nature Network
http://www.bcna.org
To Post a message, send it to: nature-net@yahoogroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a message to: nature-net-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
To Subscribe, send a message to: nature-net-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Message Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/nature-net
Unless otherwise stated, opinions expressed do not necessarily represent
BCNA's position. BCNA reserves the right to reject any message we feel is
inappropriate.
======================================================
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nature-net/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
nature-net-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Saturday, March 04, 2006
[puma-news] map of USFS parcels for sale
Neighbors --
I've tried to put together some maps that show the
parcels for sale in ways that may help you better
visualize where they are.
www.boulder.swri.edu/clark/magngoo.jpg
is an aerial image of our neighborhood from Google
Earth, stretching from Barker Reservoir on the left
to the intersection of CR-68 and Aspen Way on the
right. To the top are sections along Ridge Road
north of Boulder Canyon Rd. To the lower left are
regions around Tungsten Mountain, southwest of
Giggey pond. The darker areas are forested.
www.boulder.swri.edu/clark/magnsale.jpg
is from the official government web site, showing
a crude map of the roads. Light green areas are
existing USFS lands. Hatched regions bordered in
dark green are suggested for sale. The individual
squares are a quarter-mile on a side.
www.boulder.swri.edu/clark/magnmrg.jpg
is a merger of the two previous views. The overlap
isn't perfect, but it can help you compare the
land-sale sites with natural features.
The rightmost box is the portion that the Pine Glade
neighborhood surrounds. To its left is a portion
that includes the northern slopes of the high
point reached, for instance, from Boy Scout Trails
that has a glorious view of the Divide.
The 3 contiguous parcels to the south of the last
two are just east of Deadman's Curve and just south
of Scott Reuman's, a section of forest that PUMA
volunteers helped to document as part of the
Winiger Ridge Project. Two more parcels abut
the intersection of Lazy Z and Magnolia. West of
them is a block that contains the high hill
surrounded by hiking/mountain bike trails (and
an unused USFS road) that is very popular.
Many more for-sale parcels are in the Tungsten
Mountain vicinity, and northeast of Nederland
in the vicinity of Ridge Road. Of course, many
other large parcels of interest are off the
map, such as enormous parcels between St. Mary's
glacier and James Peak.
Most of these parcels are, in fact, contiguous
with large stretches of existing USFS lands.
Clark Chapman