| Sign up for our newsletter HERE. |
|
|
|
| The 2009 Pre-NEPA process which led to
rejection of the June 2009 Snodgrass proposal |
| |
The
Pre-NEPA pre-application Initial Screening period ended 1/29/09
when the GMUG informed CBMR that the company could submit a proposal
to expand onto Snodgrass along with the ski company’s Master
Development Plan (MDP). CBMR submitted the MDP on 5/20/2009 and
the Proposal for the Development of Snodgrass on 6/18/2009. On
11/5/2009 the Forest Service rejected the “site-specific
proposal to build and operate lift-served ski facilities on Snodgrass
Mountain.” It also returned
the MDP to CBMR to be rewritten without the proposed Snodgrass
expansion.
The reasons Forest Supervisor Richmond gave for the
rejection included: inconvenient public access to the Snodgrass
ski slopes, "Limitations
of Snodgrass Mountain for lift-served skiing development based
on the numerous studies and environmental issues that have been
identified over the years" including geological hazards,
adverse impacts on Snodgrass’ complex
hydrology, the substantial earthmoving required to create
ski slopes, avalanche dangers to Gothic Road users, the
fact that “the community
is deeply divided over the proposed development of Snodgrass
Mountain,” the displacement of current recreational
users of the undeveloped Snodgrass, adverse impacts on nearby
ranchers and on Rocky Mountain Biological Lab, and Roadless Rule
conflicts.
Mr. Richmond concluded, “I believe that perpetuation
of the debate in the NEPA process would further deepen the division that exists in
the community and would likely uncover additional environmental concerns. Acceptance
of your proposal would require a large commitment of both our resources and yours.
In addition, local governments, stakeholders, and interested parties would need to
expend time and energy engaging in the NEPA process. To proceed, I must be convinced
that such an effort could lead to a decision which serves the public interest and
for which there is a high likelihood of success. I am not convinced of this but rather
am convinced otherwise.
"I believe that the factors discussed above, taken together,
lead to only one conclusion. To proceed with consideration and approval of development
which would have the social and community effects I summarize above, in the face
of the inherent limitations and challenges of the mountain, considering potential
environmental effects we already know of, without the clear support of the affected
community, would not be in the public interest. It is my finding that it is
not in the public interest to continue to consider development on Snodgrass Mountain
any further." |
|
|
