DOCSLIB.ORG

Historical Range of Variability for Forest Vegetation of the National Forests of the Colorado Front Range

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Historical Range of Variability for Forest Vegetation of the National Forests of the Colorado Front Range Historical Range of Variability for Forest Vegetation of the National Forests of the Colorado Front Range Thomas T. Veblen Joseph A. Donnegan USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Region 740 Simms St Golden, CO 80401 Fort Collins, CO 80521 Historical Range of Variability for Forest Vegetation of the National Forests of the Colorado Front Range FINAL REPORT: USDA FOREST SERVICE AGREEMENT No. 1102-0001-99-033 WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO, BOULDER Nov. 27, 2005 Thomas T. Veblen Joseph A. Donnegan1 Department of Geography, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Region 740 Simms St Golden, CO 80401 1 Current address: USDA Forest Service, Forest Inventory and Analysis, 620 SW Main Street, #400, Portland, OR 97205 Preface and Acknowledgments This report is a response to the widespread recognition that forest resource planning and decision-making would benefit from a series of assessments of the historical range of variability (HRV) of the ecosystems which comprise the National Forest lands of the Rocky Mountain region. Although the work on the current report formally began under a Cooperative Agreement between the Regional Office of the Forest Service and the University of Colorado in 1999, prior events contributed significantly to this report. Most significantly, the staff of several National Forests in the region (e.g. Rio Grande, White River, Routt) conducted their own assessments of historic range of variability of Forest lands in the mid-1990s. These documents provided useful starting points, and were critically important in initiating the still evolving process of how to conduct the assessment of HRV in Region 2. In the late 1990s, the senior author of the current report participated in an external review of several of the HRV reports produced by the Forest Service staff. This external review team included among others the leaders of the current round of HRV reports in the Region (Dennis Knight of University of Wyoming, William Romme of Colorado State University, and Thomas Veblen of the University of Colorado). While lauding many aspects of the initial HRV reports, this external review team made a number of suggestions for their improvements. In particular, the external team raised questions about the validity of conclusions that were based exclusively on professional judgments or hypotheses that had not been examined through any systematic research process. The team stressed the need for greater reliance on peer- reviewed research publications, and more critical evaluation of some of the widespread perceptions about changes in these forest ecosystems which had been assumed to be related to past resource management practices. That initial experience as a critic of HRV reports hopefully has improved the quality of the current report, and with certainty it has contributed a high degree of caution and humility in the recognition of the limitations and challenges involved in conducting an assessment of HRV. This report is the result of a recognition by the leadership of the Regional Office of Region 2 of both the importance of the HRV process and the desirability of participation in it by researchers ii who have published extensively on Rocky Mountain forest ecosystems in the peer-reviewed literature. The current round of HRV reports was initiated in 1999 by Claudia Regan, Regional Ecologist for Region 2. This report has benefited from her insights into both the science and management aspects of the HRV process. Her leadership and perseverance in this long process are deeply appreciated. While the interpretations in this report are the responsibility of its authors, we have endeavored to address critiques and alternate interpretations from a wide variety of sources. Over the past five years we have benefited from numerous discussions with many Forest Service personnel of topics directly related to the HRV assessment. In the current report we have addressed issues and alternative interpretations which have become apparent to us from these discussions with individuals and in numerous workshops. We also have addressed issues which were raised by Forest Service personnel in written reviews of the initial drafts of the report. Likewise, the current report addresses and has benefited from written reviews of drafts of the report from researchers in the Region and from five anonymous reviewers selected by the Ecological Society of America. For providing critical comments, information, data, and/or research assistance we thank: • William L. Baker, University of Wyoming, Laramie • Jill Baron, U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins • Peter Bebi, Department of Geography, University of Colorado, Boulder • Peter Brown, Rocky Mountain Tree-Ring Research Inc., Fort Collins • Bill Butler, Rocky Mountain National Park • Stacy Drury, Department of Geography, University of Colorado, Boulder • Karen Eisenhart, Department of Geography, University of Colorado, Boulder • Sara Gallup, Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest, U.S.D.A. Forest Service • Mauro Gonzalez, Department of Geography, University of Colorado, Boulder • John Gubbins, Middle Park, Colorado • Tim Hogan, Herbarium, University of Colorado, Boulder • Laurie Huckaby, Rocky Mountain Research Station, U.S.D.A. Forest Service • David Johnson, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Region 2 • Al Kane, Pike-San Isabel N.F., Supervisor's Office • Merrill Kaufmann, Rocky Mountain Research Station, U.S.D.A. Forest Service • Dennis Knight, University of Wyoming, Laramie • Dominik Kulakowski, Department of Geography, University of Colorado, Boulder • Cecilia McNichol, Pike-San Isabel N.F., Leadville District • Mel Mehl, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Region 2 • Mark Mitchell, Pike-San Isabel N.F. Comanche Grasslands • Mike Morrison, Pike-San Isabel N.F., Supervisor's Office • Alan Reed, Alpine Archeology Institute, Montrose, Colorado • Claudia Regan, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Region 2 • Frank Romero, Pike-San Isabel N.F., Supervisor's Office • William Romme, Colorado State University, Fort Collins • Frank Rupp, Bureau of Land Management, Kremmling iii • Nancy Ryke, Pike-San Isabel N.F., Supervisor's Office • Joanne Sanfillipo, Routt National Forest, U.S.D.A. Forest Service • John Schmid, retired from Rocky Mountain Research Station, U.S.D.A. Forest Service • Tania Schoennagel, Department of Geography, University of Colorado, Boulder • Wayne Shepperd, Rocky Mountain Research Station, U.S.D.A. Forest Service • Rosemary Sherriff, Department of Geography, University of Colorado, Boulder • Jason Sibold, Department of Geography, University of Colorado, Boulder • Vern Thomas, Colorado State University • Ellen Wohl, Colorado State University iv Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 7 1.1. Concepts of Ecosystem Management and Historical Range of Variability ............................................... 8 1.2. Disturbance and Ecosystem Management .................................................................................................... 9 1.3. Objectives and Questions Addressed in This Assessment ........................................................................ 10 2. METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................ 12 2.1. Early Historical Records, Photographs, and Reports .................................................................................. 13 2.2. Macro- and Micro-Fossil Records ................................................................................................................... 13 2.3. Tree-Ring Evidence of Disturbance Regimes and Past Environmental Conditions ............................... 14 2.4. Inference from Modern Conditions of Ecosystem Parameters ................................................................. 15 3. ENVIRONMENTAL AND CULTURAL SETTING OF THE AREA ............................................................... 17 3.1. Geology and soils ............................................................................................................................................. 17 3.1.1. Arapaho-Roosevelt N.F. .......................................................................................................................... 17 3.1.2. Pike-San Isabel N.F. ................................................................................................................................ 18 3.2. Climate of the Colorado Front Range ........................................................................................................... 21 3.3. Vegetation Patterns ......................................................................................................................................... 26 3.3.1. Arapaho-Roosevelt N.F. .......................................................................................................................... 26 3.3.2. Pike-San Isabel N.F. ................................................................................................................................ 39 3.4. Human Settlement and Land Use ................................................................................................................. 49 3.4.1. The Native American Period .................................................................................................................. 49 3.4.2. The Euro-American Period: Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest ...................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form
    NPS Form 10-900-b OMB No. 1024-0018 (Revised March 1992) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form This form is used for documenting multiple property groups relating to one or several historic contexts. See instructions in How to Complete the Multiple Property Documentation Form (National Register Bulletin 16B). Complete each item by entering the requested information. For additional space, use continuation sheets (Form 10-900-a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items. X New Submission Amended Submission A. Name of Multiple Property Listing Park County, Colorado, Historic Cemeteries B. Associated Historic Contexts (Name each associated historic context, identifying theme, geographical area, and chronological period for each.) Historic Cemetery Development in Park County, Colorado, 1859-1965 C. Form Prepared by name/title R. Laurie Simmons and Thomas H. Simmons organization Front Range Research Associates, Inc. date October 2016 street & number 3635 W. 46th Ave. email [email protected] telephone 303-477-7597 city or town Denver state Colorado zip code 80211 D. Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, I hereby certify that this documentation form meets the National Register documentation standards and sets forth requirements for listing of related properties consistent with the National Register criteria. This submission meets the procedural and professional requirements
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado 1 (! 1 27 Y S.P
    # # # # # # # # # ######## # # ## # # # ## # # # # # 1 2 3 4 5 # 6 7 8 9 1011121314151617 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ) " 8 Muddy !a Ik ") 24 6 ") (!KÂ ) )¬ (! LARAMIE" KIMBALL GARDEN 1 ") I¸ 6 Medicine Bow !` Lodg Centennial 4 ep National Federal ole (! 9 Lake McConaughy CARBON Forest I§ Kimball 9 CHEYENNE 11 C 12 1 Potter CURT GOWDY reek Bushnell (! 11 ") 15 ") ") Riverside (! LARAMIE ! ") Ik ( ") (! ) " Colorado 1 8 (! 1 27 Y S.P. ") Pine !a 2 Ij Cree Medicine Bow 2 KÂ 6 .R. 3 12 2 7 9 ) Flaming Gorge R ") " National 34 .P. (! Burns Bluffs k U ") 10 5 National SWEETWATER Encampment (! 7 KEITH 40 Forest (! Red Buttes (! 4 Egbert ") 8 Sidney 10 Lodgepole Recreation Area 796 (! DEUEL ") ) " ") 2 ! 6 ") 3 ( Albany ") 9 2 A (! 6 9 ) River 27 6 Ik !a " 1 2 3 6 3 CHEYENNE ") Brule K ") on ") G 4 10 Big Springs Jct. 9 lli ") ) Ik " ") 3 Chappell 2 14 (! (! 17 4 ") Vermi S Woods Landing ") !a N (! Ik ) ! 8 15 8 " ") ) ( " !a # ALBANY 3 3 ^! 5 7 2 3 ") ( Big Springs ") ") (! 4 3 (! 11 6 2 ek ") 6 WYOMING MI Dixon Medicine Bow 4 Carpenter Barton ") (! (! 6 RA I« 10 ) Baggs Tie Siding " Cre Savery (! ! (! National ") ( 6 O 7 9 B (! 4 Forest 8 9 5 4 5 Flaming UTAH 2 5 15 9 A Dutch John Mountain ") Y I¸11 Gorge (! 4 NEBRASKA (! (! Powder K Res. ^ Home tonwo 2 ^ NE t o o ! C d ! ell h Little En (! WYOMING 3 W p ! 7 as S Tala Sh (! W Slater cam ^ ") Ovid 4 ! ! mant Snake River pm ^ ^ 3 ! es Cr (! ! ! ^ Li ! Gr Mi en ^ ^ ^ ttle eek 8 ! ^JULESBURG een Creek k Powder Wash ddle t ! Hereford (! ! 8 e NORTHGATE 4 ( Peetz ! ! Willo ork K R Virginia Jumbo Lake Sedgwick ! ! # T( ") Cre F ing (! 1 ek Y 7 RA ^ Cre CANYON ek Lara (! Dale B I§ w Big Creek o k F e 2 9 8 Cre 9 Cr x DAGGETT o Fo m Lakes e 7 C T(R B r NATURE TRAIL ") A ee u So k i e e lde d 7 r lomon e k a I« 1 0 Cr mil h k k r 17 t r r 293 PERKINS River Creek u e 9 River Pawnee v 1 e o e ") Carr ree r Rockport Stuc Poud 49 7 r® Dry S Ri C National 22 SENTINAL La HAMILTON RESERVOIR/ (! (! k 6 NE e A Gr e Halligan Res.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX a APPENDIX a Tiliber SALE Sumllary
    APPENDIX A APPENDIX A TIliBER SALE SuMllARY Area r.ocarmn -“anagemenr Area Treatmentl Esrlmated Probable Harvest -RIS I.ocatmn Area Volume “ethods by -Towashw & Range* (Acres) m LlpiBF Forest Type 1984 leadvllle 28 30 57 02 lodgepole pine 100210 clearcut T9S, R80W 1984 Leadvllle 2B 30 86 03 Lodgepole pne 100210 clearcut T8S. mow 1984 Leadvllle 70 50 143 03 bdgepole pule 100203 clearcur; spruce,fr ms, R80W shelterwood 1984 Leadvllle lhstrxt-vlde 80 2.29 08 All species. approprrare for nanagement Area.*=C 1984 Sahda 4B 320 457 16 Spruce,flr group 101001; 101002 selectmn T14S, R80W 1984 Sallda 40 200 114 0.4 Douglas-*rr thmnmg; 102311 lodgepole pine and T48N, WE aspen. clearcur 1984 SalIda 5B 15 29 0 1 Lodgepole pm 102211 clearcur T49N, R7E 1984 Salzda 5B 30 86 0.3 Aspen: clearcut 1027.06 public fuelwood T49N, WE 1984 Sahd.9 40 25 86 0.3 Aspen clearcur 101301 public fuelwood T13S, R77W 1984 Sahda District-wide 320 200 0.7 All species approprrate for nanagement Area 1984 San Carlas ,A 318 loo0 3.5 Spruce,fx. clearcut; 103510 Douglas-fir: two-step T24S, R69W sheltewood 1984 San carkss rhstrzct-wrde 420 257 0.9 All Epecles appropriate for Management Area 1984 Pxkes Peak WE 314 143 0.3 Ponderosa pine and 115302. 113303 Douglas-cr. Two-step TI1S. R68W shelterwad; spruce/ fm and aspen clearcut 1984 PlkS Peak 7A 476 286 10 Douglas-fm and 117101, 117102, ponderosa pme two- 117401, 11,402 step shelterwood, T11 s; 12s. wow aspen. clearcur *All Townshq and Range ~~rar~ons refer to the New “exzco and Sxcth Prmcxpal “enduas, ““Ifed States survey “See Chapter III, Management Area Preserqrmns for harvest methods by specks A-l TIMBER SALE SuMEwlY Area hcatlo” -Managemn Area Treatment Estmated Probable Harverr Hlscal -RI8 locatloo Area Yolme Methods by Year: District Sale Name -Township 6 Ranae (Acres) gcJ MMBF Forest Type 1984 Pikes Peak .Jobos Gulch 1OR 450 286 I.0 Poaderosa pm.e 116701, 116002 two-step shelterwood T118, R69” 1984 Pikes Peak Quaker RLdgs 28 250 143 0.5 Ponderoaa pme TWO- 116601.
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado Bighorn Sheep Management Plan 2009−2019
    1 2 Special Report Number 81 3 COLORADO 4 BIGHORN SHEEP MANAGEMENT PLAN 5 2009−2019 6 J. L. George, R. Kahn, M. W. Miller, B. Watkins 7 February 2009 COLORADO DIVISION OF WILDLIFE 8 TERRESTRIAL RESOURCES 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 SPECIAL REPORT NUMBER 81 9 Special Report Cover #81.indd 1 6/24/09 12:21 PM COLORADO BIGHORN SHEEP MANAGEMENT PLAN 2009−2019 Editors1 J. L. George, R. Kahn, M. W. Miller, & B. Watkins Contributors1 C. R. Anderson, Jr., J. Apker, J. Broderick, R. Davies, B. Diamond, J. L. George, S. Huwer, R. Kahn, K. Logan, M. W. Miller, S. Wait, B. Watkins, L. L. Wolfe Special Report No. 81 February 2009 Colorado Division of Wildlife 1 Editors and contributors listed alphabetically to denote equivalent contributions to this effort. Thanks to M. Alldredge, B. Andree, E. Bergman, C. Bishop, D. Larkin, J. Mumma, D. Prenzlow, D. Walsh, M. Woolever, the Rocky Mountain Bighorn Society, the Colorado Woolgrowers Association, the US Forest Service, and many others for comments and suggestions on earlier drafts of this management plan. DOW-R-S-81-09 ISSN 0084-8875 STATE OF COLORADO: Bill Ritter, Jr., Governor DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES: Harris D. Sherman, Executive Director DIVISION OF WILDLIFE: Thomas E. Remington, Director WILDLIFE COMMISSION: Brad Coors, Chair, Denver; Tim Glenn, Vice Chair, Salida; Dennis Buechler, Secretary, Centennial; Members, Jeffrey A. Crawford; Dorothea Farris; Roy McAnally; John Singletary; Mark Smith; Robert Streeter; Ex Officio Members, Harris Sherman and John Stulp Layout & production by Sandy Cochran FOREWORD The Colorado Bighorn Sheep Management Plan is the culmination of months of work by Division of Wildlife biologists, managers and staff personnel.
    [Show full text]
  • 505) 263-1241 (505) 239-5931 [email protected] (505
    CARLTON M. CAVES KAREN L. KAHN JEREMY K. CAVES ELEANOR M. CAVES (505) 350-8963 (505) 235-8619 (505) 263-1241 (505) 239-5931 22 EAGLE NEST COURT NE ALBUQUERQUE,NEW MEXICO 87122-2025 [email protected] (505) 856-6522 2007 January 15 A New Mexico Diary Saturday, 2005 April 16: Carl, working in his garden for the ¯rst time this year, bends over to transplant a desert marigold and feels a sudden, sharp stab in the rump. He turns around just in time to see a curved-bill thrasher preparing for a second strike and so moves quickly away from the very prickly cholla where a thrasher couple is tending a brood of three nestlings. Tuesday, 2005 April 19: Jeremy returns from three days in Santa Fe, where he won the Best Senator and Best Bill Presentation awards at a Youth and Government meeting. His bill was aimed at energy conservation. Friday, 2005 May 6: Eleanor attends the La Cueva High School end-of-year band banquet and learns that she has been selected as a Drill Master for the low brass section in next year's band. In the fall she will mainly be in charge of organizing sectional rehearsals for the low brass section of the marching band. Wednesday, 2005 May 11: Carl's father Morris, just arrived from Oklahoma to attend the festivities surrounding Jeremy's high-school graduation, stands at the breakfast-room window, enjoying the scene of birds feeding and squabbling at the backyard feeders. His attention is drawn particularly to the Gambel quail scratching beneath the feeders, their dark face masks, ruddy crowns, and foppish topknots making them very di®erent from the bobwhites he has hunted in Oklahoma.
    [Show full text]
  • South Platte Ranger District MVUM
    ! ! ! ! ! ! ! El Rancho ! ! ! ! ! Hidden Valley ! ! Bergen Park ! ! Black Eagle Mill ! ! ! Blue Valley Wah Keeney Park Lamartine ! ! ! ! C O- 74 Hiwan Hills ! Evergreen ! Troutdale ! Rosedale ! EK CRE Elephant Park AR ! CLE Herzman Mesa ! Georgetown ! Brookvale ! Silverdale (historical) Marshdale Silver Plume ! ! ! Sprucedale 5 ! Graymont 22 10 34 06 22 30 e r u t l u c i r g A f o t n e m t r a p e D s e t a t S d e t i n U ! Bakerville 21 25 33 09 13 21 25 e c i v r e S t s e r o F ! R75W 440000 4390000 R74W 01 450000 R73W 460000 R72W OPERATOR 105°45'0"W 105°37'30"W 39°37'30"N 105°30'0"W 105°22'30"W PURPOSE AND CONTENTS 20 26 32 14 20 k 26 ee 32 0 1 0 2 o d a r o l o C 02 08 r k J C e E e en RESPONSIBILITIES 19 r k OF THIS MAP 27 31 15 ek C F c 03 e 27 k i 31 04 07 r o n F h 4380000 Operating a motor vehicle on National Forest C o e C S s r e E s r o o d t u O t a e r G s ' a c i r e m A Paines Mountain s B r The designations shown on this map are effective o Sugarloaf Peak a u M r G R 28 OUNT EVA k 24 w System roads, National Forest System trails, and in NS 16 e 28 o 36 36 t G as of the date stamped or printed on the front cover.
    [Show full text]
  • 2006, Spring – Bill Manning Welcomed As CTF Managing Director
    Tread Lines The Colorado Trail Foundation Spring Newsletter 2006 President’s Bill Manning Welcomed Corner by Marilyn Eisele As CTF Managing Director This year of 2006 promises to be both Bill Manning, an exciting year and a year of change formerly of for the Colorado Trail Foundation. Durango, has been George Miller has plans for 17 named to fill the weeklong crews and 5 weekend crews new position of to make improvements on the Trail. Managing Director Gudy Gaskill is organizing eight of the Colorado weeklong, outdoor classes high up at Trail Foundation. the CTF cabin above Lake City. And Beginning Pete and Lisa Turner will lead seven February 1, Bill weeklong supported treks on five is responsible for sections of the Trail. We invite all overall manage- “Friends of the Trail” to spread the ment of the word about our 2006 programs and Foundation’s day- join us as we enjoy and improve The to-day operations P h Colorado Trail. including recruit- o t o b At our annual meeting of the CTF ment and y B i l l Board of Directors on January 21, we coordination of B l o o welcomed new Board members CTF volunteers. m q u i s Suzanne Reed and Ken Swierenga. Bill previously t Board members returning for another served as Executive President Marilyn Eisele and Managing Director Bill Manning at term are Jon Greeneisen and Marilyn Director of the CTF Annual Board of Director’s meeting. Eisele. Officers elected for 2006 are Durango’s Trails 2000 for 13 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Pikes Peak Group Annual
    Pikes Pique The Newsletter of the CMC Pikes Peak Group July, 2019 | No. 258 Pikes Peak Group Annual BBQ Sixth Annual Pikes Peak Group BBQ: Sunday, July 21, 3:00–7:00 pm Please join us again this year for a BBQ at Cheyenne Mountain State Park in southern Colorado Springs to meet other CMC members and share stories of your epic adventures—or those you are planning. There is no cost for the food and beverages, and since we are having Rudy’s BBQ prepare the meal there will be less work all around. Besides BBQ main dishes and sides, we will also provide sodas, water, and beer. Please do not bring hard liquor (e.g., vodka, tequila, etc.) as this is prohibited by the park. We will have horseshoe pits available to us, but please bring any additional lawn games that might be enjoyed as well! The entrance to the park is across from the main gate of Fort Carson. From the junction of S Academy Boulevard and Hwy 115, The pavilion has ample parking. Kids are welcome, and there is a proceed south and take a right on State Park Road. Note that the playground next to the pavilion. There are new and clean park has a $8 dollar per vehicle admission fee. We advise bathrooms for men, women, and families next to the pavilion. carpooling from the Safeway parking lot at S Academy and Hwy 115, or finding a member with a state parks pass. The pavilion has picnic tables with benches. Feel free to bring your own chairs if you want something more comfy.
    [Show full text]
  • CMC Announces Its Newest State Section
    The Newsletter of the CMC Pikes Peak Group September, 2020 | No. 271 CMC Announces its Newest State Section Mountain Biking! Do you love mountain biking? Do you struggle to find a place for it in the CMC? As part of the Strategic Plan’s initiative to bring more relevant activities to the membership, CMC state brings to you mountain biking! Whether you’re a beginner just learning the ropes as a biker, whether you’re an intermediate biker who loves flow trails, or whether you’re an expert downhill rider who loves to hit the jumps, we’ve got something for everyone in this new section. How it works: anyone from any group can join the section, participate in activities, and lead trips. We’re looking for Trip Leaders. If you’re interested in leading a trip, please reach out to Maddie Miller at [email protected]. Interested in joining the section? Contact Greg McVie at [email protected]. See you on the trails! Dean Waits Video Culturally Modified Trees are throughout the state and across the US. Have you been to Fox Run Regional Park and wondered why some trees are bent and shaped so unlike most of the tall straight one’s? Here’s a one-hour CMC video in which Dean Waits explains how these trees have been modified by Native Americans dating back hundreds of years. Some trees have been aged using dendrochronology (counting tree rings) and actually dissecting a tree to illustrate how the methods used to bend a tree appear internally in the wood.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 Park County Profile
    2014 PARK COUNTY P ROFILE GEOGRAPHY Canyons have been carved by the South Platte River and its tributaries north and south of Lake George. Established in 1861, Park County is approximately 45 miles wide from east to west, and 60 miles long, US Highways 285 and 24, Colorado Highway 9, many encompassing 2,166 square miles. Within its borders Park County roads, and numerous national forest are portions of three wilderness areas, two state parks, access routes provide automobile access into and twelve state wildlife areas and more territory above through the County. Some of the National Forest 9,000 feet than any other Colorado county. Federal routes are suitable for off-highway vehicles (OHVs) lands comprise 51 percent of Park County’s landmass. only. Five water storage reservoirs (Antero, State-owned lands account for about 8 percent and Elevenmile, Tarryall, Spinney and Montgomery) have privately-owned land for about 41 percent. Notable become important wildlife and aquatic recreation features on Federal land include the 644,000-acre Pike areas, attracting a half-million people each year. National Forest; Lost Creek, Mt. Evans and Buffalo Peaks Wilderness Areas; Elevenmile Canyon Recreation Area; Bristlecone Pine Scenic Area; Wilkerson Pass Visitor Center; and the Colorado Trail. POPULATION CENTERS Several named mountain ranges define the perimeter Alma of Park County, including the Mosquito Range above 10,350 feet above sea level. Founded in 1873. Fairplay and Alma. This spectacular range includes four of Colorado's peaks higher than 14,000 feet, as Located on Colorado Highway 9 six miles northwest well as 25 named summits above 13,000 feet.
    [Show full text]
  • Park County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2020 Update
    1005099.0001.04 REVISED DRAFT Park County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2020 Update May 2020 Prepared for: Prepared by: Park County Oce of Emergency Management Park County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update May 2020 Park County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2020 Update LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL [Placeholder for final local mitigation plan review tool.] 1 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE May 2020 Prepared for: Park County Office of Emergency Management 911 Clark Street Fairplay, CO 80440 Prepared by: ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT, INC., MEMBER OF WSP 5665 Flatiron Parkway, Suite 250 Boulder, CO 80301 Park County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2020 Update Hazard Mitigation Plan Update TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ ES-1 PART 1– THE PLANNING PROCESS CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE PLANNING PROCESS ............................................. 1-1 1.1 WHY PREPARE THIS PLAN? ............................................................................................... 1-1 1.1.1 The Big Picture ........................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1.2 Regulatory Authority ............................................................................................................... 1-2 1.1.3 Purposes for Planning .............................................................................................................. 1-2
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Park County Profile
    2021 PARK COUNTY PROFILE Updated January 2020 GEOGRAPHY POPULATION CENTERS Established in 1861, Park County is approximately 45 Alma miles wide from east to west, and 60 miles long, encompassing 2,166 square miles. Within its borders are 10,578 feet above sea level. Founded in 1873. portions of three wilderness areas, two state parks, twelve state wildlife areas and more territory above 9,000 feet Located on Colorado Highway 9 six miles northwest of than any other Colorado county. Federal lands comprise Fairplay, Alma is the highest incorporated town in 51 percent of Park County’s landmass. State-owned lands North America. The estimated 2016 population of account for about 8 percent and privately-owned land for Alma was 280, with an estimated 1,000 residents in the about 41 percent. Notable features on Federal land area. With one restaurant, five vacation rentals, coffee include the 644,000-acre Pike National Forest; Lost shop, general store, liquor store, medical doctor, Creek, Mt. Evans and Buffalo Peaks Wilderness Areas; Montessori school, flower nursery, hydroponic store, Elevenmile Canyon Recreation Area; Bristlecone Pine gift shops, hair salon, furniture maker, real estate Scenic Area Wilkerson Pass Visitor Center; and the offices, CPA, storage rentals, auto mechanic, and post Colorado Trail. office, Alma is suitable for cottage industries. Several named mountain ranges define the perimeter of Historically Alma was a center for the local mining Park County, including the Mosquito Range above industry. With continued development of residential Fairplay and Alma. This spectacular range includes four subdivisions around Alma, the area is predominately a of Colorado's peaks higher than 14,000 feet, as well as 25 bedroom community for several ski resorts in named summits above 13,000 feet.
    [Show full text]