Dan Dallas, Supervisor Rio Grande National Forest 1803 W Hwy 160 Monte Vista, CO 81144 December 28, 2017 Eric Burt Owner/Manager Kristi Sports, LLC 3222 Main St Alamosa, CO 81101 719-589-9759

Re: Forest Plan Revision final comments

Dear Mr. Dallas,

Here we are in the final stretch and I would like to say I appreciated the process and overall professionalism of your staff during this daunting but important undertaking. If I am around twenty years from now when we have to do this all over again, I think we will all be pleased with our best efforts at the time.

Before you read my letter I want to highlight some of my general assertions: - More local control and flexibility is exactly on target for what this forest (and the Forest Service) needs for the next 20+ years to be successful in an ever changing world. - Simplify how you manage the forest to be more cost effective. - Increase the potential for non-extractive activities which will build and enhance our local economies. - No new wilderness designation unless the proposed area has been categorically eliminated for possible future mountain biking potential. In other words, just because there is not a trail there now for mountain biking, don’t change the land to wilderness and permanently eliminate the possibility for the future. - Preserve, reclaim and develop new single-track opportunities on forest land for all users.

I was born and raised in Alamosa and am a fifth generation native of the . I have a wife and two sons ages 18 and 24. I started working in the ski industry at the end of my 8th grade year at the local ski shop in Alamosa. In 1983 I purchased Kristi Mountain Sports from the original owner's estate after he was killed in a motorcycle collision with a logging truck east of Del Norte Peak while setting up the original Boot Hill Enduro race. My wife and I have operated KMS for the last 30+ years and recently my older son has joined the management team after graduating from MSU with an Industrial Engineering degree. Additionally we opened a second location in Del Norte during the spring of 2016.

My wife and I started selling mountain bikes in 1986, business grew and interest increased exponentially until mountain biking relatively peaked in the late 90s. In 2000 we added outdoor equipment (camping, hiking, climbing, backpacking, etc) to the mixture of products we sell after the two local sporting goods stores closed down. Around this time I co-promoted the Riders Del Norte mountain bike race for 10 seasons, the last year being 2000. Our best races attracted over 300 riders to the San Luis Valley to ride a 28 mile course in the Limekiln/Nikomodes area on Saturday and an 18+ mile course in the Pinos/Burrow Creek area on Sunday. The riders loved and hated the race in a good way. We quit promoting the race primarily for financial reasons and because many of the other areas like Durango, Gunnison, , and Salida were developing better riding opportunities which made it more difficult for us to attract riders to the area.

During the 90s and early 2000s, we scoured the entire RGNF for mountain biking opportunities, looking for the holy grail of mountain biking; singletrack. During this time ATVs were becoming more and more popular and in ​ ​ the beginning their trails were quite desirable to ride because they were interesting, flowy and were not on a jeep road.

We were riding Cat Creek (at one time rated a top 10 singletrack trail in the state), Schilling Springs, LimeKiln, Burrow Creek, Castle Rock Creek, Shady Creek, Trout Creek, Middle Frisco, Deep Creek, Miners Creek, and West Willow. On the CTD trail we loved to ride Cumbres North (out and back to the wilderness boundary) or Wolf Creek south to Treasure Creek, Silver Creek or all the way to Elwood Pass. We looked real close at areas around Cathedral, Groundhog park, Bowers Peak, Boot Hill, Little La Garita Creek, Tewksbury, Lake Fork, Hunters Lake, Conejos Canyon and all along the Sangre de Cristos from Poncha to road. In most cases the trails were too steep or too rough for pedaled wheeled traffic without major work on the trails or the routes were already in designated wilderness areas.

We met with the Forest Service on numerous occasions asking for partnerships and consideration for MTB recreation but the land managers at the time appeared to be primarily focused on building ATV trail. ATVs were gaining popularity and their advancing technology allowed them to travel virtually anywhere which started to impact the trails we liked to ride. Sadly the RGNF managers would not or could not act to alleviate the problem. There were many stories or rumors as to why this was the case but it appeared to us personal agendas and bias was at the core of the problem. It was sad and frustrating at the same time because our neighboring regions were developing great mountain bike riding opportunities and realizing the social and economic benefit of those trails systems.

Through a failure of management, signage and compliance, the singletrack trails we loved to ride were being ruined and made dangerous by the soil pulverizing effects of the ATV tires. Riding on an ATV trail was like riding on a pile of moving ball bearings with a hump in the middle. We quit riding Trout Creek and many other classics because the ATVs created such a dangerous situation. Even the motorcyclists hated what the ATVs did to the singletrack trails they used to ride. Over time we began to look at other areas of the state to ride and started to explore more in the BLM lands of the San Luis Valley for a quality experience, basically giving up on the National Forest trails in our area.

Penitente Canyon was the beginning of a revolution for mountain biking in the San Luis Valley. A nearby guest ranch starting guiding horseback tours through the adjacent canyons which inadvertently created some very interesting singletrack trail we could ride on. It was pretty cool what a line of 20 horses walking single file could create on a weekly basis on the native soils in the area. At the same time bicycle suspension was dramatically evolving making these primitive trails quite rideable and more entertaining.

In a perfect world, my argument that the Mountain Bike community is one of the most underserved recreation groups in the RGNF would be supported by firm research and data. At this point the best we can provide is the attached infographic (RGNF Mountain Bike Trail Assessment) which overlays geographic mountain bike ride data from MTBProject.com with the RGNF boundary. In a nutshell, each circle represents a trail or ride that is noteworthy enough for users to take the time and effort to share it with other cyclists. When people are traveling or choosing a weekend destination, they will use MTB Project as a resource to find areas to recreate. When I look at this map, I see a significant amount of the forest which has no appeal to the mountain biking community.

My contention might come as a surprise when you consider the thousands of miles of roads, two-track, motorized trails, and multi-use single track that cyclists are legally allowed to ride on the National Forest. From a mountain biker’s perspective, there is a big difference between legally “rideable” and “desirable”. The reality is, singletrack attracts and captivates the cyclist - it makes them want to come back for more. Even though equestrians can legally ride on forest roads, is that the experience that would motivate them to get into a vehicle and travel to some remote location to experience? Generally, it is not - the same can be said about cycling.

On one end of the spectrum you have the mountain bike “tourist” who wants to be hauled up a mountain road in a vehicle so they can coast down for a thrill ride while exerting little effort. Roads, two-track, or trails makes little difference to them as long as gravity is doing most of the work. On the other end of the spectrum is the true mountain bike enthusiast who is drawn to an area to ride over and over again when it has a quality single track network with flowing features, gentle to moderate grades, and multiple routes that connect to create the opportunity for a variety of ride options. The last thing a mountain biker wants to do is ride with ATVs and jeeps on the same tread - no different than a hiker or horseman would not want to hike/ride along a forest road.

In the last three to four years the BLM has made huge strides in designing and building high quality single track trails in the San Luis Valley with bikes in mind - Penitente, Stone Quarry, and now the Pronghorn loop just south of Del Norte. The result has been a surge of interest and increased awareness of our area from a four state region. The trails are equally as good as any other nearby networks and the positive economic impact is just getting started. We invested almost a quarter of a million dollars in our new store in Del Norte because we see the potential is just around the corner. This summer, it was not uncommon for my staff to provide ride recommendations and maps to 10+ tourist groups each day at our Del Norte shop. After experiencing the BLM trails we’ve received customer feedback such as: - “I’ve traveled to Moab every fall for the past 15 years… now I don’t need to make that drive anymore” - “We only had time to ride Stone Quarry, we’ll be back next year to ride the rest of the networks!” - “I’m from Pagosa (or Salida) and I’m bored with our local trails. Now that I know these rides are just over the hill, I’ll definitely be back to explore next summer.” Unfortunately, we rarely mention any of the forest service trails because there is such a gap in quality and quantity between the networks on the BLM and the RGNF.

Not everyone wants to ride in the desert and would prefer a classic tree lined, high alpine riding experience. But the question is where? When you get down to it, the only recommendable trails to the general population in the RGNF are:

● Cat Creek ● Schilling Springs ● Middle Frisco ● LimeKiln / Nicomodes ● Trout Creek ● Deep Creek ● Miners Creek ● CTD Cumbres ● CTD Wolf Creek

I am sure I missed a few others but essentially that is it for a national forest the size of a small state. To my knowledge there has been no new, revised or upgraded mountain bikeable single track trails in the RGNF since the late 80’s. One good thing we recently witnessed is the metal structures installed by a motorcycle group around the Cat Creek trail system which blocked the ATVs. Over the last two to three years since the barricades were installed the trail is slowly coming back to life and is worth the trip to ride again. We would love to see more corridors on the forest follow suit.

The current forest plan revision is on the right track to give local managers more control and discretion to make real-time management changes. Based on all the meetings I’ve attended, I am optimistic for the future. But, the Wilderness Recommendation Process has me concerned for many reasons: one being the increased difficulty and cost to manage and maintain travel corridors, the other is the reality that bikes are not allowed in Wilderness. I spent several hours studying the maps, the Preliminary Evaluation Results and looked at every polygon and associated notes with the area. From a Mountain Biker’s perspective, some areas should be Wilderness because of existing terrain characteristics but many areas have Mountain Bike potential if ever pursued.

The entire Sangre De Cristo side of the valley has zero quality single track trails even with the 300,000+ visitors a year to the Great Sand Dunes and the town of Crestone along the boundary and we know visitors to these areas would love to have something interesting to ride on. Poncha pass, North pass, Cochetopa pass has no bikeable single track to our knowledge. The RGNF boundary with the BLM at Penitente Canyon has several trails which would be great to include in the official trails system. Only one trail worth making the 65 mile drive from Alamosa exists in the Conejos region; the CDT Trail north from Cumbres Pass to the Wilderness boundary. The other trails in the area are managed as restricted to mountain bike use even though they are not in Wilderness. Del Norte has one notable trail, Middle Frisco and South Fork has Trout Creek relatively closeby. The Creede classic is Deep Creek, but we stand to lose it if a Wilderness recommendation goes forward for the Snowshoe Mountain area.

Going back several years when the last wilderness review was occurring to extend the boundary around the Wheeler Geologic area, I was communicating with forest service personnel about the East Bellows Creek trail into Wheeler. The maps I reviewed at one point in the process showed the trail would not be included in the Wilderness area designation which would have created an amazing cycling route and destination. Somehow I missed something in the process and the next thing we knew the boundary was finalized to eliminate this route as a mountain bikeable option. I could not believe it and the mountain bike residents of Creede were stunned too. This route could have been a local classic and would have attracted mountain bike enthusiast for years to come. Instead the trail is too long to hike in a day (for most people) and overnight trips are a challenge because of the lack of water sources near the monument. As a bikeable trail, the out and back trip would have been a perfect way to visit the monument in a day. I share this story to help illustrate why I get nervous when a Wilderness recommendation process is active - I would hate to see this happen again.

Since the Wilderness Recommendation Analysis ties into the Forest Management areas (polygons), which eventually will tie into the topic of recreation and travel management at some future time, I’m trying to kill three birds with one stone, so to speak, and make comments based on the Wilderness Inventory polygons. I figured the revision team would know which areas I am referring to and can apply the comment or recommendation where appropriate to the Forest Plan Revision process.

A rough assessment of the Preliminary Evaluation results,:

● Polygon 1a to 10 - almost all areas have some kind of mountain bike potential. Dream trail could be Blanca peak road north to Zapata Subdivision along the contour. A trail along the contour north from Crestone to Valley View connecting the various hiking trailheads is theoretically possible. ● Polygon 11 - there was a past effort to construct a reroute of the CDT which should include MTB use. ● Polygon 12, 15, 18, 20a - all have potential ● Polygon 22 - natural arch - riding in the area was popular at one time and could be looked at closer again since Penitente is getting more popular. ● Polygon 24 - Wheeler Geologic area - poster child for a poor wilderness area designation. ● Polygon 25a - Wason Park - Creede could be more of a MTB destination if areas like this were developed ● Polygon 26 - Bristol Head - Shuttle ride to Spring Creek to snow mesa and down miners creek would be an epic ride. ● Polygon 28 and 29 - Pole Mtn - my understanding is the locals have some MTB trails in the area which would be impacted by a wilderness designation. ● Polygon 38a - Snowshoe CRA - Deep Creek trail is one of the few existing single track mountain bike rideable trails in the area. ● Polygon 41 - Trout Creek - Trail was ruined by ATV use but then restricted to single track use in recent years. Now the trail is rehabilitating back to a good ride experience. ● Polygon 43a - Kitty Creek area could be an attraction for MTB activity, especially with all the visitors to the Big Meadows area. ● Polygon 45.a - Tewksberry - trail could be a draw for South Fork visitors if it was rehabilitated. ● Polygon 51 - Bennett Peak area - many opportunities to enhance MTB experience in this area including a shuttled ride starting at Blowout Pass (or South Fork Rock Creek TH), climb over Bennett peak, and descend into Del Norte (see attached map Bennett Peak Epic). Closest Forest access to Del Norte and Monte Vista communities. ● Polygon 53 - - classic high alpine area with good characteristics for a limited MTB experience near the wilderness boundary. The views and terrain would be amazing. ● Polygon 54 - 58 - Summitville and Platoro area - plenty of visitors and recreation in the area but no real MTB trail experience available. ● Polygon 59 - area would be good for MTB due to terrain ● Polygon 63a - Cumbres - The CDT trail in this area is very conducive to MTB use. Views are spectacular, grade tough but not impossible for many riders. ● Polygon 64 - Off and on for years I have heard about an effort to connect Cumbres pass to Magote for an “Epic” ride system.

I support a multi-use forest. I own a RAZR, motorcycles, snowmobiles and occasionally use them to explore the forest. I backpack the CDT trail annually and have climbed all the 14ers in the area numerous times. I thoroughly appreciate extended backpacking trips into Wilderness but one of my strongest passions is still Mountain Biking on singletrack trail in the forest.

The State of released a study in October 2016 focused on the statewide Economic and Health Benefits of Bicycling and Walking1. It is estimated that 2.25 million out-of-state cyclists visit Colorado each year with bikes in tow. On average they spend 1.5 days cycling which means our state sees 3.38 million user days from out-of-state visitors alone. The economic impact of cycling related tourist traffic is estimated at $448 million annually when considering average trip expenditures for these visitors. While some of these individuals never get off the pavement, a significant number of them are visiting the state specifically to ride our vast networks of high quality single track. I believe there is an incredible opportunity to stimulate our local economy by developing trails that attract and excite this group of individuals.

1BBC Research Consulting, Economic and Health Benefits of Bicycling and Walking, State of Colorado http://choosecolorado.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Economic-and-Health-Benefits-of-Bicycling-and-Walking-in-Color ado-4.pdf Consider if past history had been different where prior land managers’ priorities and budgets allowed the creation and maintenance of good mountain bike trails similar to adjacent communities (Salida, Gunnison, Durango, etc.), then management polygons we are asked to comment on now and the wilderness review now ​ ​ ​ would look totally different today because the trails would already be in place and traditional use established ​ ​ precluding any further restrictive designation

My overall observation and feeling is that the RGNF should first conduct a “Wheeled Travel Single Track Trail Review” to determine if any management area in the forest has the need or unique potential for a quality multi-use single track trail now or in the reasonable future before any permanent mountain bike limiting recommendations are considered. Then after that review, yes of course make recommendations where appropriate.

As far as options A, B, C, or D are concerned, I don’t have the time or resources to analyze every plan’s details and nuances like other organizations and special interest groups do. But my instinct tells me you and your staff already have a good idea of which plan or hybrid of the four options is best for the forest and for the people who rely on it to be healthy and sustainable for generations to come.

Sincerely,

Eric Burt