Biking given another chance in Baxter Gulch

“In the long run it will be for the better”

Spin another thread into the tangled web of local travel management. The new thread could result in the Forest Service allowing mountain bikes to travel up Baxter Gulch.

The designation of Trail 565 up Baxter Gulch as non-mechanized during the Forest Planning process is being reviewed by the agency, which is in the midst of the Travel Management Plan’s (TMP) formal appeal process. Indications are the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) will change the designation of 565 to permit mechanized use—allowing hikers, horses, and mountain bikes—based on “new” information regarding the existing easements that allow public access to Baxter Gulch.
The Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison (GMUG) National Forests and the Gunnison Field Office for the Bureau of Land Management released the Records of Decision (RODs) for the Gunnison Travel Management planning effort on July 1. The plan dictates which trails are open to hiker and horse traffic, mountain bikers, and off-highway vehicles.
Of nine total appeals filed against the TMP, three addressed the designation of 1.7-mile Trail 565 up Baxter Gulch as non-mechanized. Those particular appeals were filed by the Crested Butte Mountain Bike Association (CBMBA), John Chandler, and Dave Ochs.
Since the TMP appeals period closed, the USFS received information regarding the existing easements that access Baxter Gulch, which they didn’t have knowledge of previously. According to CBMBA member and local trails advocate Don Cook, the Forest Service learned of the existing easements in coverage provided by the Crested Butte News.
“They weren’t aware there were two easements in place, and both allowed for multiple use,” Cook said.
Representatives of CBMBA and the town met with Gunnison District Ranger John Murphy, Forest Planner Gary Shellhorn, and Deputy Forest Supervisor Sherry Hazelhurst last Thursday, at the request of the Forest Service.
During the appeals process, there is an “Informal Disposition” mechanism, by which the USFS can meet with the appellants and work out what relief the appellants are looking for, as well as determine if there is anything the USFS failed to do properly. That way they can work to rectify the appeal before it enters the formal, multi-tiered appeals process.
Shellhorn said, “We are looking at that whole situation. We were not clear on the easements. It looks like there’s reason to revisit that decision based on this. There’s enough merit in the information that’s new to us to look at it. We are in the process of responding to the appellants regarding that information, and they will have our responses before that meeting.”
Shellhorn is referring to the September 7 Crested Butte Town Council meeting, when the acquisition of the Zipper Parcel easement (which accesses Baxter Gulch) will be discussed.
Councilman Jim Schmidt also attended the meeting with the Forest Service, and at their request, has drafted a letter explaining the rules and regulations governing the current easements. “The Forest Service specifically asked for an explanation of what limitations and use restrictions we have on the easements. Just the facts,” Schmidt explained. That information will be included in the Town Council packet for the September 7 meeting.
CBMBA member and trails advocate Don Cook explained why he believes the USFS is taking another look at Trail 565. “What they weren’t aware of was the town of Crested Butte already held an existing easement into the Baxter Gulch area through the private property they had concerns with, and another easement with Hidden Mine Ranch for access.”
There is enough “new” information in play that the Forest Service asked CBMBA, Ochs and Chandler to withdraw their appeals, as the USFS reviews its decision.
“From what we were asked—to revoke the appeal—meant they felt they had justification to take another look at their management of Baxter Gulch,” Cook said. “And it came about because enough stuff was in the newspaper about Baxter Gulch and the purchase of the Zipper easement. It’s unfortunate we could not get this info to them earlier, that these two easements were already in place.”
Shellhorn explained, “We were under the impression that they needed three easements across three parcels to access the Forest. With the two easements the town already has there is legal access for the public to Baxter Gulch. Those two are restricted to non-motorized use—which allows for hikers, horses and mountain bikes. The Zipper parcel provides a better route for the trail, so for the Forest Service, that changes a bit of everything.
“If we revise that decision, we would say, ‘We made a decision but we’re going to back away from that decision and issue a new one,’” Shellhorn continued. “That new decision would be subject to the same appeal process—it would have to be noticed in the paper of record, and have a 45-day appeal period. There would be the chance for the public to review and potentially appeal that decision.”
Cook said that CBMBA isn’t on the agenda for the upcoming council meeting. “We feel that our presence two weeks ago set [the review of Trail 565] into motion, and to be at the meeting this week would only be duplicating our request that the Town Council adopt this easement. If we get the letter from the Forest Service, we will make a copy and present it to John Belkin, so he can address the council with that knowledge, that the Forest Service will no longer be managing Baxter as a non-mechanized area.
Cook believes, “In the long run it will be for the better, a multi-use corridor will open peoples’ eyes to how beautiful Baxter Gulch is, the access to Whetstone Mountain, and another access point to Green Lake. Eventually, there also stands a much better chance of the Crested Butte to Gunnison Trail,” Cook concluded.
As for the Zipper Parcel, there’s still work to be done on the ground before the easement is acquired. 1% for Open Space director Molly Murfee walked the lot with the appraisers last week. “We won’t have any numbers [on the appraised value of the easement] until September 20, and the new closing is on October 1. So the 1% Board will meet in between those times and decide whether or not to purchase the Zipper easement,” explained Murfee.