The Crested Butte News Serving the Gunnison Valley since 1999
Lake Irwin Coalition running out of patience
By Mark Reaman
It should come as no surprise that the Lake Irwin Coalition has sounded the alarm again over the easement with the Scarp Ridge Trail and the old Irwin Lodge parking lot.
The LIC maintains that a Forest Service easement runs into the parking lot and citizens have a right to trek up the Scarp Ridge trail from behind the lodge. The Eleven Group, owners of the lodge, last summer placed boulders at the entrance to the parking lot, stating that the easement ended at the road and not through the parking lot. A Forest Service survey was conducted but has not been finalized so no resolution has been reached.
But on May 8 the LIC put out a public “Call to Action” stating, “The USFS is in closed door negations to give away public access on Scarp Ridge!!!!”
The LIC accuses forest supervisor Scott Armentrout of engaging “in secret closed-door negotiations with Eleven Experience to legally redefine the end of Forest Service road 826.1c, the trailhead parking area, and the routes and locations of USFS trails 426 and 419 (the main Scarp Ridge Trail).”
In a Facebook post, the LIC accused the Forest Service of nefarious motives. “At this point corruption and bribery are the only conclusion one can draw as to why the USFS would give away legally established public access without anything in return,” the LIC stated.
Forest Service spokesperson Lee Ann Loupe said that accusation is simply wrong. “What the LIC says on its Facebook page is untrue. We are working to resolve this title dispute,” she said. “Title disputes are complicated, involve a lot of work and take time.”
Loupe made it clear the agency is working to resolve the dispute. “An easement grants limited access on or across a person’s property. An easement is only granted for a specific, limited purpose. Also, an easement is ‘non-possessory,’ which means that holding an easement does not mean you hold an ownership interest in the property where the easement exists. Eleven, as the property owner, retains rights as the landowner [to their land]. The United States owns the uses that are represented in this easement,” Loupe explained. “The landowner last year used the information on file at the Gunnison Courthouse regarding the easement for NFSR 826.1 to identify the physical limits of the easement that was granted to the U.S. Forest Service. In doing so, they placed rocks at the edges of the right of way in accordance with their determination of the easement.
“The Forest Service, as the easement holder, disputes portions of the easement boundaries,” Loupe continued. “We are following Forest Service processes of resolving a title dispute, working with our respective attorneys and on the behalf of the public. We are working to resolve the title dispute with regard to the easement, in accordance with law, policy and regulation. This entails communication between the landowner and its representatives and the Forest Service and its legal representatives. We continue to work toward resolution to support public access on the road and trails and to do so in a manner that promotes long-term provisions for the use, health and safety of the public and maintains the landowner’s rights. This takes time and we continue to work diligently toward resolution.”
On Tuesday, LIC president David Gottorff told the Crested Butte News the Forest Service has confirmed several times it is negotiating with Eleven about the easement. He said while there is “no direct evidence of bribery or corruption, we are concerned that such things have occurred in the past with lower-level Gunnison USFS employees and could occur in the future with higher-level employees, given the ability of the USFS supervisor to make administrative decisions regarding these easements without a public process.”
Gottorff remains concerned about any short-term agreement that is reached between Eleven and the USFS. “The LIC’s beef is that the USFS is going to allow Eleven to block the Scarp Ridge Trailhead parking area and relocate 419 and 426 for an unknown amount of time under a short-term agreement. That would give away public access in the short-term to Eleven … which begs the question, why? If the USFS has determined the easement’s boundaries and are willing to take legal action to uphold them, why would the USFS allow Eleven to continue to block public access under a ‘temporary agreement’ that gives no incentive for the Eleven to stop blocking access in the future?
“The whole thing raises more questions than answers,” Gottorff continued. “And given the fact that the USFS withheld survey and documents from our two FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] requests and held these talks in a secret closed-door fashion raises our concern about what this temporary agreement will say. Until we review this short-term agreement, the jury is out regarding our concern that GMUG supervisor Armentrout is not managing these easements in the public interest.”
There is no timeline in place from the Forest Service perspective to come to a resolution. “We would like to resolve this title dispute; however, I don’t have an estimate of when that may occur,” concluded Loupe.
