But the location of the property has required a public process through the US Forest Service. Because Berlaimont is an in-holding, the developers must build an access road through US Forest Service land. The road development requires an environmental impact statement from the US Forest Service, as well as a formal determination regarding whether the proposed 19-unit residential area is a \u201creasonable\u201d use.<\/p>\n
The USFS and its general counsel have determined the Berlaimont plan is reasonable. Hundreds of opponents adamantly disagree.<\/p>\n
Recommended Stories For You<\/h2>\n<\/p><\/div>\nRallying cry<\/strong><\/h2>\nThe Wilderness Workshop<\/a> \u2014 funded in 1967 as a conversation advocacy nonprofit focused on the White River National Forest \u2014 hosted the Saturday march and panel discussion at Battle Mountain High School. A standing-room-only crowd numbering around 200 people attended the event \u2014 aptly described as a Buck Berlaimont rally.<\/p>\n![](\"https:\/\/www.vaildaily.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/03\/Unknown-1-325x85.jpeg\")
A standing-room-only crowd fills a BMHS lecture hall Saturday to hear local experts and residents cite their opposition to the proposed Berlaimont development.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\u201cIt is a gorgeous day out there and I sense that everyone in this room would prefer to be out enjoying their public lands rather than being inside defending them,\u201d said Wilderness Workshop Executive Director Will Rousch.<\/p>\n
Rousch said the developers have proposed a two-lane paved road, at an estimated cost of $15.7 million, through US Forest Service land to access the in-holding. He argued that despite the US Forest Service determination, that plan simply isn\u2019t reasonable and that the road has the potential to drastically impact the country\u2019s already struggling wildlife population. <\/a><\/p>\nNoting that the local wildlife population can\u2019t speak from themselves against the proposal, several people at Saturday\u2019s session spoke for them.<\/p>\n
Wildlife concerns<\/strong><\/h2>\nFor 38 years, Bill Andree worked as a district wildlife manager in Eagle County for the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife. He noted that during his nearly four-decade career, he documented the drastic decline of local deer and elk herds.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s time to do something about wildlife and not worry about some guy\u2019s money,\u201d Andree said.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe are at a point where the county\u2019s elk herd can\u2019t be sustained,\u201d Andree explained. \u201cPeople ask where did these deer and elk move to? They didn\u2019t move anywhere. They are dead, folks.\u201d<\/p>\n
Development on the south side of Interstate 70 has caused much of the decline, Andree said, while the elk herd on the north side of I-70 has been more stable. But Andre noted the Berlaimont plan would impact a critical wildlife area and throw that fragile stability into decline.<\/p>\n
During the winter months, Andree noted that elk are in starvation mode. Every calorie they expend \u2014 by standing up because a car approaches, for example \u2014 uses the energy they need to weather the winter. The drainage where Berlaimont is located has been an enclave for animals with limited disturbance, said Andree.<\/p>\n
Along with the increased human disturbance that would come with residential development, Andree noted the road itself \u2014 with is slope cuts and guardrails \u2014 would be a \u201ccomplete blockage for animals.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cYou aren\u2019t just destroying their habitat, you are blocking their migration,\u201d Andree said.<\/p>\n
Jim Gonzales, a lifelong Eagle County resident, testified he as seen the wildlife population decline first-hand.<\/p>\n
\u201cGod gave us dominion over the animals of this world and it\u2019s about time we started acting responsibly,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u201cI really hope the Forst Service will deem the wildlife is more necessary than all these trophy homes,\u201d offered Edwards resident Kim West.<\/p>\n
West argued the plan would decimate the wildlife population while creating a luxury housing enclave that would be impossible to protect from wildfire and would adversely affect water quality in the larger valley.<\/p>\n
What\u2019s next<\/h2>\n
Saturday\u2019s panel discussion of the Berlaimont plan included Colorado Sen. Kerry Donovan, a Democrat from Vail, and state Rep. Dylan Roberts, a Democrat from Avon. They both noted the state legislature doesn\u2019t have direct influence over the USFS Berlaimont decision. But they both pledged to work on related issues such as wildland fire impacts, water management strategy and wildlife corridor protections. Donovan noted that Saturday\u2019s crowd included longtime county residents and newcomers who are equally passionate about conservation.<\/p>\n
\u201cThat\u2019s is a perfect mixture to get things done,\u201d Donovan said. She urged the crowd to keep writing letters and attending USFS meetings to protest Berlaimont.<\/p>\n
\u201cKeep up the pressure, speak in a unified voice and make sure this road does not become a boulevard for the wealthiest of the wealthy who won\u2019t even call this community home,\u201d Donovan said.<\/p>\n
Andy Wiessner, Eagle County resident and member of the Wilderness Workshop Board of Directors, echoed that call.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe key player here is the US Forest Service. They can tell Berialmont no,\u201d Wiessner said. \u201cThe Forest Service, to me, is being disrespectful to go along with this plan.\u201d<\/p>\n
Wilderness Workshop attorney Peter Hart said the USFS and its counsel has used flawed reasoning to make the reasonable determination for Berlaimont. He noted that the proposed development vastly exceeds what is happening in other forest inholdings such as Fulford or Piney Lake. Hart said those areas are generally served by dirt roads that are often impassable during winter months rather than four-season, paved roads that run through federal lands. But instead of comparing Berlaimont to an in-holding such as Fulford, the USFS used the Singletree area for comparison.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe are concerned about the direction the US Forest Service is taking on this issue,\u201d said Hart. \u201cI think there is an opportunity to get them to do the right thing.\u201d<\/p>\n
But what if the USFS sticks to its determination, asked someone in the crowd. Hart believes there would be grounds to file a lawsuit against the Berlaimont decision, arguing that the USFS is being arbitrary and capricious in its decision.<\/p>\n
Additionally, Hart noted that there\u2019s another potential battleground to fight Berlaimont \u2014 Eagle County\u2019s 1041 regulations that govern expansion of water service infrastructure.<\/p>\n
But for now, keeping up the pressure on the USFS i<\/a>s the top strategy for opponents of the road.<\/p>\n\u201cIt is possible to stop this road, but it takes community action,\u201d said Rousch. \u201cThis issue will be decided by community sentiment.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Wilderness Workshop<\/a> \u2014 funded in 1967 as a conversation advocacy nonprofit focused on the White River National Forest \u2014 hosted the Saturday march and panel discussion at Battle Mountain High School. A standing-room-only crowd numbering around 200 people attended the event \u2014 aptly described as a Buck Berlaimont rally.<\/p>\n \u201cIt is a gorgeous day out there and I sense that everyone in this room would prefer to be out enjoying their public lands rather than being inside defending them,\u201d said Wilderness Workshop Executive Director Will Rousch.<\/p>\n Rousch said the developers have proposed a two-lane paved road, at an estimated cost of $15.7 million, through US Forest Service land to access the in-holding. He argued that despite the US Forest Service determination, that plan simply isn\u2019t reasonable and that the road has the potential to drastically impact the country\u2019s already struggling wildlife population. <\/a><\/p>\n Noting that the local wildlife population can\u2019t speak from themselves against the proposal, several people at Saturday\u2019s session spoke for them.<\/p>\n For 38 years, Bill Andree worked as a district wildlife manager in Eagle County for the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife. He noted that during his nearly four-decade career, he documented the drastic decline of local deer and elk herds.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s time to do something about wildlife and not worry about some guy\u2019s money,\u201d Andree said.<\/p>\n \u201cWe are at a point where the county\u2019s elk herd can\u2019t be sustained,\u201d Andree explained. \u201cPeople ask where did these deer and elk move to? They didn\u2019t move anywhere. They are dead, folks.\u201d<\/p>\n Development on the south side of Interstate 70 has caused much of the decline, Andree said, while the elk herd on the north side of I-70 has been more stable. But Andre noted the Berlaimont plan would impact a critical wildlife area and throw that fragile stability into decline.<\/p>\n During the winter months, Andree noted that elk are in starvation mode. Every calorie they expend \u2014 by standing up because a car approaches, for example \u2014 uses the energy they need to weather the winter. The drainage where Berlaimont is located has been an enclave for animals with limited disturbance, said Andree.<\/p>\n Along with the increased human disturbance that would come with residential development, Andree noted the road itself \u2014 with is slope cuts and guardrails \u2014 would be a \u201ccomplete blockage for animals.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cYou aren\u2019t just destroying their habitat, you are blocking their migration,\u201d Andree said.<\/p>\n Jim Gonzales, a lifelong Eagle County resident, testified he as seen the wildlife population decline first-hand.<\/p>\n \u201cGod gave us dominion over the animals of this world and it\u2019s about time we started acting responsibly,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n \u201cI really hope the Forst Service will deem the wildlife is more necessary than all these trophy homes,\u201d offered Edwards resident Kim West.<\/p>\n West argued the plan would decimate the wildlife population while creating a luxury housing enclave that would be impossible to protect from wildfire and would adversely affect water quality in the larger valley.<\/p>\n Saturday\u2019s panel discussion of the Berlaimont plan included Colorado Sen. Kerry Donovan, a Democrat from Vail, and state Rep. Dylan Roberts, a Democrat from Avon. They both noted the state legislature doesn\u2019t have direct influence over the USFS Berlaimont decision. But they both pledged to work on related issues such as wildland fire impacts, water management strategy and wildlife corridor protections. Donovan noted that Saturday\u2019s crowd included longtime county residents and newcomers who are equally passionate about conservation.<\/p>\n \u201cThat\u2019s is a perfect mixture to get things done,\u201d Donovan said. She urged the crowd to keep writing letters and attending USFS meetings to protest Berlaimont.<\/p>\n \u201cKeep up the pressure, speak in a unified voice and make sure this road does not become a boulevard for the wealthiest of the wealthy who won\u2019t even call this community home,\u201d Donovan said.<\/p>\n Andy Wiessner, Eagle County resident and member of the Wilderness Workshop Board of Directors, echoed that call.<\/p>\n \u201cThe key player here is the US Forest Service. They can tell Berialmont no,\u201d Wiessner said. \u201cThe Forest Service, to me, is being disrespectful to go along with this plan.\u201d<\/p>\n Wilderness Workshop attorney Peter Hart said the USFS and its counsel has used flawed reasoning to make the reasonable determination for Berlaimont. He noted that the proposed development vastly exceeds what is happening in other forest inholdings such as Fulford or Piney Lake. Hart said those areas are generally served by dirt roads that are often impassable during winter months rather than four-season, paved roads that run through federal lands. But instead of comparing Berlaimont to an in-holding such as Fulford, the USFS used the Singletree area for comparison.<\/p>\n \u201cWe are concerned about the direction the US Forest Service is taking on this issue,\u201d said Hart. \u201cI think there is an opportunity to get them to do the right thing.\u201d<\/p>\n But what if the USFS sticks to its determination, asked someone in the crowd. Hart believes there would be grounds to file a lawsuit against the Berlaimont decision, arguing that the USFS is being arbitrary and capricious in its decision.<\/p>\n Additionally, Hart noted that there\u2019s another potential battleground to fight Berlaimont \u2014 Eagle County\u2019s 1041 regulations that govern expansion of water service infrastructure.<\/p>\n But for now, keeping up the pressure on the USFS i<\/a>s the top strategy for opponents of the road.<\/p>\n \u201cIt is possible to stop this road, but it takes community action,\u201d said Rousch. \u201cThis issue will be decided by community sentiment.\u201d<\/p>\nWildlife concerns<\/strong><\/h2>\n
What\u2019s next<\/h2>\n