John Hickenlooper puts the colorful back in Colorado on the state's Tourism Day

sporobolus

from the headline i thought this article was going to tell me the new tourism slogan would be "Colorful Colorado"

"brilliant move", i thought, then i read the article looking for its non-existent punchline ... bleah

so i googled "colorful colorado" and came across the "Colorful Colorado History Page" -- worth a look:

http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/do...

Michael Roberts

Sporobolus, thanks for the link, and for reading and posting.

Robert

That link is to a page about disaster-preparedness for archivists -- try: http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/do... instead.

sporobolus

right, but it is titled "Colorful Colorado History Page"

Robert

Colorado is full of scenic wonders -- too bad Americans are too fat, lazy, and stupid to go hiking. It may be swimming against the tide, but I believe that there are things we can do to promote ecotourism here: stop the encroachment of private landowners on our National Forests; re-open historic trails into them closed by those landowners; and provide public access, promote the Colorado Trail as emblematic of the beauty of our State, and set off an incendiary device under the Colorado Mountain Club (CMC) and get it to take its rightful place at the head of efforts to complete the Continental Divide Trail (which are languishing; both the Appalachian Trail from Georgia to Maine and the Pacific Crest Trail from Mexico to Canada are protected -- the CMC doesn't care much about the CDT, partially because much of the route here passes through National Forests, and also because there are over 5,000 miles of other trails in Colorado). Hikers may be far more modest contributors to out economy than Texans buying ski chalets, but they do bring money into Colorado, and their activities are far more sustainable.

DenverScener

Half our state is public land, let private land owners have their rights too. Hikers, Skiiers, Big Game Hunters - they all bring money to the state in one way or another. There is a plenty of land, and beautiful mountain land, for everybody - maybe just not in Summit County. Question for me has always been - Why do you need to spend money to advertise something that is timeless?

Michael Roberts

DenverScener, interesting observation. Thanks for sharing it.

Robert

I didn't deny the rights of private property owners or the other groups you mention either, but the closure of historic trails into our National Forests and their ringing with "No Trespassing" signs needs to be reversed. Public access to our National Forests has been lost all over the West. I have seen it firsthand: the historic Squirrel Creek Trail from Beulah into San Isabel National Forest was closed illegally by a private landowner. The Squirrel Creek Trail leads to the first National Forest Recreation Area in the country -- the F.S. had restored the picnic area up the trail (formerly a road) and placards reproduced a photograph of visitors who had come up in their model-Ts. I walked this trail when I lived in Pueblo frequently until I found a closed gate and a sign asserting that people could not pass. It transpired that the access road blocked by the landowner was an easement granted to landowners whose property abutted it, including the USFS! I corresponded and met with the USFS, spoke before the County Commission, and conferred with a well-respected activist in Beulah -- the gate remained closed a year after this illegal act. I don't know whether this important, historic public access by trail (one of the few non-road accesses to the east side of that division of the San Isabel) is fully open yet. When I climbed Kit Carson Peak, I started too late, missed the turn for the Avenue, and found myself too far down the wrong side of the mountain to get safely back to Willow Lake before dark. I spent an uncomfortable night in the Spanish Creek drainage and hiked out the next morning. When I got to the edge of the Forest, a sign denied passage; the Buddhists had closed the historic Spanish Creek Trail! They did not have me arrested and drove me back to Crestone, but access the other direction is now restricted to those the monks permit. The USFS does not have the resources to quash these encroachments -- a way must be found to preserve access!

P.S. We shouldn't need to advertise what is timeless (of course, ecosystems are not timeless; consider, e.g. lodgepole pine forests in Colorado). Historic trails are certainly not timeless either, access gets cut, they get overgrown. Colorado is in no danger of running out of walks in the woods, but we really should pay more attention to the Continental Divide Trail (CDT) and Colorado Trail (CT). Where sections are coterminous, they should not display the CT logo in addition or in preference to that of the CDT -- it is the border-to-border, National Scenic Trail! It looks like some damned corporate identity competition in the middle of the wilderness -- bad move, Colorado Trail Foundation! I do think that we should prioritize foot access, above those other activities, because hiking represents the least destructive and consumptive of all those uses, and is healthier and safer than most for participants. I suppose ads with snowmobiles whining bring tourists, but make room for a spectacular vista accessible only by foot and the sound only of the wind -- this is more emblematic of wilderness (not just public land). Colorado can capitalize on the fact that our wilderness is nearer civilization than that in Wyoming or Montana..

Robert

"Hickenlooper got a mountain of free publicity ..." -- for himself. NYT reporter Frank Bruni's deep analysis of Hickenlooper's administration as Mayor: he "got tough on police brutality"! I sent the following e-mail to that brilliant journalist, but he has not deigned to reply:

It will be news to many in Denver that Hickenlooper "got tough on police brutality" -- just because he fired Ron Perea hardly means that. Hickenlooper set up an ineffectual system of review by a handpicked 'Citizens Oversight Board' and a so-called 'Independent Monitor' (which the Mayor hires) over two years ago, which citizens abhor. The litany of recent abuse cases (culminating not in the case that led to Perea's firing, but the murder of Marvin Booker in the new detention center by Sheriff's deputies, which led to public protests by his church and other groups) and the ACLU lawsuit for many egregious cases of false arrest and imprisonment bespeak of systemic problems in both the DPD and Sheriff's Department. Hickenlooper has not acted to reform the DPD, and removed Perea only, in anticipation of the election, four months ago. DPD and Hick's City Attorney wanted to stonewall the voters of Denver on Municipal Ordinance 38-176, which makes enforcement of the state statute against adult possession of up to an ounce of cannabis the City's lowest law enforcement priority, and Hick went along; for three years the City has been violating this popularly initiated ordinance (approved by 57% of voters in 2007), citing thousands. Denver rescinded its own ordinance two years before that, but the DPD first cited more people than ever before under state statute, then proceeded to ignore 38-176. As someone who was yelling at the ex-Mayor as he left City Hall this morning that he had failed to control the administration of the DPD and Sheriff's Departments, and as someone who is an advocate of cannabis law reform and of civilian oversight of citizens' complaints against the police, it is disheartening to find that Hickenlooper's quick political fix of persistent and systemic problems in the Police Department is represented to the world as standing up to police brutality.

P.S. The information-inversion in the national media with respect to medicinal cannabis in Colorado is astounding -- politicians despised throughout the medical cannabis community here for their opposition to Article XVIII, Section 14 of Colorado's Constitution are heralded nationally as progressive because they have reacted to the advent of dispensaries by expropriating the constitutional rights of those who are supposed to be providing cannabis to patients (i.e. caregivers) in an attempt to undo the voters' decision fully eleven years ago. In reporting on cannabis in Colorado, there seems to be a tendency to tie up the public's endorsement of the medical use of cannabis then and the prohibitionists effort last year to curtail it with a bow and represent Colorado pols as somehow progressive reformers -- nothing could be further from the truth; our poltical, legal, and journalistic (if that term can be applied to what appears in the Denver Post) establishments are in open revolt against the constitutional provision that patients whose doctors have recommended their use of cannabis should be able to obtain it. National drug-law reform groups misread the depth of reactionary sentiment among the governing class here and contributed to the mischaracterization of last year's legislation.