More on Colorado Fourteeners on Private Land
Charles Stoyer
contribute. Otherwise you just clutter up the thread.
I posted a message with a similar topic a few weeks ago and got 2 reasonable
responses and the rest deteriorated quickly. One was that Culebra was the
only 14er on private land, which is certainly not the case. The other
questioned building cabins or houses on mining claims. Since then, I have
done additional research and come up with the following:
On page 60 of "Colorado Fourteeners", in the caption of the picture of
Culebra Peak, author Roger Edrinn states that Culebra Peak is the only
Colorado Fourteener which is on private land. This is, of course, totally
false. Quite a few of the Colorado Fourteeners are on private land. Or maybe
that depends on what your definition of "is" is. Culebra Peak is the only
one which is posted and patrolled and for which access is restricted and
charged for. Most of the other private peaks are either near the edge of
private land and are accessed through public land, or the access is owned by
a hodgepodge of landowners through various mineral claims that no attempt is
made to fence off or patrol the private holdings. Nevertheless, in
principle, permission should be had before climbing, at least from the owner
of the specific peak. I understand that "stealth climbs" don't count. What
is the definition of a "stealth climb"?
There are 53 Fourteeners in Colorado, plus 5 lesser peaks rising above
14,000 feet which do not qualify as Fourteeners because they are
overshadowed by nearby "sisters". Of these, 7 are on private land, 3 are as
yet undetermined by this study and 3 border private land. The remainder is
on public land, either National Forest or Wilderness. This leaves 40
Fourteeners and 5 Sisters which are clearly and wholly on public land.
Those which border private land are peaks which, if a climber stands exactly
on the peak with legs spread slightly, one foot would be on public land and
the other would be in private land.
Those which are yet to be determined lie in areas designated by the Forest
Service as "Intermingled BLM and private land". Also, it is possible that
some of those which are said in this writing to border public and private
land could actually be (the peak, that is) on one side or the other. So
there are a total of 6 peaks in question at this writing.
There were basically 3 ways to acquire land in Colorado in areas which are
now National Forest, BLM land or Wilderness.
Several land grants of large size (400 square miles) given away by the
Spanish Government for some reason when Colorado was still part of Mexico,
probably in the 16th century.
Mining claims do not generally give surface rights until they are patented.
Mining claims could be patented in the 19th century by spending $500 to
develop them and demonstrating a commercial mineral potential. This could be
done today but would be much more difficult than it was in the lax days back
in the late 1800's. Patented mining claims are just like private land except
you have the mineral rights as well.
The Federal Government also sold Land in the late 1800's, some at least for
logging purposes.
The land grants were large and did include some Fourteeners, probably not on
purpose. Land sold for logging or other purposes probably never included
Fourteeners, as they were not desirable. Mining claims, on the other hand,
did include a few Fourteeners, as these were in the mineralized or wannabe
mineralized areas.
Two of the Fourteeners are drive-up peaks; Mt Evans and Pike's Peak. I have
not yet determined if there is any private property involved with these, but
certainly there is no danger of restricted public access by private owners
and these are special cases anyway. There is a fee to drive up as I
understand.
The Elk Range contains 5 Fourteeners and two sisters, all of which are in
the Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness.
The Front Range contains 6 Fourteeners, Pikes Peak, Mt Evans and 4 others
which are on National Forest land, except for Long's Peak which is in the
Rocky Mt National Park.
The Mosquito Range contains 4 Fourteeners and one sister. The sister, Mt.
Cameron, is on National Forest land; the Fourteeners are ALL on private
land.
The San Juan Range contains 14 Fourteeners and 2 sisters. Three of the
Fourteeners are in a mixed BLM/Private land area and the rest are in
Wilderness, Primitive Areas or National Forest. It is possible that the
Primitive Areas have by now been converted to Wilderness. I am still working
on finding out if the peaks in the mixed BLM/Private land area are public or
private.
The Sangre de Christo Range contains Culebra Peak, the only Fourteener
generally accepted to be on private land. The reason it is generally
accepted as being private is that armed security guards patrol the property
and a fee is charged to those who aspire to its summit. The remaining 9
Fourteeners include 2 on private land (Luis Maria Baca 4 Grant), 3 which
border private land, 3 in Wilderness and 1 which is on the border of
National Forest and Wilderness.
The Sawatch Range contains 15 Fourteeners, all on public land. Of these, 5
are in National Forest and the remaining 10 are in Wilderness.
The Tenmile Range contains one Fourteener, which is on National Forest land.
Constructive comments welcome.
Charles.
Gary S.
<cst...@interpex.com> wrote:
>Please do not respond unless you really have something constructive to
>contribute. Otherwise you just clutter up the thread.
>
Nice work.
It is good to have someone who is willing to go to primary sources and
compile this type of information, rather than repeating "what everyone
knows".
Happy trails,
Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence
Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom
Caveat
<cst...@interpex.com> wrote:
>Please do not respond unless you really have something constructive to
>contribute. Otherwise you just clutter up the thread.
>
That's a tall order on UseNet, and more especially in this NG ;-/.
> I understand that "stealth climbs" don't count. What
>is the definition of a "stealth climb"?
One where you sneak up the mountain across closed, patrolled, no
trespassing-signed land. Culebra is the only one where such tactics
are necessary, and used.
> There are 53 Fourteeners in Colorado, plus 5 lesser peaks rising above
>14,000 feet which do not qualify as Fourteeners because they are
>overshadowed by nearby "sisters".
Most authorities figure that number at 54, including, historically,
the Colorado Mountain Club, Gerry Roach in his 1992 guidebook, and
Borneman & Lampert's classic books on the 14ers.
I used Roger Edrinn's 1986 book "Colorado Fourteeners--the 54 Highest
Peaks" as my checklist when I did them. It depends how you count them,
however.
Caveat
Chaka
> ...author Roger Edrinn states that Culebra Peak is the only
> Colorado Fourteener which is on private land. This is, of course, totally
> false.
You are wrong. Edrinn is right.
> Quite a few of the Colorado Fourteeners are on private land.
How about an example? Not one 14'er besides Culebra is "on" private land.
> Or maybe that depends on what your definition of "is" is. Culebra Peak is the
> only
> one which is posted and patrolled and for which access is restricted and
> charged for.
True. That's because it is completely surrounded by private land. (The Taylor
Ranch mostly)
> Most of the other private peaks
Wrong. There aren't any other "private peaks". The only peak that could be
considered a "private peak" is Culebra.
> ...are either near the edge of private land and are accessed through public
> land, or the access is owned by
> a hodgepodge of landowners through various mineral claims that no attempt is
> made to fence off or patrol the private holdings.
This is true. Private lands and BLM almost surround some of the peaks. But the
peaks themselves are on federal land and access to them is open to the public.
And most of the peaks have very little private land bordering them. Large
numbers are are completely on federal land. They can in no way be considered
"private peaks".
> principle, permission should be had before climbing, at least from the owner
> of the specific peak.
If the roads are open to the public, as all of them are, permission is not
required to pass. I challenge you to give me an example of one 14'er, other
than Culebra, which is owned by someone. And please provide the name of the
owner. I can guarantee you won't find any.
> I understand that "stealth climbs" don't count. What
> is the definition of a "stealth climb"?
I've been climbing Colorado peaks for over 20 years and I've never heard the
term.
> There are 53 Fourteeners in Colorado, plus 5 lesser peaks rising above
> 14,000 feet which do not qualify as Fourteeners because they are
> overshadowed by nearby "sisters". Of these, 7 are on private land, 3 are as
> yet undetermined by this study and 3 border private land.
Most lists now include Challenger Point which brings the total to 54. There are
still a few diehards that stick with 53. Peaks that don't qualify as separate
14'ers don't meet the 300 ft. drop requirement. Like Conundrum and North
Eolus. Yet oddly, other peaks that do not meet the requirement are considered
separate 14'ers. Like North and South Maroon Peaks and Wilson and El Diente.
They stay on the list as a matter of tradition.
> The remainder is on public land, either National Forest or Wilderness. This
> leaves 40
> Fourteeners and 5 Sisters which are clearly and wholly on public land.
This is wrong. How about an example to back up this misinformation. And tell
us who owns the land.
> Those which border private land are peaks which, if a climber stands exactly
> on the peak with legs spread slightly, one foot would be on public land and
> the other would be in private land.
True. Only a couple.
> Those which are yet to be determined lie in areas designated by the Forest
> Service as "Intermingled BLM and private land". Also, it is possible that
> some of those which are said in this writing to border public and private
> land could actually be (the peak, that is) on one side or the other. So
> there are a total of 6 peaks in question at this writing.
How about being more specific.
> Several land grants of large size (400 square miles) given away by the
> Spanish Government for some reason when Colorado was still part of Mexico,
> probably in the 16th century.
Like the Baca Land Grant on the west side of the Sangres. That's the only one I
know of.
> There is a fee to drive up as I understand.
>
> The Elk Range contains 5 Fourteeners and two sisters, all of which are in
> the Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness.
>
> The Front Range contains 6 Fourteeners, Pikes Peak, Mt Evans and 4 others
> which are on National Forest land, except for Long's Peak which is in the
> Rocky Mt National Park.
>
> Constructive comments welcome.
You seem to be working backward from a predetermined conclusion. For some
reason you are absolutely convinced and keep saying that most of the 14'ers are
on private land. You seem hellbent to convince everyone of this. But you have
presented no data saying what peaks you claim are owned by who?
Bill Verderaime
You are contradicting yourself. At one point you say "Quite a few of the
Colorado Fourteeners are on private land." Then later you say "so there are a
total of 6 peaks in question at this writing."
I've live in Colorado all my life and I know that Culebra is the only peak
surrounded by private land. This can be verified quickly by consulting the
Colorado Mountain Club. Even Culebra is not a "private peak". It is only
surrounded by private property. .
Tony Laird
Lyndon J. Lampert. Page 151:
"Large land sales in the area have made access difficult into large parts of the
range and have also allowed for the only sole ownership of a Fourteener in the
United States, Culebra".
Borneman and Lampert have written extensively on the history of the Colorado
mountains. Theirs was the first guide written for climbing them.
rick++
resulting in some confusion and sniping.
One, which you seem to be following, is ownership by a non-government
individual or company.
The other definition of private is limited access.
There are many areas or cultures in the world where there is the concept
of "default easement" or passing through unless otherwise posted.
This is common in the Commonwealth countries such as the UK and Oz.
charles stoyer
land and access is through private land. Three of the Sangre de Christo are
on land grants:
Mt. Bross, Mt. Democrat, Mt. Lincoln, Mt. Sherman, Kit Carson Peak,
Challenger Point, Culebra Peak are all private.
Three border Private land so that the peak is shared by public and private
land: Mt. Lindsey, Little Bear Peak and Blanca Peak.
Look at the forest service maps. The white areas are private, green is NF
land.
Morey Reiber owns two of the peaks, Mr. Bross and Mt. Lincoln. Check the
Park County Assessor's records on the internet and do your own research.
Just because you aren't challenged at gunpoint doesn't mean the land is
public.
Charles.
"Chaka" <mcdo...@pcisys.net> wrote in message
news:3DED9503...@pcisys.net...
charles stoyer
land grants, peaks included.
Charles.
"Bill Verderaime" <verde...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3DEDFD1E...@hotmail.com...
charles stoyer
period of time, it becomes a public right of way. PA had some rule like you
had to lock the gate for 14 hours once every 21 years or something like
that.
The road to Mt Sherman through the Dauntless mine does have a gate which is
periodically locked. I does not even vaguely resemble a forest service gate.
It is on private land and goes through private land.
Charles.
"rick++" <ric...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f7422d8e.02120...@posting.google.com...
Chaka
> I am not wrong. All four of the Mosquito Range fourteeners are on private
> land and access is through private land. Three of the Sangre de Christo are
> on land grants:
>
> Mt. Bross, Mt. Democrat, Mt. Lincoln, Mt. Sherman, Kit Carson Peak,
> Challenger Point, Culebra Peak are all private.
There are many private mines around and on the flanks of the Mosquito peaks.
Ownership is hard to determine since some of the mineral claims go back 135
years. The peaks themselves are located within the Pike National Forest and
the roads to the peaks that pass through private property have always been open
to the public.
> Mt. Lindsey, Little Bear Peak and Blanca Peak.
Mt. Lindsey, Little Bear and Blanca are bordered by private property,
including the Blanca Land Grant on the west and Blanca has the Arrowhead Ranch
private property to it's south. The entire east side of the range and the
peaks themselves are within the San Isabel National Forest.
Whistlepig
> You are wrong. Look at the Rio Grande FS map. You will see three peaks on
> land grants, peaks included.
There is a big difference between a land grant and privately owned land. For
instance the Taylor Ranch land was originally given to the locals by Mexico as
the Sangre de Cristo Grant. That is not private ownership. Then the Taylors
bought the land which started years of litigation and sometimes bloody fights
over use rights. They recently settled and affirmed the local's right to graze
and gather firewood and timber on the Taylor Ranch even though the Taylors still
consider it their private property. Calling these peaks "private peaks" is
misleading. It would be more correct to call them "land grant peaks". Also
using exaggerations like "many" or "quite a few peaks are on private land"
diminishes your credibility. If you twist the definition of private enough you
might come up with 4 fourteeners on very questionable private property. 4 in 54
is hardly "quite a few". Again you exaggerate. I still think the statements
Edrinn, Gerry Roach and Walter Borneman made that Culebra is the only peak on
private property is the most accurate. And what's the point anyway? The most
intelligent thing I've heard said in this thread was Chaka's comment that it
really doesn't matter who owns the property as long as it is open and accessible
to the public the rest is academic.
>
>