Commissioners from Archuleta and Mineral counties gathered formally on Sept. 25 at the Bruce Spruce Ranch outside of Pagosa Springs, sharing ideas and voicing mutual concerns during what was the first combined meeting between the two neighbors.
Joining commissioners and administrators inside the rustic lodge were law enforcement and emergency management teams from the two counties, representatives from the U.S. Forest Service, as well as a few “curious citizens.”
Together, the group addressed the impacts of shared issues ranging from disaster preparedness and emergency response to the controversial development of the Village at Wolf Creek.
‘Don’t hesitate to call’
The site of the meeting — 15 miles from Pagosa Springs but within Mineral County lines — illustrated some of the unique challenges facing the counties’ emergency response efforts: from Creede, the Mineral County seat, it was an hour’s drive.
“It takes a long time for them to get over here,” Archuleta County Undersheriff Robert Hill explained, describing the stretch of U.S. 160 that winds through a remote corner of Mineral County but that’s actually nearer to emergency response resources in Archuleta County.
“We do everything we can to make sure that we provide immediate law enforcement service until they (Mineral County response teams) can get here,” Hill said. “And we’re happy to do that for them.”
Hill described the relationship between the counties’ law enforcement offices as particularly strong, and reflective of the shared history between Archuleta County Sheriff Mike Le Roux and Mineral County Sheriff Terry Wetherill.
“(Sheriff Le Roux) and Sheriff Wetherill have been good friends for many years,” Hill said.
Hill noted that both Le Roux and Wetherill served as emergency managers for their respective counties before becoming sheriff.
“We in our office want to continue that relationship and help each other out,” Hill said, adding that this year has been “pretty quiet” before catching himself and knocking on a piece of nearby wood.
Other than a dispute between an outfitter and a hunter, which Hill said resulted in an arrest in Hinsdale County, “we haven’t been busy in your county this year,” he continued. “Last year was not necessarily the same. But, we’re happy to help in any way we can. If you folks need anything from us quickly, don’t hesitate to call. We’re here.”
“And we very much appreciate that,” Mineral County Commissioner Ramona Weber replied.
When Archuleta County Commissioner Warren Brown asked about a hypothetical response to wildfire in the same area — a wide swath of difficult terrain with dangerous conditions for much of the year — a multiagency network of cooperation was discussed.
“Our motto is … we say, ‘Yes,’ and then we figure it out,” Hill said. “We’re going to get out there and get it done.”
Asked how jurisdictional distinctions are drawn during an emergency, effectively designating which county or agency is responsible for commanding the response, Hill explained intergovernmental agreements have already been established, saving critical time and, possibly, lives.
“Initially, we could care less whose (jurisdiction) it is,” Wetherill added. “We just go and get involved and start trying to figure it out.”
It’s an approach that’s working, according to Patrick Moran, Divide District ranger with the U.S. Forest Service.
“When we get a smoke report, it’s usually just a very general area,” Moran said. “That’s why it’s nice to have so many great partners.”
He added, “Jurisdictions are figured out later. It’s more important to just figure out what is going on and what we’re going to do. Then we can start getting our incident command system in place.”
Mutual-aid agreements between local county agencies and the Forest Service are fleshed out annually each spring, before active wildfire season, according to the Forest Service’s Anthony Garcia, representing the Pagosa Ranger District.
“It’s worked really well,” he said.
Garcia’s point was emphasized as the group traded stories of dramatic rescues and cooperative searches through dense backcountry.
“A gentleman in his 70s went out hiking with his dog and never made it back to his vehicle,” recalled Stanley Okazaki, deputy of emergency operations in Archuleta County.
In that 2023 search effort, which Okazaki described as enduring for months, “Mineral (County) was instrumental in helping us. They brought their drone out and four of their guys, which was considerable considering their size and the distance they had to drive each day. They were a huge help.”
Village at Wolf Creek
More questions than answers surfaced as the commissioners addressed recent developments in the decades-long effort to build resort-style accommodations atop Wolf Creek Pass and what impacts their counties might face.
Mineral County Commissioner R. Scott Lamb described the privately ventured project, known as the Village at Wolf Creek, as “getting fired up again” after an April ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals required the Forest Service to build an access road to the proposed site.
Since that ruling, Lamb said Mineral County administrators have received little news about the project.
“This has been going on since 1986,” he said. “It fires up and then it settles down. I think in Mineral County we’ve all kind of tired of it.”
And yet, Lamb continued, ironing out the legal wrinkles and considerations for the project, whose future remains uncertain, is likely to land with Mineral County administrators.
“Which, once again, is bizarre because we’re the county that, really, looking at the big picture, will be less affected than Archuleta or Rio Grande (counties),” Lamb said, turning to his Archuleta County counterparts to say they, too, would have “a seat at that table.”
“There’s going to be some big decisions that we have to make, but we want to get input from all of the people that are affected,” Lamb said, adding, “People in Mineral County, by and large, are not in favor of this at all.”
But, because the proposed site for the development sits on private land, Lamb noted there is little choice Mineral County commissioners have but to consider the project as they would any other in which a landowner wishes to develop their property.
Leavell-McCombs Joint Venture (LMJV), named in part for late Texas billionaire B.J. “Red” McCombs, owns the roughly 300 acres next to Wolf Creek Ski Area where the proposed village would sit.
“(LMJV) has certain rights that can’t be abridged or infringed upon,” Lamb explained. “There’s not going to be any favoritism. We’re not going to excessively hold their feet to the fire. But there’s a ponderous process that … involves a lot of other agencies.”
As the group weighed the impacts of the potential development — including on workforce housing, tourism dollars, water and highway access — Archuleta County Commissioner Veronica Medina raised the immediate specter of fire in the beetle-kill ravaged area and asked what efforts the two counties could embark upon to mitigate the threat.
“Are there any plans, right now, today?” Medina asked.
While Moran explained Wolf Creek Ski Area is managing its own property, efforts to clear the dead trees from the wider area were complicated due to access and lumber markets — and very costly.
“But, wouldn’t it be more costly if we have a fire?” Medina asked. “What could we do to start planning something?”
Garcia described some of the approaches taken by the Forest Service, including active timber management on Wolf Creek Pass and “natural ignitions when appropriate.”
“We know that fire has a pretty major role in this landscape in the right conditions,” he said. “We’re trying to use all the tools that we have at our disposal to try to address some of those impacts.”
As the group further explored those impacts — including additional mitigation efforts, hypothetical evacuations and the overall health of the forest — there was a consensus that more conversations were in order, and that this first meeting between the two counties should not be the last.
Lamb’s suggestion that “we resolve to make this an annual thing” was met with mutual agreement around the table.
garrett@pagosasun.com
