Recreation
Limit recreational opportunities in areas with high ecological value. (i.e. "regional" spaces) i.e. –NO trail use during migration seasons, NO disturbing sensitive areas.

Introduce bison in natural areas to the north. Coordinate open space with regional transportation authority.

Not all natural areas need recreational trails. People disturb ecosystems negatively.

There is a huge NEED in this community for open spaces for recreational use that would permit residents to have their dogs off leash. I am firmly convinced it is possible-desirable!- and not incompatible with the preservation of natural spaces to allow dogs off leash in clearly designated, large areas (not like the current pathetic dog park-sigh!). Please help with these needs. I support all open space initiative with my vote (and taxes) but never visit them because it is not relaxing or pleasurable to go there with my dog pulling me right and left, and there are so many like me! This suggestion is possible because many areas/towns/cities in the U.S. have resolved this by creating separate natural areas where dogs can run free.

I do not support a "dogs-off-leash" policy in Natural Areas, dogs have a large negative impact on wildlife.

Community Separators should have more recreational opportunity compared to the Regional areas. Community separators have less ecological value, so they should facilitate human recreation because the threat is less to ecosystem integrity.

Keep ecological integrity as a highest priority when developing trails, parking lots, etc.

Not all areas should be multi-use. No snowmobiles, ATV, 4-wheels, etc. Also need to limit activities in sensitive areas.

Please try to arrange asphalt or concrete bike trial extension from ELC south to Drake and Ziegler. This missing piece is a bummer. Thanks.

When planning for trails, please do not fragment the land any more than necessary. Put trails on edges as much as possible. Our landscape is already so fragmented and trails are just one more inroad.

1981 I helped support the county sales tax to buy Horsetooth Mountain Park. Now it costs $6 to park and it still loses money – I say make it free and cover it from county budget. Plus now it’s illegal to go off trail in the "park" err, zoo. This REALLY annoys me. I know it’s county, not city, but please don’t pull this stunt on city natural areas. It’s fine to REQUEST "stay on trail", such as Fromme Prairie. I do - it’s fragile. But allow free access in natural areas. At most - seasonal restrictions from nesting birds of prey where appropriate.

I believe government has a fiduciary responsibility to use our tax dollars to their highest and best use. As such one way to stretch these dollars is to combine recreational activities with the open space lands in areas where it makes sense, like community separators. Let's take the Long View Farm on South College for example. I believe that property could incorporate a recreational facility (soccer field, frisbee golf course,
multi-functional game field, etc.) by embedding it in the middle of the property and screen it from the perimeter of the property by locating it in natural low spots in the land or creating very gentle rises for berming that can screen the activities. In this manner we are using our tax dollars to their highest use and giving the community the amenities that we have come to expect. I would not propose this for properties that are intended for preservation, but the Long View Farm is one that I believe would serve this purpose well, and I'm sure there are others.

We strongly support open space acquisition to protect habitat, wildlife, trails, views, etc. However, we have lived in the "country" for almost 20 years and have some difficulty with current "Open Space" trends. For example:
• some open spaces might best be used as farmland at least initially; a portion of proceeds going to food banks etc.
• closing all areas after purchase does not take into account previous use by local residents. This use may not be obvious precisely because we feel a stewardship to the land and use it lightly. Such use should be allowed to continue – it is much less destructive than vehicle use by rangers!
• not all off leash dog walkers are evil. We simply allow our pets to get their needs met. One kind of playground doesn’t meet every child’s needs!

I believe the majority of voters who passed this initiative anticipated accessible recreation areas within or very near the city. I am concerned with the Regional acquisition plan and areas secured via conservation easement that would not be available for use by those paying sizable tax dollars to secure it.

Ongoing problem of conflicting recreation--don’t mix on same site--don’t want to "Love the land to death" or "Kill the natural areas value."

Would like to see limited recreation on high value ecological areas (regional).