Colorado Fisherman Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,716 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I just got done sending a message to the City of Colorado Springs about the dumb ass idea to save money by closing the lakes to fishing.
If you want to fish there, now is the time to send a message.
I don't understand the city's gain by closing access to the lakes. They have to drive there anyway for maintenance.
With higher fuel costs the Lakes are close by for locals to enjoy.
You can canoe, kayak and hike around them. The city will lose in sales taxes from fishing gear sold, the restaurants in West Colorado, Cascade will have less business from people etc.
Only Colorado Springs can lose money on a couple of beautiful lakes.
They seldom advertise the lakes, and they were kept closed for many years so the city workers could use them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
Who did you send the message to? Do you have an e-mail?

This is just another example of the city trying to punish the people of colorado springs into approving tax hikes. Instead of cutting back on things that most citizens would consider reasonable, they prefer to hit us where it hurts.

I've taken a number of beginner fisherman up there from the springs and given them a great experience close to home. I would hate to see this go through.

I can't imagine that the math works. The entry fees I've paid to fish has more than covered the expense it has taken to keep the lakes up and running.

Humble
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,651 Posts
Aren't they referring to the South Slope lakes, which they were planning to open at some point? The thread that ItsaBigun posted didn't refer to the North Slope lakes as far as I could see.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
762 Posts
North and South Catamount? Does that include Crystal?

That really blows if that is true. I would be willing to cough up more dollars to fish those lakes. Like earplug said, gas is rising. Those are some really nice lakes that are close by.

Bummer
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
844 Posts
It's to bad that now days it seems we need all these amenities at our parks. 30 yrs ago I don't remember paying to access a lot of fishing lakes that are state or city parks but over the yrs they have developed into micro economys that need to feed on themselves and those who use them to pay for patrols, cars, boats, trucks, flush toilets, paved roads and paths, and plush employee facilities.
Why not if they feel the need to tighten the belt as they should, throw the gates open, shut down or remove the high maintenance facilities and once in a while send in com. service workers or prison crews to do basic maint. and clean up?
Instead as has been said they choose to take punitive action against citizens by locking them out of what belongs to them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
844 Posts
I'm not familiar with those specific lakes and that situation but I think that there are numerous public areas in the state where public access could be left open while services were curtailed leaving things in the balance in the end rather than authorities punishing us because we want a more responsible use of our tax dollars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,825 Posts
Maybe with the election of a strong mayor, there will be a better voice to combat CSU's authoritarian views on the South Slope.

CSU has one proposal on the table to make it a guide only area with a daily fee of $350.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
305 Posts
What's TU's stand on this? I know they were trying to work with CSU some time ago. Guide only? That's ridiculous! There must be something soo secret that is in the lakes that only the csu employees can enjoy? ;)
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top