Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Space Access Camping topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents raise wildfire, safety and plan‑compliance concerns over proposed 'primitive' camping at Sandstone Ranch
Summary
Residents near Sandstone Ranch told commissioners they oppose a proposal to allow minimalist/primitive camping at the county open space, citing wildfire risk, wildlife conflicts, master‑plan incompatibility and insufficient public outreach.
Several Douglas County residents used the public‑comment period at the Jan. 28, 2025 Board of County Commissioners meeting to urge the board to reconsider a proposal to allow minimalist ("primitive") camping at Sandstone Ranch open space.
Residents raised wildfire and emergency‑response concerns, disputed whether primitive camping is consistent with the 2020 Sandstone Ranch master plan and asked for greater transparency about outreach and site selection. "People don't follow rules all the time," said Gary Wood of Perry Park, referencing the 2002 Hayman wildfire and warning that camping increases the risk of new ignitions. Wood asked whether the county had budgeted year‑round supervision and whether a dedicated disaster relief fund for nearby residents had been considered.
Ed Chambers, whose property borders Sandstone Ranch, asked detailed operational questions about the proposal: how many people requested camping, whether an online reservation system and fees would be used, whether firearms would be allowed, whether portable toilets and curfews would be provided, and how emergency response time to remote sites would be managed. "There are rattlesnake signs right there where you put the campsites," Chambers said, and he noted the extra distance emergency responders would need to travel to reach the proposed sites.
Several speakers argued the proposal conflicts with the park’s adopted 2020 master plan. Patricia Oker Smemczyk cited the plan’s recreation objectives and the results of the public survey that informed it, saying primitive camping was not included among the public‑supported uses and therefore would be out of step with the master plan. Kim Greer, a longtime Larkspur area resident and former volunteer firefighter, said conservation‑easement language would likely require legal review and might prevent the type of disturbance camping requires; she also raised concerns about bears and wildlife and the lack of installed bear boxes in a minimalist approach.
Board members responded that the initiative is in the early stages. Commissioner Teal said staff will ‘‘listen’’ and that no final decisions were imminent; he asked citizens to submit comments by email to the board. A commissioner asked staff to document the phrasing "leave no trace camping" as a framing option for the proposal; "Can I please have a member of staff please write down leave no trace camping?" the commissioner asked during the discussion. Commissioners and staff emphasized the need for more study, public input and coordination with fire and emergency partners before any trial or implementation.
No vote or formal action on camping at Sandstone Ranch was taken at the meeting; the board indicated it would continue public engagement before advancing any pilot or policy change.
