The 5 things you should do if you want to live in rural Colorado: (Denver: sale, gated)

[nanannie]

Originally Posted by francowell

nanannie

After visiting many places in 3 different states we came to the conclusion, with all things considered, Grand Junction would best meet our needs. For more details about our search, please see this post:

Happy Campers in Grand Junction!

regards...Franco

what a great thread,enjoyed your adventure.What does your wife say of the quality of schools in your area?.We would love to visit Coloradao, northern Calif coast/Mnt Shasta area for a possible move,and the way you did it was brilliant, we still have a 6th grader at home,so schools are an issue.

[CosmicWizard]

nanannie

Having taught for 16 years in a much larger metropolitan school district ( Virginia Beach ), my wife appreciates the lower stress level of teaching in a smaller school district. The kids are easier to work with and the whole atmosphere is more laid back. The downside from a teachers perspective would be the slightly lower payscale, and the resources ( library, computers, tuition re-imbursement, health insurance, etc ) are not as adequate as a larger district can provide. In her opinion, the educational quality doesn't quite measure up to Virginia Beach, but it is close. All things considered, she wouldn't go back to Virginia Beach.

On previous trips without my wife, I also visited Cedar City, UT, Mt Shasta, & Ashland, OR. Of those 3 places, Ashland was my favorite. If money wasn't an issue we may have chosen to live in Ashland. Even though Ashland is in Oregon, the climate is more like California than most parts of Oregon.

Now that we are here in Colorado, we're glad to be here. It seems to be the right place at the right time for us.

One of my favortite websites is Best Places to Live: Compare the Best Cities & Small Towns for You!. For a free list of about 20 places that more or less match your preferences, go there and fill out the questionaire. You might get some places on your list that you never considered...and you'll probably get a few that will have you scratching your head.

I wish you the best in your search...Franco

[nanannie]

Thanks Franco, We visited Ashland and the Grants pass area as well as the southern Oregon coast last year and crossed them off our list>We loved Ashland,but prices were way overboard

[CosmicWizard]

nanannie..

Two years ago when I visited Mt Shasta & Ashalnd, real estate prices in Mt Shasta were slightly higher than Ashland prices and availability was far less. It would also be an expensive place to live, and you would probably need to have a source of income not dependent on the local economy. One of the main reasons we like Grand Junction is affordability and the availability of jobs...if you need to have one. Of course there are many other great things about Grand Junction too. For example, from our home, a 5 minute drive in one direction takes us into a semi wilderness area, while a 5 minute drive in the other direction takes us into downtown Grand Junction. We are also less than 5 minutes from the Colorado National Monument, one of the lesser known & less crowded units of the National Park System. We truly have the best of both worlds. There are several Grand Junction neighborhoods with 5 minute access to both worlds.

many blessings...Franco

[jazzlover]

A number of posters have asked, quite reasonably, for some positive suggestions on how to keep Colorado a livable place into the future. Well, here are some of mine:

1. Proposed land subdivisions, including those of 35 acre and larger tracts not currently under any regulation, should be subject to much greater review--particularly as to their impacts on water, transportation infrastructure, and future public expenditures. This may smack of government intervention into private property rights, but the fact is that these developments are having long-term impacts on public finances, the property rights of other landowners, and other segments of the local economies--impacts that currently are hardly even examined in the current completely development/developer-biased review process. Laws should encourage densified cluster-type development (with adequate open space) and DISCOURAGE the kind of suburban sprawl now devouring the state.

2. The water law and water development philosophy of Colorado must move away from how to develop more and more water for municipal use to a regime of conserving existing water resources and using them more efficiently. The diversion of more water from wetlands or further reductions in irrigated agricultural acreage by either development or water diversion should be flat-out prohibited.

3. Colorado's current transportation system is an abomination, not because its highways are inadequate, but because the state (like everywhere else in the U.S.) over-relies upon them. Colorado should move to develop a robust short and medium-haul intermodal (rail and highway) freight transportation infrastructure. There need to be fewer trucks on the highways and more freight moving by rail. It can be done, and some states are moving in this direction (Pennsylvania is a good example). Colorado needs to quit having much of its remaining rail infrastructure slowly dismanted and needs to revitalize and expand the current structure. New development should singly shoulder future costs of highway expansion--it should not be socialized on all of the taxpayers of the state.

4. The state should re-examine its entire tax structure, and eliminate ALL direct and indirect subsidies that encourage sprawl, unsustainable transportation infrastructure and general waste of scarce resources--most notably, water. It should also eliminate direct and indirect subsidies that encourage non-productive investments and consumption, and move to encourage investment in industries and commerce that promote efficiency and conservation.

There will be those who will say such initiatives are impossible. I hope they are wrong. We are going to HAVE to change our present course--otherwise everything we cherish about places like Colorado, indeed our country as a whole, will be at extreme peril. Like most everyone else, I am quite comfortable in my own lifestyle and, like many, I'm old enough to be kind of resistant to change, but I also understand that the way I (and most all Americans) currently live (comfortable as it may be) is not going to stay that way. I would rather learn to live a new way now, on my own schedule, than have circumstances jam it down my throat in the not so very distant future. As the old Western saying goes, "I like to make dust rather than eat dust."

If anyone seriously thinks about what amount of resources it takes to live in our current wasteful and destructive lifestyle, that lifestyle's utter unsustainability becomes readily apparent. Moving to a new way to live would be a postive step in the right direction for our own wellbeing, as well as the region we call home. I'm already moving my life in that direction . . .

[hello-world]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

A number of posters have asked, quite reasonably, for some positive suggestions on how to keep Colorado a livable place into the future. Well, here are some of mine:

1. Proposed land subdivisions, including those of 35 acre and larger tracts not currently under any regulation, should be subject to much greater review--particularly as to their impacts on water, transportation infrastructure, and future public expenditures. This may smack of government intervention into private property rights, but the fact is that these developments are having long-term impacts on public finances, the property rights of other landowners, and other segments of the local economies--impacts that currently are hardly even examined in the current completely development/developer-biased review process. Laws should encourage densified cluster-type development (with adequate open space) and DISCOURAGE the kind of suburban sprawl now devouring the state.

2. The water law and water development philosophy of Colorado must move away from how to develop more and more water for municipal use to a regime of conserving existing water resources and using them more efficiently. The diversion of more water from wetlands or further reductions in irrigated agricultural acreage by either development or water diversion should be flat-out prohibited.

3. Colorado's current transportation system is an abomination, not because its highways are inadequate, but because the state (like everywhere else in the U.S.) over-relies upon them. Colorado should move to develop a robust short and medium-haul intermodal (rail and highway) freight transportation infrastructure. There need to be fewer trucks on the highways and more freight moving by rail. It can be done, and some states are moving in this direction (Pennsylvania is a good example). Colorado needs to quit having much of its remaining rail infrastructure slowly dismanted and needs to revitalize and expand the current structure. New development should singly shoulder future costs of highway expansion--it should not be socialized on all of the taxpayers of the state.

4. The state should re-examine its entire tax structure, and eliminate ALL direct and indirect subsidies that encourage sprawl, unsustainable transportation infrastructure and general waste of scarce resources--most notably, water. It should also eliminate direct and indirect subsidies that encourage non-productive investments and consumption, and move to encourage investment in industries and commerce that promote efficiency and conservation.

There will be those who will say such initiatives are impossible. I hope they are wrong. We are going to HAVE to change our present course--otherwise everything we cherish about places like Colorado, indeed our country as a whole, will be at extreme peril. Like most everyone else, I am quite comfortable in my own lifestyle and, like many, I'm old enough to be kind of resistant to change, but I also understand that the way I (and most all Americans) currently live (comfortable as it may be) is not going to stay that way. I would rather learn to live a new way now, on my own schedule, than have circumstances jam it down my throat in the not so very distant future. As the old Western saying goes, "I like to make dust rather than eat dust."

If anyone seriously thinks about what amount of resources it takes to live in our current wasteful and destructive lifestyle, that lifestyle's utter unsustainability becomes readily apparent. Moving to a new way to live would be a postive step in the right direction for our own wellbeing, as well as the region we call home. I'm already moving my life in that direction . . .

you might want to chime in on scrantonwilkesbarre's "urban sprawl -- blessing or a curse?" poll/thread. i can guess you might have some good things to add to the "global warming" poll/thread, as well.

it is absolutely sensible that we cannot continue living as we do and inspiring the "economic arms race" through our exported greed. there are simply only so many resources and so much our environs can adapt before they begin offering things we cannot adapt to while the human population continues to explode along with a concurrent "need" for more/bigger/now.

i, too, am moving my life in that less consumptive and hopefully more sustainable direction...

[CosmicWizard]

jazzlover

These are all great ideas that would make Colorado an even better place than it already is. Even though they make alot of sense to me personally, I/we have no CONTROL as to whether or not any or all of them ever get implemented. At best we could all become politically active, get involved, make our voices heard and contribute our personal INPUT. Whereas the simple things listed below give us immediate CONTROL if we choose to TAKE it:

1. replacing our wasteful 5 gallons per flush toilets with low flush toilets
2. converting wasteful irrigation systems to drip irrigation where applicable
3. trading in the gas guzzler for a more fuel efficient car
4. or better yet...riding a bike when that is a reasonable thing to do
5. ocassionally walking the 3 miles into town instead of getting into the car
6. taking shorter showers,
7. buying locally grown produce,
8. etc, etc,etc. I think you get the picture.

I can almost hear the snickers from some of you and I've had the tree hugger label pinned on me more than once or twice...and that's OK. If that's what it takes to get people thinking and acting more as stewards and less as owners then so be it. All of these things on an individual basis won't begin to make a dent, but as more and more individuals start doing these simple things and others like them it does begin to have an impact.

EG: There is probably no one on this list who couldn't break a chopstick into two pieces with their bare hands. However if you were to put 10 chopsticks into a bundle and try to break the bundle in two, most people wouldn't be able to do it. If you can, you are certainly stronger then I am. Moral of the story...In numbers there is strength.

Jazzlover, you wrote: Moving to a new way to live would be a postive step in the right direction for our own wellbeing, as well as the region we call home. I'm already moving my life in that direction . . .

It makes me wonder...what are you doing to move your life in that direction? I'm not attempting to pin you dow, but rather I am sincerely looking for additional ways to live more responsibly and lighten my footprint on the Colorado environment.

regards....Franco

[jazzlover]

francowell,

Any of my friends would probably not consider me an "enviromentalist." For years, I had direct ties to the agricultural industry. I have had indirect association with the energy industry. I probably drive as much in a year as any typical American (though I am trying to reduce that).

But, I've come to realize that I live in a house bigger than I possibly need, that I (like many) accumulated way more "stuff" than I possibly could use, and that I was getting caught up into the "materialistic" treadmill that makes one a slave to one's possessions or one's desire for them.

The epiphany came for me at a meeting I was attending a couple of years ago with some very high-level petroleum company executives. They were gleefully talking about the growing demand worldwide for petroleum and the upward trend in energy prices that was resulting. One of their experts calmly displayed a slide showing the demand curve for petroleum arrayed against the known worldwide reserves of oil. Their analysis indicated that the gap between available oil worldwide and worldwide demand, which they predicted would appear sometime between 2005 and 2008, would widen for the foreseeable future. In terms of oil price levels, they found that gratifying, since it would indicate rising prices indefinitely.

Now, as a student of economics, I thought, "This can't be right." If prices rise high enough, buyers will leave the market, prices will drop, and markets will stabilize. The high prices might even encourage more production. But, then, a geologist dashed all of that with a simple statement, "All the cheap oil has been found. Whatever we find in the future, IF WE FIND ANY big new reserves, is going to be very expensive to produce, and it is very unlikely to be in the United States." The only way prices will stablize or go down in that scenario is if buyers leave the market. So, what buyers will leave? American auto drivers? Third-world farmers? Shippers? Who? Somebody has to go. I decided that I (!) had better figure out how I (!) am going to conserve and get along with less now and in the future before markets, fiats, or outright scarcity jam it down my throat with no chance to plan for it.

So, that's what I'm working toward--figuring out HOW TO CONSERVE! And, sooner or later, every American is going to have to figure it out. We will have no choice. The free (or relatively cheap) lunch is over! I agree with you, Francowell, to start with the small, local things--"think globally, act locally," as they like to say.

PS--I know many on this forum get tired of my supposedly "dire" predictions. But, quietly (but not quiet for long), the forces are gathering that will head us in a different direction. Grain prices have exploded since more and more grain is being diverted to ethanol production--so, you will pay for the gasoline you use (or don't) at the grocery checkstand, even if you don't buy gas at the pump. With summer air conditioning demand ramping up, electricity demand is pushing the power grid to the limits once again. Here in the Rocky Mountain West, there are still many areas trapped in a multi-year drought ( you can see the latest prediction here: Climate Prediction Center - Expert Assessments: United States Seasonal Drought Outlook ). June has been hotter than hell in many parts of the region. A forest fire came close to roasting some houses (in an area in which they probably should never have been built) near New Castle, Colorado earlier in the week. Could be another bad fire year in the region.

The warning signs are everywhere. Change is 'a comin'.

[pirate_lafitte]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

Want to move to rural Colorado? Here are the top 5 things you should you should be willing to accept if you want to live in rural Colorado:

5. Don’t try to make rural Colorado like the place you just left. A lot of rural Coloradans (both old and new) like rural Colorado just the way it is. They don’t want paved roads, curb-and-gutter, local tax-supported “amenities,” trendy upscale resorts, fancy golf courses, strip malls, or umpteem big-box stores. They especially don’t want another 5,000 trophy houses cluttering up the landscape.

4. Learn to like brown. People who visit Colorado in the height of summer or for the winter ski season tend to think that the state is either green or white. The truth is that most of the Colorado landscape is brown most of the time. The longest growing season in the state is maybe six months. Most places, even at lower elevations, it’s less. In the mountain areas it can be WAY less, often less than 3-4 months. In winter, only the higher elevation areas have continuous snow cover. Most of the time, the winter ground is bare (and brown) in most of Colorado. The “brown season” usually lasts from 6-8 months in most of the state. Much of what is green in summer is from agricultural irrigation. Front Range cities have been diverting more and more of that water for decades. Every year more agricultural land and wetlands are dried up into a permanent brown condition. With the ongoing drought and pine beetle infestation, many of Colorado’s evergreen forests are also becoming less “ever” and less “green” every year. There are a lot of dead brown trees up there now. If Colorado were all green or white, it would have been named “Verde” or “Blanco,” not for the Spanish term for “reddish.”

3. Learn to understand Colorado water rights. Colorado’s history includes homicides committed over water rights disputes. In rural Colorado, water rights are deadly serious business. There are more water lawyers in Colorado than any other state for a reason. The old ranchers’ saying that, “You can mess with my wife, but don’t mess with my water” is not a just a trite joke. As population growth continues to stretch Colorado’s water resources to their very limits—and beyond, expect the acrimony over water to become more heated, shrill, and—probably in some circumstances—violent.

2. Don’t expect to be greeted with open arms by many of the rural Colorado natives. You, and thousands of other people like you, are moving to rural Colorado. You are causing the real estate market to inflate and you are demanding more and more governmental services. That will translate into higher taxes for the current residents. Many of those like you have contributed to the demise of the industries that historically supported much the local population—ranching, farming, logging, mining. You are also helping to make it economically impossible for many of the native residents’ children to stay in the community in which they grew up. And, unless those natives are prostituting themselves by selling you their land, or by working in the real estate or construction industries to pander to your needs, you are doing little to benefit them economically. Your increasing presence is reducing the amount of open space and agricultural land that they have enjoyed—often for generations. Your presence means more traffic congestion, less solitude, inflating living costs, and—often—increased social problems. Most of the natives didn’t ask you to show up and a lot of them, at least privately, wish you hadn’t.

1. Don’t expect to make a good living in the local economy. Unless you happen to be in one of the limited professions in high demand in rural Colorado (say, a doctor, or a roughneck in the energy industry), or you, too, are willing to prostitute yourself in the real estate or construction trades—effectively helping to destroy the very lifestyle that you probably moved to rural Colorado to embrace, you are relatively unlikely to find many decent-paying jobs. You will also find that, excepting some services, most day-to-day living expenses in rural Colorado—utilities, fuel, food, etc.—will cost as much or more than the area you left. Because of Colorado’s relative isolation from many manufacturing and distribution sources, the costs of those goods are likely to rise faster than other better-located areas—especially if fuel costs continue to spiral. Real estate may seem cheaper than some areas of the country, but is far overpriced if you expect to pay for it out of locally-generated income. Unless you can pay cash for it, rural Colorado real estate is generally no bargain.

Accept all of this, and you just might enjoy living in rural Colorado. Otherwise, you just may be disappointed. Oh, and don’t expect it to be much different anywhere else in the rural Rocky Mountain West.

What about the people who don't want to change rural Colorado and who want to live there for what it is and are not trying to change it? Many of those people want to live in rural Colorado because the things they want in rural CO(better quality of life in their eyes, not strip malls or LA-like problems), they can't find so easily where they live.

[hello-world]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

francowell,

Any of my friends would probably not consider me an "enviromentalist." For years, I had direct ties to the agricultural industry. I have had indirect association with the energy industry. I probably drive as much in a year as any typical American (though I am trying to reduce that).

But, I've come to realize that I live in a house bigger than I possibly need, that I (like many) accumulated way more "stuff" than I possibly could use, and that I was getting caught up into the "materialistic" treadmill that makes one a slave to one's possessions or one's desire for them.

The epiphany came for me at a meeting I was attending a couple of years ago with some very high-level petroleum company executives. They were gleefully talking about the growing demand worldwide for petroleum and the upward trend in energy prices that was resulting. One of their experts calmly displayed a slide showing the demand curve for petroleum arrayed against the known worldwide reserves of oil. Their analysis indicated that the gap between available oil worldwide and worldwide demand, which they predicted would appear sometime between 2005 and 2008, would widen for the foreseeable future. In terms of oil price levels, they found that gratifying, since it would indicate rising prices indefinitely.

Now, as a student of economics, I thought, "This can't be right." If prices rise high enough, buyers will leave the market, prices will drop, and markets will stabilize. The high prices might even encourage more production. But, then, a geologist dashed all of that with a simple statement, "All the cheap oil has been found. Whatever we find in the future, IF WE FIND ANY big new reserves, is going to be very expensive to produce, and it is very unlikely to be in the United States." The only way prices will stablize or go down in that scenario is if buyers leave the market. So, what buyers will leave? American auto drivers? Third-world farmers? Shippers? Who? Somebody has to go. I decided that I (!) had better figure out how I (!) am going to conserve and get along with less now and in the future before markets, fiats, or outright scarcity jam it down my throat with no chance to plan for it.

So, that's what I'm working toward--figuring out HOW TO CONSERVE! And, sooner or later, every American is going to have to figure it out. We will have no choice. The free (or relatively cheap) lunch is over! I agree with you, Francowell, to start with the small, local things--"think globally, act locally," as they like to say.

PS--I know many on this forum get tired of my supposedly "dire" predictions. But, quietly (but not quiet for long), the forces are gathering that will head us in a different direction. Grain prices have exploded since more and more grain is being diverted to ethanol production--so, you will pay for the gasoline you use (or don't) at the grocery checkstand, even if you don't buy gas at the pump. With summer air conditioning demand ramping up, electricity demand is pushing the power grid to the limits once again. Here in the Rocky Mountain West, there are still many areas trapped in a multi-year drought ( you can see the latest prediction here: Climate Prediction Center - Expert Assessments: United States Seasonal Drought Outlook ). June has been hotter than hell in many parts of the region. A forest fire came close to roasting some houses (in an area in which they probably should never have been built) near New Castle, Colorado earlier in the week. Could be another bad fire year in the region.

The warning signs are everywhere. Change is 'a comin'.

or maybe it's not a drought...

Colorado River Streamflow: A Paleo Perspective - The First Reconstruction

and there are plenty of other reasons to conserve beyond supply and demand (though i think your reference to those is probably the most poignant for most people).

here's a readable (with citations) account of the possible future in, e.g., the US Southwest (especially curious with the previous link in mind)

Global warming could hit Southwest hard - The Boston Globe