University of Denver Law Students Sue To Block Christo's 'Over The River' Project (VIDEO, PHOTOS)

Law students in the Environmental Law Clinic at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law plan to file a lawsuit on Wednesday in attempt to block fabric-artist Christo's latest "Over the River" project which proposes to hang 5.9 miles of aluminum coated fabric panels across eight spots along a 42-mile stretch of the Arkansas River, according to a DU press release.

The case is being filed by DU student lawyers Mason Brown and Justine Shepherd whose work will be overseen by attorney and professor Michael Harris.

The DU law students are filing the suit on behalf of Rags Over the Arkansas River (ROAR), a group that opposes the industrial scale art project due what they claim are environmental issues and dangers to the residents and visitors of the proposed "Over the River" project area.

On their website, ROAR describes themselves:

Whether you call us "ROAR," or our full name "Rags Over the Arkansas River," our organization is dedicated to preserving and protecting the headwaters of the Arkansas River, the Bighorn Sheep Canyon, its inhabitants and the communities that depend upon them.

Our founding project has been to formally oppose Christo and Jeanne Claude's "Over the River" project. This project involves suspending horizontal fabric panels within a 45 mile stretch over the Arkansas River's Bighorn Sheep Canyon. Hence the name "Rags Over the Arkansas River." The acronym ROAR soon became our primary moniker.

The Bureau of Land Management approved the project in November and is believed to be the first artwork to receive the BLM's approval through the drafting of a lengthy environmental impact statement. Christo is still awaiting approval from two local counties that would be impacted by the project as well as the Colorado Department of Transportation and the State Patrol.

On Wednesday morning, while the DU law students file suit at the Denver federal courthouse, public hearings will begin in Canon City in Fremont County for final permits, according to Westword.

7News reports that the art project is estimated to cost $50 million, paid for by Christo, and that materials used for the project would be recycled. Christo is also required to put several mitigation measures into place for local wildlife including bighorn sheep and birds.

Construction of Christo's project is expected to begin in 2012. The final work would then be displayed for two weeks in August 2014 before being dismantled.

Comments

[lzach]

11:38 PM on 02/09/2012

Hoping ROAR prevails. The Colorado "wilderness" and "wildlife" is compromised enough and this is asinine. Buy your own private property and shrink wrap it. And BLM, do your job as a steward of the land, not as a tool for this guy. Ridiculous.

[Against Christo]

07:22 PM on 02/06/2012

http://www.facebook.com/RagsOvertheArkansasRiver

[Greg DiRito]

04:28 PM on 02/06/2012

As a business owner and lifetime resident I am inclined to share my outlook on this issue. First, I certainly understand the concerns of those residents that live out in that area and have to travel that section of highway 50 for work. However, based on the relative short life of the viewing time, I would ask that they please try to make accommodations. In regards to the inconvenience to those participating in the outdoor activities, I have to say I see no one person with more or less rights to enjoy that area then the other. As far as the question of "why" this is being done, there are few answers to what or why, motivates any artistic personality, we can only look and form our own opinions. Finally, as a small business owner, I look forward to the influx of people and what they will bring to the state of Colorado. In the recession that we all have been struggling through, things that create jobs and revenue should not be taken for granted.

[pariwmv]

07:07 PM on 02/06/2012

You are completely missing the problem. It won't be 2 weeks of inconvenience, it will be 3 to 4 years. That's how long the construction and deconstruction will take. Years of road closures, delays, native wildlife disruption. Over 9000 holes must be drilled as deep as 30 feet for the anchors for the cabling. In some locations, the footprint of the drilling rig will require the entire roadway. This means trying to get to emergency services in either Canon City or Salida will be impossible.
I am a 60+ year resident of Colorado and a 20 year resident of the area that will suffer the impacts of this project. It is not worth it.

[Greg DiRito]

12:14 AM on 02/07/2012

All due respect sir, that 3 to 4 years that you speak of indicates 3 to 4 years of construction crews, and people coming to consult in the area, and basically infusing cash into our community which contributes sales tax, which in turn pays for your road paving, keeps business doors open, and assists in keeping your neighbors gainfully employed. We are and have been, for my entire life, a community which depends heavily on tourist trade. And perhaps that may have been a factor you should have considered when relocating here 20 years ago. As far as the environmental impact goes, I am not an environmental engineer, and unless you are, we can only speculate based on the information provided. While I respect your opinion and I sympathize with your concerns, I can't help but feel your passionate opinion is based on inconvenience to the residents to that area as opposed to the weight of what it can bring to us all. Perhaps there will be priority traffic precautions in place to assist you. Sometimes things inconvenience us, but we must endure and persevere in order to achieve a greater good for the entire community with which we live.

[heboprotagonist]

11:38 PM on 02/08/2012

I've read your thread and I've come to the conclusion that you would sacrifice mother nature just to make a few bucks. I sincerely hope that mother nature repays you the sentiment.

[Greg DiRito]

11:34 AM on 02/09/2012

Well heboprotagonist, I'm glad that you are able to come to such conclusion so quickly. Quite the contrary actually. I base all of my opinions and thoughts on facts. I am a journalist by education and I am opposed to anything that causes permanent damage to our environment. I am a believer that we live here and everything we do effects the environment. But it is up to us to minimize these effects. So unless you live in a naturally formed cave, ride a bicycle, don't use electricity or natural gas (which beings you are on the Internet we can rule those out) you are doing things that are hurting the environment. The carbon monoxide that cars spew each day, the strip mining of mountains for minerals, and the deforestation for building materials is of a much greater significance to me then the holes that will be left in the rock face after this is all done. But I graciously thank you for your well thought out opinion sir.

[ETT]

01:32 PM on 02/06/2012

Wasting $50 million while people in this country go to bed hungry and without a home.

[N133]

01:47 AM on 02/05/2012

A few facts for people commenting without doing ANY research whatsoever:
-The stretch of river is 42 miles long. The fabric would stretch 6 miles of that 42. The rest would be uncovered.
-The idea is that people raft *underneath it* (w/the fabric 8-25 feet above the river)
-The fabric is translucent, thus you see the sky from below the fabric...
-From the road the fabric will reflect the sky, and it will turn pink at dawn, orange at sunset, etc...

This is all right from the website: http://www.overtheriverinfo.com/

Finally -- I live, work, play, and pay taxes in Colorado, I love the mountains and valleys here plenty without any fabric hung between them, but art and nature are not mutually exclusive and that is the POINT, that they can enhance each other -- what would we be without nature? Nothing. And without art, we would just be animals -- art is what defines us as human beings; that we can claim words like "wretchery" are poetic and appreciate our surroundings beyond thoughts of our own survival. Everyone here might benefit from clearing their minds of prejudgment, reading some actual facts on the website, then forming an informed opinion before commenting anymore or disrespecting Christo or the late Jeanne-Claude.

[boomer7391]

01:04 PM on 02/05/2012

You are correct about art/nature.

BUT......it's getting old. I don't find cut and paste to be particularly artistic. This isn't a new idea for them. All these folks do any more is "wrap" stuff and take pictures. They "wrap" other artist's work (bridges and monuments) and nature...maybe the first time it was thought provoking but now it's just another bag of rags thrown over a river. Not sure being bored with this "artist's" work is prejudging or being disrespectful. $50 million for this? And it lasts 2 weeks and then yippee we get the photos? Photoshop is cheaper. And with all the artists out there who are struggling and actually have something new to say to the world, we need to waste our time on this guy?

His career began with pictures of lacquered pieces of crumpled paper. Deep. He's been wrapping crap since the 50's and selling the photos to anyone impressed enough with his one word name to write a big check. He's a businessman, not an artist. He's found a niche and he's become the best at it. That doesn't mean the niche has value. And he has an audience, ie, market. Maybe if he covered the Amazon, I know I'd be impressed, but that would actually be a work of art and engineering. This is just rags on a river.

[ziggy3339]

03:09 PM on 02/05/2012

I'll have to agree with you. As an art "lover" I support free expression. There's a time and place, however. Where people are absolutely jobless, hungry (starving to death) in the United States I would think the "artist" might be more sensitive to spending his $50 million (really? REALLY?) on some true artistic original expressions. This has been done & is now considered overkill (at least by me). Yawn is the word that comes to mind. If, in fact, it's been shown in any way to be harmful to the environment then by all means just stop it. Right now.

[heboprotagonist]

11:43 PM on 02/08/2012

The fact is Christo is a snake oil salesman and a huckster. As an artist myself I find his works to be nothing more than a mockery of artistic expression. He creates nothing new only covers what mother nature and others have already made beautiful. He offers no commentary on the human condition save our endless desire to consume. And though some might comment and judge Christo w/o the academic background I possess, surely he doesn't deserve any better.

[segami]

12:46 PM on 02/04/2012

I'm sorry but this would absolutely interfere with the ecosystem and I'm an artist. Think birds, think fish, think elk, think deer, think big horn sheep, think bear, think wildlife period! An EIP means looking at the impact that will occur not no impact. While it is being installed it will disrupt the ecosystem, while it is up it will disrupt the ecosystem, while its being taken down it will disrupt the ecosystem, any lingering presence will disrupt the ecosystem. Why not install these over the Riverwalk in San Antonio, or over the canals of Holland or the canals of Venice? These are places that are already heavily impacted by humans and their urban wildlife neighbors. There is no benefit to this art project other than to the artist. Sorry but the wildlife will not appreciate the art and ultimately they may be harmed by it.

[Marturia]

11:26 PM on 02/04/2012

No need to apologize in your post. You are absolutely right.

[D-Driller]

09:42 PM on 02/03/2012

All I care about is traffic. Will it back up traffic? If so, no.

[OCCUPYHERALD]

11:22 PM on 02/03/2012

No traffic on the river!

[D-Driller]

12:20 AM on 02/04/2012

LOL not what I meant!

[N133]

01:10 AM on 02/05/2012

From the website (http://www.overtheriverinfo.com/index.php/about-over-the-river/faqs/)

Christo understands that traffic is one of the most important concerns of the region. Throughout the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has worked closely with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) to minimize traffic impacts caused by the temporary work of art.

With implementation of several mitigation measures, the Final EIS determined that traffic delays during the project’s construction and removal periods would be negligible. During the two-week exhibition period, travelers can expect a maximum travel time increase of 17 minutes in the westbound direction and 11 minutes in the eastbound direction for the project’s full 42-mile drive. However, this would only be the case during two Saturdays and two Sundays, and delays would be far less during the non-peak days of the exhibition.

[Marturia]

02:54 PM on 02/05/2012

You failed to mention the traffic problems that will arise from the over three years of construction and dismantling the 'exhibition'. The last paragraph in the article above states:

****Construction of Christo's project is expected to begin in 2012. The final work would then be displayed for two weeks in August 2014 before being dismantled.****

The Bighorn Canyon is a narrow, winding stretch of highway, already a hazard. There aren't many places to pull off the road and parking areas are small and scarce. For over three years people will have to deal with the disruption of traffic. This whole project comes from the "what were they thinking" file.

[angusmciver]

09:10 PM on 02/03/2012

That looks like a lot of anchor bolts that don't need to be there.

[necropteluate]

02:12 PM on 02/03/2012

Do you people do any sort of research on articles before you post? These exhibits are temporary and taken down as quickly as they are put up. The only evidence to know they existed are the photos taken. The law students are probably causing more of an environmental impact with the shear amount of paper they are wasting drafting their arguments to the courts.

[pariwmv]

06:08 PM on 02/03/2012

Try reading the EIS and other documentation. It will take nearly 4 years to construct and deconstruct this project!!!

[Marturia]

12:03 AM on 02/05/2012

necropteluate - why don't you read articles before you post? Here's the last paragraph from the above article:

****Construction of Christo's project is expected to begin in 2012. The final work would then be displayed for two weeks in August 2014 before being dismantled.****

If this exhibit will be taken down as quickly as it is put up, as you said, the project will take over three years to be completed.

[Clare53]

01:34 PM on 02/03/2012

The good thing about Christo's self-indulgence and entitlement is he pays for it himself.

[GraphicMatt]

04:01 PM on 02/03/2012

Could you clarify how exactly Christo is "entitled"?

[hpblue5011]

01:35 AM on 02/05/2012

Then he should be paying all of us to read about this? I am sure those truck drivers that will be stuck in traffic will appreciate the thought that Christo is "paying". Time does not always equal money.

[CSKAP]

10:19 AM on 02/03/2012

Oh goody, our little law students doing their graduation project tying up the judicial system
Christo is an internationally acclaimed artist, he is paying for this with his own money, he has filed the required environmental impact statements, he has said if there is any impact, he’ll pay for it.
This is a vanity law suit by some students and their faculty advisor.
Take a look at the economic impact on the area as well!
We had the same issues brought up prior to his display in Central Park. It’s now one of the iconic pictures of Central Part at the Met.

[BringthePaine]

09:37 AM on 02/04/2012

The Central Park exhibit was a travesty, just like this proposed project.

[CSKAP]

11:18 AM on 02/04/2012

Well done, the millions of people that went to see it seemed to disagree.
There are people who think the Sistine Chapel ceiling is not art.
As the saying goes
“Who are you, the Art Police?”
The city of New York’s Mayor estimated the economic impact of the Central Park project at $254 million.
Don’t like it, don’t see it.

[heboprotagonist]

11:46 PM on 02/08/2012

Christ is the only one working on a vanity project here.

[spongeworthy06]

07:17 PM on 02/02/2012

If this guys name was Bob and he was from Omaha, no offense intended Omaha, he would have never been allowed to do this in the first place.

[GraphicMatt]

04:03 PM on 02/03/2012

At some point in his career he was just plain old Chris from Bulgaria. I am not really seeing what your point is?

[spongeworthy06]

06:01 PM on 02/03/2012

his name and accent makes him more credile in some peoples eyes

[OCCUPYHERALD]

11:23 PM on 02/03/2012

Bob from Omaha aint got the bucks!

[spongeworthy06]

01:08 AM on 02/04/2012

the bucks for what?

[spongeworthy06]

07:16 PM on 02/02/2012

dont we have enough lawyers already? ugh

[BringthePaine]

09:38 AM on 02/04/2012

Guess you've never been accused of a crime.

[spongeworthy06]

12:43 PM on 02/04/2012

There are clearly way to many Lawyers out there trying to squeeze money out of people. Im not saying do away with them

[img005]

07:05 PM on 02/02/2012

The prototypical artists to the 1% deem it within their right to pollute nature with their monstrosity.

[GraphicMatt]

04:07 PM on 02/03/2012

I was under the impression that environmental impact studies had already been conducted? Are you privvy to some knowledge of how this will lead to pollution that the rest of us are not? And what is with all the disdain directed at artists? Artists create their art for everyone to enjoy, not just the 1%. Do explain how Christo is an "artist to the 1%"? As i recall, he makes his money by selling the preliminary sketches and photographs afterwards, and I don't recall them being that expensive.

[img005]

07:32 PM on 02/03/2012

Temper temper GraphicMatt, I didn't know you felt so deeply about the right of Christo to defile nature. I do not object to all of Christo's work, but I do to this one because of the high probability of its negative environmental impact. Here is a link to a related article at HP that discusses this very issue.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/07/over-the-river-project-ge_n_1080181.html

Here is a particularly relevant objection:

"Opponents have said the work needed just to construct the anchor-and-cable system for suspending the fabric would disrupt wildlife, clog traffic on U.S. 50 along the river, and limit rafting and fishing in a scenic region that depends on summer tourism and recreation."

Let's make up, go to a Subway near you and have them make you a sandwich, it's on me.

[angusmciver]

09:04 PM on 02/03/2012

Yea, but is it art??

"Opponents have said the work needed just to construct the anchor-and­-cable system for suspending the fabric would disrupt wildlife, clog traffic on U.S. 50 along the river, and limit rafting and fishing in a scenic region that depends on summer tourism and recreation­."

[wiscogirl761]

05:05 PM on 02/02/2012

Way to go ROAR! Some attorneys I can agree with!