Squatter Near climbing crag. Who to contact?

Mark E Dixon wrote: @ Greg D-
The absence of a fire ban doesn’t matter to me if we’re talking about an illegal campsite near a climbing area. Or for that matter, near homes or buildings.
I’m not the crag police, but I’m also not going to let somebody screw things up for the rest of us or endanger the public for the sake of a naive romantic image of ‘rebel’ climbers or ‘noble’ homeless people. 

The camp in question isn't going endanger climbing access. While the Cold Springs Fire was started by homeless campers, and while there's some risk of squatters starting a fire, far more wild fires have been started by local homeowners, campers who aren't homeless or squatters, and from lightning strikes. Three of Boulder County's most destructive fires were started by local homeowners burning trash. The Hayman Fire, the most destructive fire in Colorado history, was started by a USFS employee. The Waldo Canyon Fire, by Colo Spgs, was caused by arson. The fire that killed two by Platte Canyon was started by a controlled burn. 

George, I'm not sure I understand your argument here.
Just because many fires are started by other groups doesn't give squatters a pass to behave however they wish.
I'm indifferent to this particular camper. I don't feel any special stewardship toward the St Vrain climbing areas.
Locals there can do what they think is best.
As mentioned above, I'm not the crag cop anywhere, even in those areas that I do feel a special obligation to protect.
I'm certainly not innocent of the occasional stretched rule and wouldn't intervene for harmless, but disallowed behavior on the part of others.
But I feel differently about illegal fires around here, and littering and environmental damage.
If the person involved is a climber, I'll take to them directly.
But if it's a mentally ill homeless person off their meds, I'm probably going to call the cops.
And not feel bad about it.

Mark E Dixon wrote: George, I'm not sure I understand your argument here.
Just because many fires are started by other groups doesn't give squatters a pass to behave however they wish.
I'm indifferent to this particular camper. I don't feel any special stewardship toward the St Vrain climbing areas.
Locals there can do what they think is best.
As mentioned above, I'm not the crag cop anywhere, even in those areas that I do feel a special obligation to protect.
I'm certainly not innocent of the occasional stretched rule and wouldn't intervene for harmless, but disallowed behavior on the part of others.
But I feel differently about illegal fires around here, and littering and environmental damage.
If the person involved is a climber, I'll take to them directly.
But if it's a mentally ill homeless person off their meds, I'm probably going to call the cops.
And not feel bad about it.

I agree that squatters shouldn't get away with creating a real fire risk or failing to contain trash. (Btw When I've hiked by this camp, it wasn't messy.) I'm just saying that many other residents and users of the forest are creating much greater impacts and risks. One blatant example includes target shooters, who leave shot-up trash, casings, clay pigeons and shot-up trees in the SSV and lot's of other places. They often are insensitive to the presence of hikers and climbers down range.  Therefore, going after these squatters, who are merely trying to get by, seems classist. 

Mason Stone wrote: Live and accept others have right to live without someone meddling in their affairs. You want to be a busybody fine, snitch people out, ok, please wear your stewardship shirt at the crag or wherever so we can avoid each other.

Community, mutual aid, acceptance of eccentricities, yes even yours are what free societies are made of. Free societies are dynamic, which implies discussion, negotiation and transaction. Many of the above posts are automatic responses; rule of law, responsibility as crag stewards/warriors etc. The op asked "I’m pretty sure it’s on national forest land but not 100 percent. Any ideas on what I should do?"

Many of the above responses also suggested accepting the person as a member of the community: buy em a beer, sandwich, leave em alone etc., others suggested murder.

Maybe, cultivate the Buddha, Karmic, Christian, Mohamadan, Existentialist, Druidic and on ethos, as above simply accept. Too idealist, what happens if you go to the other extreme? Look around our society, you police murder people on your behalf all the time.

If folks are behaving in a way that I feel threatens the broader community or even just the climbing community, I'm going to call them out.

Either face to face, or via the authorities if necessary.

Not every behavior is acceptable.

On the other hand, if it's not hurting anybody, I couldn't care less.

I would leave them be. Aside from that ,  there are two other courses to choose from. 1. Report it if you feel that this is a some kinda threat to land, recreation etc . 2. If they are out n about say Hello chat 'em up. Is the person is ok or needs help. Ya know they might just tell you an interesting tale as to how they got in their current situ. Granted #2 has a downside they could be hostile to your 'intrusion' So maybe err on the side of safety -Your own !-  its a gut call.
That said I've seen LE respond and actually be pretty sympathetic to them trying to get them to a safer place etc. And remember there are plenty more doing this in the foothills as the weather gets better.