Last month, Coloradans rose in solidarity against a proposed section of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. While the bulk of the controversial legislation ultimately passed with a tie-breaking vote by Vice President J.D. Vance on July 1, the final draft of the bill removed text regarding public lands sales.
Senator Mike Lee of Utah had proposed the section, which would have required the incremental sale of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service lands. Lee claimed that the provision would help to address a federal funding deficit and nationwide housing strains. The public, however, seemed to largely disagree with Lee’s assertions.
Colorado is a state that would have been heavily affected by the now-rejected provision. Over 36% of Colorado is federally-owned land. Over 11 million acres of the state are managed by the U.S. Forest Service, nearly two-thirds of its recognized forest area.
Pitkin, Eagle and Garfield counties all include significant portions of public land. Between White River National Forest, designated wilderness areas and BLM acreage, 62% of Garfield County is public land. Eagle and Pitkin counties have even higher percentages at 80% and 83%, respectively.
For decades, there has been debate around how to best manage these lands, from wildlife management, hunting regulations, types of leasing on BLM lands and more. But Lee’s proposal coalesced a mostly unified public sentiment: resistance.
Local ranchers and livestock producers raised concerns because the privatization of federal lands would jeopardize their established leasing opportunities for grazing. Over 7.8 million acres of BLM land in Colorado is authorized for livestock grazing — in 2023, the White River Field Office alone generated $14 million in economic output from grazing permits. According to the BLM website, “All reported economic outputs reflect estimated total effects and ripple effects throughout the economy.”
That figure is dwarfed by other modes of use on BLM lands managed by the White River Field Office. Recreation yielded nearly $124 million in the same period and oil and gas generated $1.4 billion and supported thousands of jobs.
Many local recreation areas are on public lands — from Red Hill to popular hiking and four-wheeling roads along the Crystal and Fryingpan River valleys. Each of the local ski resorts are made up, in large part, of public lands.
Local response demonstrated the passion the community has for the many uses of these lands. Local papers were flooded with letters to the editor and opinion columns advocating for the preservation of federal lands. Prominent livestock producers advocated for one another; rogue protestors placed “for sale” signs at recreational trailheads with contact information for Senators John Hickenlooper and Michael Bennet and Representative Jeff Hurd. All three legislators voted down the provision, though Hurd then supported the Big Beautiful Bill once it was removed.
The outcry suggests that when it comes to public lands, Coloradans are united in seeing such an expansive and diverse resource as invaluable. The community is likely to see more discussion on the topic of federal land use and possible proposed sales thereof, as Sen. Lee and others in Congress continue to express interest in privatization.
To review the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, as well as the public lands provision that was stricken, visit www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1/text