Rep. Jeff Hurd’s “Productive Public Lands Act” (HR 1997) is deeply concerning. While he frames the bill as promoting local control and common sense, it would actually override years of locally driven planning behind many of the Bureau of Land Management’s Resource Management Plans.
These plans were created with input from communities, tribes, industry representatives, ranchers, conservationists and recreation advocates. Reverting to outdated plans would open the door to unchecked development in areas that Coloradans have worked hard to protect – wildlife corridors, cultural sites and popular outdoor spaces.
The claim that recent plans “lock up” land is false. Nearly 74% of BLM-managed land in Colorado remains open to oil and gas leasing. These plans don’t ban development – they guide it responsibly, balancing economic opportunity with conservation and recreation.
What’s more troubling is the contradiction between Hurd’s words and actions. He says decisions should be made locally, yet this bill imposes a Washington, D.C., mandate that overrides community input. He supports moving the BLM headquarters to Grand Junction to elevate local voices – HR 1997 silences them, I can’t seem to square that.
Though he opposed a sell-off in committee, Hurd ultimately backed a federal budget that included the potential sell-off of over half a million acres of public land, and provisions that limit public involvement and weaken environmental safeguards.
If he truly values local voices and sustainable land use, he should support the plans we helped create – not throw them out.
Louise van Vonno
Durango
