Public lands are essential to Colorado’s identity, including economically, environmentally and culturally. They support everything from hiking and hunting to grazing and energy production. Yet, recent rhetoric from elected officials and activists suggests we must choose between protecting public lands and allowing responsible energy development. That’s a false choice and one that risks undermining both conservation goals and the communities that depend on balanced land use.
Ridgway Mayor John Clark’s recent letter (Herald, Jun. 18) asserts that new legislation threatens Colorado’s public lands by prioritizing oil, gas, mining and logging over clean air, water and wildlife. But that misrepresents both the intent and the effect of the bill in question – the Productive Public Lands Act.
The truth is that Colorado’s public lands have long been managed under a multiple-use mandate. This means that outdoor recreation, grazing, conservation and energy development must all be considered within a balanced framework. Unfortunately, in recent years, access for some industries, particularly the oil and gas sector, has been increasingly restricted by federal red tape while other uses are favored. This imbalance threatens jobs, local tax bases and the very funding streams that support conservation programs.
Let’s look at the numbers. In 2023, Colorado’s oil and gas sector contributed nearly $48 billion to the state’s economy, supported over 200,000 jobs, and generated more than $1 billion annually in public revenue. Severance taxes and royalties fund Colorado Parks and Wildlife, the School Trust and local government resources that protect the very public lands we all value.
By contrast, while 81% of BLM-managed lands are technically open to leasing, the vast majority are not actively leased or developed. Companies only pursue permits in areas where development is economically viable and where rigorous environmental reviews can be completed. Suggesting that energy development is swallowing up Colorado’s public lands ignores the reality that most leased acreage sees no activity at all, and when it does, it’s heavily regulated.
Critics warn that the new bill eliminates public input. Not so. It streamlines duplicative processes, ensures clarity and restores reasonable timelines for permitting decisions, benefiting all users of public lands, including renewable energy developers. What it does not do is privatize lands, eliminate NEPA review or give industry a free pass. Leasing is not selling. It is temporary, revocable and subject to environmental safeguards.
Much has also been made of carbon emissions from fossil fuels on federal lands. However, Colorado’s energy sector leads the nation in reducing methane emissions and applying strict environmental controls. We should be exporting our regulatory model, not vilifying the industry that powers our communities and funds our public institutions.
If we genuinely value our public lands, we must manage them in a way that reflects the full range of their uses and benefits. This includes recreation and conservation, as well as energy, grazing and timber, where appropriate. The goal should be stewardship, not prohibition.
The Productive Public Lands Act doesn’t undermine Colorado’s values; it reinforces them by recognizing that public lands must serve all Coloradans. That includes the rafting guide in Ridgway and the roustabout in Rifle. These workers, families and businesses deserve representation, too.
We can and must lead with facts, not fear. Responsible oil and gas development has a place on our public lands, and with the proper guardrails in place, it can coexist with recreation, conservation and climate goals. A balanced approach is the only sustainable one.
Michelina Paulek is executive director of the Energy Council. She lives in Durango.
