Huge government land ownership defines state

By Bill Scanlon
Denver Rocky Mountain News Staff Writer

FEDERAL LAND OWNERSHIP IN COLORADO, ACRES Total land area: 66.4 million Total federally owned lands: 24.2 million Forest Service: 14 million Bureau of Land Management: 8.4 million National Parks Service: 527,000 Bureau of Reclamation: 480,000 Army: 182,000 Navy: 60,000 Fish and Wildlife: 33,000 Department of Energy: 30,000 Corps of Engineers: 28,000 Air Force: 27,000

Ranchers can run cattle on it but can't build on it.

Skiers can ski on it, but resorts can't build lodges on it.

You can hike it, bike it and fish, water ski and snowmobile on it. With the right permits or political clout, you can even mine it or log it. But you can't buy it.

It's all federal land, a giant 34 percent swath of Colorado, 24 million acres of forest, stream, mountain and sagebrush, an area the size of Indiana.

Federal land owernship is higher in Colorado than in all but eight other states, all of them in the West.

What created this legacy that sharply defines Colorado?

Unrelenting land exploitation in Colorado's first few decades as a territory and a state led presidents, Congress and federal agencies to put a giant federal handprint on its land.

After 100 years of giving away Colordo's public lands for farming, dams, railroads and development, federal agencies are intent on preserving what's left. Not in the pristine condition favored by the Sierra Club but kept from intense economic development.

Contrast Colorado with states such as Texas or Ohio, where virtually all land is privately held, and permission is needed to hike, fish, picnic or wander.

Colorado once was all federal land after the United States acquired much of it from France and Mexico and seized the rest from American Indians. In the mid-19th century, settlers and railroad barons began acquiring pieces for their own.

By the time Colorado became a state on Aug. 1, 1876, miners, homesteaders, ranchers and railroad men were scrambling over prairies and mountains.

Each new wave chose the most tillable land, the best grazing pastures, the richest veins of ore. Then they found a way to pry the land from the federal government. Settlers streamed into Colorado because land and water were free and plentiful.

The federal government gave away hundreds of acres at a time to anyone willing to go west and farm them. The Homestead Act of 1862 was the first of the land-giveaway laws, followed by the Desert Lands Act and the Timber Culture Act.

It was the era of exploitation, an ethic that prevailed for almost a century.

Ranchers who had no intention of farming acquired land under the acts so they could graze sheep and cattle on the grasslands.

Railroad barons exploited the federal government's eagerness to give its land away. Men like William Palmer acquired checkerboard patterns of land from a compliant Congress so they could lay tracks, then sell adjoining land for settlement, which in turn would spur use of the railroad, said David Halaas, chief historian for the Colorado Historical Society.

Without water, farming was fruitless in much of arid Colorado. So a law giving first water rights to the most senior users was crucial.

Land owners and developers helped push through the Reclamation Act of 1902, under which most of the huge dams that dot Colorado and the West were built.

But millions of acres of public land remained, too high or dry for anyone to make a living on it.

"The demand from the public for the use of the land was so infinitesimal" in the 19th century, said Tom Dougherty, spokesman for the Colorado branch of the National Wildlife Federation.

"Some guy from Cheyenne could go out and hunt antelope on the public lands, and it was no big deal for the rancher or anyone else."

The tide started to turn around the start of the 20th century, said David Getches of the Natural Resources Law Center at the University of Colorado.

"The federal government realized that people were going out there and not settling down, and not developing minerals or stock," he said. 'They were clear-cutting all the timber and moving on, or overgrazing while moving their cattle through in huge numbers. They'd move them from Texas to Canada, like locusts, devastating the place."

Public sentiment grew to put land off limits from unbridled exploitation.

In 1905, chief U.S. forester Gifford Pinchot and President Theodore Roosevelt set aside 148 million acres of new forest reserves. Included were 14 million acres of national forest in Colorado.

In his famous "Pinchot Letter," the chief forester outlined his philosophy. Forests would be managed by professional foresters, guaranteeing a sustainable yield to ensure that trees would be there for future generations. Pinchot believed the forests first should benefit the general public -- the little man in need of lumber for a house or maybe just a walk in the woods, not the big man in need of clear cuts for his lumber company.

But clear-cutting nonetheless became common practice, and annual timber harvests grew from 1 billion board feet a year to 11 billion.

Finally, in 1976, the National Forest Management Act declared that the forests would be managed for the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

That meant forests would be culled, not clear-cut, so they would last forever. And the interests of others -- hikers, bird-watchers -- would be considered.

"The days of those thousand-acre clear cuts are gone," said Colorado Division of Wildlife director John Mumma. "The American public has become much more conscious of what happens on public lands. The Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act all say you've got to evaluate your activities and their impacts on resources and people."

Through the decades, U.S. presidents have exercised their authority to protect public lands from development, and Congress often has howled. Just recently, many in Congress lambasted President Clinton for designating the Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument in Utah.

"It's great sport for all the presidents to use their authority to protect public lands as much as possible," Getches said. "Congress kicks and screams, and then five years later brags about how many lands were protected under their watch."

But how the battles have changed.