Routt County Commissioners have reaffirmed their strong opposition to oil and gas development on public lands within the county as outlined in a recent letter sent to Doug Vilsack, Colorado’s state director of the Bureau of Land Management.

The March 17 letter reiterates the county’s previous stance that “oil and gas development is not the highest and best use” of Routt County public lands.

This is the third letter the county has sent to the BLM regarding oil and gas development since October 2023. 

---

---

In the first letter, the commissioners commented on the BLM’s Colorado River Valley Field Office and Grand Junction Field Office Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and highlighted the economic and environmental challenges faced by public lands, which make up approximately half of Routt County.

In the statement, the commissioners commended the federal agency for including new conservation measures and for “analyzing new alternatives that seek to increase protections of BLM lands from oil and gas development.”

---

---

In February 2024, county commissioners provided comments on the BLM’s Draft Resource Management Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement for Oil and Gas Management in Colorado.

They stated the county’s position that oil and gas development does not significantly benefit the local economy compared to other public land uses and advocated for strong environmental protections, requesting that the BLM adopt an alternative to the plan that considers cumulative impacts beyond BLM-owned lands.

The latest letter — to be ratified next week, according to Routt County Commissioner Sonja Macys — focuses on the proposed Q4 2025 oil and gas lease sale, which includes parcels in Routt County that overlap with High Priority Habitats identified by Colorado Parks and Wildlife. 

High Priority Habitats support critical species such as greater-sage grouse, Columbian sharp-tailed grouse, Bears Ears’ elk and mule deer. The commissioners emphasize in the letter that these species and their habitats are under stress due to “cumulative, direct and indirect impacts such as climate change, development, industry and increased recreation.”

In the latest letter, the commissioners also criticize the BLM for not adequately addressing impacts to these habitats, arguing the agency should require comprehensive Wildlife Mitigation Plans and compensatory mitigation. They ask that the BLM consider the consequences to High Priority Habitats extending beyond BLM lands, particularly when these habitats are part of a productive unit that includes parcels owned by the agency. 

The letter concluded with the commissioners’ firm opposition to the lease sale of approximately 6,700 acres north of Slater Creek and the request that the BLM defer these parcels. 

“(We share) many of the same concerns as Routt County does regarding the potential impacts that oil and gas development could have on wildlife resources within the Slater Creek area, as well as the parcels proposed in Moffat and Rio Blanco counties,” said Luke Schafer, Western Slope director of Conservation Colorado. 

Schafer underlined the concerns given the additional ambiguity created by the introduction of U.S. Rep. Jeff Hurd’s Productive Public Lands Act, which, if passed, would essentially nullify the BLM’s Resource Management Amendment for Big Game Habitat Conservation for Oil and Gas Management in Colorado. 

“At its core, the Big Game plan amendment seeks to limit the habitat fragmentation and loss that has contributed to significant population declines in the elk and mule deer populations across much of the state,” Schafer said. 

He noted that the plan is “particularly important in this specific instance” given the “precipitous decline in populations that the Bears Ears’ elk and mule deer herds have incurred.”

He continued that the animals migrate from and through the Elkhead Mountains into lower elevation winter ranges in Moffat County and the Little Snake River Valley in Wyoming, “which puts them in direct conflict with a number of these proposed parcel locations.” 

“This, coupled with the fact that hunting is a sustainable economic driver in western Routt and Moffat counties, where there are a number of economic uncertainties ahead due to power plant closures, makes this proposed lease sale of particular concern,” Schafer added. 

In a separate letter to Vilsack also dated March 17, nearly 20 environmental organizations, including the Center for Biological Diversity, the National Parks Conservation Association and the Sierra Club, submitted comments to the BLM regarding the Q4 2025 lease sale. 

The organizations emphasize in the letter the importance of ensuring that leasing decisions comply with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, stressing that the BLM must conduct thorough environmental analyses to address potential repercussions of new leasing and development on these sensitive resources.

They also note that BLM is not obligated to lease any specific parcel and should consider deferring parcels where conflicts with other land uses exist.

As Routt County continues to engage with the BLM on these issues, the outcome of this lease sale will have considerable implications for the county’s environmental policies and economic strategies. In the coming weeks, BLM will consider the commissioners’ comments alongside other public feedback as the agency determines the fate of the proposed lease sale parcels.

“This is the constant challenge our agency officials are trying to address, whether they work at BLM or Colorado Parks and Wildlife: How do we balance all of the competing needs and desires of multiple interests?” Schafer said. “Finding the answers to that question is a complicated endeavor that requires real collaboration from stakeholders, which luckily is something we do well in Colorado.”