Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
This bill amends the Colorado Wilderness Act of 1993 to add approximately 6,817 acres to the Sarvis Creek Wilderness in Routt National Forest, as shown on a map dated February 26, 2024. It designates the added land as wilderness and makes the Wilderness Act effective as of this Act's enactment for administration.
Left emphasizes conservation and tribal protections; right emphasizes federal restrictions.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill functions as a narrowly scoped statutory designation that is well-integrated into existing wilderness law: it specifies the amendment, acreage, and map, defines responsible authority, and preserves treaty and traditional tribal uses while enabling statutory management actions under the Wilderness Act.
This bill amends the Colorado Wilderness Act of 1993 to add approximately 6,817 acres to the Sarvis Creek Wilderness in Routt National Forest, as shown on a map dated February 26, 2024.
It designates the added land as wilderness and makes the Wilderness Act effective as of this Act's enactment for administration.
The Secretary of Agriculture may permit tribal access for traditional, religious, and cultural uses and may undertake actions necessary to control fire, insects, and disease consistent with the Wilderness Act.
Narrow, low-cost wilderness addition with built-in administrative provisions favors enactment, though local stakeholder or floor scheduling issues could block it.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill functions as a narrowly scoped statutory designation that is well-integrated into existing wilderness law: it specifies the amendment, acreage, and map, defines responsible authority, and preserves treaty and traditional tribal uses while enabling statutory management actions under the Wilderness Act.
Left emphasizes conservation and tribal protections; right emphasizes federal restrictions.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Left emphasizes conservation and tribal protections; right emphasizes federal restrictions.
Likely broadly supportive because the bill expands protected federal wilderness and explicitly preserves tribal rights and traditional uses.
Supporters will view the wildfire, insect, and disease language as prudent for ecological resilience, provided it is implemented to protect wilderness character.
Generally favorable but pragmatic; views the bill as a modest, targeted wilderness expansion with limited federal cost if managed within existing budgets.
Wants clear implementation rules for fire and pest control and attention to local stakeholder impacts.
Likely opposed or skeptical because it expands federal wilderness, limiting local control and potential economic uses.
Concerns center on federal land use restrictions, possible impacts to ranching, recreation, or forest management, and precedent for further designations.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, low-cost wilderness addition with built-in administrative provisions favors enactment, though local stakeholder or floor scheduling issues could block it.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Left emphasizes conservation and tribal protections; right emphasizes federal restrictions.
Narrow, low-cost wilderness addition with built-in administrative provisions favors enactment, though local stakeholder or floor scheduling…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill functions as a narrowly scoped statutory designation that is well-integrated into existing wilderness law: it specifies the amendment, acreage, and map, defines respo…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.