Last summer, Senate Republicans attempted to sell off millions of acres of federal public land as part of the budget reconciliation process. Now, a group of Western Democratic senators wants to send a clear message that this cannot happen again. 

“Public lands are owned by the American people and are managed to provide perpetual benefits that far outlast a 10-year budget period, a Senate career or even our lifetimes,” said Colorado Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet on a Thursday, April 30, press call. “In Colorado, they are part of our DNA, the foundation of our economy and treasured parts of our culture, geography and history … The idea of selling them is insane and something that I will never stop fighting.” 

Bennet introduced a new bill called the Public Lands Integrity Act this week alongside Sens. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., to bar public land sales from being included in any future reconciliation processes. 

The Colorado senator said this was an appropriate venue for preventing public land sales, “because  it is this process that (Sen.) Mike Lee used to try to basically terrorize the Senate last year over this issue.” 

Lee, a Republican Senator from Utah, spearheaded the effort to mandate the sale of between 2 million and 3 million acres of U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management lands in 11 Western states, purportedly for housing and “community needs” as part of the “One Big, Beautiful Act” last June. In Colorado, the sales could have impacted the 16 million acres managed by the Forest Service and the 8.3 million acres managed by the Bureau. 

Ultimately, it was opposition from congressional Republicans, Democrats and members of the public to the sale proposal — and the Senate parliamentarian ruling it improper for the budget reconciliation bill — that led the provision to be stripped from the final package. 

The new legislation introduced by Bennet would make public land sales a seventh exception to the Byrd Rule, which establishes guardrails to what senators can include in a reconciliation process. It is the Senate parliamentarian — a nonpartisan, appointed advisor who is often described as a referee — who makes determinations based on the Byrd Rule. 

Last year, Lee’s proposed public land sale was found in violation of the Byrd Rule’s requirement that all items in a reconciliation package must have a direct and substantive impact on federal spending or revenues.  

As Lee and other congressional Republicans continue to push for privatizing public lands, Bennet has defended the proposed legislation as necessary.

“Sen. Lee’s proposal was a radical idea, but he’s been clear ever since that he’s not giving up the fight to sell off our treasured public lands — and we aren’t done either,” Bennet said. “Public lands must be off the table to pay for short-term, partisan spending.”

Colorado House Speaker Julie McCluskie, D-Dillon, spoke in favor of the federal legislation on Thursday’s press call.

“More than $17 billion of our economy is driven by our outdoor recreation usage and the connection that so many people feel with nature,” McCluskie said. “More than 130,000 jobs rely on access to our public lands. And just as importantly, our public lands define who we are as Coloradans. It is really a testament to the spirit of the West when you can get out into the great outdoors, connect with nature and understand how really serene and beautiful these special places are.” 

For the second year in a row, Colorado’s legislature introduced and passed a joint resolution opposing “all efforts” that “directly or indirectly diminish the public’s voice, access and recourse in the management of national public lands,” including widespread land sales and “erosion of bedrock laws” such as the Federal Land Policy and Management Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. 

While it did have some dissenting votes — from 15 Republican representatives and eight Republican senators — legislators from both parties supported the resolution. 

Bill Fales, a Carbondale rancher who owns a cattle operation that straddles Garfield and Pitkin counties, spoke of the importance of public land access for producers, especially in Western Slope counties like Pitkin, where nearly 85% of the land is federally owned. 

“Every family ranch in the valley that I know of — well, I know almost everyone from Rifle clear to Aspen — every one of them relies on public land grazing. It’s the only land there is,” Fales said, adding that cattlemen were called on to support Sen. Lee’s federal land proposal because they could buy the land themselves. 

“That is just totally ludicrous, the idea that a small family ranch will outbid the insane number of billionaires and oil companies who also treasure this land,” Fales said. “It would end multiple use on these public lands and/or federal land grazing, and the important recreation economy.”

Bennet was optimistic about the act’s chances due in part to the widespread support of public lands. Several Western Slope county commissioners expressed support for the act in a Thursday news release.

 “Our public lands, which represent 85% of our county, nourish critical wildlife habitat for fish, bird, elk and bear populations, serve as the backbone of a thriving recreational economy, and inspire the love and awe we have for this place we call home,” said Jeffrey Woodruff, Pitkin County Commissioner. “We are stewards of this land. Our residents, international visitors, and the over 40 million Americans who depend upon the Colorado River, all trust that public land will be a vital resource, not just today, but for all of the generations to come.”

Public land sales are widely opposed in the West regardless of political affiliation, according to the 2026 Conservation in the West Poll — an annual survey of eight western states, including Colorado, on environmental issues. Around 80% of the Colorodans surveyed expressed opposition to public land sales for housing development and to private companies for oil, gas and mining development. Similar rates of opposition were reported in all the states surveyed. 

“There was a time when we were passing, every generation was passing, strong bipartisan public lands bills,” Bennet said. “That has been stopped in recent years by the Republicans, particularly by Sen. Lee and Sen. (Ted) Cruz, (R-Texas), and I hope someday we actually get back into the business of passing bipartisan bills, so we can protect more land, so we can pass bills like the GORP Act.” 

Bennet introduced the GORP Act, or Gunnison Outdoor Resource Protection, last year to add protections to more than 700,000 acres of public land in and around Gunnison County. 

“In the meantime, what we’ve got to do is make sure that they know that we’re gonna fight every single effort to sell off the public lands of the United States, and that’s what the Public Lands Integrity Act is meant to do,” he added. 

The Minnesota Wild have secured a berth into the second round of the NHL playoffs!

After a close match with the Dallas Stars, there will be no Game 7. It was a 5-2 victory for the Wild, behind two goals from Quinn Hughes and another from Vladimir Tarasenko, with forward Matt Boldy adding two in two minutes of the game. The goals for the Stars came from Mavrik Bourque and Wyatt Johnston.

SHOP: Minnesota Wild vs. Colorado Avalanche 2026 NHL playoff tickets

After advancing to the second round, the Wild will now will face the Colorado Avalanche, who swept the LA Kings 4-0 in the first round. As the No. 3 seed, the Wild will be on the road for the first two games before hosting Game 3 and Game 4.

Here’s everything to know in order to buy Wild vs. Avalanche NHL playoff tickets.

Minnesota Wild vs. Colorado Avalanche playoff tickets, prices

Minnesota Wild vs. Colorado Avalanche second-round tickets are available now. As of publication, the cheapest available tickets for Minnesota’s first home game are starting at $387.

Minnesota Wild vs. Colorado Avalanche NHL playoff schedule

As the No. 1 seed, the Avalanche will have home-ice advantage and host Game 1, Game 2, Game 5* and Game 7*. Then, they’ll face the Wild on the road for Game 3, Game 4 and Game 6*.

Minnesota Wild NHL playoff tickets

Colorado Avalanche NHL playoff tickets

* = if necessary

Minnesota Wild future playoff tickets

Hypothetical tickets to Wild’s first home game in the Western Conference Finals and even Stanley Cup Final are already on sale. If the Wild advance, you’re all set! If they are eliminated, you will be refunded for your ticket.

Shop Wild vs. Avalanche NHL Playoff tickets

Population losses in several of Colorado’s Western Slope resort counties underscore a growing trend: as housing and cost-of-living pressures mount, more residents are moving out than moving in.

Overall, the state of Colorado continues to experience positive population growth, according to the U.S. Census Bureau’s county-level population estimates published on March 26.

From July 2024 to July 2025, the state saw a 0.4% increase in residents, equal to more than 24,000 people. The state also saw more births than deaths — a product of a low death rate offsetting a steadily declining birth rate.

However, the 0.4% increase is significantly less compared to the kind of growth the state saw before 2020, which could signal that Colorado has begun to lose its appeal as a popular destination for movers, according to the Common Sense Institute of Colorado’s analysis of the census estimates. The institute is a think tank that promotes free enterprise policy.

A significant factor behind Colorado’s slowed population growth is a slowdown of domestic migration. While the state’s population growth 10 years ago was primarily driven by people moving to Colorado from other states, the most recent census estimates reveal natural change — births versus deaths — now plays a larger part in maintaining the state’s population.

Census estimates rank the state 48th in the nation for domestic migration as a share of the population and 44th for net migration. Ten years ago, Colorado was third in the nation for domestic migration as a share of population, according to the Common Sense Institute report.

The population gained from net migration into Colorado was 20 times less in 2025 than it was in 2015. In total from July 2024 to July 2025, Colorado gained 3,256 people from net migration compared to 20,608 from births minus deaths. The gain in migration is thanks to the arrival of 15,356 international migrants, which offset the state’s net loss of 12,100 domestic migrants.

What’s happening in Aspen, in one click.

Sign up for daily or weekly newsletters AspenTimes.com/newsletter

Other factors behind negative net migration have been influenced by national movements, such as slower job growth, higher interest rates and changes in immigration policy, according to a March release from the Colorado State Demography Office.

“At least some portion of the domestic out-migration is made up of recently arrived international migrants (arriving between 2022 and 2024) who have moved to other states as Colorado was not their intended final destination,” the office said in its March release. Counties that received the highest numbers of international migrants were more likely to see net negative domestic migration from their move to other states or counties in 2025.

Western Slope counties see population declines

While several Western Slope counties also share in the state’s domestic migration slowdown, the region’s births, deaths and international migration weren’t enough to save resort towns from a dip in population.

Between 2024 and 2025, counties including Eagle, Pitkin, Summit, Garfield and Grand saw net population losses between 344 and 126 residents. Similarly to statewide trends, rural mountain counties experienced a drop in domestic migration, though natural change was not enough to offset the number of people moving out of the Western Slope.

This is a shift from the cumulative population trends from 2020 to 2025, which show positive population growth for most Western Slope counties with the exception of Eagle and Pitkin counties.

Of the 24 counties that have experienced a population decline since the 2020 Census, Eagle County is among the top three seeing the largest declines with a loss of 1,430 residents since 2020. The other two counties — Jefferson and Boulder counties — both lost over 2,000, a notably lower percentage of their approximately 580,400 and 328,500 populations, respectively.

Pitkin, though having lost a smaller quantity of residents since 2020, saw a larger percentage decrease of its overall population — around 4.2%. 

While births continue to outpace deaths for most of rural western Colorado, domestic migration paints a significantly different picture. Out of the state’s 64 counties, 30 saw negative domestic migration, including several Western Slope counties housing resort ski towns.

‘High housing cost counties’ drive out-migration

The impacts of housing opportunities on Grand County’s population mirror broader trends seen across the mountain region. According to the State Demography Office, a significant portion of counties that lost populations to other states or counties in 2025 were considered “high housing cost counties.”

The State Demography Office specifically identified Eagle, Pitkin, and Summit counties as areas with higher housing costs that experienced net negative domestic migration.

Pitkin County Commissioner Jeffrey Woodruff said a combination of higher interest rates from international conflict, higher construction costs far exceeding county budgets, and higher shipping costs and tariffs for materials have all weighed on construction budgets.

“This county continues to be both an attractive place to work and live; to recreate and enjoy year round cultural activities. But headwinds include cost of living in the mountains, with construction costs, regional healthcare costs and homeowners insurance adding to financial burden and acting as a net migration constraint,” Woodruff wrote in an email. Pitkin County’s 2024 cost of living is over 120% of the national average and is 95% higher than the rest of the state, he added.

On the other hand, many of the counties with the strongest positive net migration in the state were also those that saw some of the largest increases in residential construction. These include Weld (1.9% increase), Douglas (1.6%) and Larimer (0.8%) counties.

Grand County was one of the few Western Slope counties to see gains in population between July 2024 and July 2025, which Grand County Commissioner Randy George credits partially to an increase in housing projects.

“If you look at it over several years, at least five years, the population of Grand County has been relatively stable. … Although there’s been a lot of building,” George said. “What that means is there are a lot of people that have built second homes, or have built homes that they’re using for short-term rentals.”

A growing number of retirees aging in place and the county’s proximity to the metro area has likely also contributed to positive domestic migration, in addition to a lower cost for homes compared to neighboring ski towns.

“Just like a lot of places, there was a big bump during COVID, when people all of a sudden said, ‘Wait a minute, I don’t want to be in the metro area, I’ll build a place,’” he said. “It has abated some, but people continue to build up here.”

For rural towns like those in Eagle and Pitkin counties, factors like mountain terrain and zoning regulation can limit where cities are able to build and expand. For Grand County, space is less of an obstacle.

“We are grand. It’s in the name,” George said. “We are not hemmed in that way, there is still a fair amount of space available.”

Hoping to make housing more accessible, Woodruff said Pitkin County issued $323 million in permits in 2025. A number of employee housing developments are currently under construction, in addition to projects stemming from ongoing partnerships with the West Mountain Regional Housing Coalition on deed restricted units.

Cost of living, business challenges

Aside from housing, one of the biggest challenges faced by mountain resort towns is cost of living, which has been met with departure from both families and businesses. An April report from the Colorado Chamber Foundation found that 98 companies relocated or moved business operations to other states since 2019, taking jobs with them. The companies blamed excessive business regulations and high costs for their decision.

“As you can guess, it’s a cost of living challenge that’s driving a change in our demographics here,” said Erin McCuskey, economic resiliency manager for Eagle County. “I think it’s also meaningful to mention that these … demographic shifts are happening nationally, at least in terms of workforce. We have long predicted that our number of active workers was going to start to decrease as we have so many people aging out of the workforce and moving into retirement.”

The outflow of domestic migration and lower birth rates have only exacerbated these workforce challenges, especially with some sectors already struggling to hire in rural areas. The Common Sense Institute report said the combination of lower birth rates and a domestic migration slowdown could potentially compound an already-occurring loss of economic activity. 

“Policymakers should consider how to avoid a situation in which the two trends feed into each other: businesses leave as fewer skilled and educated workers are available, and fewer people move from other states as high-paying jobs become scarcer,” the report said.

In order to combat these challenges, McCuskey said the Eagle County government launched its Workforce Pipelines and Ecosystem Mapping at the start of 2026 with the goal of expanding access to career pathways and strengthening partnerships with local employers and workforce organizations.

“Our focus is really on retention initiatives,” McCuskey said. “Since it is hard for us to relocate workers to our area due to the cost of living challenges and just the lack of housing, we really want to make sure that the people who are here that love being a part of our community can see the great career opportunities that are available to them.”

Eagle County is also host to the Northwest Colorado Small Business Development Center, which works with 11 counties on various business support initiatives. The center has advisors who, for no cost, work with businesses to figure out succession plans and protect their assets.

“We’re really trying to change the narrative that employers are competing for talent with the business that’s across the street from them, or that we’re competing between our communities for workforce,” McCuskey. “In reality, we in Colorado are competing with other states for our workforce.”