Under pressure from public-lands advocates, the White River National Forest will include a 15-day public-comment period before moving forward with plans for Pitkin County to oversee operations at the Maroon Bells Scenic Area under a special-use permit. The Pitkin Board of County Commissioners is scheduled to discuss the action during a public hearing on Wednesday.
Officials with Pitkin County and the White River National Forest say the special-use permit is the best possible way to protect the Maroon Bells amid federal staffing and budget shortages, but public-lands watchdog groups are sounding the alarm that the move could inadvertently serve as a forerunner in efforts to privatize federal lands.
The concern stems from the implications of transferring the daily operations of the popular destination out of federal hands and the process by which it could happen.
Members of the White River National Forest’s leadership team in May asked the Pitkin County commissioners to approve a special-use permit for the county to oversee operations at the Maroon Bells Scenic Area.
“We run in the red there, which means we collect less revenue than it costs to run the site, by a significant margin, [$300,000-plus], and that’s not sustainable for the forest,” Forest Supervisor Brian Glaspell told commissioners May 12. “So we need a better option, and the best one is to continue our partnership with you all.”
Gary Tennenbaum, Pitkin County Open Space and Trails director, has been working with the Forest Service on a special-use permit, under which the county would run operations and the federal agency would retain ownership and ultimate decision-making.
The Maroon Bells Scenic Area, the developed gateway to the Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness that is served during the peak season by busses shuttling from Aspen Highlands, sees hundreds of thousands of annual visits, making it one of the most heavily visited natural attractions in Colorado.
The special-use permit would be issued from the White River National Forest, likely using a “categorical exclusion,” which allows the agency to skip lengthy environmental reviews through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in instances when proposed actions do not have a significant effect on the environment, such as painting a building or selecting a concessionaire to run a campground. But watchdog groups are concerned that this action, especially in the context of the Trump administration’s downsizing and restructuring of federal land management agencies, should not happen using categorical exclusion but should include a more robust review.
“Because the Trump administration wants to do privatization anywhere it can, it’s going to need test cases, and the mechanism here by which they’re doing the privatization is what’s so problematic,” said Aaron Weiss, executive director of the Center for Western Priorities, a public-lands advocacy group based in Denver.
Weiss cited a letter sent to officials at both the White River National Forest and Pitkin County in which University of Colorado law professor Mark Squillace describes what he calls “an obvious legal problem with this proposal.”
“[T]he idea that the Forest Service can lawfully categorically exclude this proposal is laughable,” Squillace wrote. He maintains that categorical exclusions are being used too broadly, and that the provision “does not allow the wholesale transfer of management responsibility over the entire Maroon Bells Scenic Area as is apparently being proposed here.”
Glaspell, Tennenbaum and Pitkin County Attorney Ry Neiley say a categorical exclusion is appropriate in this instance, as the county is not proposing any changes and will operate under an existing management plan for the Maroon Bells Scenic Area.
Glaspell, in a letter responding to Squillace, pointed to language in the federal code that states a categorical exclusion can be used to issue a new authorization for “recreation special uses that occur on existing roads or trails, in existing facilities, in existing recreation sites, or in areas where such activities are allowed.”
“That is precisely what we are doing here,” Glaspell wrote. “Issuance of a special-use permit is not a ‘wholesale transfer’ of management, rather it is an authorization to conduct activities in a specified manner and it remains the responsibility of the Forest Service to establish the parameters for operations and monitor compliance. As the former Forest Service planning director for the Rocky Mountain Region, I have considerable experience reviewing the appropriate level of NEPA for projects of all types, and I believe the referenced CE is appropriate here. There is no public benefit to litigating this issue, but if that were to happen, I’m confident we would prevail.”
A chance for the public to weigh in
After public-lands advocates voiced concern that the process for allowing Pitkin County to assume operations at the Maroon Bells Scenic Area has not included a chance to provide feedback to the federal government, the Forest Service said Friday that it would provide a 15-day period for public-comment as part of a scoping process following approval of the special-use permit by Pitkin County commissioners. The Forest Service will consider those comments before signing a categorical exclusion.
Will Roush, executive director of the Carbondale-based public-lands advocacy organization Wilderness Workshop, expressed gratitude to agency officials for using their discretion to add a comment period.
“It’s one of the most iconic landscapes, not just in the state, but in the country,” Roush said. “So if the Forest Service is going to hand off management to any other party, I think it’s really important that the public get a chance to weigh in and get notice of that potential.”
This public-comment period is welcomed by critics of the proposed permit, but Weiss and Squillace say it does not go far enough.
“Public comment is one thing, but the public deserves the opportunity to comment not only on an analysis of the proposal, but also on reasonable alternatives to that proposal,” Squillace said in an interview with Aspen Journalism.
Weiss also maintains that the move should warrant robust environmental analysis, and he pointed out that neither the county nor the Forest Service has released the scope of the special-use permit. There are no maps available of the entirety of the area that would fall under Pitkin County’s purview, and current documents do not show how much acreage would be involved.
“Holding a comment period without saying how many acres are involved or releasing a map would be another red flag,” Weiss wrote in an email to Aspen Journalism. “The public can’t meaningfully participate if USFS is withholding key information about the scope of what it’s proposing.”
Tennenbaum said the specific acreage is not clear and the Forest Service is working on that.
“For us, it was all the existing operations that are in the scenic area today,” Tennenbaum said. “It’s the campgrounds; it’s the East Maroon portal; it’s the West Maroon portal; it’s the parking lots; it’s right around Maroon Lake to where it crosses Maroon Creek.”
Under the special-use permit, the county would not play a management role in the Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness terrain beyond Maroon Lake.
Tennenbaum pointed out that the county has been assuming more roles in the Maroon Bells operations as the Forest Service capacity has dwindled for decades. “Things have been shifting. The reality is that a lot of the operations up there have shifted over time,” Tennenbaum said.
The bus system has always been managed by either the county or the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority or a combination, and the county manages the road. A county employee, Olivia Niosi, was hired this year as Maroon Bells facilities and operations supervisor. The county also provides backcountry community-response officers through the sheriff’s office and hired a contractor to pump the scenic area’s restrooms and clear out a packrat infestation in order to reopen to the public this summer.
With the agreement founded on decades of partnership and in accordance with a management plan developed in 2023, Tennenbaum said the public should not expect changes at the Maroon Bells, except in certain fee amounts.
“There’s a change in the operator, but there is no change in operations,” Tennenbaum said. “Everything that is existing out there, there’s no change to that except for the person who is managing it.”
Concern remains about precedent and federal responsibility
The proposal itself comes with significant angst, anger and sadness that the federal government is not providing adequate funding for the Forest Service as a whole and one of its iconic locations in particular.
“It disturbs me that one of the iconic places in the National Forest System — the Maroon Bells — is not funded and staffed enough,” said Scott Fitzwilliams, former forest supervisor of the White River National Forest who retired early last year as the Trump administration worked to reduce the federal workforce. “Shameful is the word I use all the time to describe it. It’s shameful that we don’t even have the money to take care of one of the iconic places in the system.”
Fitzwilliams worked to build the partnership with Pitkin County and said he trusts the county shares a conservation ethic with a focus on stewardship of public lands.
“Partnerships should add to the agency’s capability,” he said. “They should not become a mechanism to normalize the decline and dismantling of our federal agencies.”
He and others worry that Pitkin County’s move will be seen as a model that validates the transfer of federal public lands to other agencies or entities.
“What I’m more concerned about in the context of this administration is it’s going to be used as a model or to demonstrate that we can just have counties or states do this,” Fitzwilliams said. “That’s a slippery slope in my opinion.”
Neiley emphasized that the ultimate management authority for the scenic area will remain with the Forest Service, and any proposed changes would still be subject to federal review. He said the county has considered how this action may be perceived as agreeing with the Trump administration’s work to unload federal lands.
“The county is going into that with eyes wide open,” Neiley said.
But the risk to the Maroon Bells warranted the decision, he said, especially if the Forest Service turned to a private concessionaire to operate the scenic area.
“The county understands that if the Forest Service doesn’t utilize this process to issue the special-use permit to Pitkin County, it will utilize this process to issue a special-use permit to a private concessionaire,” Neiley said. “If it goes to a private concessionaire, it will never come back to public management. And the fees will go up; they will go up with the goal of profit, not with improving the resource.”
The county has proposed raising the vehicle day-use fees to visit the Maroon Bells Scenic Area to $30 from $10, “with 100% of the revenue dedicated to the management, operations, maintenance and improvement of the Maroon Bells Scenic Area,” according to a memo.
Other fees are also expected to rise, including the motorcycle and e-bike daily fee (to $10 from $5) and the campground nightly fee (to $33 from $15). The shuttle fares are not expected to change from the current rates. The county will not have oversight of the backcountry wilderness overnight permits and fees.
On Wednesday, Pitkin County commissioners will also discuss establishing a new enterprise fund, where revenue from user fees, permits and reservations will be collected and used to cover the expenses of managing and operating the scenic area.
Without federal investment through Congress’ budgeting process, the current fees cannot support operations.
“I would prefer that we had the resources to manage the Bells on our own, but we don’t, and I’m hopeful that this expanded partnership with the county will be net positive, yielding benefits we would not otherwise realize,” Glaspell wrote in his response to Squillace.
As Forest Service officials have argued that the current situation at the Bells is untenable, Fitzwilliams agreed that the area would see significant change if the county does not step in, either through a private concessionaire or reduced services.
“Given the situation and the longtime trust we have, it’s probably the right decision to make, and it’s a very sad one,” Fitzwilliams said.
The county said the ultimate goal of the special-use permit is for a temporary fix.
“We feel like this is the best path forward, and if we can all work together and get federal lands funded at a higher level, that one day, the county could give this back,” Tennenbaum said. “Ultimately, we would like the federal government to fund their public lands.”
Aspen Journalism, which is solely responsible for its editorial content, is supported by a grant from the Pitkin County Healthy Community Fund.
