Piñon Canyon growth targeted

Bipartisan opposition from Colorado’s congressional delegation could kill an Army plan to triple the size of a training area in the state’s southeast corner.

An amendment to a military spending bill introduced by U.S. Reps. Marilyn Musgrave and John Salazar would forbid the Defense Department from taking any action — including studies — that could aid in the expansion of Fort Carson’s 235,000-acre Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site.

U.S. Rep. Doug Lamborn, a Republican from Colorado Springs, said the amendment stands a good chance of passing the House, possibly this week, because it has bipartisan backing from Musgrave, a Republican from Fort Morgan, and Salazar, a Democrat from the San Luis Valley whose district includes Piñon Canyon.

Lamborn, whose district includes Fort Carson, is scrambling to block the amendment.

“They tried to blindside me, but I found out,” said Lamborn, who spent Wednesday lobbying members to defeat the amendment.

Musgrave said Wednesday that Lamborn shouldn’t be surprised. “I’ve been on this Piñon Canyon thing for a year and a half,” she said.

The Army proposal would add 418,000 acres to the maneuver site. The Army says it needs more land because it’s adding 10,000 soldiers to Fort Carson by the end of the decade and needs to train them for increasingly far-flung battlefields.

The expansion has drawn fire from southeast Colorado ranchers, who fear losing their lands, and property-rights advocates who don’t want the government to seize the land under condemnation laws.

Last week, the Army narrowed the land it’s considering for expansion and offered assurances to Congress that it wants to buy land from willing sellers rather than seize property.

Until this week, though, no Colorado congressman had tried outright to block expansion through legislation.

Tara Trujillo, a spokeswoman for Salazar, said Musgrave first penned the amendment, which forbids spending money on any action related to expansion. She then sought backing from Salazar, who was already a foe of the plan.

The two are odd allies. According to The Washington Post, Musgrave has voted with her fellow Republicans 93 percent of the time and Salazar has voted with Democrats 88 percent of the time.

What they have in common are rural voters who want to fight the expansion. Musgrave’s 4th District includes Fort Collins and Greeley and extends from the Wyoming border to the New Mexico border, taking in most of the state’s rural eastern plains along the way.

Salazar’s 3rd District includes the rural Western Slope counties, crosses the Continental Divide to the south to wrap in Trinidad and Pueblo, and extends far enough out onto the plains to include Piñon Canyon.

Echoing arguments made by local ranchers, Musgrave said she’s a strong supporter of the military but thinks Fort Carson troops should go out of state to train if they need more land.

“The Army already has 235,000 acres in the area of the current maneuver site, and I don’t understand why that isn’t sufficient,” she said.

Salazar’s office didn’t respond to questions.

Lamborn said the Army should get a chance to study the possibility of expansion further so it can make its case for whether the land is needed.

If the amendment passes the House, as Lamborn and Musgrave predict, the fate of the expansion will fall to Colorado’s Senate delegation, which has been lukewarm to the proposal.

U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., has opposed federal land seizures but has been cautiously supportive of the Army’s plans to at least study a Piñon Canyon expansion.

“He wants to see the process through,” said spokesman Steve Wymer.

U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., has been warmer to expansion than his brother in the House, but not much, saying any Army land purchase must be “an economic winwin” for southeastern Colorado. He has rapped the Army for not being forthcoming with its plans for Piñon Canyon or its reasons for expansion.

“He does want to see the studies,” spokesman Cody Wertz said.

CONTACT THE WRITER: 636-0240 or tom.roeder@gazette.com