49–006 

109TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 109–624 

COLORADO NORTHERN FRONT RANGE MOUNTAIN 

BACKDROP PROTECTION STUDY ACT 

SEPTEMBER 6, 2006.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State 

of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. POMBO, from the Committee on Resources, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 2110] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 

(H.R. 2110) to provide for a study of options for protecting the open 

space characteristics of certain lands in and adjacent to the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests in Colorado, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with 

an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; FINDINGS; PURPOSE. 

(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Colorado Northern Front Range 

Mountain Backdrop Protection Study Act’’. 

(b) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 

(1) Rising dramatically from the Great Plains, the Front Range of the Rocky 

Mountains provides a scenic mountain backdrop to many communities in the 

Denver metropolitan area and elsewhere in Colorado. The portion of the range 

within and adjacent to the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests also includes a diverse array of wildlife habitats and provides many opportunities for 

outdoor recreation. 

(2) The open space character of this mountain backdrop is an important esthetic and economic asset for adjoining communities, making them attractive locations for homes and businesses. 

(3) Rapid population growth in the northern Front Range area of Colorado is 

increasing recreational use of the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests and 

is also placing increased pressure for development of other lands within and adjacent to that national forest. 

(4) Efforts by local governments and other entities have provided important 

protection for portions of this mountain backdrop, especially in the northern 

Denver metropolitan area. However, some portions of the mountain backdrop in 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with REPORTS
2 

this part of Colorado remain unprotected and are at risk of losing their open 

space qualities. 

(5) It is in the national interest for the Federal Government, in collaboration 

with local communities, to assist in identifying options for increasing the protection of the mountain backdrop in the northern Front Range area of Colorado. 

(c) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this Act is to identify options that may be available 

to assist in maintaining the open space characteristics of lands that are part of the 

mountain backdrop of communities in the northern section of the Front Range area 

of Colorado. 

SEC. 2. COLORADO NORTHERN FRONT RANGE MOUNTAIN BACKDROP STUDY. 

(a) STUDY AND REPORT.—The Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Chief 

of the Forest Service and in consultation with the State and local officials and agencies specified in subsection (c), shall review the lands within the study area and, 

not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, shall report to 

such officials and to Congress regarding the following: 

(1) The present ownership of such lands. 

(2) Which undeveloped land may be at risk of development. 

(3) Actions that could be taken by the United States, the State of Colorado 

or a political subdivision of such State, or any other parties to preserve the open 

and undeveloped character of such lands. 

(b) DEFINITIONS.—For the purposes of this section, the following definitions apply: 

(1) STUDY AREA.—The term ‘‘study area’’ means those lands in southern Boulder, northern Jefferson, and northern Gilpin Counties, Colorado, that are situated west of Colorado State Highway 93, south and east of Colorado State Highway 119, and north of Colorado State Highway 46, excluding lands within the 

city limits of the cities of Boulder or Golden, Colorado, as generally depicted on 

the map entitled ‘‘Northern Front Range Mountain Backdrop Study Area’’ dated 

April, 2006. 

(2) UNDEVELOPED LAND.—The term ‘‘undeveloped land’’ means land that—

(A) is located within the study area; 

(B) is free or primarily free of structures; and 

(C) the development of which is likely to adversely affect the scenic, wildlife, or recreational value of the study area. 

(c) CONSULTATIONS.—In implementing this Act, the Secretary shall consult with 

the following: 

(1) The Colorado Department of Natural Resources. 

(2) Colorado State Forest Service. 

(3) Colorado State Conservation Board. 

(4) Great Outdoors Colorado. 

(5) The Boards of County Commissioners of Boulder, Jefferson, and Gilpin 

Counties, Colorado. 

(d) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture to take any action that would affect the use of 

any lands not owned by the United States. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 2110 is to provide for a study of options for 

protecting the open space characteristics of certain lands in and adjacent to the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests in Colorado, 

and for other purposes. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

The State of Colorado has grown significantly in recent years and 

even gained a House of Representatives seat in th last census. As 

such, the Denver-metro area has expanded and may continue expanding into the ‘‘front range’’ of the Rocky Mountains. West of the 

front range, the Forest Service manages the Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest. H.R. 2110 would authorize a study conducted by the 

Forest Service on the best way to protect open space between the 

Denver-metro area and the National Forest. 

The bill would require, within one year of enactment, the Forest 

Service to study the ownership patterns of the land in the front 

range area, identify areas that are open and could possibly be deVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:45 Sep 08, 2006 Jkt 049006 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR624.XXX HR624

sroberts on PROD1PC70 with REPORTS
3 

veloped, and recommend to Congress how these lands might be 

protected and how the federal government could help local communities and residents preclude development. The lands identified for 

study are within Colorado’s Second Congressional District represented by Congressman Mark Udall. 

At the legislative hearing on H.R. 2110, the Forest Service made 

several suggestions, including clarifying language that would ensure the Forest Service and the Department of Agriculture only influenced lands under its jurisdiction and that land use decisions on 

non-federal land be made by the appropriate zoning or planning 

authority. Congressman Mark Udall worked with the Forest Service to draft an amendment to the bill making these and other technical changes. The amendment was approved during the Full Committee markup. 

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 2110 was introduced on May 4, 2005, by Congressman Mark 

Udall (D–CO). The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on Forests 

and Forest Health. On March 9, 2006, the Subcommittee held a 

hearing on the bill. On July 19, 2006, the Full Resources Committee met to consider the bill. The Subcommittee was discharged 

from further consideration of the bill by unanimous consent. An 

amendment making substantive changes requested by the Forest 

Service was offered by Congressman Udall and agreed to by unanimous consent. The bill, as amended, was then ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives by unanimous consent. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Resources’ oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in 

the body of this report. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Article I, section 8, clause 3 of the Constitution of the United 

States grants Congress the authority to enact this bill. 

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of 

the House of Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) of that rule provides 

that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. 

2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2) of rule 

XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 

308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this bill does not 

contain any new budget authority, spending authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or tax expenditures. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with REPORTS
4 

3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. This bill does not 

authorize funding and therefore, clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the 

Rules of the House of Representatives does not apply. 

4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause 

3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 

section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate for this bill from the 

Director of the Congressional Budget Office: 

H.R. 2110—Colorado Northern Front Range Mountain Backdrop 

Protection Study Act 

H.R. 2110 would require the Forest Service to conduct a study 

of the lands in and adjacent to the Arapaho and Roosevelt National 

Forests in Colorado. The study would report on the present ownership of the lands, underdeveloped areas that may be at risk for development, and preservation actions that can be taken by Colorado 

state and local governments and other interested parties. Under 

the bill, the agency would report its findings and recommendations 

to the Congress within one year of the bill’s enactment. 

Based on information provided by the Forest Service, CBO estimates that the study required under H.R. 2110 would have no significant impact on the federal budget. Enacting the bill would have 

no effect on revenues or direct spending. 

H.R. 2110 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Leigh Angres and 

Deborah Reis. This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, 

Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4

This bill contains no unfunded mandates. 

PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or tribal law. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing law. 

Æ 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with REPORTS