American Purgatory-Southeastern Colorado & The Federal Government

~Norman Kincaide

The Purgatoire River traverses southeastern Colorado, eventually emptying into the Arkansas near Las Animas, Bent County, Colorado. Originally called “Rio de la Animas” or the “River of Spirits.” Spanish traders called it the River of the Souls in Purgatory. Even later it was called the River of Souls Lost in Purgatory. The French pronunciation is Purgatoire which was anglicized to Picketwire. The United States Board on Geographic Names settled on Purgatoire. Locals just call it the Purgatory.

Purgatory is a temporary, intermediate state in Roman Catholic belief where souls who died in a state of grace undergo final purification and cleansing from the lingering effects of sin before they can enter heaven. It's a process of suffering to make the soul perfectly pure and ready to be in the presence of God. Are those who live and work in southeastern Colorado cleansing their souls by enduring the hardships of this region?

In Purgatory nobody reaches the heaven they desire nor are they cast into eternal torment. Meanwhile, federal government entities covet this region for various purposes. National Register landscape designation compromises private property through Section 106 compliance review of the Historic Preservation Act of 1966. The United States Army wanted all of southeastern Colorado to expand Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site. The National Park Service wanted a National Heritage Area over the same region of seven counties. One of their partners in Palmer Land Trust said it would be the largest protected landscape of its kind in the country. The Forest Service seeks to project its conservation and preservation agenda onto private property. And nongovernmental organizations seek to create an American Prairie Reserve or Serengeti from Montana to Texas. All covet a slice of control of the region. Meanwhile, the people who populate southeastern Colorado are left working and living in a Purgatory of competing interests, enduring through drought, Great Depression, fluctuations of market and declining population, to build and enhance a livelihood.

Those who have endured the longest along with those who found their ranching dream have to work around constant threats to their life, liberty, pursuit of happiness and productivity. It’s neither all private like Kansas or Nebraska, unencumbered by federal property, consequently with minimal Park and Forest Service interference, except for voluntary conservation programs, that still compromise private ownership. Nor is it all federal government, which is frustrated by the fragmented nature of southeastern Colorado property ownership that inhibits absolute, uniform control of a vast landscape.

Is the Cimarron and Comanche National Grassland Revised Management Plan necessary and did the Forest Service act reasonably in initiating the revised management plan process? In this respect are their actions in implementing this process arbitrary and capricious? Has the public in general been well served by implementing the 2012 Planning Rule and the National Forest Act of 1976, which mandates a revised management plan for National Forests and National Grasslands? Has the timeline for implementation adequately engaged those who live near, work in and use the Cimarron and Comanche Grasslands?

Is there standing by allotment owners to bring suit against the Department of Agriculture and the Forest Service as in the case of New Civil Liberties Alliance vs United States Department of Agriculture challenging the lawfulness of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s new rule requiring electronically readable ear tags for certain cattle and bison transported across state lines, rather than already-in-place, efficient means of cattle identification?

In an R-CALF Press Release, October 3, 2025, Bill Bullard, R-CALF CEO: “We are pleased that the court has determined our case is worthy of proceeding on to the next phase of litigation. However, because this case involves a federal agency regulation implemented during the Biden administration that imposes an unnecessary and costly burden on America’s cattle farmers and ranchers, we believe this mandate should be targeted for elimination by the new Trump administration.”.

Could the same apply to the Draft Assessment and Revised Management Plan process for the Cimarron and Comanche National Grasslands? Initiated in 2023, was this an extension of Biden’s 30X30 Executive Order 14008, in which President Joe Biden directed the Department of the Interior to develop a plan to conserve “at least 30 percent of our lands and waters by 2030” in collaboration with the departments of Agriculture and Commerce? If the Draft Assessment is indeed an outgrowth and relic of the 30X30 Executive Order, then it would be an unnecessary and costly burden to allotment owners. In light of the Trump administration invalidating much if not all of the previous administrations executive orders concerning the ‘Climate Crisis,” the Draft Assessment and revision of the Cimarron and Comanche Grasslands Management Plan would no longer be in line with Trump administration policies.

There have been and continue to be competing federal government interests in southeastern Colorado. Is this activity all coordinated or is it just crass inter-governmental jockeying for power and control of an entire region? This scenario all came about as a result of the Homesteading Act of 1862 to encourage settlement of the vast plains west of the Mississippi River. The federal government continues to over manage something it wanted privately settled in the first place. Those who live and work here must feel like living and working in Purgatory. To make their ranching operation function, they have to accommodate private and governmental interests every day.

An email from Cathy Garcia, Southern Colorado Regional Director, Rep. Jeff Hurd, October 6, 2025, to Trish Pfeffer Leone and Norman Kincaide, in response to Leone’s email with comments to the Forest Service and articles attached, states:

“I met with the Forest & Grassland Supervisor.   The last plan that was developed was 41 years ago and centered around timber.  The Assessment Phase (internal) closed 9/24/2025 which is a starting point – what the grasslands are currently.  The plan will start soon and the forest service will have meetings in person (along with virtual meetings).   Once the draft plan is done, there will be 90 days for resident comments.   Once the final plan is completed, another 90 days for comments.

The forest service does want resident input and urges all to become involved now during the draft planning process.  It is easier to do it right rather than wait until the plan is done to go back and fix. Recreation will be reviewed, hunting and grazing will still be allowed (if residents choose to), bicycling via mountain bikes, etc., even walking through the grasslands and bird watching is part of the recreation discussion.   Ideas are being sought. More public vs. virtual sessions will be held which will help residents feel comfortable with Forest Representatives. If you have any questions, let me know.  Just urge folks to attend meetings and provide input.”

In other words, just do what government man say and all will be well with the revised management plan. Contacting your federal representative is nye unto worthless. Also, does the current federal government shutdown compromise the precious Forest Service timeline for creating a revised Cimarron and Comanche Grassland Management Plan? Or has this process ground to a halt along with the Leviathan of the federal government. Interested ranchers and farmers can wonder if their comments really mean anything in light of the above email. Or do their comments exist in Purgatory as well.

Barb and Zane Leininger distribute salt and mineral mix to their cattle on their Comanche Grassland Allotment.