Senate Republicans will consider mandating a sell-off of an estimated 2.5 million acres of public land, including possible parcels in Wyoming, in the budget bill they are now reconciling, a proposal Utah Sen. Mike Lee released Wednesday night shows.
The plan from Lee describes selling the land as both a way to raise money to fill federal coffers and to open up land for housing in western communities that have struggled with enough supply. Lee, who chairs the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, has long sought to trim the amount of federal land owned by all Americans.
Ahead of Wednesday’s announcement, conservation groups and hunter advocacy organizations were lining up to oppose the public land sale, which has in the past been a politically unpopular idea throughout the West.
“Public lands need to stay in public hands and the Muley Fanatic Foundation opposes anything or anyone that threatens our lands that we hold dear for personal use,” Joey Faigle, president and CEO of the foundation, told WyoFile in a statement Monday, two days before Lee released his language. The nonprofit is based in southwest Wyoming and represents hunters.
“Selling off our lands without consulting the communities who use them will risk permanently losing the places we use for hunting, outdoor recreation, and so much more,” Faigle wrote. “It will also affect those traditions to be passed on to our future generations. The public land sales being included in the reconciliation needs to stop now.”
Lee’s proposal mandates federal land managers offload land from 11 possible western states, with the notable exception of Montana.
Congressional delegates from Wyoming’s northern neighbor – including former interior secretary and current Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke – have rejected efforts to sell federal land. Zinke’s opposition to a similar proposal in the House last month led to that body ultimately jettisoning the idea when it passed its version of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, a sprawling budget measure designed to advance President Donald Trump’s priorities of rapidly increasing the deportation of immigrants, beefing up military and security spending and extending tax cuts that critics say mostly benefit wealthy Americans and corporations.
Iconic public lands appear largely exempt from sale under Lee’s proposal. National parks, national monuments, wildlife refuges, national seashores and lakeshores, national battlefields and nine other designated areas are all excluded. Lands that have ongoing leases or use claims, such as for grazing or mining or mineral extraction, also can’t be sold.
Wyoming politicians and public land
Wyoming Rep. Harriet Hageman, a Republican, backed the House proposal to sell off land to help blunt the impacts of Trump’s spending package on the federal deficit. And in April, Wyoming’s two Republican senators voted against a Democrat-sponsored measure to block the sale of federal land to generate revenue.
Sen. John Barrasso’s communications director, Laura Mengelkamp, did not respond to a WyoFile request Wednesday for comment on Lee’s proposal. A spokesperson for Sen. Cynthia Lummis said her office was still evaluating the proposal and did not yet have a comment.
But last week, Lummis issued a statement, first reported by Cowboy State Daily, backing Lee’s general approach to the sale of public lands, if not the concept of the proposal the Utah senator released Wednesday.
“I support Senator Mike Lee’s efforts to address the reality that federal ownership of nearly half of all Western land — exceeding 50% in states like Wyoming, Nevada, and Utah — creates significant challenges for local communities, state governments, and efficient land management,” she said in the statement. Her office provided WyoFile a copy of the statement this week.
“The federal government doesn’t need to perpetually own every piece of land it currently holds, and we must have honest conversations about smart, strategic land management that serves our communities while protecting our natural treasures,” Lummis said.
Proposal angers public access groups
Lee’s proposal would require the Interior Department to sell between 0.25% and 0.5% of the total acreage of public lands managed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, and another 0.5% to 0.75% of all lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service. According to a calculation released Wednesday night by advocacy group the National Wildlife Federation, the upper threshold of those mandates equates to more than 2.5 million acres of land passing out of public hands across the West.
“Mandating the fire sale of up to two-and-a-half million acres of public land violates more than a century of land stewardship, threatens wildlife and clean water, runs directly against widespread public opinion, and will not begin to solve either the budget crisis or the affordable housing crisis,” David Willms, the federation’s associate vice president for public lands, said in a Wednesday night statement.
Willms, an attorney and Wyoming resident, previously worked for former Gov. Matt Mead, a Republican.
Lee’s proposal does not mandate the sale of certain amounts by certain states, so there is no set amount of public land that would go private in Wyoming. Conservation and public access advocates were scrambling Wednesday evening to understand which lands would be targeted by Lee’s proposal, and a more concrete picture is likely to emerge in the coming days and weeks as the U.S. Senate debates.
“This proposal is central to relieving the housing crisis, fulfilling President Trump’s housing and public lands agenda, and creating jobs and strong economic growth in the West,” a statement issued by the Energy and Natural Resources Committee said. The land sale would raise between $5 billion and $10 billion in a decade.
The majority of that money would go toward helping fund the federal budget, while 5% would be spent on deferred maintenance on federal lands in the state where the lands are sold. Another 5% would go to local governments abutting sold parcels for housing development “or other associated needs,” according to the committee’s statement.
The $10 billion the sales could raise would be a drop in the bucket compared to the overall cost of Trump’s spending bill, which largely increases the federal deficit through tax cuts that opponents say overwhelmingly benefit wealthy Americans and corporations. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated the bill will add $2.4 trillion to the federal deficit over the same decade in which Lee would mandate the federal land sales.
“Shoving the sale of public lands back into the budget reconciliation bill, all to fund tax cuts for the wealthy, is a betrayal of future generations and folks on both sides of the aisle,” Michael Carroll, of the The Wilderness Society, said in a statement. “We call on lawmakers who cherish public lands to reject any inclusion of public land sales in the budget reconciliation bill.”
Though the BLM has had swathes of public lands marked for disposal, including in Wyoming, the agency follows a process that includes public participation and generally has allowed local governments to weigh in on when, how and if federal land is sold off or exchanged. That process also directs proceeds from land sales largely toward increasing public access to other federal lands. Lee’s proposal would largely sidestep the BLM’s process and is not limited to lands that have been previously marked for disposal.
Instead, it calls for the interior secretary and secretary of agriculture, both presidential appointees, to select the lands to be sold. The proposal directs those officials to consult with state governors, tribes and local governments to select land suitable for developing housing. The language does not appear to require that development to focus on affordable housing, however, and it also calls for public lands to be sold at fair market prices.
The federal land surrounding Jackson Hole, one community desperately in need of affordable housing, would likely be valued at steep prices.
The government’s “management” of public lands has always been inept and inconsiderate of the general population. In reality there is really no public land. Leasing of public land in Wyoming has been controlled by monied interests for centuries in order to exploit resources for private gain, with virtually no input from the people other than those doing the “development”. Now those special interests want to deed rather than lease—the difference being between partial and total control. Take timber harvest for example. It was micro-managed and all but shut down entirely for decades—while combined with the near total suppression of fires, gave the lowly pine beetle a foothold to nuke just about every forest in the state. I remember looking at the Sierra Madre range just East of my home after years of beetle kill and seeing nothing but brown as the pine needles turned. Now that they have all fallen off, there is nothing to block the sun and slow the snowmelt runoff. Today we have acres of standing dead timber that is falling down at an alarming rate, creating a greater fire hazard than has ever existed. The Yellowstone fire in the late 80’s was viewed, through the existing lens then, as a disaster. Yet nowadays, most of the area has been successfully reclaimed and was actually impacted less by the beetle kill effect. Whether the rise of the pine beetle population was due to global warming or want of forest fires to naturally control them, is still being debated. However, debates after the fact are not going to make a lot of difference in our current situation. The debate to sell or not to sell public lands in my view, is such a debate. The voters put the three amigos in office where they also put a would be dictator. Just like my Dad used to say when we screwed up: “What did you think was gonna happen?”
The ultra-wealthy will use their ‘big beautiful’ tax cuts, courtesy of trump, hageman, barrasso, and lummis, to buy up OUR public lands and turn parcels into their personal estates… while the rest of us will encounter ‘Private Property’ signs denying us access…forever. Thanks trump.
Hands Off!! Congress has a Spending Problem, not a Revenue Problem. Leave our public lands alone!
If it’s truly about a housing crisis, which I don’t believe, start by adding housing near existing cities and towns and target a few acres at a time.
This is nothing more than another give away to those billionaires, much like the taxes they don’t pay.
Perhaps we should start targeting those folks who have more than 2 homes to their names and replace whatever public lands are taken by condemnation. If that were up for debate we wouldn’t be having this bs.
The thing that is so irritating to me is that the Republican Party advertises itself as being fiscally conservative, that they want to balance budgets. The truth is that they just don’t want to pay taxes but expect to have the same or increasing levels of service. Remember when Mike Enzi (God rest his soul) used to rail against the deficit? Yet he voted for the Trump tax cuts that increased the deficit by hundreds of billions. Not a peep out of him about that. This latest Big Beautiful Bill nonsense that Hageman voted for and Barrasso and Lummis surly will, increases the national debt by about 3 trillion dollars. If the Federal Government sold off the 18.5 million acres in Wyoming that are managed by the BLM to satisfy that 3 trillion debt the land would have to be sold for about $160,000/acre. That’s how big $3 trillion is. That’s all so that the very wealthy can have a tax cut. That and they haven’t even told us yet how much they are going to slash Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security.
How bout Barrasso and Hageman sell whatever real estate they have and contribute to the reduction of the national debt. How bout that!
I seem to recall last year’s campaign of misinformation stating that if the BLM Rock Springs management plan was approved, we, the public, wouldn’t even be able to leave town to enjoy our public lands. How much enjoyment will we get from those lands when the richest “non-taxpaying” billionaires are allowed to buy them? I still have the ability to wander the public lands of Wyoming and hope to for as long as I’m alive and that my descendants can do the same. Senator Barrasso, Senator Lummis, and Representative Hageman, are you paying any attention to your constituents or is Senator Lee driving your thoughts?
Larry with all due respect what you’re proposing is not what they’re talking about. They’re talking about millions of acres of public land to be sold to help pay for Trump‘s spending. And of course our three federal representatives are all for selling public lands and this is what Wyoming has voted for so That’s the way it is.
It’s interesting, and encouraging that Montana is standing strong against this effort to just benefit the wealthy and Trump’s bloated budget that calls for more tax breaks for his wealthy supporters. Regretfully, between our Washington and Wyoming conservative republicans, Wyoming public lands are being heavily targeted for sale.
SHOW THE MAP- it wants to sell all the beautiful lakes near Pinedale and most if the Wyoming Range. Maybe they think there are so few people in Sublette and Lincolnshire Counties that no one will notice.
They could start off by selling all these ski resorts that are sitting on leased mountain sides on very sweetheart deals. Could also start off selling land oil/gas wells sit on as well. Mineral rights included. That would shut down a lot of future orphan wells. Sell off the coal mine leases and leased land. Again. Minerals go with it. Sell all the leases which solar and wind turbines sit on. Lot of private owned cabins sit on leased govt land. Sell that lease off Lot of properties like that could be sold off first. It not all doom and gloom with this idea.
even with your nonsense description, it wouldn’t make a dent in the deficit. your dear leader’s big bullshit bill is a wreck.
let’s not forget the hundreds of millions he’s spending on his military parade tomorrow. will you be in your brown shirt giving an elon salute in your living room tomorrow?
Selling public lands will not solve the nation’s debt or budget deficit or provide affordable housing or provide recreational opportunities. Selling public lands will result in more locked gates and Posted signs. Selling public land does solve the corner crossing issue since all four corners will now be private.
Ya all can get your money togeather and buy a piece of history. Lot of this land will go surprisingly cheap. All you illegal migrant lovers can build a tiny house village for them.
John, Cynthia,and Harriet each own exactly as much of our public land as you or I do. They were hired to do a job by the people of Wyoming– for the people of Wyoming. If I hire the neighbor boy to mow my lawn— I have the reasonable expectation that he will put on his gloves and get to work cutting the grass. If he does a good job I won’t hesitate to hire him back week after week, tip him well, and sing his praises to every neighbor in the hood. I’m not interested in hearing about who’s agenda he is fully supporting ( if the mower is running and making hay in my backyard I won’t have to anyhow). I consider making him stop every now and then for a cold glass of lemonade to be the least I can do, but I won’t tolerate it if I happen to look out the window and see him sitting on his butt on the porch across the street sipping orange koolaid with his buddies and flipping me the bird while he’s on my dime… And if I ever catch him spitting on my sidewalk, throwing rocks at my house, or disrespecting “my property” with the disregard that 3 Amigos will show by selling our native soil out from under our feet he’ll wish to the high heavens that his mama didn’t let him get above his raisins.
We must vote the three traitors out of office.
So the wild horses are being sold,why ,room for oil ,money and of course people.Been here all my life and the devastating things and waste is appauling.Please keep this state nice for my families.
Tourism and Recreation is the largest employment sector in Wyoming. It is the 2nd largest economic sector. Tourism and Recreation rely on public access to Federal Public lands, these include all National Parks, National Forests, and BLM administered lands. It is the principle economic driver in many Wyoming communities. Without it, these communities’ economies will be devastated. Strongly an anti-business move that will hurt Wyoming small businesses and the people that they employ and serve. Virtually no average Wyoming or American Citizen is advocating for disposal or transfer of Federal Lands. The only people pushing this idea are politicians, who are totally ignoring the wishes of their constituents. This is a pretty strong indication that our Congressional Delegation is totally out of touch, and that they don’t represent Wyoming people or interests. Smells like corruption at a very high level.
Right on Luke.
Capitalists taking away public lands to pay for politicians’ blundering fiscal policies! Budgets that exceed the $5 trillion annual tax revenues generated by hard working Americans. What company COO in this country can ‘t operate in the black with that revenue. They know the federal deficit is not sustainable, yet they
keep adding to it, passing it on to younger generations, shameful. Selling public lands for paltry millions will not fix the trillions in deficit, who are these politicians fooling. Spineless and clueless Wyoming politicians that obviously don’t represent the will of American or Wyoming citizens, certainly not me! I suggest Congress contract with the five most prestigious business schools to formulate a balanced budget plan that also reduces the federal deficit. I have no faith in our politicians correcting the deficit problem, they keep over spending regardless what jersey they’re wearing, red or blue.
Business Schools:
1. Harvard
2. Stanford
3. Warton School, Pennsylvania
4. MIT Sloan School of Management
5. University of Chicago
(CHATGPT, source)
Interesting observation Brian. It makes me think that if the moderate and thoughtful sales (led by much public input) was to “benefit” the public at large through promoting things like universal health care, I’d feel more supportive. But these conservative efforts never seem done for a beneficial outcome, and in this case, is more warped to support reducing tax rates for the already rich and NOT needy in our country.
There is a good bit of Wyoming owned real estate. Why is this land sacrosanct?
If there is a legitimate argument for selling public lands, I have not heard it. The thinly-veiled ‘affordable housing’ is almost laughable. ‘Fixing the budget’ is equally laughable and short-sighted. These lands will be bought and developed as fast as possible and will not fix any of our problems. Please, call your senators and make this an issue they don’t want to revisit again in our lifetimes.
Public lands are not “owned’ by the government. They are owned by the people, they are managed by the government. While there are a lot of things that can be improved as far as management, selling the land only has one out come; reduced access to the public. Wyoming reps need to start acting like they represent us in this state and fight back like Montana reps have.
Under NO circumstances should we sell public lands.
Theodore Roosevelt is turning over in his grave waving a large fist for Mr. Lee!
What will we have when public lands start selling off. It will get bigger. Eventually we will lose it all! Not in my lifetime but my grandchildren may not have any public land to recreate in. It is becoming a very sad America.
If you don’t like what the gullible ol’ party is trying to do to public lands, then stop supporting them?
They have been convinced Democrats are out to get them when nothing could be further from the truth. Instead of fixing the bloat in the DOD, they are raising its budget and then saying our lands have to pay for Congressional incompetence. Ludicrous
Wyoming has been ranked as a State with 4th in gullibility; however, if we elect Harriet Governor and put Lummis back in we should easily achieve first prize. Go WYO!
Just follow the money! Who has these congressman in their back pockets?
Why not take a hard look at existing land already developed….like defunct malls or foreclosed properties and utilize them for housing redevelopement.
The housing ‘crisis’ has nothing to do with public land. There’s plenty of private land that can be purchased, in most cases. Our three goofballs are working against their own constituents, they are traitors to the public. The wealthy will snap up this land and keep you off of it. Are you happy MAGA? Don’t forget some of our state goofballs (like Ide) are also stabbing you in the back for their own personal gain.
Gordon 95% of all BLM/Federal land never has one human footprint put on it. Your type has worked for years to shut down mineral resources mining or extraction. We have abundance of minerals here in USA we can’t mine because we may disturb some 20 toed mouse or special insect. We pay for that foolishness now, with having to kow tow to china and others. Copper in reaching critical stage now. Guess who has access to worlds copper supply? Sell the lands open them up.
Completely wacky
President Trump is not focused on deporting immigrants, the President is focused on deporting ILLEGAL immigrants.
This is the start of a massive sell off , we have two choices accept it or reject it. We are not run by the government. We are represented by the government, we have more power on this side of the ledger. Wyoming must speak up either way to protect or to acquiesce.
The last best lands, OUR public lands, billionaires want them too, along with their tax breaks. Write Barrasso and Lummis. This is a travesty. We cannot allow them to do this.
I wish writing to our ‘reps’ would work. I have many times and they talk out of both sides of their mouths. They love and worship the orange menace, and don’t care what their constituents think. The best route is to join Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, TRS, Wyoming Outdoor council because there is power in numbers.
Always been the wealthy’s plan to possess and exploit.