Lawmakers Discuss Selling Local Forest Lands During Budget Bill Process

WASHINGTON DC — Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah has introduced a controversial amendment to the tax and spending bill currently being considered by the Senate—the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act—which, if adopted, would require the federal government to sell 2-3 million acres of public land administered by the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management in California and 11 other western states (Nevada, Oregon, Arizona, Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, New Mexico, Utah, Washington and Wyoming). In a video announcing the proposal, Senator Lee described it as “part of President Trump’s agenda” that would facilitate building affordable housing.

The proposed legislation directs the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture to identify lands that would be eligible for sale and publish lists of available tracts within 60 days. The measure would also allow other “interested parties” to nominate tracts for sale; state and local governments would qualify as interested parties, but the bill does not limit who else would be able to nominate land for sale or buy it.

According to the text of the bill, tracts prioritized for sale should be adjacent to existing developed areas, have access to infrastructure, and be suitable for residential housing. Protected federal lands, such as national parks, wilderness areas, and recreation areas, would be exempt. The bill does not include a mechanism for direct public input on land sales, but federal officials would be required to consult with state and local governments and Indian tribes.

While the current proposal would require the government to sell only about 1% of existing public land, critics of the proposal point out that the area that could potentially be up for sale is much larger. A map developed by the Wilderness Society, a conservation group, shows some 250 million acres, including over 16 million in California, that could be opened for sale according to the bill’s criteria.

In the local area, large tracts of National Forest land extending west from the Diamond Mountains to Indian Valley and south from Antelope Lake to Highway 49 near Sattley could be considered for sale, according to the Wilderness Society map.

Conservation groups and outdoor enthusiasts fear the proposed sales would open prized areas for private development and limit access to trails, camping sites, and hunting areas. Michelle Abramson of the Sierra Buttes Trail Stewardship said, “Public lands are invaluable to our beloved mountain communities.” Critics of the measure also charge that it does not ensure that housing built as a result of the sales would be affordable, so desirable public lands could be converted to gated communities or billionaires’ retreats.

The fate of the proposed sale in Congress is uncertain. A related, but less extensive, proposal to sell public lands in Nevada and Utah was dropped from the budget bill passed by the House after opposition from western Republicans, including Congressman Kevin Kiley, who represents Plumas, Sierra, and Nevada Counties. In the Senate, most Democrats oppose the measure, and a growing number of Republicans have also voiced opposition. Montana was dropped from the list of states where sales could be held after the state’s Senators, both Republicans, said they opposed selling off public land. Both Idaho’s Senators, also Republicans, have said recently they would not support the measure. Congressman Kiley said in an email statement that he is watching to see what emerges in the Senate and will strongly oppose proposals similar to the one rejected by the House.

Since this story was written, the Senate Parliamentarian has ruled that the current draft of Senator Lee’s amendment does not meet the criteria for inclusion in the budget bill. It remains to be seen whether the proposal will be excluded, rewritten, or reconsidered in later legislation.