Does the “Big Beautiful Bill” Have a Public-Lands Wart?

There is a time, a place, and a method for the selling of public lands, but the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation says this ain’t it.

On Thursday the 12th of June, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee released their provision of the budget reconciliation bill, the large and comprehensive bill that has been consuming most of the oxygen in the nation’s capital for much of the 119th Congress. Included in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee’s reconciliation text is the mandate to arbitrarily sell-off at least 2 million acres and up to 3 million acres of federal public lands across 11 western states, which the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation (CSF) strongly opposes.

Last month, when the House was considering their version of the reconciliation bill, CSF put out a statement expressing our concerns with selling-off and disposing of federal public lands through the budget reconciliation process. The House-passed reconciliation bill contained no public land disposal provisions. To be clear, CSF is not anti-disposal or sale in principle – we recognize there are real challenges facing local communities across the country where federal landownership is high. CSF understands, and in the right circumstances, can support the transfer or disposal of federal lands that are low in both recreational and biological value, and through a process that has leveraged the tools at our disposal to conduct small, thoughtful exchanges or sales that result in a win-win for sportsmen and women, conservation, and local communities. But, the details and process matter when conducting any land sale, transfer, or exchange.

CSF is willing to have serious discussions about how we as a nation can leverage the existing authorities in place to provide for the thoughtful and strategic analysis of how we can meet the needs of local communities while ensuring we stay true to one of the core tenets of what makes America unique – our magnificent system of federal public lands that belong to all American citizens.

Any disposal or sale of federal public lands must be targeted in nature, and importantly, must follow the long-established processes that Congress has put in place through the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and the Federal Lands Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA). CSF remains opposed to moving land disposals and sales through the reconciliation process, which requires a simple majority vote in the U.S. Senate compared to the normal threshold of 60 votes. Once lands leave the federal estate, it is almost inconceivable that these lands will end up back in public ownership, potentially resulting in a net-loss of access for sportsmen and women, which means that a higher degree of scrutiny is necessary.

One of the key components of the FLPMA process is public input. Unfortunately, the Senate public lands language guts the public’s voice in determining how their lands are managed or which lands are sold. An arbitrary, undefined percentage-based target is the opposite of a thoughtful and transparent process. As written, the Senate language omits critical detail to determine what specific lands would actually be disposed of, regardless of if they are underutilized or highly valuable, and instead essentially gives carte blanche authority to determine which lands would be sold.

Lastly, another key element of the FLTFA process is that 96% of proceeds from the sale of a low-value parcel of land is reinvested into conservation and access by sending the revenue to an account to be used to acquire higher value lands. The Senate reconciliation language eliminates this reinvestment into public lands and sends 90% of the proceeds from the proposed land sales at hand back to the U.S. Treasury.

CSF stands willing to have meaningful and thoughtful discussions to address challenges facing local communities through the FLPMA and FLTFA processes, but reconciliation is not the vehicle for these types of actions.