Printer-friendly version
The Trump Administration is trying to sell off federal lands, while its budget cuts are severely impacting national parks and forests
By G. A. McNeeley
Photo: Staircase Escalante National Monument, Utah
May 16, 2025 (San Diego) – House Republicans have approved a provision to their budget that would allow the federal government to sell thousands of acres of public land in Nevada and Utah, in an effort to boost fossil fuel production and development projects, according to Newsweek.
The move comes after deep cuts in rangers and other staffing have impeded public access and safety at national parks and forests.
Meanwhile, the Trump Administration’s funding cuts and the loss of federal workers who support wildland firefighting is continuing to make planning for the upcoming wildfire season a challenge, according to CBS News.
The amendment to sell off public lands came from Representatives Mark Amodei (Nevada) and Celeste Maloy (Utah). This proposal drew bipartisan opposition, according to Politico, though East County’s Republican Congressman Darrell Issa voted for the measure. Maloy added that the sales total around 10,000 acres across the two states.
What’s at stake
The sale of public federal lands in the United States could potentially threaten conservation efforts, public access, and indigenous land rights.
Advocates argue that transferring land to state or private ownership could promote development and reduce bureaucratic gridlock. They also argue that selling public lands will empower states and local communities to utilize resources for economic gain.
House Natural Resources Committee spokesperson John Seibels (R-Kansas) said that “sales from these small parcels of land will generate significant federal revenue, and have broad local support,” according to Politico. “It’s a tailored, parochial budgetary measure,” he added.
Critics argue that it risks irreversible environmental damage and could restrict access to recreational spaces and sacred indigenous sites. Those lands could be lost to the public domain permanently, with no guarantee of future protection or accessibility.
Senator Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nevada) released a statement, saying, "In the dead of night, Representative Mark Amodei pushed House Republicans to move forward with an insane plan that cuts funding from water conservation and public schools across Nevada."
Masto went on to describe the measure as "a land grab to fund Republicans' billionaire giveaway tax bill."
Representative Dave Min (D-California) said, “This is not a good-faith introduction,” according to Politico.
While the bill includes some carve-outs (excluding national parks and certain protected areas), it lacks clarity on criteria for sale, raising concerns among environmental groups and tribal communities about potential misuse and long-term losses.
Driven mostly by Republican lawmakers, this is part of a larger push to restrict federal control of vast public areas, especially in states like Nevada and Utah where federal holdings dominate the landscape, according to Newsweek.
Democratic lawmakers pushed back against the measure, calling it a "last-minute" amendment that lacked transparency. Representative Joe Neguse (D-Colorado) claimed Amodei bypassed other members of Nevada's delegation, saying that Representatives Steven Horsford, Susie Lee and Dina Titus learned of the proposal only through text messages.
Democrats said they didn’t see the 33-page amendment before it was proposed, and that it would sell land in districts represented by Democrats.
Maloy argued at the House Natural Resources Committee markup, that the bill "generates revenue from numerous federal assets” and it “will bring revenue to the Treasury for debt and deficit reduction,” according to Newsweek.
The provision could create issues for Republicans when the full package heads to the floor as Representative Ryan Zinke (R-Montana) has declared public land sales to be a “red line” for him, according to Politico.
Although the measure still faces potential obstacles within the Senate, it still marks a significant shift in federal land policy, as well as the potential precursor to a large-scale divestment of public lands.
The final vote was 26-17 all along party lines, with the exception of Representative Adam Gray, a California Democrat who voted “yes,” according to Politico.
What are federal lands?
Federal land is land that’s owned by the United States government and managed through agencies, such as the Bureau of Land Management. Federal lands serve many purposes, such as recreation, conservation, grazing, energy development and national defense.
While the current bill excludes California, the potential exists for future legislation to target broader land sell-offs. California has numerous national parks and other federal lands, while San Diego County has federal lands that include Cleveland National Forest, Hauser Wilderness, the Sweetwater By National Wildlife Preserve that extends east to Jamul, as well as Bureau of Land Management recreational properties and Cabrillo National Monument.
Photo, right: Cleveland National Forest in San Diego County
In Nevada, the Bureau of Land Management manages nearly 48 million acres. These lands are used for grazing, mining, and renewable energy projects. The state also includes extensive National Conservation Lands, such as Red Rock Canyon, and large-scale military zones, such as the Nevada Test and Training Range, according to their website.
In Utah, the Bureau of Land Management oversees about 22.8 million acres. The lands span a range of ecosystems from alpine mountains to red-rock deserts, and are used for recreation, grazing, energy development and cultural site preservation, according to their website.
The extent of federal land managed by the federal government varies drastically by state. For Nevada it’s about 80 percent, for Utah it’s about 63 percent, and for California it’s about 45 percent.
The amendment focuses on states like Utah and Nevada, because some lawmakers contend that excessive federal control hampers development and local authority. If implemented, the measure could authorize the sale of large strips of land, including areas designated for conservation or public use.
Budget cuts impact harm national parks and public access
The Forest Service workforce was cut during Elon Musk's push to reduce federal spending. Nearly 1,000 National Park Service workers were let go. A court order to rehire fired workers brought many workers back to their jobs, but Murray and fire officials say it wasn't enough. The loss of trained workers also set the process back, according to CBS News.
The Sacramento Bee warns of serious impacts to California’s national parks including long lines, limited hours, and threats to public safety from layoffs of employees who provided everything from trash cleanup to search and rescue services. California’s National Parks include such popular destinations as Yosemite, Sequoia, King’s Canyon, Redwoods, Joshua Tree, Channel Islands, Death Valley, and Lassen Volcanic national parks..
Federal firefighting concerns raised
The biggest issue they're facing is the lack of communication from the federal government as the West faces "a pretty significant wildland fire season," Washington State Forester George Geissler said at a press conference hosted by Democratic Senators Patty Murray (Washington) and Jeff Merkley (Oregon).
"Without knowing what our partners are doing or not having a clear understanding of what actions are being taken, we struggle with missing the third leg of the stool that we have,” Geissler said at the press conference.
Merkley said Trump's budget proposal cuts forest and watershed management programs that improve forest conditions, eliminates a collaborative forest landscape restoration program and slashes 2,000 National Forest positions, on top of the thousands who left through early retirement, buyouts and layoffs, according to CBS News.
Murray said that most of those workers might not have the title "firefighter," but they all hold Red Cards which show they have special training to provide essential frontline support to firefighting crews.
"Around three quarters of forest service workers are trained in wild land firefighting," Murray said, according to CBS News. "They provide crucial surge capacity when a crisis strikes."
Trail maintenance crews clear the paths for firefighting personnel and equipment, Murray added. Biologists also help conduct testing to make decisions about prescribed burns and fuel reduction planning.
An unnamed spokesperson from the Department of Interior, which oversees National Parks and other public lands, said "funding is not in jeopardy." They're supporting firefighting efforts by increasing pay for federal and tribal wildland firefighters across the country, according to CBS News.
The Trump Administration hasn’t released the exact number of fired and rehired workers, but according to the spokesperson, several numbers are coming in from individual forests.
"I've heard of at least 35 people at Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, 46 at Okanogan-Wenatchee, 21 at Colville, 15 at Gifford-Pinchot, and more at the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area, Olympic National Forest and Methow Valley," the spokesperson said.
Sources:
https://www.newsweek.com/republicans-federal-land-map-nevada-utah-2069550
https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/article305058216.html
Comments
No surprise...