Two weeks ago, the House of Representatives killed a provision in the federal budget bill that would have forced the sale of more than 500,000 acres of public land in Utah and Nevada. Introduced in the middle of the night on May 6, the Amodei-Malloy Amendment ignited a firestorm of opposition from hunters and anglers before it was stripped from the bill just 15 days later. Now, the rejected plan to dispose of public lands is back in play in the U.S. Senate.
According to Politico’s E&E News, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) put public land sell-offs back on the table earlier this week. Lee holds a powerful post as chair of the Senate’s Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and he has a history of pushing for public-land sell-offs and transfers.
When asked on Monday if he plans to revive the defeated amendment, Lee said "yes." He has since doubled down on the statement, telling reporters that his committee could re-insert a public-land sell-off provision as early as Monday, June 9. Meanwhile, Sen. Steve Daines, a Republican from Montana, said he’s working on a compromise with Lee that would reduce the amount of public lands targeted for sale. "It’d be very, very narrow in scope..." Daines told E&E on Wednesday, June 4. "I told [Sen. Lee] I’m gonna have to see some significant changes in what he has.”
If Daines decides to support any public-land sales in the budget bill, it would conflict with his previous rhetoric about selling off federally managed public lands. In a recent statement provided to the Bozeman Daily Chronicle, for example, he said he would "never support the sale of public lands.” And in early April , he joined Montana’s other Senator, Republican Tim Sheehy, in voting for an amendment that would have prohibited public lands sell-offs during budget negotiations.
In a statement shared with Field & Stream on Wednesday, Montana's Sheehy reiterated his past support for public lands, though he stopped short of opposing or even addressing Mike Lee's plans to reinvigorate public-land sell-offs in the Senate. “There’s no question that public lands belong in public hands," the emailed statement reads. "That’s not just a slogan, it’s a way of life and one thing most Montanans agree on regardless of party. I will always fight to protect our right to hunt, fish, and recreate on our public lands.”
It was Montana Representative Ryan Zinke who ultimately thwarted the House's sell-off amendment by threatening to withhold his vote if it wasn't stripped. And many public-land advocates are banking on Daines and Sheehy to act as similar bulwarks in the Senate, given their recent statements in support of public lands.
Conservation Groups Call For Action
Hunting and fishing conservation groups that were just celebrating the removal of public-land sell-offs from the House's budget bill are now gearing up for a renewed fight in the Senate. In a statement posted to Instagram yesterday, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers (BHA) said, "Now it’s time to flood the Senate with messages they can’t ignore." The Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership (TRCP) issued a similar statement, saying it opposes "the large-scale transfer or sale of public lands, and lawmakers need to hear from you to stop this latest threat to public lands." Trout Unlimited—announcing its opposition to the proposal in an Instagram post—said it expects a public-land sell-off provision to be included in the budget bill's base text whenever it's released next week.
Madeline West is Vice President of Western Conservation at the TRCP. She tells F&S that it's too early to know just how much public land would be included in a new sell-off provision—or even where that land would be located. "Regardless of what it includes, any proposal in the Senate will run into the same procedural problems we saw in the House," West says. "There will be no meaningful public engagement in whatever sales take place."
West points to other flaws with selling off public lands during budget negotiations, like the fact that proceeds from land sales would be funneled away from land-management agencies and into the U.S. Treasury. "When public lands are sold through the proper processes by the agencies that manage those lands, the funds go back into the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Account," she says, "to support public lands and more public access."
She says that if the Senate includes a new sell-off provision in its official language for the budget bill next week, there might be less time for public backlash like the House of Representatives saw when the Ameodei-Malloy amendment was introduced last month. "There may not be an opportunity for Senators to even vote to remove it," she says. "Because the bill does not have to go to committee for debate and markup, it could just get fast tracked. It's more of a behind-the-scenes process than we saw in the House."
It would also set a precedent for more public-land sell-offs during future budget negotiations. "This doesn't just pose a threat for our public lands in the West," she says. "The Forest Service manages 24 million acres in its eastern region. There are Bureau of Land Management lands in the East as well."
Read Next: Budget Bill Would Force Permits for Banned Copper Mine Next to Boundary Waters
Those concerned about the proposal to put public-land sell-offs back in the budget bill should contact their representatives sooner than later, West recommends. "Tell your senators that this is problematic," she says. "It came out of the House version because it was jeopardizing the whole bill from moving forward. At the end of the day, that's what it will take to get it out of the Senate version as well."
