Conservation groups applaud removal of land sale amendment from House budget bill

Washington, D.C. — National conservation groups were celebrating a major win on Thursday: the withdrawal of provisions in the House budget reconciliation bill – the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1) – that would have authorized the sale of nearly 500,000 acres of public lands in Utah and Nevada.

The provisions, introduced via a late-night amendment during the May 6 House Natural Resources Committee markup of the bill by Representatives Mark Amodei (R-Nev.) and Celeste Maloy (R-Utah), would have set a dangerous precedent for public land policy.

As originally passed by the committee, the language circumvented existing public land sale authorities like the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA), and provided no reinvestment in conservation or public access. Their inclusion sparked a wave of national opposition from groups like Missoula, Mont.-based Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, Pheasants Forever, and the Boone & Crockett Club.

“We extend our deep appreciation to Rep. Ryan Zinke and Rep. Mike Simpson for publicly opposing language in the House budget reconciliation bill that would sell off and sell out our public lands legacy,” said Kaden McArthur, BHA’s director of policy and government relations. “As the Senate considers a budget reconciliation bill, hunters and anglers across the nation must continue the groundswell of opposition to public land sales so it is understood that this is a line in the sand that we will not allow to be crossed.”

MORE COVERAGE FROM OUTDOOR NEWS:

New Cessna 206 promises great changes ahead for how Minnesota DNR does work

Sight-fishing for bass is a subtle approach that’s great fun

Michigan study suggests promise for deer vaccine for bovine tuberculosis

“A budget reconciliation bill debated into the wee hours, without public input, is no place to decide the future of Americans’ shared assets,” said Caitlin Curry, Vice Chair of the Utah Chapter of BHA. “This misguided attempt to bypass existing public process and agency oversight yields a scary future for the disposal of public lands moving forward, threatening outdoor recreation in our state and beyond. We applaud the representatives who stood against these public land selloffs. Because Utah is not for sale.”

The Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership also applauded Wednesday’s action that removed public land sales from the budget reconciliation bill.

“Hunters and anglers stepped into the arena to make their voices heard, and members of Congress listened – thank you,” said Joel Pedersen, president and CEO of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership. “We also appreciate the efforts of the House Natural Resources Committee and House leadership for their role in an outcome that maintains the public’s ability to weigh in on actions affecting our public lands. We remain committed to working with lawmakers to resolve challenges with public lands management and to find solutions that are in the public interest.”

In a statement Wednesday night, Land Tawney, co-chair of American Hunters and Anglers, said his group was excited that the House had removed the controversial amendment.

“We’re high-fiving all our friends across this great country who stepped into the arena with us to defend our birthright – access to public lands and wildlife. Your social media posts and comments, calls, conversations with your elected reps and neighbors – it all mattered. Tip of the hat to ya,” Tawney said.

Despite the removal of provisions to sell off public lands, BHA noted that the One Big Beautiful Bill Act still contains provisions strongly opposed by the group, including:

• Reversing a 20-year mineral withdrawal in the Superior National Forest in Minnesota that threatens the health of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and reinstating Twin Metals’ mining leases, exempted from judicial review.

• Requiring oil and gas leasing in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge over the next ten years and reinstating previously canceled leases, exempted from judicial review, as well as rescinding previous environmental reviews.

•  Undermining the Roadless Area Conservation Rule.

• Rescinding Bureau of Land Management funding allocated for conservation, ecosystem and habitat restoration projects.