Sen. Mike Lee revives public land sell-off bid

A parcel near you may one day be covered in houses

🌵 Public Lands 🌲

Hidden Valley on National Forest land near Durango, Colorado. This is the type of parcel that could be on the auction block if Sen. Mike Lee gets his way.

It is not hyperbole to say we are living in dark times.

The U.S. President is about to hold a multi-million-dollar, taxpayer-funded, dictator-style military parade — for his frigging birthday. He activated the national guard and the marines to violently quell non-violent protests in Los Angeles. A U.S. senator was tackled, thrown to the ground, and handcuffed for deigning to ask a question of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem during a press conference in which she admitted that federal troops were in Los Angeles not to stop rioting, but to “liberate the city from the socialists and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor have placed on this country.” Oh …

American democracy, morality, empathy, civil liberties, and the rule of law are all under attack, and the assailants are none other than the President, his administration, and a vast majority of congressional Republicans.

So when Sen. Mike Lee, the Jello-slurping Utah MAGA-ite, proposed selling off a mere one half of one percent of the nation’s public land, it might not seem worth squandering whatever remains of one’s outrage on. But we — as in the American people — stand to lose a lot from this latest push to take public lands out of the public’s hands.

Lee installed his amendment into the Energy and Natural Resources section of the so-called “Big, Beautiful Bill,” which proposes to rescind environmental protections on millions of acres in Alaska, slash royalty rates for oil and gas, and revive noncompetitive leasing, among other mining- and drilling-friendly provisions.

Lee’s provision would require the Interior Secretary to “select for disposal not less than .50% and not more than .75% of Bureau of Management land, and shall dispose of all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to those tracts” and the Agriculture Secretary shall select for disposal .50% to .75% of National Forest System.” Lands in national parks, monuments, or conservation areas, wilderness, wildlife refuges, and other protected areas would not be eligible for disposal.

While that’s a tiny fraction of the nation’s public lands, it adds up to between 2 million and 3.2 million acres, which on the upper end is about equivalent to Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments combined. The amendment would apply to every Western state except Montana, which was probably exempted in the hopes of winning Rep. Ryan Zinke’s support.

While the amendment is purportedly to free up more land for affordable housing, there is nothing in the text restricting the end use of the land after it’s sold or transferred. It only requires someone nominating a parcel to specify what they plan to use land for and the extent to which development of the tract would address local housing needs (including housing supply and affordability).

It would prioritize tracts for disposal that are:

• nominated by states or local governments

• adjacent to existing developed areas

• have access to existing infrastructure

• suitable for residential housing

• would reduce checkerboard land patterns

• inefficient to manage.

At first glance, this appears relatively harmless: It would merely consolidate private holdings on the urban fringe, and ease the management nightmares of checkerboard land-ownership. But this is where I urge you to think about your favorite public land-adjacent community and consider what might parcels might be prioritized for disposal.

I went through this exercise somewhat inadvertently recently as I rode my bike on a trail through a place known as Hidden Valley on National Forest land north of town. The valley floor is nearly perfectly level, having been carved by a glacier many millennia ago, and bounded on two sides by bone-white sandstone cliffs. Up until the fifth century A.D., Pueblo people inhabited and farmed the valley, and the area continues to hold cultural and archaeological significance. Grass — green during this time of year — covers much of the valley. Cattails, nourished by the waters of Falls Creek, jut from the northern end.

Durango folks come up here to walk and seek solace from the din of humanity. They walk and bike and in the winter even ski and snowshoe here and coexist — sometimes uneasily — with bears and mountain lions and deer and elk and even rattlesnakes.

That this tract of public land would be sold off for development is almost unthinkable. And yet, it fits all of the criteria: It is just a few miles from town, is sandwiched between existing residential areas, is easily accessible and quite buildable, and infrastructure is already in place. Durango is grappling with a severe housing affordability crisis and Hidden Valley could theoretically support hundreds of housing units, alleviating some pressure on the real estate market. Unthinkable to you and I, yes. But keep in mind that it would be the Trump administration calling the shots on this one.

There are hundreds of other Hidden Valley-like tracts of land across the West, pieces of public land near communities that provide all kinds of benefits to wildlife and humans and the ecosystem and solitude. And if Mike Lee has his way, 3 million acres of these special places would go on the auction block, ultimately to be covered with homes, affordable or otherwise, and other development.