Public Lands, the Big Ugly Bill, and Remaining Vigilant
The senate parliamentarian has ruled current language to sell-off OUR public land cannot be in the budget bill, but we still must remain vigilant...
Note: This article is a follow-up to the May 25 Nature Communications Substack, Public Lands
For anyone (R, I, or D) who hunts, fishes, hikes, paddles, camps, or otherwise enjoys OUR American inheritance of national splendor and wants it preserved for our grandchildren...
Stay vigilant and know and communicate what is at stake for parks, wildlife, and federal public land sales in the Big Ugly Bill (a more descriptive name than The Big Beautiful Budget Bill title given in the House-approved version). With all the attention on ballooning the deficit and throwing people off Medicare, ramifications for natural resources, conservation, and environment are sliding in under the radar of most Americans (these provisions have been largely slipped in late at night, and without any deliberation). For some of the general public, and especially for those glued to FOX “News” and “FOX News-ish” media, the topic likely is an unknown or has been redefined. Even standard, basic news stations, sidetracked by other aspects of the Bill and by the barrage of other urgent stories, have given little attention to the attacks on our public land.
Following public lands and other conservation elements in the Big Ugly Bill has been arduous. So many of the details have changed, yet so little of the dangers are gone. The Big Ugly Bill now sits before the Senate with a self-imposed July 4 deadline for passage.
The roller-coaster ride for public lands
The House bill back in May included selling off a half-million acres of public land in Utah. The public outcry, along with a surprise champion in the House of Representatives (Rep. Zinke, R-Montana), led to the removal of public land sales from the Big Ugly Bill when it passed the House and went to the Senate. This was good news, and public lands advocates began congratulating each other… for a moment or two. Then, well known public lands hater and chair of the Senate Natural Resources Committee, Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah), predictably dropped his public lands bomb, with a load of explosives and a short fuse. This bill trumped (no pun intended) the previous House effort. It designated some 250 million acres of Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service public lands as eligible for sale, and required no less than 2 million and no more than 3.28 million acres be identified in a matter of months and sold (or transferred to states) within the first few years. The designated eligible lands conveneiently did not include Montana, likely in attempt to appease Zinke and other members of the Montana contingent that tend to appreciate their state’s public lands. The stated purpose of the sale was to provide housing and “other infrastructure”, but it is unlikely affordable housing will be built in these areas. Sales would be done with no public input and few if any restrictions.
Waiting in the background was the Byrd Rule. Many of the Natural Resources Committee’s proposals would have little if any effect on the federal budget. They are, by-and-large, partisan, ideological objectives. The Byrd Rule states that a reconciliation bill cannot include items that are not primarily meaningful to the budget if it is to be passed by a simple majority. The Senate Parliamentarian, a person appointed by the Senate Majority Leader, is the arbiter of the Byrd Rule. There is one hope and one fear with this. The hope is that the Parliamentarian rules appropriately that public lands elements do not meet the Byrd Rule and must be removed. The fear is that, if the Parliamentarian acted, majority leader Senator Thune (R-SD) would move to replace her with a strict Trump yes-person (everything is up for grabs in Trump Land).
The awarding of a contract to a foreign company to conduct sulfur ore mining on U.S. Forest Service lands adjacent to the Boundary Waters was taken out even before the parliamentarian acted. Then, on June 19, the Parliamentarian threw out the repeal of Inflation Reduction Act funding and changes to EPA’s multi-pollutant emissions standards for light-duty and medium-duty vehicles as not meeting the Byrd Rule.
At that point it was surprising that the public lands sell-off, which is more ideological than fiscally responsible, was left in the bill. Oodles of pressure from public lands advocates (including some of you!) continued to mount against the proposed public land sale language still in the bill. Then, last night (June 23), the Parliamentarian ruled public land sales as currently written did not meet the Byrd Rule, and needed to be removed. The Parliamentarian remains in her position, and seems to be a worthy arbiter.
Many nonprofit groups have been working to stop the great public lands sell-off. A letter signed by 148 such organizations was sent to Senators on June18, stating among other things that, “Selling off public lands is short-sighted, self-serving and irreversible. These lands belong to all Americans. Once they’re sold, they’re gone for good - fences go up, access disappears and they are lost to the public forever.”
It is still a big, ugly bill…
Public lands still are not off the table in the bill. After the Parliamentarian ruled, Senator Lee posted on X that he intends to rework the language and submit a scaled down version, writing “I’m doing everything I can do to support President Trump and move this (land sales language) forward.” It would be nice if the Senator’s allegiance were to the American people and protecting OUR national inheritance of natural splendor, rather than to one man’s agenda. We will have to wait to see what he feels he can sneak into the legislation that can escape the Byrd Rule. The proposal for mining adjacent to the Boundary Waters is still going to be pursued.
The Big, Ugly Bill still drastically cuts the National Park Service, slashing its appropriation by $1.2 billion (31 percent) - the largest cut in the agency’s 109-year history. There would be huge reductions in national parks operational funding, programs to protect wildlife and ecosystems, cultural programs such as at historic landmarks and heritage sites (60 percent reduction), and the elimination of National Heritage Areas Programs (in Iowa, this includes Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Areas).
There also is a push to zero-out funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), a critical cost-share program that helps states and local communities conduct natural resources and outdoor recreation projects (as an example, see article on how Colorado would be affected). The LWCF helped fund several of the local county parks I managed as director of Buchanan County Conservation Board in Iowa, and has been a mainstay for federal/local partnership funding for 60 years. The grants are popular and competitive, with only enough money to fund some of the many quality potential projects.
Contact your senators and let them know public lands, parks, and wildlife are important to you - click here.
It is worth noting that none of the items currently excluded from the Big Ugly Bill by the Senate Parliamentarian are going away. If they are no longer in the bill once it is enacted, these items will remain a priority for Trump and his followers. Some of the ideas are taken from Project 2025, which remains a blueprint for the direction the Administration and Congress are moving our country. We cannot allow efforts to dispose of or degrade our public lands and wildlife to succeed. To what end would this be done? To provide tax breaks for the wealthiest among us? To allow land grabs for favored industries and provide access to polluters? To trade eons of national splendor for a few months of budget funding? These all are bad deals, and our grandchildren will not approve. The work to build and protect our public lands legacy has a storied past and is ongoing. The effort has been a mainstay of the American experience. As President Teddy Roosevelt once said,
“Here is your country. Cherish these natural wonders, cherish the natural resources, cherish the history and romance as a sacred heritage, for your children and your children's children. Do not let selfish men or greedy interests skin your country of its beauty, its riches or its romance.”
Unfortunately, selfish men and greedy interests also are a mainstay in the American experience. We must remain vigilant.
I sent notes to both of our Senators expressing my dismay and pleading to each, to reject ANY sale of public land, in the big ugly bill before the senate. I did hear back from one so far. And, as expected, it was a BS sandwich. Please all, remember this arrogance and hate the next time you vote.
Thanks for the advocacy, Dan! Yes, we need eternal vigilance and resistance.