BREAKING: Controversial Public Lands Sale Provision Pulled from Federal Budget Package

iSportsman Staff

A hotly contested proposal to sell off millions of acres of federal public land has been dropped from what former President Donald Trump has dubbed the “Big, Beautiful Budget Bill,” following intense opposition from sportsmen’s groups, conservation organizations, and even some fellow Republicans.

According to Politico, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) confirmed Friday that he had removed the federal land sale language from the broader budget reconciliation package due to a lack of support from key GOP senators.

“I wish we could do it,” Lee said, “but we just don’t have the votes.” On X, Lee blamed “misinformation” and “outright lies” about his bill for the pushback and wrote he continues “to believe the federal government owns far too much land.”

The provision would have directed the Department of the Interior to identify and prepare up to 3 million acres of public land for sale, citing parcels deemed to have “limited recreational, scenic or conservation value.” However, sportsmen and conservationists quickly pushed back, arguing that such a vague definition could jeopardize important hunting, fishing and wildlife habitat areas.

As Outdoor Life reported, more than 50 outdoor and conservation groups, including the Sportsman’s Alliance, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership and the oft-maligned Backcountry Hunters & Anglers, voiced opposition to the proposal. These groups warned that “selling off federal lands would reduce public access for hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation, and could result in the permanent loss of landscapes critical to wildlife habitat and conservation,” OL’s Andrew McKean wrote. Some of the parcels listed in past disposal efforts have been found to contain access routes, water sources or critical wildlife migration corridors and there was little in the vague language of the bill that promised anything different.

The backlash extended throughout the political sphere as well. All Democrats and a growing chorus of Republicans—many typically allies of Lee—voiced hesitation or outright disapproval of the measure.

“The people of Idaha have been clear—we do NOT support the sale of our public lands to the highest bidder. I am proud to help lead the effort to remove this provision from the One Big, Beautiful Bill,” Idaho Republican Sen. Jim Risch said in a post on X.

Montana Republican Sen. Tim Sheehy was prepared to oppose the entire tax bill because of the public lands provision, Deseret News in Utah reported. He later changed minds after receiving approval from Senate GOP leaders to “introduce an amendment to strip the public lands language from the bill,” signaling not even many Republicans wanted to be tied to the provision.

“I oppose the sale of public lands and will vote no on the motion to proceed if it is included,” Sheehy said in a post on X.

After pre-emptively pulling the measure, Lee signaled he’s not giving up entirely on the idea of what he sees as a need for the federal government to divest of some land holdings.

“I continue to believe the federal government owns far too much land—land it is mismanaging and in many cases ruining for the next generation,” Lee said in his statement citing that he will revisit the issue in the future.

For now, however, sportsmen and women across the country can breathe a bit easier. The public lands they rely on for adventure, meat and solitude remain off the auction block—at least for the time being.