TRCP, partners, and hunters & anglers applaud bill introduction
Hunters and anglers have been working to prevent the sale of important public lands for years, and the recently introduced Public Lands in Public Hands Act would maintain valuable hunting and fishing access for sportsmen and women. This bipartisan legislation, introduced by Representatives Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.) and Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.) would require congressional approval for the sale and transfer of public lands to non-federal entities in most instances. The biggest impact of the bill would be to prevent the Bureau of Land Management from selling important access parcels as part of its land disposal process.
What is the BLM Land Disposal Process?
The BLM is the nation’s largest landowner. The agency administers 245 million acres of federal public land primarily in 11 western states and Alaska. Currently, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act—federal law governing the management of BLM lands—directs the agency to identify lands for potential disposal, including sale, and the agency has been completing land use plans with land disposal lists for the past 45 years. While a comprehensive list of lands available for potential disposal does not appear to exist, estimates put the total at around 3.3 million acres.
When the BLM identifies lands for potential disposal, existing statute does not require the BLM to prioritize retention of parcels with public access. TRCP has analyzed several land use plans and identified numerous accessible and important public land parcels tagged by the BLM for potential sale across the West. The sale of such parcels could result in lost honey holes for hunters and anglers, and we agree that additional scrutiny is needed.
The law governing how the BLM completes land disposals was passed in 1976 and predates the advent of handheld GPS units that are now utilized by millions of outdoor recreationists to navigate property boundaries with confidence. It’s easy to see how small parcels in the past may have been viewed as low value for public access because they were difficult to locate and use. But in today’s world where private-land access is becoming increasingly difficult to obtain, small, isolated parcels of BLM land have become some of the most important for recreational access.
A Practical Safeguard
To keep these important parcels in public ownership, the Public Lands in Public Hands Act would require congressional approval for the sale of land-accessible parcels 300 acres or larger and water-accessible parcels five acres or larger. Presently, such parcels can be sold without consent from Congress. Some people believe that the BLM should lose their authority to sell any land, and while it is easy to reach that conclusion at first glance, there are several things to consider:
- First, in 2018, Congress reauthorized a program called the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act that established an account to collect proceeds from the sale of small public land parcels and to use those funds to acquire new public lands, including for the purpose of expanding public access. There are many small BLM parcels scattered around the West that provide very little public benefit. Many of them are landlocked and inaccessible. Selling parcels with low recreation value and using the proceeds to acquire new public lands with higher recreation value is good policy, and it’s good for public access. The Public Lands in Public Hands Act would maintain the BLM’s ability to implement this important land consolidation program.
- Second, with 16.43 million acres of landlocked public land in 22 western states, it is unrealistic to think that the federal government is going to buy its way out of the access problem. Yes, we need to find ways to acquire access to the largest and most important landlocked parcels, but land exchanges and utilization of the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act also need to be a part of the solution. The Public Lands in Public Hands Act would keep these tools in the box.
- Finally, there are circumstances when small BLM land transfers to local communities make sense for the construction of a school or fire department. The bill’s acreage floor of 300 acres maintains existing opportunity for communities to work with the BLM on specific local development needs when other options do not exist.
TRCP is excited about the Public Lands in Public Hands Act because of the added certainty it would provide to ensure that your favorite hunting or fishing spot would not be sold and closed to public access. We appreciate the leadership of Representatives Zinke and Vasquez in introducing this legislation, and we look forward to working with them to see the bill passed into law.
Learn more about TRCP’s work to expand public hunting and fishing access HERE.
Please keep public lands in the hands of the people!
The devil as usual will be in the act/bills details, which so far, are not available.
Glenn, the bill text is hyperlinked in the first paragraph. Thanks for your interest in the Public Lands in Public Hands Act.
How will BLM get access to “land-locked” parcels?
Great question, John. The BLM and Forest Service receive millions of dollars every year through the Land and Water Conservation Fund specifically for the purpose of increasing public access for outdoor recreation. We believe that this money should be used purposefully to increase public access, and TRCP is working with our hunt-fish partners and the land management agencies to see these dollars leveraged most effectively. Thanks for your interest in the Public Lands in Public Hands Act.
I support the legislation to protect public lands for hunters, fishermen, and other outdoor activist and to prevent the sale of these lands to any other entity, organization or individual which would deny public access or cause environmental damage to public lands. That includes leases as well.
Access to public land is becoming more difficult every year. Being able to go upland bird hunting, deer, elk, & pronghorn has become very frustrating. CRP land is disappearing, private ranches/farms are charging more per gun each year, if they allow you at all. Land in the plains are being bought up by rich folks for their private hunting areas and don’t allow the Joe public hunting access. The same is true in the mountain states.
I can’t afford to pay thousands of dollars to hunt with a guide or on private land. The same is true when trying to access streams, rivers, and lakes.
I hope the proposed Public Land in Public Hands Act goes through. I also wish the BLM would make cattle owners paid more per head for allotment fees. Both cattle and sheep grazing causes habitat destruction for wildlife. Driving through parts of the mountain states there is nothing but sagebrush. Native grasses and plants are nonexistent.
Dear Trcp, what about Louisiana’s water access tumor, corrupt Louisiana politics continues, when will it all end?🧐
I think 300 acres is too large and could be used poorly. Also wasted to stop breaking up pieces into whatever size to make eligible for off sale?
BLM needs to have the discretion to sell parcels to complete 3rd party land exchanges such as exchanges facilitated by The Conservation Fund. BLM identifies parcels that go through the NEPA process for possible disposal. A Conservation entity helps BLM negotiate an exchange purchasing valuable pvt lands with high value wildlife habitat and purchases those pvt lands at fair mkt value from willing sellers with funds collected from the low value public land parcels. The lands are sold by the Pvt Conservation Fund mostly to adjacent landowners. All these parcels go through the NEPA analysis bu the BLM with public input. This prosed bill would restrict BLM’s existing public land management process which is intended for the public’s benefit. If this bill is passed, the way Congress is deadlocked, could significantly degrade BLM’s ability to process positive acquisitions for sportsman and outdoor rec enthusiasts.
Steve, TRCP agrees that land exchanges are necessary to consolidate public lands and to increase public access to public lands, and this bill does not alter the authority of federal land management agencies to complete land exchanges. TRCP additionally believes land exchanges should serve the public interest, and that interest includes benefitting public access.
With regard to land sales, the Public Lands in Public Hands Act is designed to prevent the sale of parcels that should remain in public hands because they are high value for public access. TRCP supports the sale of parcels with low recreation value as long as the proceeds are used to acquire new public lands with higher recreation value—the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act makes this possible. The Public Lands in Public Hands Act would not add additional restriction to the administrative sale of inaccessible parcels and accessible parcels under 300 acres that are not accessed via public waterway. It would also allow for implementation of the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act.
Finally, the world has changed in the past decade since the advent of GPS technology, and public scrutiny of land sales is at an all-time high. If the BLM were to bring high-value tracts of land with public access up for sale, it could result in a public relations nightmare for the agency and sour decision makers on future land sales. The Public Lands in Public Hands act will reduce the potential for controversial sales, while allowing low controversy sales to proceed—it’s good public policy. Thanks for your interest in the Public Lands in Public Hands Act.
This oversight is critical to the future of public lands. All too often individuals within the BLM do not discharge their duties as they should. Rather they are in positions where they can benefit private interests at public expense and enrich themselves in ways that are not readily apparent. Kudos to the Congressmen for this bipartisan effort. Pass this and keep public lands out of the reach of the patronage of wealthy individuals who do not give a damn about the public interest.
I applaud Representatives Zinke and Vasquez for working together in the public’s best interest. Overlooking their political affiliations to work together for the greater good of American constituents. Doing the job they were elected to do. So many of our politicians have forgotten or ignore that fact. I certainly hope that with the aid of TRCP and other like minded organizations, they can gain enough support to get this bill passed.
I hope there will be sufficient notifications of upcoming sales of public lands so that the public can have a voice in the decisions . Not many people are monitoring what The BLM is doing or what congress is working on for that matter , on a daily basis. It seems like it would still be possible to sell something valuable to the public without the public noticing
This proposed legislation requires congressional approval for most land swaps between USFS or BLM and private owners. Such swaps, proposed and authorized by the federal land management agencies, have helped consolidate federal land holdings and improve public access. This bill would turn that process over to Congress, who can’t agree on how to fold a taco. As Trump’s Interior Secretary. Zinke is a snake in the grass, did nothing to do with protect public land. He advised Trump to remove 2/3 of Bears Ears National Monument so his oil/gas buddies could have at it, and Trump did so. Further, if the day comes when Republicans control the house and senate, this bill allows them to sell all the public land they want to private interests. Remember, selling public lands to industry and private owners is stated GOP national policy, has been for decades. Keeping public lands in public hands is the opposite of the true intent of this bill.
Strongly opposed!
Mark, TRCP agrees that land exchanges are necessary to consolidate public lands and to increase public access to public lands, and this bill does not alter the authority of federal land management agencies to complete land exchanges. TRCP additionally believes land exchanges should serve the public interest, and that includes benefitting public access. Thanks for your interest in the Public Lands in Public Hands Act.
BLM In Wyoming acquired the 36,000 acre Marton property but with severe scrutiny from Governor Gordon. Now BLM-WY will not consider any acquisitions until it has disposed of an equal amount of acreage even though there are current project shovel ready that qualify for LWCF funding. There is very little incentive for private parties to acquire BLM lands especially stock growers who can use the land as their own at a cost of $1.35/AUM.
On the whole it sounds well thought out….seems sensible to somehow gain access to landlocked land
Fight HARD to get this legislation passed!
What is TRCP’s position on transfer of public land to tribal entities?
PK
Patrick, TRCP recognizes there are circumstances where conveyances to Tribal and other entities make sense, and there are several exceptions listed in the legislation that allow existing conveyance authorities to proceed. The bill text is hyperlinked in the first paragraph. Thanks for your interest in the Public Lands in Public Hands Act.
As one who hunts public land, I fully support his initiative. Gaining access to private land has been increasingly difficult, and many large land owners tie up access to much public land. Finding ways to benefit the public without harming landowner rights would be a real win for everyone. Thank you!