Frequently Asked Questions

Our nation’s public lands are areas of land and water that are owned collectively by all Americans and managed by the federal government. In Wyoming, there are almost 30 million acres of rangelands, forests, refuges, and waters managed by the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, National Park Service, and Fish and Wildlife Service on behalf of the American people. 

Public land sell-off proponents have opened the door to the sale of all federally-managed public lands — from national forests to national parks — with wide-ranging consequences for all of us.

When we say public lands “sell-off” we’re talking about the large-scale sale or transfer of America’s federally-managed public lands to private interests. 

There are a couple of paths this could take: Congress could “liquidate” public lands by selling directly to the highest bidder or, alternatively, they could turn over large swaths of public lands to the states. Faced with the significant costs of managing millions of acres of public lands, Western states like Wyoming would be forced to either raise taxes or sell off public lands to balance the state budget. Because raising taxes in Wyoming is deeply unpopular, any transferred lands would be sold. 

Either way, you’re likely to see public lands end up in private hands. Once lands are privatized, they are nearly impossible to reclaim.

Perhaps, with appropriate safe-guards, including robust public engagement where the people affected are involved in the decision-making and where the land sale or swap is in the community’s interest. Sometimes it makes sense for small parcels to be deeded to a town or city for public needs. Federal land management agencies already have the authority and processes in place to consider these disposals and undertake community engagement to ensure a swap or sale is in our best interests. Keep it Public, Wyoming is opposed to the wholesale and indiscriminate transfer and sale of public lands, like those supported by some Wyoming legislators and those being pursued by the State of Utah and Senator Mike Lee.

Wyoming lacks the resources to effectively manage our public lands, especially when factoring in the soaring costs of wildfire prevention and response. Given that our state constitution requires a balanced budget each year and mandates state-owned lands be managed for profit, even well-meaning state officials would face significant pressure to charge for public access, develop, or privatize lands to address financial shortfalls. In 2015, Wyoming legislators commissioned a study that unequivocally showed the state would lose money by owning these lands.

Costly housing is a serious problem in many of Wyoming’s communities. To address the housing crisis, President Trump’s administration have suggested that selling off “underutilized” public lands could be a ready solution to increase housing supply across the West. 

It sounds intriguing, but there are many reasons to be skeptical. First, the Bureau of Land Management already has the authority to sell or swap small parcels of public lands in coordination with local communities, including for affordable housing development. Selling off large swaths of public land to developers without guardrails will lower the quality of life in the West, while doing nothing to solve the affordable housing shortage. Many of the lands that have been considered eligible for sale are nowhere near the water, sewer, or road infrastructure that would make housing development feasible. This begs the question: Why the solution is our public lands rather than properly sited housing developments in existing cities and towns?