A controversial amendment to the contested “Big Beautiful Bill,” the Trump administration’s omnibus budget reconciliation bill, would make more than 250 million acres of public land spanning the western U.S available for sale to private buyers and corporations.
The amendment, added to the bill just days before voting began, was sponsored by U.S. Senator Mike Lee (R) of Utah, and would allow for the transfer of land managed by the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management across 12 states, with more than 16 million acres in California and 15 million acres in Wyoming offered for sale.
Ten other states – Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington – would also see significant portions of their public lands made available purchase by private buyers.
Although the amendment would exclude federal protected land, like national park territory, a legal opinion drafted by the Department of Justice claims the Trump administration has the right to strip national monuments of their practice status; it remains unclear if this authority would allow for national monuments to be made available for sale.
Potentially at risk in the sale of public lands is public access to many popular waterways and recreational lakes and reservoirs across the western U.S. Thousands of acres of land spanning the Wild Horse Range in northern Nevada would be made available for sale by the U.S. Forest Service, including large swaths of territory surrounding the Wild Horse Reservoir State Recreation Area.
Nearly all land surrounding the Wilson Reservoir to the immediate west would also be up for sale, significantly limiting access to the lake to just a single road. Just south of the border between Oregon and Nevada, the entire southern half of the Continental Lake could be privatized. The same holds true for Summer Lake in Oregon, and the entire perimeter of Lake Abert could also be privatized, potentially restricting all access to its waters.
Although America’s largest recreating reservoir, Lake Powell, has been thus far spared from its land being made for sale, the amendment to the omnibus bill could potentially eliminate access to hundreds of square miles of U.S. waters used every year by hundreds of thousands of boaters, wakeboard and water skiers, fisherman, and vacationers.
Supporters of the amendment argue the land sale would stimulate economic growth in rural areas. But opponents say the land grab would cause an explosion in unsustainable housing development and fuel an increasingly unsustainable use of water rights across the western states. The bill’s vague language includes no requirements ensuring any residential properties developed on the purchase lands would adhere to specific affordability, density, or sustainability standards.
In a sign of wavering support for the initiative, House Republicans initially struck the language from the omnibus making any public land for sale. It was later reintroduced by Sen. Mike Lee in early June, then expanded a third time, with yet more land included in the proposal. Meanwhile, residents across affected western states appear to largely oppose the measure, with residents from Nevada, Arizona, and Utah vocally dissenting the amendment and pressuring state representatives to vote against the measure.
Elsewhere, lawmakers are proposing similar initiatives in their states. Representative Celeste Maloy (R), of Utah, proposed a transfer of more than 10,000 acres of public land to ownership under Washington County in the state’s southern region.
Water rights advocates claim the idea amounts to a water grab by the legislature, drawing comparisons to the admonished Lake Powell Pipeline project, which would redirect water from the failing reservoir, which holds just 32% of its capacity as of 2025, to Utah’s southern districts.
Democratic representatives from Arizona issued a statement condemning the proposal, arguing it is a, “Trojan horse to steal Nevadans’ and Arizonans’ water.” A Washington County civil manager denied the land would be used to construct a water pipeline.
Although the measure was vetoed by the senate mid-June, Sen. Lee says he will revise the proposal and intends to reintroduce it a third time for a future vote.
