A Battle for America’s Birthright: Public Lands Under Siege

America’s federal public lands, a vast expanse of over 640 million acres encompassing national parks, forests, wildlife refuges, and areas designated for resource extraction, represent a unique inheritance for all citizens. This unprecedented system of shared ownership, exceeding a quarter of the nation’s landmass, distinguishes the United States from every other country in the world. Representative John Garamendi of California aptly described these lands as "one of the greatest benefits of being an American," encompassing iconic treasures like Yosemite, Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon, and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area.

Despite widespread bipartisan support for safeguarding these public lands, they are currently facing a relentless assault, particularly during President Donald Trump’s second term. The administration and its congressional allies are aggressively pushing to shift the balance from natural resource protection towards increased extraction, jeopardizing a cornerstone of American identity and democratic governance.

Jesse Deubel, executive director of the New Mexico Wildlife Federation, characterized public lands as the "largest concentration of unappropriated wealth on this globe," expressing concern over interests seeking to monetize and liquidate these assets for immediate financial gain. This drive towards monetization is manifesting in various forms, including attempts to dismantle landscape protections and weaken foundational conservation laws, all in the name of accelerating drilling, mining, and logging activities across the federal estate.

Alarmingly, the administration and Congress are contemplating the sale of federal lands for housing development and to offset tax and spending cuts. The newly established Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk, is accused of causing widespread disruption within federal land management agencies, by pushing out thousands of dedicated civil servants. This systematic purge is expected to leave America’s natural heritage even more vulnerable to existing threats like growing visitor numbers, climate change, wildfires, and invasive species.

This Republican-led campaign to undermine land management agencies and seize control of public lands is not entirely new, as it echoes the Sagebrush Rebellion of the 1970s and 1980s. However, the current assault’s speed, scope, and blatant disregard for public sentiment are unprecedented, raising concerns among public land advocates and legal experts. Steven Davis, a political science professor and author of "In Defense of Public Lands," deemed this period as "probably the most significant moment since the Reagan administration in terms of privatization."

Deubel noted that while the conservation community anticipated a renewed struggle for public lands under Trump, the current level of chaos, especially the mass removal of agency staff, has been alarming. He emphasized that although public opinion remains strongly in favor of protecting public lands, the administration’s apparent disregard for the will of the American people poses a significant threat.

The Trump administration, in a post on the White House website celebrating Earth Day, touted its environmental accomplishments, including "protecting public lands" by opening more areas to energy development, "protecting wildlife" by halting wind energy projects, and safeguarding forests by expanding logging operations. However, these claims have been widely condemned by environmental, climate, and public land advocacy groups.

A leaked draft strategic plan revealed the Interior Department’s four-year vision, which entails opening new federal lands to drilling and other extractive industries, reducing the amount of federal land managed by the government through sales and transfers to states, weakening bedrock environmental laws such as the Endangered Species Act, and shrinking the boundaries of protected national monuments. The DOGE is actively reducing staff and expertise within agencies like the National Park Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

Nearly all Republican senators have publicly expressed support for selling off federal lands to reduce the federal deficit, having recently voted against a measure that would have prevented such sales. The state of Utah is pursuing a legal battle to wrest control of over 18 million acres of BLM lands within its borders from the federal government. While the Supreme Court declined to hear Utah’s lawsuit, the effort was supported by numerous Republican-led states.

The Trump administration has been invoking a series of "emergencies" to justify its agenda, which critics argue are either exaggerated or entirely fabricated. For instance, a purported "energy emergency," declared shortly after Trump’s inauguration, is being used to justify the relaxation of permitting processes, public comment periods, and environmental safeguards in order to accelerate fossil fuel extraction across federal lands and waters, despite record-high domestic oil and gas production.

Similarly, the threat of extreme wildfire, a genuine crisis exacerbated by climate change, is being used to justify slashing environmental reviews and ramping up logging on public lands. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins declared a forest health "emergency," opening nearly 60 percent of national forest lands to aggressive logging.

Furthermore, the administration is invoking America’s "housing affordability crisis" as justification for opening federal lands to housing development, either by selling land to private interests or transferring control to states. A task force has been established to identify "underutilized lands." Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Scott Turner suggested that much of the 500 million acres overseen by the Interior Department is "suitable for residential use."

Critics argue that selling public lands for housing will lead to sprawl in remote and sensitive landscapes, failing to address the root causes of housing affordability issues. They contend that the focus should instead be on issues like stagnant wages and construction costs.

Former Deputy Interior Secretary David Hayes emphasized that Trump’s extensive use of executive power sets the current privatization push apart from previous attempts. Aaron Weiss of the Center for Western Priorities accused the administration of circumventing environmental rules and safeguards in order to advance its agenda, with little regard for public opinion.

Throughout his first term, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke compared his record to that of conservationist President Theodore Roosevelt, despite criticisms from Roosevelt’s great-grandson. Similarly, Burgum invoked Roosevelt during his confirmation hearing, stating that Trump’s "energy dominance agenda" could be America’s "big stick."

Despite some initial optimism among public land advocates, Burgum’s actions have been viewed with increasing concern. The CEO of REI expressed regret over endorsing Burgum, stating that the administration’s actions are "completely at odds with the longstanding values of REI."

At an April 9 meeting with Interior employees, Burgum showed pictures of himself touring oil and gas facilities, promoted "clean coal," and criticized government regulations. He has described federal lands as "America’s balance sheet," arguing that Americans are receiving a "low return" on these assets, based solely on revenues generated from energy and resource extraction.

Davis criticized Burgum’s "balance sheet" argument as ignoring the numerous climate, environmental, cultural, and public health benefits of public lands, which underpin a trillion-dollar outdoor recreation economy. He likened public lands to libraries, schools, and the Department of Defense, arguing that they are essential public goods.

The last attempt to privatize public lands, spearheaded by former Representative Jason Chaffetz in 2017, faced fierce public backlash and was ultimately withdrawn. While the Trump administration weakened protections for millions of acres of federal lands, it stopped short of large-scale sales or transfers.

Public land advocates remain hopeful that the current push will fail, expecting courts to strike down many of Trump’s environmental rollbacks. Rallies have been held at national parks and state capitol buildings to support keeping public lands in public hands. Senator Martin Heinrich has used social media to raise awareness about the Republican effort to undermine, transfer, and sell off public lands.

Deubel emphasized that widespread mobilization, encompassing various stakeholders, is critical to defending public lands. Public lands continue to enjoy broad bipartisan support. Polls consistently demonstrate strong voter support for public lands conservation and opposition to transferring federal lands to state control or weakening protections for national monuments.

Burgum, at his recent staff meeting, stressed the importance of balancing management and protection of federal public lands. However, his social media posts and media appearances have focused on promoting Trump’s energy agenda.

In conclusion, the battle for America’s public lands continues, with advocates hopeful that the administration’s agenda will be thwarted by public opposition and legal challenges. The future of these shared resources, which represent a fundamental aspect of American identity, hangs in the balance.