U.S. Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) has announced that he is withdrawing his latest public lands sell-off plan from the Senate budget reconciliation bill, one which would have mandated the sale of millions of acres of public land throughout the Western United States. The original plan would have been a massive blow to outdoor enthusiasts, conservationists, and nature photographers.
The decision follows widespread public outcry and bipartisan opposition, marking a significant victory for conservationists, outdoor enthusiasts, and advocates of public land access.
A Reversal That Preserves Public Lands
In a significant reversal, the U.S. Senate has removed the controversial provision from its sweeping federal budget reconciliation bill H.R.1 officially titled the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” often referred to as the “Big Beautiful Bill,” that would have authorized the sale of federally managed public lands, many of them in ecologically and culturally significant areas of the American West. The decision comes amid mounting opposition from across the political spectrum, including members of both the Republican and Democratic parties, as well as a wide array of stakeholders concerned about long-term access to public lands.
The provision, which was tucked into earlier drafts of the bill, would have required the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to identify and sell off large tracts of public land, some of which bordered or overlapped with areas near National Parks and protected wilderness in states like Utah, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico.
National Park-Adjacent Lands Spared
While the exact parcels under consideration were not publicly itemized, environmental groups and local officials raised alarms that the plan could have affected land in or directly near Arches National Park, Grand Staircase–Escalante National Monument, and Great Basin National Park, among others. These landscapes are widely regarded for their geological and ecological richness and are frequently visited by photographers, hikers, and nature enthusiasts drawn to their remote beauty. The now-removed provision posed a risk not just to these adjacent lands but to the visual corridors and wildlife migration paths that connect National Parks with the surrounding wilderness.
“Americans from all corners spoke out in unprecedented numbers, showing that our public lands are common ground, uniting us in the fight to protect them. Every member of Congress who listened and stood up to protect access to our favorite trails, fishing holes and camp sites deserves thanks. Future generations are counting on them to remain vigilant against any more attempts to sell off our public lands — including the threats that we know are coming from the administration. Now we turn to fighting back on the other harmful provisions of this bill, which aim to lease millions of acres to oil and gas corporations at rock-bottom prices,” wrote Tracy Stone-Manning, president of The Wilderness Society.
Organizations such as the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership (TRCP) are celebrating what it calls “a critical win for America’s public lands.”
“Public lands are a cornerstone of our national heritage, our outdoor traditions, and the economies of countless communities across the country. We’re deeply grateful to Senators Sheehy, Daines, Crapo, and Risch for their leadership and all the lawmakers — including Senator Heinrich — who helped ensure this short-sighted proposal was removed,” said Joel Pedersen, president and CEO of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership.
Political Pressure from Within
Notably, the opposition was not confined to environmental groups or Democratic lawmakers. Several Western-state Republicans expressed concern that the sale could undermine hunting, recreation, and tourism economies in their home states.
Facing increasing scrutiny, public outcry, petitions, and a looming vote, Senate leadership confirmed late Monday that the land sale provision had been officially struck from the final version of the spending bill.
A Pause, Not a Full Stop?
While conservation groups welcomed the decision, many acknowledged that broader debates over federal land use, management, and privatization are far from over. Calls for reforming how public lands are designated and maintained continue to echo in Congress, especially as housing pressures and resource demands grow in Western states.
Meanwhile, the Conservation Lands Foundation noted that the proposal to sell 1.8 million acres of public land in the “One Big Beautiful Act,” including 38 million acres of National Conservation Lands, was dismissed only on a technicality.
While Senator Lee posted to Instagram that he withdrew the bill on June 29, the withdrawal came after the controversial land-sale provision was first struck down by Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough earlier in the month, who ruled that it violated the Byrd Rule on multiple accounts, a key guideline governing budget reconciliation bills.
The Byrd Rule restricts reconciliation to items that have a direct impact on federal spending or revenue, and the proposed sale of public lands was determined to be an extraneous policy measure rather than a budgetary necessity. This procedural decision effectively blocked the provision from moving forward, marking a critical turning point in the debate.
“On Monday night, Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough ruled that Senator Mike Lee’s (R-Utah) proposal requiring the sale of up to 1.8 million acres of Bureau of Land Management lands in the Senate amendment to the One Big Beautiful Act was ruled out of the reconciliation package because it violates the ‘Byrd Rule,’ Conservation Lands Foundation says in a press release.
“While this decision is based on a technical legislative process, it reflects the views of an overwhelming majority of Americans across the country and political spectrum that America’s public lands are not for sale, and that they should not be used to finance tax cuts for the wealthy or to line the pockets of billionaires who seek to profit from these priceless lands and waters,” wrote David Feinman, Vice President of Government Affairs of the Conservation Lands Foundation.
“We urge Senator Lee to abandon this effort, and call on Congress to act on behalf of the rights of all Americans to enjoy their access to public lands by rejecting any additional attempts to mandate the sale of millions of acres of public land and line the pockets of campaign donors and out-of-state special interests. Public lands must remain in public hands for everyone to enjoy, not just the greedy few.”
“We know the fight isn’t over. New threats to public lands and conservation funding are already emerging. And we’ll be ready. But today? We celebrate,” writes the Trust for Public Land.
With Sen. Mike Lee’s own statement announcing the withdrawal of the land sales from the bill alluding to his looking forward to alternative methods to achieve his goals, it includes verbiage that many have taken as a literal warning of what new steps may come.
“I continue to believe the federal government owns far too much land,” Sen. Lee wrote.
“President Trump promised to put underutilized federal land to work for American families, and I look forward to helping him achieve that.”
For now, the withdrawal is considered a hard-won victory celebrated by conservationists, outdoor enthusiasts, and everyday citizens alike. The overwhelming public outcry, fueled by a shared commitment to protecting public lands, proved that collective voices can influence policy. While this moment is a win, many remain vigilant, with millions of acres of land under federal stewardship, knowing that future proposals could again easily threaten access to these cherished spaces.
Image credits: Lead image photograph by Martin Falbisoner used via CC BY-SA 3.0
