Could Trump sell his public lands? Absolutely – Adventure Diary

Well, they warned us. For more than 50 years, since the 1970s, conservatives have been trying to steal Americans’ most precious resources: our shared ownership of what is called federal land, but is actually public land, land that belongs to you and me. Beginning with the so-called Sagebrush Rebellion, they have attacked federal land ownership from all angles. Now, with Donald Trump as president, it appears the government is, at the very least, open to selling public lands to private landowners. I say “seems” because no one in the administration has yet explicitly suggested scrapping land, but they sure are hinting at it, and the many public lands activists I’ve contacted are terrified that Trump will scrap parts of the commons for a pittance.

In an essay published on Time’s website last week (“Trump should not sell our public lands”), Patagonia CEO Ryan Gellert wrote: “This Congress and the Trump administration are trying to facilitate the leasing or sale of 640 million acres of public lands, including America’s most iconic landscapes, and turn their backs on the indigenous and local groups who advocated for their protection. The government’s plans could revoke our access to hike, climb, camp, fish and hunt in the places we treasure. Small business owners who depend on tourists are suffering from the drop in visits. “All surrounding communities would be affected by the economic change and pollution that would occur when drilling or mining began.”

The problem gets complicated pretty quickly, but I’ll simplify it as best I can. States have long tried to seize federal lands without success. In his confirmation, new Interior Secretary Doug Burgum talked about treating the government like a business and extracting value from American assets. “Some of those areas we absolutely have to protect for their valuable assets, but the rest is the balance of the United States,” he said. “If we restrict access, don’t cut down a tree, don’t use it for recreation, and then don’t develop the minerals sustainably and intelligently, we’re going to get a very low return for the American people.”

Land Towney, co-chair of the American Hunters and Anglers Action Network, saying“Considering our public lands as part of the balance sheet? That’s bullshit that’s never been said out loud before.”

Quick reminder: governments are not for-profit companies and the value of land is much, much greater than its extractive or sales price.

Two other measures point to the administration’s intentions. First, Trump wants to create what’s called a sovereign wealth fund, a giant kitty of American money to invest. with the united states $36 billion puffed up, The easiest and fastest way to boost the fund is by selling land.. Second, in January, the Republican-led Congress passed a rule making it easier to transfer, sell, donate or exchange land.

From the Foreign Alliance again: “This budget maneuver is designed to make it seem like giving away or selling public lands would cost nothing. In fact, public lands provide valuable ecosystem services like clean air and water, are a major source of government revenue, form the foundation of the $1.2 trillion outdoor recreation economy, and are critical to the well-being of local communities across the country.”

Let’s be clear. The United States government has the right and responsibility to conduct land transactions on behalf of all Americans. That’s not what we’re talking about here. This seems like an all-out assault by people who for decades have been trying to dismantle our national treasures. In the first month of the Trump administration, we have seen almost gleeful attacks on institutions like the National Park Service and the Forest Service, with no regard for the people who make them operate or the effect on the lands they manage. Even if you agree that government should be smaller, Trump, Musk and company have brought chaos and probable illegality to the process. Given their track record thus far, there is nothing to suggest they would approach public lands with sensitivity, nuance, or understanding. Quite the opposite.

Let’s also be clear that Americans across the political spectrum value public lands and oppose selling them. This is a bipartisan issue. In fact, the traditionally conservative hunting and fishing community has moved ahead of the human-powered recreation community by warning about attacks on public lands and fighting to preserve access. Finally, the argument for continuing federal ownership can be formulated in strictly economic terms. As mentioned above, outdoor recreation generates $1.2 trillion in economic growth and is responsible for 5 million jobs in the United States. The outdoor recreation economy is 3.5 times the size of the airline or automobile manufacturing industries, twice the size of agriculture and forestry, and 1.5 times the size of oil and gas development and mining.

So how do you act? Make your voice heard. There is a form on this page. where you can quickly send an email to your representatives. If you want to call or email them directly, you can find their information here. You should also convey your support to Public lands law in public handsa bipartisan House bill introduced by Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.) and Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.), which blocks the sale or transfer of large parcels (300 acres or more) managed by the Department of the Interior and the U.S. Forest Service.

Finally, watch this space. I am following the issue closely and will continue to report on it.

Stephen Casimiro
Founder + Editor

Photo: At the march in support of national parks, Joshua Tree, California, March 1, 2025, by Stephen Casimiro