Idaho Rep. Russ Fulcher: Federal public lands transfer is ‘imminent’

An Idaho Republican congressman is advocating for the transfer of Idaho’s federally managed public lands to local control, a move he said would address the federal government’s failure to properly oversee the resources that make up 62% of Idaho’s land.

In a letter to state legislators, county commissioners and other state leaders, Rep. Russ Fulcher said resources on lands controlled by federal agencies, like the Bureau of Land management and the U.S. Forest Service, are mismanaged. The congressman said the federal government’s “derelict” management creates wildfire risk, impedes access to public land and stymies leases for grazing, mining and timber.

Fulcher’s comments come on the heels of national pushback to proposed public land sell-offs, as well as a failed attempt by Utah politicians to wrest federally managed land to state control.

The Meridian-based congressman called federal agencies “overwhelmed” in his letter.

“They don’t have the resources to do all the management, so they don’t,” Fulcher wrote.

Fulcher cited a benchmark of $50 billion in deferred maintenance projects as of 2024 and said “moving forward, agency budgets will only see more pressure.” The Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management have seen deep staffing cuts under President Donald Trump’s second administration, as well as mandates for increased timber sales.

John Robison, public lands and wildlife director for the Idaho Conservation League, a nonprofit that has been vocal against public land sales and transfers, in part echoed Fulcher’s criticisms of the agencies in a statement to the Idaho Statesman.

“Everyone has some degree of frustration with land management right now, in large part because critical agencies like the Forest Service and BLM are not currently able to do the job that we expect,” Robison said.

But Robison pointed to congressional funding cuts and the Trump administration’s cuts as the source of the management issues.

“These federal agencies are being dismantled instead of getting the support they need to be successful,” he said. “For example, the Sawtooth National Recreation Area, one of the most popular places in Idaho, has gone from 35 full-time staff to under 10.”

Fulcher said in his letter that there is a growing lack of support in Congress for funding the upkeep of large swaths of public land in Idaho and other western states.

“I hear it all the time: Members of Congress from states without vast levels of federal land don’t want to subsidize us anymore,” Fulcher wrote.

In his letter, Fulcher said a transfer from federal control is “imminent,” in part because of land management costs. Critics have long said that Idaho – which is facing a budget deficit – doesn’t have the funds for the upkeep of the roughly 33 million acres of federally managed land.

“I frequently hear the argument that local stakeholders can’t possibly afford to manage the lands within our borders,” Fulcher wrote. “My response to that is long-term, we can’t afford not to.”

The last official cost analysis of such a transfer was completed in 2013 at the request of Idaho’s Rep. Mike Simpson, according to prior Statesman reporting. A Congressional Research Service report at the time showed three agencies spent $392 million in 2012 to manage Idaho’s federal public lands – more than four times the $90.3 million budget the Idaho Department of Lands operated on in fiscal year 2025, which came from state and federal sources.

Simpson, who was an outspoken opponent of fellow Republicans’ plans to allow federal public land sales earlier in the year, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In an interview with the Statesman in August for the 10th anniversary of the Boulder-White Clouds Wilderness, Simpson said it’s likely management costs have only increased since the 2013 report.

Fulcher’s letter said he has “started holding a series of stakeholder meetings around the state” on the topic. He did not immediately respond to a request for more details on the discussions.

Fulcher maintained that his goal is not to privatize the land.

“Our public lands need to stay public, but they need to be controlled locally,” he wrote.

Robison said partnerships, not a shift in control, are key to addressing the state’s land management issues. He said transferring federal lands to state or local control “will inevitably lead to privatization and Idahoans being locked out of the lands they currently own.

“ ‘Local management’ sounds good until you realize that wealthy private interests are inevitably going to have a bigger voice than you do,” Robison said. “Transferring ownership risks losing our voice to monied interests who don’t value public lands the same ways we do. You shouldn’t have to know the right politicians or wealthy private property owners to enjoy the public lands you currently own.”