Idaho senators push back on federal land sale
LEWISTON – Idaho Sens. Jim Risch and Mike Crapo said Friday that they oppose selling federal land as part of the massive tax cut and budget bill making its way through Congress.
It’s the first time the two influential Republicans have commented on a controversial provision of the “Big Beautiful Bill” that would mandate the sell-off of up to 3 million acres of public land overseen by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management.
“After reviewing the Senate Energy and Natural Resources reconciliation language, I do not support the proposed provision to sell public lands,” Risch said in a statement.
Crapo released a similar statement through his press secretary Melanie Lawhorn.
With the two Idaho senators out, the provision authored by Republican Mike Lee of Utah would seem to face a tough road. Sens. Steve Daines and Tim Sheehy have both said they are philosophically opposed to the large-scale liquidation of federal land. Neither Montana Republican, however, had commented specifically on Lee’s text until Friday.
“Senator Daines is opposed to selling public land and is opposed to Sen. Lee’s proposal.” Daines spokesperson Matt Lloyd told the Tribune.
Sen. Sheehy’s staff did not respond to a request for comment.
The Senate is split 53 to 47 with Republicans in the majority. They are attempting to pass the bill that extends and expands President Donald Trump’s 2017 tax cuts and includes provisions of his domestic agenda by July 4.
“If the Montanans – Daines and Sheehy – remain a ‘no’ and the Idahoans remain a ‘no, I think it gets very, very complicated to see that language stay in the final package,” Michael Carroll of the Wilderness Society said. “We hope those four senators in particular lock arms and oppose what Sen. Lee has been proposing.”
Big tent coalition
Earlier this week, the Wilderness Society built a map using the latest language from the land sell-off provision. It shows that more than 250 million acres of land across the West, including 21.6 million in Idaho and 5.3 million in Washington eligible for the auction block.
It served as fuel for the growing opposition seeking to sink the land sell-off provision. The effort encouraging people to tell their senators to kill the provision spans a broad spectrum of stakeholders from left-leaning conservation groups like the Sierra Club to hunting organizations like the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.
Aaron Lieberman, executive director of the Idaho Outfitters and Guides Association, said his members – hunting, fishing and boating outfitters – have not voted on Lee’s language, but they have previously strongly opposed the transfer of federal land to private interests.
“We have a really diverse group of hard-core MAGAs and hard-core hippies and everything in between,” he said. “I think of outfitters in Idaho as a pretty good litmus test as to where the broader public may stand on this and it’s pretty clear Idahons want to maintain public access to public lands.”
Clay Hayes, a hunting and outdoors influencer, filmmaker and winner of the 2021 season of the survivalist TV show “Alone,” avoids politics in his posts. But he made an exception for the proposed land sell off.
“It’s beyond my ability to comprehend how anybody could think this is a good idea,” he said in an Instagram Reel. “I don’t care if you live in Massachusetts, if you have ever dreamed of going elk hunting in the West this affects you.”
Hayes, who lives near Kendrick, Idaho, said he is troubled by the vague language used to outline the proposal and fears it would set a bad precedent.
“My family recreates on public lands every month of the year. A big part of our livelihood is based around public land. A big part of our food comes from public land, through hunting, fishing and foraging. My family could not live the life we live without public land.”
According to Lee’s text, the secretaries of Agriculture and Interior would be directed to consult with governors, local governments and Native American tribes before choosing which tracks of land to sell. Priority would be given to land adjacent to developed areas with supporting infrastructure and land suitable for residential housing. Housing is not defined in the text. It would exclude the disposal of protected land such as wilderness areas, national parks or lands with valid existing rights.
The definition of existing rights is being debated in the discourse around Lee’s proposal. An earlier version of his text named land with grazing permits as being exempt from being sold. The latest version simply exempts land with valid existing rights.
Some say the term covers things like grazing leases but an analysis by the University of Colorado Law School released Wednesday notes that federal grazing permits don’t create “any right, title, interest or estate in or to the lands” and that federal case law interprets grazing permits as “licenses rather than rights.”
The Wilderness Society map grew by roughly 100 million acres when Lee’s second version edited out a specific exemption for land covered by grazing permits.
Cameron Mulrony, executive director of the Idaho Cattle Association said his group hasn’t taken a position because of the uncertainty.
“If pre-existing rights include grazing permits we wouldn’t take a position,” he said.
“Everybody in our industry is going to have a personal view on whether or not they agree with the disposal of public land but our position is going to directly lie on the impacts to the cattle industry.”
An amendment that would have directed the federal government to sell 500,000 acres of federal land in Utah and Nevada was stripped out of the House version of the reconciliation bill. Idaho Rep. Russ Fulcher voted for the amendment but it was removed following opposition from Rep. Mike Simpson of Idaho’s 2nd Congressional District, Rep. Ryan Zinke of Montana and a handful of other Republicans.