While the most recent attempt to sell U.S. public lands was stymied on a procedural rule, the idea has gained traction as a means of funding the domestic budget. The next potential action being discussed is the sell-off of public land around Western population centers, which will have hugely detrimental effects on outdoor recreation. Here’s what trail runners need to know.
Public land sales, once considered a political non-starter due to their widespread unpopularity, have gained traction under the Trump administration as a way to fund domestic tax cuts. Proposals to authorize land sell-offs were added and later stripped from both the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” in the House of Representatives reconciliation bill and the “One Big Beautiful Bill” in the Senate. Both are comprehensive bills aimed at enacting key elements of President Trump’s domestic policy agenda, and they ignited fierce debate and drew sharp opposition across the political spectrum. [Editor’s Note: The House of Representatives and the Senate are the two bodies that make up the U.S. Congress, and work together to create federal laws.]
Environmental advocates, Western lawmakers, and outdoor recreationists, including hunters, anglers, and trail runners, sounded the alarm about the threat these sales pose to access, habitat, and local economies.
Trail runners and all who enjoy the outdoors should have their voices heard on the threat to public lands. Photo: iRunFar/Eszter Horanyi
While the sell-off provision was removed from the current version of the bill on June 23, after Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough ruled it violated the Byrd Rule, which bars non-budgetary policy in reconciliation legislation, the threat to public lands is far from over. This episode underscores how quickly once-taboo policies can gain ground and highlights just how vital it is for outdoor athletes and public land users to stay engaged and outspoken.
“This kind of proposal reframes public lands from shared national assets into disposable budget items. If Congress starts treating our parks, forests, and open spaces as a blank check, it opens the door to more land sell-offs whenever lawmakers are looking for easy revenue,” said Tania Lown-Hecht, Vice President of Communications and Strategy at the Outdoor Alliance, an outdoor advocacy organization that has been active on the issue. “It signals a cultural shift away from stewardship and toward privatization, and once these lands are gone, we don’t get them back.”
Sell-Offs Enter the Main Stream
Just before midnight on May 12, 2025, Mark Amodei (Representative of Nevada) and Celeste Maloy (Representative of Utah) introduced a surprise amendment to the House budget reconciliation package that would authorize the sale of public lands across Nevada and Utah to help offset domestic tax cuts.
The amendment was quietly added during a late-night committee markup session, catching both lawmakers and conservation groups off guard. While the amendment’s text cited just 11,000 acres, third-party watchdogs used GIS mapping tools to reveal that the total footprint of the land in question exceeded half a million acres, far more than was initially disclosed. A spokesperson for Amodei later claimed the 11,000-acre figure referred only to “net” sales, but critics said the discrepancy underscored the rushed and opaque nature of the proposal’s inclusion.
The proposal sparked pushback from across the political spectrum, including the former Secretary of the Interior, Ryan Zinke (Representative of Montana), who formed the Bipartisan Public Lands Caucus on May 7 with Gabe Vasquez (Representative of New Mexico) to oppose any inclusion of land sales in the reconciliation process.
“I do not support the widespread sale or transfer of public lands. Once the land is sold, we will never get it back. God isn’t creating more land,” said Zinke in a press release from May.
While the sell-off idea has gained steam in Washington, public pushback, spearheaded in part by conservation and outdoor recreation groups, helped bring attention to the issue and sent a clear signal to lawmakers about the unpopularity of the proposals. Mass support for public land crosses the two-party divide, which has forced some Republicans to break with the national party on the issue and created the potential for some unusual political alliances. A 2025 poll from YouGov showed that 71 percent of Americans, regardless of political affiliation, oppose the sale of public lands.
iRunFar’s Meghan Hicks on a fastpacking trip in Capitol Reef National Park in Utah. Photo: iRunFar/Eszter Horanyi
The Outdoor Industry Pushes Back
After land sell-off provisions were removed from the House budget reconciliation bill during last-minute negotiations, Utah Senator Mike Lee, Chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and a longtime advocate for privatizing federal lands, pushed to include them in the Senate version.
Estimates of how much land could be sold under the Senate bill vary, largely due to the bill’s vague language. While it doesn’t list specific parcels, analysts commonly cite a figure of 3 to 3.3 million acres, based on eligibility criteria drawn from a 1997 Bureau of Land Management (BLM) review that identified certain lands as “suitable for disposal.” Though the Senate bill effectively revives this decades-old inventory, the BLM has since acknowledged that the list is outdated and that many of the parcels have not been evaluated for current ecological, recreational, or cultural value.
According to reporting by the Outdoor Alliance, the parcels potentially for sale contained nearly 100,000 miles of trails. Unlike the previous bills that limited sales to lands previously identified for disposal, the most recent bill called out almost any multiple-use Forest Service or BLM land, including many popular recreation spots.
According to an analysis by Runners for Public Lands, a nonprofit that mobilizes runners for climate action and advocacy, 35 trail races take place either entirely or partially on lands that would have been eligible for sale under the original Senate bill. Of those, 21 races have at least half of their total mileage on at-risk lands. While most of these races are held on U.S. Forest Service lands, a separate GIS analysis found that more than 23 million acres of BLM land lie within five miles of a population center across the 11 western states. On those lands alone, there are at least 2,373 miles of trails.
“As one of the primary recreation users of federal lands, runners once again lent their voice to the chorus of public land defense,” said Bryant Barker, a Runners for Public Lands Board Member who did the analysis. “Race directors from around the country contacted members of Congress to let them know about the detrimental impacts public land sales for development would have on races and running in general. The work isn’t over yet, however, and runners need to continue vocalizing their support for public lands as the legislation moves forward.”
In Utah, popular trails like the Hidden Valley area east of Ogden, as well as Salt Lake County trails including Upper Mill Creek, Grandeur Peak, White Pine Lake, and Mill Creek Pipeline trail were slated for potential sale. In Colorado, popular hiking and trail running spots near the Front Range, including Lefthand, Gold Lake, West Magnolia and Winiger Ridge, as well as trails near Brainard Lake, could be sold.
Significant swaths of land on Colorado’s Western Slope, including land adjacent to popular ski resorts like Vail, Aspen, and Steamboat Springs, could have been privatized as well. California trail hot spots along the Pacific Crest Trail corridor, in Big Sur, near Mount Shasta, and Lake Tahoe-adjacent lands were also earmarked for sale. The Scout Mountain Ultras in Idaho and the Hardrock 100 in Colorado each found that large percentages of their event courses traveled through lands that had been earmarked for potential sale.
The stunning route of the Hardrock 100 in Colorado, much of which takes place in public lands. Photo: iRunFar/Bryon Powell
In addition to outdoor athletes and activists, outdoor brands have rallied in support of public lands, coming together to form Brands for Public Lands, a group that represents outdoor industry businesses located in 17 states and spanning gear, apparel, media, and tourism.
“This is a watershed moment for the outdoor community. Either we stand up and, with one loud and unequivocal voice, stop this sale of our natural and national heritage, or we stand to lose that which we hold most dear as a community,” said Will Roush, Executive Director of Wilderness Workshop, an environmental watchdog organization.
[Editor’s Note: The author, Zoë Rom, is also on the Runners for Public Lands Board of Directors.]
Call for Comments
- How would this public land sell-off affect your running access and opportunities?
- Have you been involved in opposing these bills in the House and Senate?
