Washington continues to maintain a tight grip on the vast real estate it owns out West, despite recent efforts to relinquish control. The 50 percent of land under federal purview in this area dwarfs the limited holdings in the nation’s other regions. These states should be given greater stewardship over their territory. Local jurisdictions can better manage the terrain, maximize its potential, and simultaneously alleviate problems and unleash prosperity. Americans would greatly benefit.
After America gained its independence, it expanded westward. Congress enacted the Homestead Act of 1862 to encourage and accelerate settlement in the West. Millions of acres were divested until Congress passed the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, declaring the federal government would retain ownership of the roughly 640 million acres of land remaining.
Most of that acreage lies in the westernmost states: Nevada (85 percent of the land is federal), Utah (65), Idaho and Alaska (60), Oregon (53), Wyoming (48), California (46), Arizona (39), Colorado and New Mexico (35), and Montana and Washington (29). Compare that to Connecticut, Iowa, Kansas, Rhode Island, and New York whose federal ownership is less than one percent. Most states, in fact, own most of their territory. The federal-state dynamic across the country is off-balance; it needs to change.
Last year Utah petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to address whether the federal government can legally retain perpetual ownership of the 18.5 million acres of unappropriated land—which has no designated purpose—within the state. Idaho, Alaska, Wyoming, and Arizona filed amicus briefs in support; Utah’s neighbors have high hopes for their own jurisdictions. The Court declined to hear the case.
In May, the House Natural Resources Committee passed an amendment for the Reconciliation Bill which would have allowed selling 500,000 acres of Utah and Nevada public land. Nevada Representative Mark Amodei expressed concerns that “vast stretches of public land could threaten Nevada’s economic momentum and competitiveness.” The measure was stripped from the bill before the House passed it.
The following month Utah Senator Mike Lee, a long-time advocate of selling off public lands, introduced an amendment for the Reconciliation Bill requesting the sale of public land to address local housing issues or other community needs. The measure instructed the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Forest Service to identify roughly 0.75 percent of their lands (less than three million acres across eleven states) for potential disposal. After public outcry from all sides, the proposal was withdrawn.
These recent actions represent the West’s ambitions to regain control over a portion of their terrain, the same sovereignty granted to every other state. Federal overreach prevents them from actively managing public lands, which impacts recreation, local economies, and resource development. The enormous pushback from opponents is misplaced and misguided.
Despite claims to the contrary, the requests do not target designated locations like national parks, national monuments, wilderness areas, the national trails system, national preserves, or any other federally protected land. The measures ask for unappropriated and/or isolated tracts of land.
The type of land proposed in the Reconciliation Bill would have included land adjacent to existing development and infrastructure: small BLM patches surrounding communities to help meet housing demands or “checkerboard parcels” which obstruct community growth. State and local governments, who are intimately familiar with both local needs and the land, would nominate these non-essential federal areas; they would not simply be up for grabs to the highest bidder.
The nationwide shortage of approximately 4.5 million homes has spiked housing prices. Estimates indicate that selling just 0.3 percent of BLM land would be enough for up to four million single-family detached and townhomes. Exploding population growth in states like Nevada and Utah are causing serious housing crises; selling a tiny fraction of BLM land could “usher in housing abundance and prosperity.”
Utah’s 18.5-million-acre lawsuit sought local control. Having already closed hundreds of miles of roads and limiting public access and use, BLM plans to close thousands more, further impacting recreation and local economies. If granted ownership, the Beehive State would “balance recreation, wildlife habitat, and conservation with other responsible uses such as energy production, livestock grazing, and sustainable resource development.” The federal government is impeding potential prosperity and public use.
Western states like Utah, Nevada, and Arizona are rich in critical minerals (used in thousands of modern technologies), but federal control keeps them locked up, limiting the nation’s ability to compete globally. In a 2023 House testimony, the president of the Utah Mining Association stated that mines on state or private lands can receive permits in a two-to-three-year timeframe; mines on federal lands can take up to 20. Now that China—our largest supplier—will be restricting its disbursement of mineral resources, we could be facing our “most serious energy crisis in decades.” For Utah, two-thirds of BLM-controlled land contains many of the state’s substantial mineral resources.
State land is better managed. A Property Environmental Research Center (PERC) study finds that states earn an average of $14.51 for every dollar spent on state land management; the federal government loses money by only generating $0.73. A different PERC study demonstrates that eastern states successfully manage land for “multiple uses and revenue-raising purposes while maintaining forests and other state lands in a healthy environmental and ecological condition,” far surpassing their western counterparts, whose federal lands encounter backlogs and mismanagement.
The U.S. government is depriving municipalities and states of revenue, growth, and prosperity. It is in the interests of individual states and their citizens to govern more of their own territory. As our nation faces new challenges, like housing and resource scarcities, making the best use of our land will be crucial in avoiding catastrophes.
Kristen Walker is an energy policy analyst for the American Consumer Institute, a nonprofit education and research organization. For more information about the Institute, visit www.theamericanconsumer.org or follow us on X @ConsumerPal.