Transferring public land to private ownership will unleash America’s abundant natural resources
Last week, the House Natural Resources Committee included a provision in the budget reconciliation package allowing federal public land sales in Nevada and Utah. Yet the proposed provision has sparked pushback from some members of Congress and environmental activists. It shouldn’t: The provision represents a vital step toward restoring Americans’ ability to use their abundant natural resources to advance freedom, and it would represent a welcome challenge to the executive branch public lands abuse.
For decades, federal property ownership has resulted in the erosion of Americans’ ability to harness the abundant natural resources with which our nation has been blessed. The United States possesses the world’s largest combined reserves of oil, natural gas, and coal. Our forests could sustainably produce timber for generations. Our mineral deposits contain critical materials essential for everything from smartphones to renewable energy technology.
Yet these resources remain largely inaccessible under a federal management regime that is increasingly divorced from congressional intent and constitutional limits. Consider the scale of this problem: Federal agencies control more than 640 million acres of public property—nearly 30% of all American land. In western states, federal ownership approaches 80%. This arrangement creates an untenable situation where distant bureaucrats with shifting political priorities control the economic destiny of entire communities.
Private ownership would transform this dynamic. When land transfers to private hands, owners gain direct incentives to manage resources sustainably for long-term productivity. Accountability replaces bureaucratic indifference. Efficiency replaces stagnation. Innovation replaces rigid one-size-fits-all mandates. And the communities where these resources are located would benefit from private industry, which provides jobs and other benefits to everyone.
Modern resource development technologies also allow for responsible utilization that acknowledges environmentalist concerns but also recognizes its 2025. It is no longer the 1970s, and our public policy should reflect as much. Today’s oil and gas wells have minimal surface footprints. Modern forestry practices enhance wildlife habitat while producing valuable timber. Mining operations implement sophisticated reclamation techniques. The choice isn’t between preservation and destruction—it’s between responsible development and perpetual lockup.
Yet for decades, presidents and unelected bureaucrats have systematically sought to limit extraction of America’s vast natural resources through unilateral executive action. The consequences are unmistakable: rising energy costs, ruined rural economies, and a dangerous dependence on foreign natural resources—all without congressional approval or local input.
And the executive branch’s abuse of public land authority has grown increasingly brazen in just the past few years. For example, in 2021, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack single-handedly issued the “Southeast Alaska Sustainability Strategy,” terminating old-growth timber sales in the Tongass National Forest and withdrawing vital timber resources from Alaska. This decree, issued 2,700 miles from the affected communities, is incompatible with the Tongass Timber Reform Act’s explicit mandate to maintain reliable timber supplies meeting market demand. This unilateral action attempted to circumvent Congress by disregarding clear statutory requirements through mere administrative guidance. With a stroke of his pen, Vilsack continued the devastation of an industry that once supported over 4,000 jobs, leaving businesses that had invested millions in equipment and infrastructure facing ruin.
This abuse is not isolated. It represents a larger problem with federal property ownership. The committee’s proposed amendment would return the nation to a better approach to our country’s vast natural resources. Indeed, the proposed land sales—covering less than 1% of federal holdings in Nevada and Utah—represent a modest but vital step toward a better federal land policy. Far from the “land grab” some critics portray, these sales would begin unwinding decades of executive branch overreach that has harmed western communities and the national interest. America’s energy security, economic prosperity, and natural resource independence require access to our domestic resources. And by beginning to transfer public lands to productive private ownership, Congress could begin to unlock the potential for responsible resource development. The time has come to restore Americans’ natural resource freedom.
