Snow run off into the Merced River covers meadow areas in Yosemite National Park.
California – As Congress races toward a July 4 deadline to pass a sweeping budget measure, a controversial provision buried within the sprawling legislation could pave the way for the sale of millions of acres of public land — including more than 16 million acres in California. The plan, championed by Senator Mike Lee of Utah, would authorize the sale of up to 3 million acres across the western United States over the next five years, drawing from a pool of 258 million acres currently under federal management.
The legislation, dubbed by some lawmakers as the “Big Beautiful Bill,” has been under intense scrutiny for weeks. But a new map released by the Wilderness Society — a nonprofit focused on land conservation — has given the public its first glimpse at which landscapes could be affected. In California, some of the land eligible for sale lies alarmingly close to iconic natural sites, including Yosemite National Park, Lake Tahoe, Big Sur, and Mount Shasta.
Senator Lee, who chairs the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, argues that selling public land could help spur housing development, generate jobs, and raise an estimated $10 billion in federal revenue. His defenders frame the move as a practical solution to longstanding budgetary and land-use challenges. But conservationists see something else: the quiet dismantling of a foundational part of American public life.
Though capped at 3 million acres, the proposal’s scope — which spans Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming — signals a fundamental shift in federal land policy. Critics point to vague language in the bill that allows “any interested party” to purchase land, raising alarms about corporate acquisition, foreign investment, and irreversible privatization of wild spaces.
Michael Carroll of the Wilderness Society called the proposal a drastic change, warning that beloved trails, hunting grounds, and open spaces could be sold without meaningful input from local communities. Though states would have the first right of refusal, Carroll dismissed that provision as hollow, noting that many are already grappling with severe budget deficits.
Opponents also question the environmental implications. Public lands are essential not just for recreation and biodiversity but also for wildfire management — particularly in California, where underfunded fire prevention efforts depend heavily on federal land stewardship.
This is not Lee’s first attempt to push land sales through Congress. A previous effort targeting 500,000 acres in Nevada and Utah narrowly failed. That plan drew Republican support, though dissent from lawmakers like Rep. Ryan Zinke, who warned that once public land is sold, “we will never get it back.” Now, the new version reemerges — broader, bolder, and potentially more consequential.
