BHA congressional contact link for writing your Senators and Reps about the public land selloff.

[44hunter45]

BHA has made it incredibly easy to write your Senators and Reps on this. Use it as is, customize, do whatever.
Put in your address and it will preload the addressees and letter text.

Yours if you want it to use it.

Take Action

 

[SD_Prairie_Goat]

BHA has made it incredibly easy to write your Senators and Reps on this. Use it as is, customize, do whatever.
Put in your address and it will preload the addressees and letter text.

Yours if you want it to use it.

Take Action

View attachment 372393

Good recommendation, sent

 

[brymoore]

Done

 

[Corndog Nation]

BHA has made it incredibly easy to write your Senators and Reps on this. Use it as is, customize, do whatever.
Put in your address and it will preload the addressees and letter text.

Yours if you want it to use it.

Take Action

View attachment 372393

Wish they had done something like this when close to 1 million acres of timber company land was sold off in NW Montana, most of it to a billionaire. Instead they were too busy endorsing the democrat governor and senator that allowed it to happen.

 

[baz77]

Done

 

[Southern Elk]

Wish they had done something like this when close to 1 million acres of timber company land was sold off in NW Montana, most of it to a billionaire. Instead they were too busy endorsing the democrat governor and senator that allowed it to happen.

How could they stop a private land sale?

 

[Gerald Martin]

Wish they had done something like this when close to 1 million acres of timber company land was sold off in NW Montana, most of it to a billionaire. Instead they were too busy endorsing the democrat governor and senator that allowed it to happen.

Yeah, they should have used a time machine to go back in time and stop Congress from checker boarding all that land in the west and giving it to the railroad so it wouldn’t be sold to lumber companies who then sell it to billionaires…

 

[mrcowboy]

Done.

 

[44hunter45]

For the win! Thanks to all who submitted letters.

 

[Wildabeest]

I’ve written my WY reps. I replaced the bulk of the legal argument with a more personal plea. Content below in case anyone wants to borrow from it.

As your constituent and a public land hunter and angler, I strongly urge you to oppose a provision in the House budget reconciliation bill that authorizes the sale of approximately 500,000 acres of public lands in Utah and Nevada - now estimated by some as over 1.5M acres! I also maintain a residence in Utah and have contacted representatives there despite not being a legal resident.

Numerous outdoor recreation, hunting, fishing, wildlife and conservation organizations have already laid out the legal arguments regarding this topic, so I won’t belabor those points here other than to say they all warrant your careful consideration. My plea is more personal. As Wyomingites, our cultures, traditions and lifestyles are built upon a foundation of outdoor recreation and public lands. Those public lands not only provide recreation opportunities for our citizens, they produce significant economic value to WY and its citizens through tourism, severance taxes, federal mineral royalties, PILT reimbursements, and other sources.

Forcing UT and NV to sell off over a million acres of public lands will set a dangerous precedent that will ultimately lead to similar pressures to sell off WY public lands.

Make no mistake - this has absolutely nothing to do with “affordable housing” as it’s being positioned by many proponents. This is about transferring OUR public lands into the hands of the rich and entitled class such that they can exclude the public and exploit OUR lands for their personal benefit and wealth. The vast majority of the lands have almost no value for development as affordable housing due to the costs required to develop them and the lack of supporting infrastructure and jobs in those areas. I’m all for some limited transfers (preferably via swaps) near urban center such as Las Vegas, but that is NOT what this provision is about.

The other argument being made is that this will generate revenue to offset our current federal budget deficit. When embedded in a bill that will add trillions of dollars to the deficit, that seems a bit hypocritical. And in the grand scope of things, it would only amount to a rounding error.

Public lands belong to all Americans -- not private interests. I respectfully urge you to stand up for public access, fish and wildlife habitat, and responsible stewardship by opposing this provision and other anti-conservation elements of the broader House budget reconciliation bill.

 

[44hunter45]

I’ve written my WY reps. I replaced the bulk of the legal argument with a more personal plea. Content below in case anyone wants to borrow from it.

As your constituent and a public land hunter and angler, I strongly urge you to oppose a provision in the House budget reconciliation bill that authorizes the sale of approximately 500,000 acres of public lands in Utah and Nevada - now estimated by some as over 1.5M acres! I also maintain a residence in Utah and have contacted representatives there despite not being a legal resident.

Numerous outdoor recreation, hunting, fishing, wildlife and conservation organizations have already laid out the legal arguments regarding this topic, so I won’t belabor those points here other than to say they all warrant your careful consideration. My plea is more personal. As Wyomingites, our cultures, traditions and lifestyles are built upon a foundation of outdoor recreation and public lands. Those public lands not only provide recreation opportunities for our citizens, they produce significant economic value to WY and its citizens through tourism, severance taxes, federal mineral royalties, PILT reimbursements, and other sources.

Forcing UT and NV to sell off over a million acres of public lands will set a dangerous precedent that will ultimately lead to similar pressures to sell off WY public lands.

Make no mistake - this has absolutely nothing to do with “affordable housing” as it’s being positioned by many proponents. This is about transferring OUR public lands into the hands of the rich and entitled class such that they can exclude the public and exploit OUR lands for their personal benefit and wealth. The vast majority of the lands have almost no value for development as affordable housing due to the costs required to develop them and the lack of supporting infrastructure and jobs in those areas. I’m all for some limited transfers (preferably via swaps) near urban center such as Las Vegas, but that is NOT what this provision is about.

The other argument being made is that this will generate revenue to offset our current federal budget deficit. When embedded in a bill that will add trillions of dollars to the deficit, that seems a bit hypocritical. And in the grand scope of things, it would only amount to a rounding error.

Public lands belong to all Americans -- not private interests. I respectfully urge you to stand up for public access, fish and wildlife habitat, and responsible stewardship by opposing this provision and other anti-conservation elements of the broader House budget reconciliation bill.

What I love about this tool is that you can do just that, edit it however you like. The AI handles the logistics of finding the reps, etc..

 

[Bonasababy]

House Republicans Kill Provision to Sell Public Lands

The controversial amendment in the federal budget bill would have required the disposal of 500,000 acres of public land.

www.outdoorlife.com

 

[mevertsen]

From my rep.. email I received yesterday after I sent him a message last week basically saying "not for sale"

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

May 22, 2025





Amodei Statement on House Passage of Budget Reconciliation Bill





Washington, D.C. – Rep. Mark Amodei issued the following statement after the House passed H.R. 1, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act:



“A few months ago, we were given an opportunity by the House Natural Resources Committee and House leadership to help alleviate land constraints faced by Nevada’s communities,” said Rep. Mark Amodei. “While the House reconciliation bill ultimately did not end up including my lands amendment, the fight is far from over. I will continue to push for the responsible management of underused lands in Nevada and ensure our state’s future is no longer jeopardized by excessive federal land ownership.”

#

 

[mevertsen]

So he got pushback. But clearly has the federal lands for sale in his head.

 

[jryoung]

So he got pushback. But clearly has the federal lands for sale in his head.

I wonder what level of attention it would garner from the RNC if he and Maloy lost in the mid-terms.

 

[mevertsen]

I wonder what level of attention it would garner from the RNC if he and Maloy lost in the mid-terms.

To that point...

Hard to say. In Amodei instance, he rarely gets opposition in the primaries.

And the dems put up quite weak opponents.

And his district is very large, wide open, red Nevada.

Ironically, lots of the people in his district are outdoors, federal lands users.

I personally can't stand him. Im also a registered non partisan because of the crap like this. He has conservative values, but conservative values often include the idea of divesting of federally owned lands open to all.

I feels stuck between a rock and hard place at times.

 

[Corndog Nation]

Yeah, they should have used a time machine to go back in time and stop Congress from checker boarding all that land in the west and giving it to the railroad so it wouldn’t be sold to lumber companies who then sell it to

Bullock and Tester could have tried to purchase some of it using state or federal dollars. Wasn't like it was sold 1 time. BHA didn't say or do a damn thing. And neither did the dirt bag politicians that BHA vehemently claimed to be supportive of public lands. 1 million acres of accessible land that I grew up on hunting, hiking, picking hucks on gone.

 

[Corndog Nation]

How could they stop a private land sale?

That land was broken up and sold multiple times and still probably is. The dirt bag liberal politicians that BHA supported didn't even slightly attempt to do anything. They could have tried to buy some or all of it with state and federal dollars. You want to talk about scoring brownie points with conservatives and independents. We had a liberal governor and liberal senator at the time. One million acres of land that I grew up recreating on mostly west if kalispell is now private thanks to those dirt bags.

 

[sapperJ24]

Bullock and Tester could have tried to purchase some of it using state or federal dollars. Wasn't like it was sold 1 time. BHA didn't say or do a damn thing. And neither did the dirt bag politicians that BHA vehemently claimed to be supportive of public lands. 1 million acres of accessible land that I grew up on hunting, hiking, picking hucks on gone.

That land was broken up and sold multiple times and still probably is. The dirt bag liberal politicians that BHA supported didn't even slightly attempt to do anything. They could have tried to buy some or all of it with state and federal dollars. You want to talk about scoring brownie points with conservatives and independents. We had a liberal governor and liberal senator at the time. One million acres of land that I grew up recreating on mostly west if kalispell is now private thanks to those dirt bags.

At risk of drifting too much from the main thrust of this thread...

Are we talking about the Plum Creek land that was sold to Weyerhaeuser that was sold to SPP that was sold to Green Diamond? Are Plum Creek and Weyerhaeuser not private land owners that allowed access?

Also seems like much of the area west of Kalispell is dominated by anti-federal land sentiment and politicians. There's also a significant faction of no net gain in federal and state lands. And not to mention concerns over the debt. Sure seems like it was a non-starter to suggest buying some half million plus acres.

Sorry you lost access to areas you used to recreate, that sucks.

 

[Gerald Martin]

It was private land when you grew up recreating on it as well. Just because one private landowner allowed access doesn’t guarantee subsequent landowners will.