(C) Idaho Capital Sun
This story was originally published by Idaho Capital Sun and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .
Proposed sale of Utah public land pulled from Congress’ budget bill • Idaho Capital Sun [1]
['Kyle Dunphey', 'Micah Drew', 'Rod Gramer', 'More From Author', '- May', '.Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus-Coauthors.Is-Layout-Flow', 'Class', 'Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus', 'Display Inline', '.Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus-Avatar']
Date: 2025-05-23
Utah U.S. Rep. Celeste Maloy’s proposal to sell off nearly 11,500 acres of public land in southwestern Utah was shot down this week after receiving bipartisan pushback in Congress.
The proposal, which identified parcels owned by the Bureau of Land Management to sell to Washington and Beaver counties, the Washington County Water Conservancy District and the city of St. George, was included by Maloy as part of Congress’ budget package.
Need to get in touch? Have a news tip? CONTACT US
But on Wednesday evening, Montana Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke, who previously said selling public lands is a line he would not cross, rallied support from a bipartisan group of lawmakers to strip Maloy’s proposal from the budget bill during a House Rules Committee meeting.
“I worked hard with my colleagues in the House and locally elected officials to make sure that the one big, beautiful bill represented the unique needs of Utahns,” Maloy said in a statement Thursday. “My lands amendment would have delivered critical relief to fast-growing communities in my district.”
However, Maloy acknowledged it was removed from the reconciliation package, which she voted for.
“I still supported the bill, because it delivers a strong economy that will benefit Utah and the country as a whole,” she said. “I will continue to fight for Utahns to responsibly manage federal lands that currently landlock our communities and hinder economic growth.”
Congresswoman says proposal would have helped expand water, transportation, housing infrastructure
Maloy, in an earlier statement, said the land would help the southwest corner of the state expand water, transportation and housing infrastructure, as the region deals with rapid population growth. St. George was eying an airport expansion; the Washington County Water Conservancy District had plans to build a new reservoir; Washington County was looking to widen some existing roads.
In a statement, St. George city leaders thanked Maloy for working on the amendment, and they plan to have more talks with lawmakers on the issue.
“We were disappointed that some groups falsely presented this amendment as if it were a land grab,” city leaders said. “In actuality, the amendment was intended to protect existing critical infrastructure or future critical infrastructure that would be built on already disturbed public lands. Only approximately nine acres would have been used for attainable housing, at a spot adjacent to a future cemetery and an existing residential subdivision.”
The Washington County Water Conservancy District issued a similar statement, telling Utah News Dispatch it respects Congress’ decision to remove Maloy’s amendment.
“We appreciate Congresswoman Maloy’s efforts to facilitate the availability of federal lands for exchange in a manner that would benefit the water district,” the statement reads. “The water district remains committed to securing the necessary federal lands in Washington County for critical water infrastructure projects through established, traditional processes.”
Maloy’s amendment identified a total of 70 parcels to be sold in Utah. The proposal had a far greater impact on Nevada, with Republican Rep. Mark Amodei earmarking nearly 450,000 acres for disposal in his state.
Environmental groups, public land advocates said bill lacked parameters on what land could be used for
The proposal received broad criticism from environmental groups and public land advocates, who said the bill lacked language mandating what the land would be used for. They argued there was nothing stopping the governments from purchasing the land, then using it for something other than the originally stated purpose. And some of the land abutted rivers and popular recreation areas, including Zion National Park, prompting concerns over access and environmental harm.
The proposal also had its critics in Congress, on both sides of the isle, including Zinke, who called it his “San Juan Hill,” referring to a famous Spanish-American War battle.
“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,” Zinke said in a news release on Wednesday.
Environmental groups celebrated the decision, issuing a flurry of statements and reactions.
Travis Hammill, the Washington, D.C., director for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, said Maloy is the “latest in a long list of politicians with the bad idea to try and sell off public lands.”
“The through line of those failed efforts is this: love of public lands transcends geography and political party. Americans don’t want to see these lands sold off and time and time again have risen up to make their voices heard,” Hammill said.
Kyle Roerink executive director of the Great Basin Water Network, said Zinke’s move to tank the disposal “sends a strong message to lawmakers of all stripes: We can never break the public trust and the Colorado River for billionaire tax breaks.”
Others noted the bipartisan opposition to the amendment, including Patrick Donnelly, Great Basin director for the Center for Biological Diversity, who called the attempt “appalling” and “Gilded Age-level stuff.”
“Republicans’ public lands fire sale was so greedy even their own caucus wouldn’t support it,” Donnelly said in an emailed statement. “I hope people remember it the next time Republicans try to pretend they care about public lands.”
According to the amendment’s text, about 70 parcels were identified to be sold off to four entities, at market value. Consider:
Washington County would have been allowed to purchase 23 parcels covering about 6,492 acres.
The Washington County Water Conservancy District would have been allowed to purchase 22 parcels amounting to about 4,375 acres.
St. George would have been allowed to purchase 23 parcels amounting to about 520 acres.
Beaver County would have been allowed to purchase three parcels amounting to roughly 62 acres.
The amendment was a small part of what President Donald Trump has called the “big, beautiful bill” that has been in the works for months. The bill extends Trump’s 2017 tax law, cuts steps out of the energy permitting process, increases defense and border security spending, and makes substantial changes to Medicaid.
The bill cleared the House early Thursday and is headed to the Senate.
Utah News Dispatch, like the Idaho Capital Sun, is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Utah News Dispatch maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor McKenzie Romero for questions: [email protected].
[END]
---
[1] Url:
https://idahocapitalsun.com/2025/05/23/proposed-sale-of-utah-public-land-pulled-from-congress-budget-bill/
Published and (C) by Idaho Capital Sun
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0.
via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/idahocapitalsun/
