logo
‘Gamble for Montana's future:' Report says transferring federal lands to state would cost billions

‘Gamble for Montana's future:' Report says transferring federal lands to state would cost billions

Yahoo19-04-2025
Emigrant Peak in the Custer-Gallatin National Forest (Photo by Jacob Frank | National Park Service | Flickr).
In Montana, where land managed by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management comprises 30 million acres — roughly a third of the state — the notion of turning swaths of terra firma to state control could be costly, according to a newly published report.
The report, written by longtime natural resources manager John Tubbs, calls the financial implications of federal lands transfer 'staggering and disproportionately impactful for a rural state with large swaths of national public lands.'
'The costs associated with maintaining national public lands at the state level — ranging from wildfire operations to the loss of essential federal funding for rural counties — would be far too great for Montana to bear per capita,' the report states. It amounts to an $8 billion 'gamble on Montana's future.'
Tubbs, who authored the report with support from the Montana Wildlife Federation, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, Mountain Mamas and the Montana Conservation Voters Education Fund, is the former director of the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation under Democratic Gov. Steve Bullock.
The long simmering dispute over whether the federal government should relinquish lands managed by the Departments of Interior and Agriculture to individual states has been turned up at all levels, from the halls of Congress to Montana's capitol.
The estimated roughly $8 billion increase to Montanan's balance sheet would be primarily driven by the costs of managing the land, according to the report, including for wildfire, deferred maintenance backlogs, and abandoned mine reclamation.
Citing reports by the Legislative Fiscal Division, the report states that during the last 20 years, Montana has paid more than $2.3 billion in wildfire mitigation costs on federal land — comprising just 25% of total cost, as the federal government covers 75% of costs.
A transfer of federal lands to state management would shift the cost of future wildland fire suppression to state taxpayers to the tune of $5.5 billion — the bulk of the total.
On a press call about the report, Tubbs pointed to the essential partnerships with federal agencies — including the large fleets of firefighting aircraft operated by the Forest Service — and the difficulty in replicating that from the state or private industry.
'That is untenable,' he said.
Tubbs also focused on Payment in Lieu of Taxes funds the federal government disseminates. The PILT program channels money to rural counties with swaths of untaxable federal land to support vital services such as public safety, housing, social services and transportation.
In fiscal year 2023, Montana counties received more than $40 million in PILT funds — and another $16 million from the similar Secure Rural Schools program — a loss the state likely couldn't make up.
Tubbs said such a loss would result in the largest 'unfunded mandate' in state history, and 'several of Montanaʼs counties would be bankrupt—- in particular, the 11 counties in which more than half of the acreage is owned by the federal government.'
The report also states that Montana would be on the hook for $623 million in deferred maintenance and repairs on current federal lands; between $474 million and $1 billion for reclamation work on the state's 5,000 abandoned mines; and a 1,600% increase in grazing fees.
'The state simply cannot afford the responsibility of managing such vast swaths of land without significant financial strain,' the report concludes.
Tubbs said the value of public lands goes far beyond the numbers, and supporters need to strengthen efforts.
'The core value I think most of us find in public lands is there's some landscape that means something to each of us,' he said on the press call.
Discussions about the federal lands transfer came to the forefront in Washington D.C. and nationwide following statements by the Trump administration that federal lands are part of the nation's 'balance sheet' and could be utilized to help pay off the national debt.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Senate passed a federal budget in a series of late night votes, and one particular budget amendment saw Montana's two Republican Senators buck their party.
The amendment, brought by Sen. John Hickenlooper, D-Colorado, would have prevented the sale of public lands to lower the federal deficit.
Montana Sens. Steve Daines and Tim Sheehy joined all Democrats in supporting the amendment, but it was defeated 51-49.
In a similar vein, Republican U.S. Rep. Ryan Zinke, Montanan's western representative, reintroduced his 'Public Lands in Public Hands Act,' earlier this year with a Democratic senator from New Mexico.
The provision would ban the U.S. Department of Interior and U.S. Forest Service from selling or transferring 'most public lands' except in specific circumstances. It also would require Congressional approval for disposals of publicly accessible federal land tracts over 300 acres and for public land tracts over 5 acres if accessible via a public waterway.
'In Montana, public lands are our way of life. It's not just Yellowstone and Glacier, it's also the BLM and Forest Service areas where a kid fills their first tag, a lake in the Beartooths that is the perfect picnic spot, and the trail just down the road that helps you clear your head after a long workday,' Zinke, a former Secretary of the Interior during Trump's first term, said in a press release. 'Public lands must remain public, and the federal government has a responsibility to manage and ensure access to those lands.'
Earlier this month, Montana's eastern representative, Republican Troy Downing, signed on as a cosponsor to the legislation, as did Idaho Republican Rep. Mike Simpson.
In Helena this legislative session, Montana's state lawmakers also got to offer their own takes on the issue thanks to a lawsuit filed by the State of Utah against the federal government in favor of land transfer.
The suit, which claimed federally-managed land infringed on the state's sovereignty and sought a return of millions of acres, was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Despite that, freshman Rep. Tom Millett, R-Marion, introduced a resolution supporting Utah's position.
While Millett stated House Resolution 24 did not concern Montana's federal public lands, his comments were broadly applicable to all states.
'Nothing in the U.S. Constitution authorizes the federal government to hold vast unreserved swaths of unreserved territory in perpetuity over the states' express objection,' he told the House Energy, Technology and Federal Relations Committee during a hearing. 'The U.S. generates significant revenue from these unappropriated lands — millions of dollars annually that would go toward our counties and schools. But instead, we get but a pittance, leftover crumbs from what should be our lands.'
The bill passed out of committee on partisan lines, but saw broad bipartisan opposition on the floor.
'Montanans have overwhelmingly rejected transfer time and time again,' Rep. Debo Powers, D-Whitefish, told her colleagues during the debate. 'In fact, 87 percent of Montana voters considered the conservation — not the transfer, but the conservation — of public land to be influential in their voting decisions. That's why so many political candidates in Montana from every political party pledged to keep public lands in public hands.'
The bill failed to pass the House floor in a bipartisan 33-66 vote.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Kamala Harris mocked for post celebrating one-year anniversary of failed presidential campaign
Kamala Harris mocked for post celebrating one-year anniversary of failed presidential campaign

Fox News

time19 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Kamala Harris mocked for post celebrating one-year anniversary of failed presidential campaign

Former Vice President Kamala Harris was mocked on Monday for commemorating the one-year anniversary of the start of her failed presidential campaign. One year ago Monday, then-President Joe Biden announced via social media that he would be dropping out of the presidential race. He shortly thereafter endorsed Harris, who went on to become the Democratic nominee for the 2024 presidential election. Harris celebrated the anniversary by writing a post on X with photos from her past campaign. "One year ago today, I began my campaign for President of the United States. Over the 107 days of our race, I had the opportunity and honor to travel our nation and meet with Americans who were fighting for a better future. And today, millions of Americans continue to stand up for our values, our ideals, and our democracy. Their courage and resolve inspires me. Whether you are attending a protest, calling your representatives, or building community, I want to say: Thank you. We are in this fight together," Harris wrote. Many social media users were not as impressed, with some pointing out that she neglected to reference Biden in the photos or the post. "You didn't get a single primary vote. How very democratic," Twitchy's Amy Curtis wrote. RNC Research, managed by the Republican National Committee, posted, "Becoming the presidential nominee without getting a single vote is not the flex you think it is." Washington Free Beacon investigative reporter Chuck Ross joked, "lol. complete Joe Biden erasure." Political commentator Link Lauren agreed, "No mention of Biden again. Really trying to erase her association with him. She was there in lockstep with that failing administration. I don't have amnesia." "I wonder what caused that campaign to begin on July 21," National Review senior writer Dan McLaughlin remarked. "'One year ago today, I began my campaign for President of the United States.' Oh wow, I remember that. What did Drew Barrymore call you? Momala? Oooh, and Beyonce endorsed you, right? How did you work out? Did you win?" author John Hawkins joked. "Your failure and reputation were complete," columnist Kurt Schlichter wrote. Fox News Digital reached out to Harris' team for comment. FEC filings showed the Harris campaign spent more than $1 billion in three months, including spending on celebrity influencers, radical activist groups and private jets. She lost to President Donald Trump in November.

Mayor denies wrongdoing in a corruption probe into Milan's building boom
Mayor denies wrongdoing in a corruption probe into Milan's building boom

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Mayor denies wrongdoing in a corruption probe into Milan's building boom

MILAN (AP) — Milan Mayor Giuseppe Sala on Monday said he would not step down in the face of a sweeping probe into the city's massive urban development over the last two decades, saying, 'My hands are clean.' The city's top urban development official, however, resigned while denying wrongdoing. Milan prosecutors last week announced a widespread investigation into the real estate boom that has seen skyscrapers transform the city's skyline and entire neighborhoods rebuilt, including the construction of an Olympic village for the 2026 Milan-Cortina Winter Games. The investigation targets more than 70 people, including Sala, as prosecutors allege corruption that made Italy's financial and fashion capital 'a commodity to be plundered.'' The probe alleges that developers bribed officials to speed building permits and win approval for projects. Prosecutors are seeking the arrest of six people, including Giancarlo Tancredi, an architect who has been the city's top urban development official since 2021. Tancredi announced his resignation to focus on his defense but denied any wrongdoing. 'My conscience is clear,'' he said. Sala, a member of the center-left Democratic Party who is serving his second term as mayor, denied any wrongdoing during an address to the city council, saying, 'All I have done is in the interest of the city.'' Sala pledged to continue in his mandate, which expires at the end of 2026, and underlined the necessity of continuing projects that are in the works, including determining the future of Milan's San Siro stadium, home to soccer clubs AC Milan and Inter Milan. The teams want the city to jointly buy the stadium so they can tear it down and build a new one. The investigation has led to calls by the center-right majority that governs from Rome for Sala to step down. But he has received the support of Lombardy's regional governor, Attilio Fontana, a prominent center-right politician, while Premier Giorgia Meloni urged caution, saying an investigation should not automatically lead to resignation. Milan's extraordinary development around the 2015 Expo and now the Olympics has sent real estate prices skyrocketing. Many say ordinary workers have been priced out in gentrification. 'Do we need to do more to make Milan more fair, healthy and balanced? By definition, we must always do more,'' Sala said. Colleen Barry, The Associated Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

"I hate it": Redistricting arms race gives lawmakers heartburn
"I hate it": Redistricting arms race gives lawmakers heartburn

Axios

time2 hours ago

  • Axios

"I hate it": Redistricting arms race gives lawmakers heartburn

House members are watching with growing discomfort as Democrats in California and other blue states consider joining Texas Republicans in pursuing mid-decade redistricting to gain an advantage in the 2026 midterms. Why it matters: It threatens, as one Democratic lawmaker put it, a "race to the bottom" that will encourage both sides to test the limits of gerrymandering and further fan the partisan flames engulfing the country. But with President Trump bearing down on Texas Republicans to change their maps and California Democrats wanting to respond in political self-defense, members of both parties feel they have little choice. Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) told Axios of his state's possible redistricting: "How I feel is terribly conflicted. I hate it. I really worry about a race to the bottom on something that I consider pretty despicable." "But I understand why the governor and others are considering it. The only reason it would even be possible is what Texas and others are doing just stinks so badly that it's pissing people in California off." State of play: Texas Republicans began a special session Monday, which Gov. Greg Abbott said would include an attempt to redraw the state's U.S. House districts. Redistricting is normally only done after the decennial census — most recently in 2020 — or in response to a court order. However, Trump has put pressure on Republicans to undertake the unusual effort in the hopes of creating as many as five new GOP-leaning seats. Republicans in Ohio are also looking to redraw districts to try to unseat several Democrats. In response, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, has threatened to try to revisit his state's districts to create more Democratic-leaning seats. What we're hearing: Democrats may not stop at California, and are eyeing other blue states, including New York, New Jersey, Minnesota and Washington, senior House Democrats told Axios. Democrats are "definitely looking into what's going on and trying to level the playing field," said one House Democrat. "It's crazy what's happening in Texas." House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) told reporters Thursday: "It's all options on the table at this moment." Even though California has a constitutionally mandated independent redistricting commission, several House Democrats from the state told Axios they are confident Newsom could find a legal pathway. What they're saying: While lawmakers have largely stuck by their parties' plans as a necessary evil in an increasingly existential political environment, others expressed trepidation at the escalating brinksmanship. "We're only supposed to be redistricting every 10 years," said Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.). "At some point, the partisanship gets too much. ... I just think it goes too far." A House Democrat from California, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told Axios: "It's a difficult conversation, because we're literally doing it to gerrymander — everything that we stood against, and the reason we created the independent redistricting commission." "If we do it," the lawmaker added, "let's be very upfront and transparent about it. Don't leave it to an independent commission. Everybody knows what we're doing." Yes, but: Other relative moderates in both parties said they are more than comfortable with mid-decade redistricting, pointing to the other side's actions as justification. "It's not only Texas," Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas), whose own seat could be threatened by the redistricting plan, said, noting Newsom's comments. Gonzales added that Trump is a "political genius" and that "if we can pull off squeezing five more seats out of Texas, that's a game changer." Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) said if Republicans are "going to stoop to midterm redistricting to politically advantage the party, I think it's certainly something that should be on the table." The bottom line: Even Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine), an arch-centrist who represents the reddest district of any House Democrat, declined to condemn potential redistricting in California — but he did warn Republicans against what is known as a dummymander.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store