Center for American Progress

Donate

Center for American Progress

The Trump Administration’s Expansive Push to Sell Out Public Lands to the Highest Bidder
Report

The Trump Administration’s Expansive Push to Sell Out Public Lands to the Highest Bidder

After bipartisan opposition forced Senate Republicans to remove language from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that would have sold off public lands, the Trump administration is still moving forward with proposals to transfer control over tens of millions of acres of public land to the oil and gas, mining, and timber industries.

Tackling Climate Change and Environmental Injustice, Clean Energy, Climate Change, +4 More

Media Contact

[email protected]

Government Affairs

[email protected]

In this article
An oil pumpjack operates in the Great Plains of southeastern Wyoming.
An oil pumpjack operates in the Great Plains of southeastern Wyoming, September 16, 2022. (Getty/Universal Images Group/UCG/Marli Miller)

Introduction and summary

Thanks to an outpouring of opposition from across the political spectrum, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) was forced to withdraw language from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) that would have sold millions of acres of public lands to pay for tax cuts for billionaires.1 Nonetheless, a flurry of orders and proposals from the Trump administration—some supercharged by lesser-known provisions in the OBBBA—are still in motion to open up vast amounts of public land for extractive development, allowing it to be leased and claimed by drilling, mining, and logging companies.

The Trump administration has made little secret of its plan to let private companies drill, mine, and log America’s public lands. In fact, Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum—who is charged with overseeing the majority of U.S. public lands—recently told those extractive corporations that he views them as “the customer” for his department.2

This field is hidden when viewing the form

Default Opt Ins

This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form

Variable Opt Ins

This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form

Compared with Congress’ failed attempt to sell public lands, these Trump administration actions have garnered substantially less public and media attention. But collectively, they will remove protections from approximately 88 million acres of public lands and directly affect more regions of the country than Congress’ proposed OBBBA sell-off.3 The administration’s actions include removing protections for some of the most intact national forest lands, opening sensitive Arctic wildlife habitat for drilling, eliminating restrictions on mining for ecologically sensitive lands and waters, and erasing conservation requirements and habitat protections.

Simultaneously, the administration is hitting the gas on sales that will hand corporations primary control of public lands, including those lands recently stripped of their protections. Together, these actions amount to a massive transfer of control over public lands and a dramatic reversal in the long tradition of American land conservation.

See also

The lands targeted for eliminated or weakened protections

Collectively, the Trump administration has already initiated actions that could eliminate or weaken protections from more than 175 million acres of U.S. lands—larger than the states of California, Florida, and Georgia combined4—according to new analysis by the Center for American Progress. This accounts for removing protections from 88 million acres of public lands and weakening species protections across more than 87 million acres of wildlife habitat.

TABLE 1

Scroll to the section

The reach of these Trump administration actions extends beyond the states targeted by the Senate’s rejected sell-off proposal. That plan would have sold national public lands from 11 eligible states, including Alaska and most Western states5—minus Montana, which was exempted.6 The Trump administration’s sell-out actions will reach far beyond, touching public lands in more than 70 percent of U.S. states.7 Counting the erasure of long-standing protections for the habitat of threatened or endangered species, the impacts to America’s natural lands and waters extend even farther.

FIGURE 1

Scroll to the section

The acreage totals detailed in this report include most of the protected land already targeted by publicly announced Trump administration actions, as well as wildlife habitat particularly threatened by certain Endangered Species Act rollbacks. However, these totals still underestimate the extent of lands at risk. In particular, they do not capture the impacts of redirecting how public lands will be managed more broadly—for example, by eliminating the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) Public Lands Rule. They also understate the scope of wildlife habitat likely to be affected by gutting endangered species requirements and do not account for public lands actions on the horizon, such as potential erasure of national monuments. Moreover, they do not account for other public lands that could be affected by the Trump administration’s reckless push to sell access for oil and gas drilling, timber harvests, and mining, which could sacrifice additional areas valuable for recreation, wildlife, or cultural and historic resources that lack formal protective status or could not be easily estimated in this analysis.

Major actions in motion

The summaries below highlight the most consequential actions currently in motion to unprotect and sell out public lands to the highest bidder. Many of these actions stem directly from orders signed by President Donald Trump that redirected America’s public land managers to prioritize and expand drilling, logging, and mining, 8 while others were initiated or announced by his Cabinet leadership.9

Unprotecting public lands and wildlife habitat for corporate gains

A set of actions proposed or anticipated from the Trump administration is poised to erase protections for uniquely sensitive and valuable lands, opening these places up for drilling, mining, logging, and other extractive development. Collectively, these actions threaten approximately 88 million acres of public lands.

“Roadless area” protections for national forests

First announced on June 23, 2025, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins is eliminating protections for nearly 40 million acres of national forests conserved as “roadless areas,” opening some of the most ecologically intact forests in the country to industrial development.10

Ending these forest protections, first established by the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule, would open the public lands to potential logging, oil and gas drilling, and, in the case of Eastern forests, new mining.11 The direct impacts would be widespread, with national forests in 36 states and Puerto Rico losing protection.12 This includes the Tongass National Forest in Alaska,13 a national treasure harboring some of the last remaining old-growth coastal rainforest in the world.14

An estimated 48 million people source their drinking water from watersheds that currently enjoy roadless area protections, with major cities such as Atlanta, Los Angeles, Phoenix, and Salt Lake City reliant on drinking water sourced from now-threatened forests.

Erasing conservation protections for these forested lands would affect the drinking water supply for millions, unparalleled recreational opportunities, commercial fisheries, wildlife habitat, and much more. An estimated 48 million people source their drinking water from watersheds that currently enjoy roadless area protections,15 with major cities such as Atlanta, Los Angeles, Phoenix, and Salt Lake City reliant on drinking water sourced from now-threatened forests.16 Meanwhile, outdoor user groups estimate that roadless national forests under threat protect more than 25,000 miles of trails, more than 8,600 climbing and bouldering routes, and more than 760 miles of whitewater paddling runs.17 Finally, roadless areas provide habitat for more than half of the at-risk wildlife species in the continental United States18 and filter clean water that supports high-quality commercial and recreational fisheries.19

Although Secretary Rollins attempted to justify this action, in part, as a solution for wildfire risk, it followed President Trump’s executive order mandating a dramatic expansion of timber production on public lands and removal of “undue burdens” for timber.20 Additionally, recent analysis of more than 30 years of fire data found that roads substantially increase the risk of fire ignition in national forests.21 U.S. Forest Service findings published during the first Trump administration found that national forest lands with and without roads burned at similar rates in total, while also finding no evidence that roadless requirements were limiting fuel reduction activities nationwide.22

America’s arctic and other Alaskan lands

President Trump wasted no time in aggressively dismantling conservation measures across national public lands in Alaska, issuing a specific executive order on Alaskan resource exploitation on January 20, 2025.23 In addition to mandating the reversal of the protections described below, the order also targets protections for the Tongass rainforest in Southeast Alaska and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, as described elsewhere in this report:

FIGURE 2

Scroll to the section
  • Western Arctic: On June 2, Trump’s Department of the Interior announced a proposal to eliminate safeguards conserving 13 million acres of “special areas” in the Western Arctic24 and subsequently unveiled a plan to open even more lands to drilling.25 The Western Arctic, also known as the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, is the largest stretch of intact public lands in the United States,26 and special areas are intended to conserve the most ecologically and culturally important lands, which are home for migrating wildlife and are relied on for subsistence by more than 40 Alaskan Native communities.27 The Trump administration’s proposals directly threaten one of North America’s largest caribou herds;28 polar bear, beluga whales, and other at-risk species;29 and breeding grounds of birds that migrate all across America and to every continent across the globe.30
  • 28 million acres of D-1 public lands: President Trump’s executive order directed Secretary Burgum to eliminate long-standing protections for 28 million acres of public lands in Alaska. This reversal would open lands and waters across the state, collectively the size of about 37 Yosemite national parks, to destructive industrial development.31 Known as “D-1” lands and overseen by the BLM, these public lands are home to uniquely intact habitats that support vital fish and wildlife populations. About 75 percent of the targeted lands are designated as places where rural communities have priority to hunt and fish for subsistence.32 Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland reaffirmed protections for these areas in 2024 following extensive public input, Tribal consultation, and scientific evaluation.33 In fact, more than half of the federally recognized Tribes in Alaska proactively called for retaining the protections the Trump administration is now dismantling.34
  • Brooks Range and Ambler Road: President Trump and Secretary Burgum ordered steps to approve the Ambler Access Project across the iconic Brooks Range and Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve.35 Rejected by the Department of the Interior in 2024,36 this destructive project—a 211-mile private road to benefit a foreign mining company37—would cut through 11 major rivers and 3,000 streams and disrupt migration routes for more than 164,000 caribou.38
See also
Lands protected from mining and drilling

Consistent with President Trump’s directives to prioritize mining and drilling across public lands,39 his administration is now targeting public lands that were explicitly protected from mineral leasing and mining claims. Existing or proposed “mineral withdrawals” protect specific lands from extractive development—often due to their unique ecological, cultural, and/or recreational resources—and typically respond to requests from citizens to conserve treasured places at risk of destructive development:40

  • Boundary Waters (Minnesota): The interconnecting lakes and streams that comprise the Boundary Waters of northern Minnesota are beloved by countless Americans for clear and clean waters, abundant fish and wildlife, star-filled dark skies, and seemingly endless opportunities for wilderness adventures.41 But actions by the Trump administration put this legacy directly at risk. With a social media post on June 11, 2025,42 Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins announced that she and Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum would eliminate the mineral withdrawal for the watershed that feeds the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, opening more than 225,000 acres of national forest to destructive copper sulfide mining opposed by the vast majority of Minnesotans.43 One month later, the Department of the Interior took action to reinstate canceled leases for the Twin Metals mine,44 a massive project at the doorstep of the Boundary Waters wilderness proposed by a Chilean-owned mining company with a track record of toxic spills.45
  • Greater Chaco region (New Mexico): In the Greater Chaco region of New Mexico, the Trump administration is quietly taking aim at protections prohibiting new oil and gas leasing on public lands surrounding Chaco Canyon and the Chaco Culture National Historical Park.46 Final protections were adopted for this 336,000-acre area in 2023 to conserve extensive cultural and historic resources, including more than 4,700 known archaeological sites, following decades of Tribal and indigenous advocacy and extensive Tribal consultation and public input.47 In addition to preserving sacred lands and a cultural legacy dating back more than a millennium, these protections encompass more than 60,000 acres of New Mexico’s highest-value ecological resources, providing vital desert habitat and connectivity for wildlife.48
  • Upper Pecos River (New Mexico): Without warning or opportunity for public input, the Trump administration canceled protections for the Upper Pecos watershed on April 4, 2025. Trump officials buried the notice about two canceled mineral withdrawals at the bottom of an unrelated press release, leaving reporters to later confirm which places were affected.49 These public lands enjoyed temporary protections as land managers evaluated a longer-term mineral withdrawal—and Congress considered permanent protections—to prohibit mining and associated impacts in the Pecos River watershed.50 Recognized by the state of New Mexico for its valuable waters and culturally significant to the Jemez and Tesuque Pueblo, this special area provides vital habitat for imperiled Rio Grande cutthroat trout and other wildlife, as well as various recreation opportunities.51 This watershed is threatened by proposed mining for gold and other metals, even as cleanup continues from a catastrophic 1991 mining spill of toxic sludge from a legacy mine located in this same area.52
  • Ruby Mountains (Nevada): At the same time protections were stripped from the Upper Pecos, the Trump administration lifted drilling restrictions for the Ruby Mountains of Nevada.53 Known as the “Nevada’s Swiss Alps,” the Ruby Mountains are a renowned destination for fishing, hunting, and other recreation and provide refuge to the state’s largest mule deer herd, at-risk Lahontan cutthroat trout, and other iconic wildlife.54 Responding to calls from Tribes, hunters, anglers, conservationists, and other community members, the area was put off-limits to new oil, gas, and geothermal drilling in 2024 while a process was initiated to establish longer-term protections.55 The Trump administration’s action leaves these special public lands immediately vulnerable to leasing by oil and gas interests.
See also
Other Western public lands

Additionally, the Trump administration has taken steps to rewrite the rules that apply across public lands and redraw management plans to favor oil, gas, coal, and other extractive development at the expense of landscape health and future generations:

  • Public Lands Rule: On top of targeting protected lands, the Trump administration is gutting conservation requirements that apply broadly across 245 million acres of public lands.56 By moving to rescind the BLM Public Lands Rule,57 also known as the “Conservation and Landscape Health Rule,” the administration is targeting the fundamental requirement that natural resource conservation should be treated on par with drilling, mining, and other extractive uses of public lands.58 Eliminating this rule would undercut requirements aimed at balancing land use decisions, conserving the most ecologically significant lands, and considering community proposals to conserve highly important lands.59 Ultimately, the impacts of this rollback are hard to quantify in advance, but they will be seen over time as land use decisions skew in favor of extractive development and away from long-term stewardship of public lands.
  • Land use plans in Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, and Wyoming: Complementing the effort to rig the system by eliminating the Public Lands Rule, the Trump administration is targeting completed public land management plans for a hasty rewrite. In particular, the Trump administration has indicated that it will revise at least five recently finalized plans that govern management of public lands in parts of Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, and Wyoming.60 Mandated by orders aimed at “unleashing” energy and other resource production61—and mirroring legislation from congressional Republicans to revoke or block these same plans62—the effort appears particularly aimed at reversing limitations on oil, gas, and coal development. In total, such a reversal would eliminate or weaken protections for an estimated 6.4 million acres of public lands,63 directly threatening wildlife migration corridors, Alaska Native subsistence resources, outdoor recreation opportunities, and more.64
Endangered species habitat

One of the most far-reaching and harmful actions being advanced by the Trump administration is a proposal that would gut key habitat protection provisions of the Endangered Species Act. This landmark law prohibits harm to endangered species, which, for a half-century, has included injuring or killing wildlife by modifying or destroying their habitat.65 As a result, clear-cutting or strip-mining the lands relied on by endangered wildlife is generally prohibited if it results in injury or death of the wildlife. This is not an all-out ban on habitat-related harm; the law allows some activities to proceed with assurances that harm is appropriately minimized and mitigated—offset by other beneficial activities, for example.66

In recent years, the evidence of a global extinction crisis has become more and more glaring. In October 2023, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced that 21 U.S. species were being simultaneously removed from the endangered list due to their extinction,67 and scientists estimate that 40 percent of animals and 34 percent of plant species in the United States are now at risk of extinction.68 A top driver of this alarming extinction trend is habitat loss and degradation.69

But earlier this year, the Trump administration issued a formal proposal to completely eliminate this definition of species “harm” and green-light habitat destruction for imperiled wildlife.70 This action would weaken protection for habitat that currently stretches across tens of millions of acres of natural lands and waters in all parts of the United States. Available data suggest that this action could weaken protections across more than 87 million acres of vital wildlife habitat.71 Corporate interests, which have fought these habitat protections for decades,72 celebrated the proposal.73

A threat to protected lands on the horizon: National monuments

The Trump administration is also threatening to wipe national monuments off the map, targeting special lands or waters protected by past presidents under the Antiquities Act. Buried in the fine print of an order from Secretary Burgum on February 3, 2025—without openly using the words “national monument”—was a directive to review existing national monuments for potential changes in the name of “unleashing” American energy and minerals.74 Already, President Trump has acted to erase protections for vast ocean areas within the Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument;75 various news reports suggest other national monuments may be next.76 At risk are up to 13.5 million acres of public lands,77 from coast to coast, that protect outstanding recreation opportunities, scenic beauty, wildlife populations, scientific treasures, cultural heritage, and more.

Fire sales on oil and gas leases, mine approvals, and timber

While the Trump administration removes protections for special lands and waters, it is also moving rapidly to sell control of available public lands to the highest bidder. That push was just dramatically supercharged by new mandates and loopholes tucked into the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which hand even more control to industry to claim public lands while slashing the royalties and fees paid to drill those lands.

Oil, gas, and coal leasing

President Trump and Secretary Burgum have issued numerous orders aimed at making it easier for the oil and gas industry to lock up national public lands for oil and gas development.78 In addition to broad directives to expand leasing, approve drilling proposals, and eliminate requirements that slow development, Secretary Burgum has implemented “emergency” permitting procedures to bypass endangered species protections and compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act,79 while also shrinking the time for public input and environmental review.80 Moreover, Trump and Burgum mandated the expansion of new oil and gas leasing in the Western Arctic and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge—making the entire 1.56-million-acre coastal plain available for drilling and related development.81 With the help of the courts, President Trump also reinstated the oil leases held by the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Administration from the 2021 lease sale in the Arctic Refuge,82 which had previously been canceled.83

At the same time, the Forest Service is in the process of finalizing a rule that would fast-track oil and gas leasing in national forests,84 affecting nearly 190 million acres across the United States.85 As proposed by the Trump administration in 2020, the rule would take substantial authority away from the Forest Service to determine where oil and gas leasing happens on national forests, while also short-circuiting environmental review and public input.86

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act will supercharge efforts by the Trump administration to give oil and gas companies free rein over more than 200 million acres of public lands.

Meanwhile, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act will supercharge efforts by the Trump administration to give oil and gas companies free rein over more than 200 million acres of public lands.87 Most notably, the new law mandates formal lease sales every three months in nine Western states and mandates nine sales across millions of acres in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and Western Arctic over the next decade.88 It also gives the oil and gas industry unprecedented control over what lands it can lease, stripping the ability of federal land managers to deny leases on land with clear wildlife, recreation, archaeological, or other conflicts.89 Essentially, the oil industry can choose to drill in a popular fishing or camping spot, or next to a national park or hospital, and the BLM can do nothing to stop them.

The OBBBA also cuts oil companies a major price break—cutting royalty rates on oil and gas from nearly 17 percent to just 12.5 percent and eliminating the modest $5 per-acre lease nomination fee—while reinstating the practice of “noncompetitive leasing” to allow companies to quietly scoop up leases on public lands at rock-bottom prices after a public auction ends.90 Royalties for coal from public lands, meanwhile, are cut from 12.5 percent down to just 7 percent, and the OBBBA mandates that an additional 4 million acres of public lands be made available for coal leasing within 90 days.91

Timber sales

Consistent with this pattern, President Trump is pushing reckless policies to sell out America’s public forests for timber profits as well. Through a March 2025 executive order, Trump directed public land managers to tap into emergency authorities under the Endangered Species Act to facilitate timber production and explore ways to avoid required environmental review.92 A month later, Secretary Rollins abruptly declared nearly 60 percent of national forest lands to be in a state of emergency due to wildfire risk and forest health, claiming that the situation warranted the use of emergency legal authorities to facilitate commercial timber harvesting, among other qualifying activities.93 As discussed above, Rollins has also taken steps to remove conservation protections for special national forest lands, which would open some of the most recreationally and ecologically valuable public forests for commercial logging.

Subsequently, Congress passed President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act,94 which dramatically accelerates logging on public lands. To help offset the bill’s expensive tax cuts—which predominantly benefit the wealthiest Americans95—the final legislation mandated massive increases in timber sold from public lands.96 In fact, the law ultimately requires more than a 75 percent increase in timber sales across both national forests and BLM public lands.97 It also mandates that public land managers enter into new 20-year timber sale contracts.98

Mining prioritized everywhere

On March 20, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order that aims to make mining the No. 1 priority across all public lands, trumping all other uses of those lands where legally allowable.99 Specifically, the order mandates that the secretary of the interior make mineral production and mining activities the “primary land uses” of any federal lands with mineral deposits or reserves. That means, by direction of the president, mining would take precedence over outdoor recreation, wildlife conservation, preserving archaeological or cultural sites, and any other use.

While a president cannot unilaterally allow mining in areas deemed off-limits by Congress—national parks, for example—Trump’s order is already precipitating the reversal of protections for special areas, threatening the Boundary Waters and other treasured places. With Trump’s mining order also mandating the review and revision of public land management plans and with a proposed rule aimed at speeding mine approvals in national forests currently under review by the White House, more rollbacks of protections are likely on the horizon.100

In addition, Trump’s order requires land managers to fast-track approvals for mines on federal lands, while also directing relevant government agencies to find ways to subsidize the corporations developing these mines. Notably, Trump’s executive order applies to more than just “critical” or strategic minerals and explicitly includes minerals such as gold, copper, and uranium. Under a legal framework dating back to 1872, companies can generally stake claims and mine for valuable minerals on Western public lands without paying royalties for the minerals they extract.101 Trump’s order is poised to dramatically expand that giveaway of public resources while throwing in additional taxpayer money for selected corporations.

See also

Locking in private rights to public lands

While oil leases and mining claims do not transfer ownership of the land itself, the legal rights to drill and mine can be—and often are—extended again and again. Additionally, drilling, mining, and other extractive development can have long-lasting impacts on land health, clean water, and wildlife populations.102

Federal oil and gas leases are issued for a 10-year period, and they can be easily extended for a producing well or if the company simply demonstrates that drilling operations are in progress at the end of those 10 years.103 These extendable eases can be acquired “competitively” for as little as $10 per acre, plus administrative fees and a rental fee starting at $3 per acre each year.104

The oil and gas industry is already sitting on 35 million acres of leased federal lands, an area about the size of Florida, and it produces on less than half of those acres.105 Even while they are not actively producing, companies can benefit from stockpiled leases that pad their balance sheets.106 Larger and more frequent lease sales pushed by President Trump, particularly combined with reduced fees and the return of noncompetitive leasing thanks to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, are likely to result in even more extensive speculation and stockpiling.

Additionally, hardrock mining claims can be staked across the vast majority of Western public lands for just $49 per claim and may also be extended indefinitely even if the claim is not actively developed—generally by paying an annual fee of $200.107 Companies can then develop and sell the valuable minerals without paying royalties,108 often extracting substantial profits from public resources with no public compensation.

Once acquired, oil and gas leases and mining claims are treated as preexisting development rights that outweigh future conservation action long into the future. In fact, more than 3,700 mining claims exist today within the boundaries of what are now national parks or national monuments,109 and legal battles to cancel antiquated leases to conserve high-value public lands can extend for many years.110

Conclusion

Just as it was nearly impossible for the public to track the many harmful provisions buried in the 850-plus page One Big Beautiful Bill Act,111 following the maelstrom of anti-conservation actions from the Trump administration can be a daunting proposition. But with more than 175 million acres of land protections already slated for elimination and weakening, the collective impacts are on track to be massive. Ongoing efforts by President Trump’s Cabinet to further weaken environmental protections mean the total impact will only grow from here.

With more than 175 million acres of land protections already slated for elimination and weakening, the collective impacts are on track to be massive.

Meanwhile, parallel actions to sell or give control of available public lands to corporate interests for drilling, mining, and logging could spell long-term losses for the American public. At rock-bottom prices, extractive corporations can scoop up long-term leases or mining claims that encumber public lands for many decades. That includes formerly protected lands and waters treasured today for their outdoor adventure opportunities, wildlife, and history.

Ultimately, the Trump administration’s efforts to un-protect and sell out public lands are wildly out of step with what the public wants.112 Widespread outrage sparked by Congress’ attempt to sell off public lands was a powerful reminder that Americans expect their public lands to be kept in public hands. It remains to be seen whether the steady onslaught from the Trump administration will catch as much public attention and, critically, whether elected officials in positions of power will take steps to stop it before it is too late.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Sophie Conroy, Nicole Gentile, Sam Zeno, Gianna Sala, Frances Colón, Frederick Bell, Will Beaudouin, Bill Rapp, Steve Bonitatibus, Lindsay Rosa, Becca Settele, Marty Schnure, and Phil Hartger for their assistance with this report.

Endnotes

  1. CBS News, “Sen. Mike Lee removes public lands provision from Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’,” June 30, 2025, available at https://www.cbsnews.com/news/sen-mike-lee-removes-public-lands-provision-from-trumps-big-beautiful-bill/; Drew McConville, “What To Know About the Senate’s Public Lands Sell-Off,” Center for American Progress, June 18, 2025, available at https://www.americanprogress.org/article/what-to-know-about-the-senates-public-lands-sell-off/.
  2. Spencer Kimball, “Trump administration sends a clear message to the oil and gas industry: ‘You’re the customer’,” CNBC, March 15, 2025, available at https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/15/trump-administration-message-to-oil-and-gas-industry-youre-the-customer.html.
  3. See Figure 1 and “Methodology and Data Sources” document available at https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2025/09/PublicLandsSellOffReportMethodology.pdf.
  4. U.S. Census Bureau, “State Area Measurements and Internal Point Coordinates,” available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/reference-files/2010/geo/state-area.html (last accessed September 2025).
  5. The Wilderness Society, “250+ million acres of public lands eligible for sale in SENR bill,” June 13, 2025, available at https://www.wilderness.org/articles/media-resources/250-million-acres-public-lands-eligible-sale-senr-bill.
  6. Jordan Hansen, “Millions of acres of public land at risk of sale, though Montana excluded,” Daily Montanan, June 23, 2025, available at https://dailymontanan.com/2025/06/23/millions-of-acres-of-public-land-at-risk-of-sale-though-montana-excluded/.
  7. Rollbacks to roadless forest protections alone would affect 36 states—38 states with protected roadless areas minus Colorado and Idaho, which the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has announced will be excluded from this action. See Anne A. Riddle and Adam Vann, “Forest Service Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs)” (Washington: Congressional Research Service, 2020), available at https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46504; U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Secretary Rollins Opens Next Step in the Roadless Rule Rescission,” Press release, August 27, 2025, available at https://www.usda.gov/about-usda/news/press-releases/2025/08/27/secretary-rollins-opens-next-step-roadless-rule-rescission.
  8. The White House, “Unleashing American Energy,” January 20, 2025, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/unleashing-american-energy/; The White House, “Immediate Expansion of American Timber Production,” March 1, 2025, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/immediate-expansion-of-american-timber-production/; The White House, “Immediate Measures to Increase American Mineral Production,” March 20, 2025, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/immediate-measures-to-increase-american-mineral-production/.
  9. Not covered in this analysis are impacts of the early and ongoing firings of park and forest staff, the costs of frozen or revoked conservation funding, or the future harms that President Trump’s budget proposes. See Drew McConville and Sam Zeno, “America’s Park and Forest Rangers Are Being Fired, and Oil and Gas Bosses Are Now in Charge,” Center for American Progress, March 3, 2025, available at https://www.americanprogress.org/article/americas-park-and-forest-rangers-are-being-fired-and-oil-and-gas-bosses-are-now-in-charge/; Sam Zeno and Jenny Rowland-Shea, “The Trump Administration Is Recklessly Axing Funding and Staff for America’s National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands,” Center for American Progress, July 1, 2025, available at https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-trump-administration-is-recklessly-axing-funding-and-staff-for-americas-national-parks-forests-and-public-lands/.
  10. Roadless forests affected by the proposed rescission cover nearly 45 million acres in total, but the statistic provided in this report (40 million) does not count those lands with other permanent protections against extractive development, such as a wilderness area or wilderness study area. See U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Secretary Rollins Rescinds Roadless Rule, Eliminating Impediment to Responsible Forest Management,” Press release, June 23, 2025, available at https://www.usda.gov/about-usda/news/press-releases/2025/06/23/secretary-rollins-rescinds-roadless-rule-eliminating-impediment-responsible-forest-management; U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Secretary Rollins Opens Next Step in the Roadless Rule Rescission.”
  11. U.S. Forest Service, “Special Areas; Roadless Area Conservation,” Federal Register 66 (9) (2001): 3244–3273, available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2001/01/12/01-726/special-areas-roadless-area-conservation; The roadless rule precludes road building to access new mineral leases—not issued prior to publication of the final 2001 rule. This restriction covers oil, gas, and coal leases as well as hardrock minerals considered “leasable” under federal law; hardrock mining on most Eastern national forests, which were primarily acquired by the federal government under the authority of the Weeks Act, occurs through federal mineral leases, while mining can occur on the majority of Western national forests, which were mostly reserved from the public domain, through the claim system established by the General Mining Act of 1872. See Brandon S. Tracy, “Policy Topics and Background Related to Mining on Federal Lands” (Washington: Congressional Research Service, 2020), available at https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46278; Laura B. Comay and others, “Federal Land Ownership: Acquisition and Disposal Authorities” (Washington: Congressional Research Service, 2025), available at https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/RL34273.
  12. Thirty-eight states as well as Puerto Rico have protected roadless areas, and the USDA has announced that it will exclude Colorado and Idaho from this action. See Riddle and Vann, “Forest Service Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs)”; U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Secretary Rollins Opens Next Step in the Roadless Rule Rescission.”
  13. Roadless protections for the Tongass National Forest were also separately targeted prior to Secretary Rollins’ announcement. President Trump’s January 20, 2025, executive order “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential” had called for the reinstatement of a rule from Trump’s first term that had stripped roadless protections from this forest. See The White House, “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential,” January 20, 2025, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/unleashing-alaskas-extraordinary-resource-potential/.
  14. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, “The Tongass National Forest,” available at https://seacc.org/our-work/tongass/ (last accessed August 2025).
  15. McKinley J. Talty and others, “Conservation value of national forest roadless areas,” Conservation Science and Practice 2 (1) (2020): e288, available at https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/csp2.288.
  16. The Wilderness Society, “The Importance of U.S. Roadless Areas,” available at https://gagecarto.github.io/roadless/ (last accessed August 2025).
  17. Outdoor Alliance, “Roadless Rule Under Threat: Speak Up for 45 Million Acres of National Forests,” August 29, 2025, available at https://www.outdooralliance.org/blog/2025/8/29/roadless-rule-under-threat-speak-up-for-45-million-acres-of-national-forests.
  18. Matthew S. Dietz and others, “The importance of U.S. national forest roadless areas for vulnerable wildlife species,” Global Ecology and Conservation 32 (2021): e01943, available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01943.
  19. Dominick DellaSala and others, “National Forest Roadless Areas and Clean Water” (Ashland, OR: Geos Institute, 2011), available at https://geosinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/FINAL_Clean_Water_report_6.30.11.pdf; Shauna Stephenson, “What can you do in a roadless area?”, Trout Unlimited, September 18, 2018, available at https://www.tu.org/magazine/uncategorized/what-can-you-do-in-a-roadless-area/.
  20. The White House, “Immediate Expansion of American Timber Production.”
  21. The Wilderness Society, “Three-decade record of contiguous-U.S. national forest wildfires indicates increased density of ignitions near roads,” available at https://www.wilderness.org/sites/default/files/media/file/Summary%20NFS%20roads%20fire%20paper%20-%202025.pdf (last accessed August 2025).
  22. Sean P. Healey, “Long-term forest health implications of roadlessness,” Environmental Research Letters 15 (2020): 104023, available at https://research.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/61251.
  23. The White House, “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential.”
  24. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Interior Moves to Rescind 2024 Rule on Alaska’s Petroleum Reserve,” Press release, June 2, 2025, available at doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-moves-rescind-2024-rule-alaskas-petroleum-reserve; U.S. Department of the Interior, “Biden-Harris Administration Announces Sweeping Protections for Up To 16 Million Acres of Land and Water in Alaska,” Press release, March 12, 2023, available at https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-harris-administration-announces-sweeping-protections-16-million-acres-land-and.
  25. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Department of the Interior Moves to Expand Oil and Gas Development in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve,” Press release, June 17, 2025, available at https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/department-interior-moves-expand-oil-and-gas-development-alaskas-national-petroleum.
  26. Christopher Solomon, “America’s Wildest Place Is Open for Business,” The New York Times, November 10, 2017, available at https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/10/opinion/sunday/wildest-place-in-america.html.
  27. Lauren Cusimano, “What’s So Special About Alaska’s Special Areas?”, Audubon Alaska, December 11, 2023, available at https://ak.audubon.org/news/whats-so-special-about-alaskas-special-areas; U.S. Department of the Interior, “Biden-Harris Administration Takes Critical Action to Protect Alaska Native Subsistence, Lands and Wildlife,” Press release, April 19, 2024, available at https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-harris-administration-takes-critical-action-protect-alaska-native-subsistence.
  28. Yereth Rosen, “Western Arctic Caribou Herd population decline continues, with hunting expected to be affected,” Alaska Beacon, December 19, 2023, available at https://alaskabeacon.com/2023/12/19/western-arctic-caribou-herd-population-decline-continues-as-does-endorsement-of-hunting-limits/.
  29. Alaska Wilderness League, “America’s Unknown Treasure: National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska” (Washington: 2014), available at https://www.alaskawild.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Americas-Unknown-Treasure-National-Petroleum-Reserve-Alaska.pdf.
  30. Elizabeth Arnold, “America’s Arctic: A Remote Patch Of Oil-Rich Tundra That Teems With Migratory Birds,” Cornell Lab of Ornithology: All About Birds, May 31, 2025, available at https://www.allaboutbirds.org/news/americas-arctic-a-remote-patch-of-oil-rich-tundra-that-teems-with-migratory-birds/.
  31. Drew McConville and Alia Hidayat, “A Below-the-Radar Public Lands Decision With Big Implications for Alaska Native Communities” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2024), available at https://www.americanprogress.org/article/a-below-the-radar-public-lands-decision-with-big-implications-for-alaska-native-communities/.
  32. Ibid.
  33. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Biden-Harris Administration Affirms Protection of 28 Million Acres of Public Lands in Alaska,” Press release, August 27, 2024, available at https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-harris-administration-affirms-protection-28-million-acres-public-lands-alaska.
  34. McConville and Hidayat, “A Below-the-Radar Public Lands Decision With Big Implications for Alaska Native Communities.”
  35. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Interior Secretary Takes Steps to Unleash Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential,” Press release, March 20, 2025, available at https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-secretary-takes-steps-unleash-alaskas-extraordinary-resource-potential; Sam Zeno, “The Biden Administration’s Opportunity To Protect the Brooks Range From Unnecessary Mining via Ambler Road,” Center for American Progress, December 13, 2023, available at https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-biden-administrations-opportunity-to-protect-the-brooks-range-from-unnecessary-mining-via-ambler-road/.
  36. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Biden-Harris Administration Takes Steps to Protect Tribal Subsistence, Vital Ecosystems in Alaska,” Press release, June 28, 2024, available at https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-harris-administration-takes-steps-protect-tribal-subsistence-vital-ecosystems.
  37. Dermot Cole, “Ambler Metals claims to be an Alaska company. It’s owned by two foreign companies,” Reporting From Alaska, July 3, 2024, available at https://www.dermotcole.com/reportingfromalaska/2024/6/28/ambler-metals-claims-to-be-an-alaska-company-dont-be-fooled.
  38. Zeno, “The Biden Administration’s Opportunity To Protect the Brooks Range From Unnecessary Mining via Ambler Road.”
  39. The White House, “Unleashing American Energy”; The White House, “Immediate Measures to Increase American Mineral Production.”
  40. For more information on mineral withdrawal legal authorities, see Christopher Davis and others, “Secretary of the Interior’s Federal Land Withdrawal Authority Under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA)” (Washington: Congressional Research Service, 2025), available at https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF13009. In the case of finalized mineral withdrawals, the administration is declaring that it will throw out years of scientific study and public input to open these sensitive lands to mining and drilling. But doing so will require an extensive process that involves legally required public comment periods. For other areas where the process to finalize long-term protections was unfinished, such as the Pecos River and Ruby Mountains, the Trump administration may be able to reverse the prohibition on new mining claims and leasing more quickly while throwing out ongoing scientific analyses and public input. Although those proposed 20-year withdrawals were not finalized, they were each accompanied by a two-year “segregation” prohibiting new mining claims while the proposals were evaluated. See U.S. Bureau of Land Management, “Notice of Proposed Withdrawal and Public Meeting, Upper Pecos River Watershed Protection Area Withdrawal, New Mexico,” Federal Register 89 (241) (2024): 101621–101624, available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/16/2024-29674/notice-of-proposed-withdrawal-and-public-meeting-upper-pecos-river-watershed-protection-area; U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior, “Withdrawal Application and Public Meeting for the Ruby Mountains; Nevada,” Federal Register 89 (250) (2024): 107157–107161, available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/31/2024-31389/withdrawal-application-and-public-meeting-for-the-ruby-mountains-nevada.
  41. Explore Minnesota, “Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness,” available at https://www.exploreminnesota.com/destinations/boundary-waters (last accessed August 2025).
  42. Secretary Brooke Rollins, @SecRollins, June 11, 2025, 4:00 p.m. ET, X, available at https://x.com/SecRollins/status/1932890793846374568.
  43. Zac McCrary and Luke Martin, “Re: Minnesotans Support Permanent Protections for the Boundary Waters from the Risks of Sulfide-Ore Copper Mining,” May 10, 2022, available at https://www.savetheboundarywaters.org/sites/default/files/resource-file/IMPACT%20-%20Memo%20MN%20Boundary%20Waters%20April%202022%20FINAL%20%281%29.pdf.
  44. Deputy Secretary Katharine MacGregor, “Reinstatement of Solicitor Opinion M-37049, ‘Reversal of M-37036, Twin Metals Minnesota Application to Renew Preference Right Leases (MNES-01352 and MNES01353)’ and Withdrawal of Solicitor Opinion M-37072,” July 17, 2025, available at https://www.doi.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-07/2025-07-17-memo-reinstating-m-37049.pdf.
  45. Save the Boundary Waters, “Antofagasta: The chilean mining giant rushing to ruin the Boundary Waters,” December 20, 2018, available at https://www.savetheboundarywaters.org/updates/antofagasta-chilean-mining-giant-rushing-ruin-boundary-waters.
  46. Following Secretarial Order 3418’s directive to review mineral withdrawals, the Bureau of Land Management initiated consultation to discuss potential revisions to the Chaco withdrawal in May 2025. See Office of Sen. Ben Ray Luján, “N.M. Delegation Urges Interior Secretary Burgum to Protect Chaco Canyon, Demand Trump Administration Respect Tribal Sovereignty and Consult Tribal Nations,” Press release, June 9, 2025, available at https://www.lujan.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/n-m-delegation-urges-interior-secretary-burgum-to-protect-chaco-canyon-demand-trump-administration-respect-tribal-sovereignty-and-consult-tribal-nations/; Alaina Mencinger, “Acoma Pueblo governor urges Trump administration to leave Chaco buffer zone in place,” Santa Fe New Mexican, May 29, 2025, available at https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/acoma-pueblo-governor-urges-trump-administration-to-leave-chaco-buffer-zone-in-place/article_bf2daaa0-777f-4fe1-a06f-242e22fb3f53.html.
  47. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Biden-Harris Administration Protects Chaco Region, Tribal Cultural Sites from Development,” Press release, June 2, 2023, available at https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-harris-administration-protects-chaco-region-tribal-cultural-sites-development; Sam Zeno, “The Biden Administration Is Protecting Wildlife and Ecosystems at Chaco Canyon,” Center for American Progress, March 11, 2024, available at https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-biden-administration-is-protecting-wildlife-and-ecosystems-at-chaco-canyon/.
  48. Zeno, “The Biden Administration Is Protecting Wildlife and Ecosystems at Chaco Canyon.”
  49. Danielle Prokop, “Feds backtrack on mining ban in the Upper Pecos watershed,” Source New Mexico, April 7, 2025, available at https://sourcenm.com/2025/04/07/feds-backtrack-on-mining-ban-in-the-upper-pecos-watershed/.
  50. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Secretary Haaland Initiates Two-Year Protection of Pecos River Watershed from Mining Claims,” Press release, December 12, 2024, available at https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/secretary-haaland-initiates-two-year-protection-pecos-river-watershed-mining-claims.
  51. Ibid.; American Rivers, “America’s Most Endangered Rivers: 2021” (Washington: 2021), available at https://www.americanrivers.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/MER2021_FINAL_Report_ReducedSize-1-1-1.pdf.
  52. Prokop, “Feds backtrack on mining ban in the Upper Pecos watershed.”
  53. Lisa Friedman, “Trump Administration Opens More Public Land to Drilling and Mining,” The New York Times, April 8, 2025, available at https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/08/climate/trump-new-mexico-nevada-mining-drilling.html.
  54. Zoe Bommarito, “Hunters and Anglers Applaud the Reintroduction of the Ruby Mountains Protection Act,” Trout Unlimited, Press release, April 11, 2025, available at https://www.tu.org/press-releases/hunters-and-anglers-applaud-the-reintroduction-of-the-ruby-mountains-protection-act/.
  55. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Biden-Harris Administration Proposes Protections for Ruby Mountains,” Press release, December 30, 2024, available at https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-harris-administration-proposes-protections-ruby-mountains.
  56. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, “About Us,” available at https://www.blm.gov/about (last accessed August 2025).
  57. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, “Rescission of Conservation and Landscape Health Rule,”
    Federal Register 90 (174) (2025): 43990–43994, available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/09/11/2025-17537/rescission-of-conservation-and-landscape-health-rule.
  58. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, “Fact Sheet: Public Lands Rule,” available at https://www.blm.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2024-04/PLR_general-factsheet_508.pdf (last accessed August 2025).
  59. Drew McConville, “New Public Lands Actions Turn the Page on Decades of Conflict and Mismanagement” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2024), available at https://www.americanprogress.org/article/new-public-lands-actions-turn-the-page-on-decades-of-conflict-and-mismanagement/.
  60. Resource management plans slated for revision include the Central Yukon in Alaska; Miles City, Montana; Buffalo, Wyoming; Rock Springs, Wyoming; and statewide plans in North Dakota. The Trump administration indicated it was redoing the North Dakota plan in its court filings responding to a legal challenge from the state of North Dakota. See The White House, “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential”; U.S. Department of the Interior, “SO 3418: Unleashing American Energy,” February 3, 2025, available at https://www.doi.gov/document-library/secretary-order/so-3418-unleashing-american-energy; Shayna Greene “North Dakota Challenge to Energy Resource Plan Put on Pause,” Bloomberg Law, June 18, 2025, available at https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/north-dakota-challenge-to-energy-resource-plan-put-on-pause; North Dakota v. U.S. Department of the Interior, order granting motion to adopt stipulated preliminary injunction and motion to stay, U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota, Case No. 1:25-cv-00042 (June 18, 2025), available at https://climatecasechart.com/wp-content/uploads/case-documents/2025/20250618_docket-125-cv-00042_order.pdf.
  61. U.S. Department of the Interior, “SO 3418: Unleashing American Energy.”
  62. Congressional Review Act resolutions have been introduced to nullify finalized plans for Central Yukon, Miles City, and North Dakota. Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-WY) also introduced bills to block implementation of the Rock Springs and Buffalo plans. See Coalition for Sensible Safeguards, “Congressional Review Act in the 119th Congress,” available at https://sensiblesafeguards.org/cra119/ (last accessed August 2025); To prohibit the implementation of the Rock Springs Field Office Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan, H.R. 229, 119th Cong., 1st sess. (January 7, 2025), available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/229; To prohibit the implementation of the Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment for the Buffalo, Wyoming Field Office of the Bureau of Land Management, H.R. 230, 119th Cong., 1st sess. (January 7, 2025), available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/230.
  63. See Figure 1 and “Methodology and Data Sources” document available at https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2025/09/PublicLandsSellOffReportMethodology.pdf.
  64. See, for example, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, “Rock Springs Field Office: Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan” (Washington: 2024), available at https://eplanning.blm.gov/public_projects/13853/200030619/20125383/251025363/RSFO_ROD%20and%20ARMP_20241220_ADA_Final.pdf; Wyoming Wildlife Federation, “Rock Springs Resource Management Plan,” available at https://wyomingwildlife.org/rock-springs-resource-management-plan/ (last accessed August 2025); U.S. Bureau of Land Management, “BLM issues new Central Yukon Resource Management Plan,” Press release, November 12, 2024, available at https://www.blm.gov/press-release/blm-issues-new-central-yukon-resource-management-plan
  65. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, “Part 17 – Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Reclassification of the American Alligator and Other Amendments,” Federal Register 40 (188) (1975), available at https://archives.federalregister.gov/issue_slice/1975/9/26/44371-44471.pdf#page=45 40 FR 44415; Code of Federal Regulations “§ 17.3 Definitions,” available at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-50/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-17/subpart-A/section-17.3 (last accessed August 2025).
  66. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “Permits for the Incidental Taking of Endangered and Threatened Species,” available at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/permits-incidental-taking-endangered-and-threatened-species (last accessed August 2025); U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “Permits for Native Endangered and Threatened Species,” available at https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/permits-native-endangered-and-threatened-species (last accessed August 2025).
  67. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “21 Species Delisted from the Endangered Species Act due to Extinction,” Press release, October 16, 2023, available at https://www.fws.gov/press-release/2023-10/21-species-delisted-endangered-species-act-due-extinction.
  68. NatureServe, “Biodiversity in Focus: United States Edition” (Arlington, VA: 2023), available at https://www.natureserve.org/sites/default/files/NatureServe_BiodiversityInFocusReport_medium.pdf.
  69. Lindsay Rosa, Laura Nunes, and Talia Niederman, “Biodiversity in Crisis: Exploring Threats to America’s Most Imperiled Species” (Washington: Defenders of Wildlife, 2023), available at https://defenders-cci.org/files/5_Drivers_Report.pdf.
  70. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “Rescinding the Definition of ‘Harm’ Under the Endangered Species Act,” Federal Register 90 (73) (2025): 16102–16105, available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/04/17/2025-06746/rescinding-the-definition-of-harm-under-the-endangered-species-act.
  71. See “Methodology and Data Sources” document available at https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2025/09/PublicLandsSellOffReportMethodology.pdf. This total accounts for known habitat of actively declining Endangered Species Act-listed wildlife species, for which habitat loss and degradation is a main threat to survival, as a conservative estimate of lands where the proposed weakening of protections could have an impact. Areas identified as a designated protected area (Gap 1 and Gap 2) in the Protected Areas Database for the United States were removed from the total land area counted here.
  72. The timber industry even took the issue to the Supreme Court in 1995. See Tom Kenworthy, “Justices Affirm Wide Power to Protect Wildlife Habitat,” The Washington Post, June 30, 1995, available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1995/06/30/justices-affirm-wide-power-to-protect-wildlife-habitat/6775a326-5855-414f-b8b7-715cd06a175d/.
  73. Lisa Friedman, “By Redefining ‘Harm,’ Agencies Aim to End Longstanding Wildlife Protections,” The New York Times, April 16, 2025, available at https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/16/climate/trump-endangered-species-act-harm.html.
  74. The Wilderness Society, “Burgum secretarial orders target monuments, give drilling favored status on public lands,” Press release, February 4, 2025, available at https://www.wilderness.org/articles/press-release/burgum-secretarial-orders-target-monuments-give-drilling-favored-status-public-lands; U.S. Department of the Interior, “Unleashing American Energy.”
  75. Rebecca Dzombak and Lisa Friedman, “Trump Opens a Huge Marine Protected Zone to Commercial Fishing,” The New York Times, April 17, 2025, available at https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/17/climate/trump-fishing-marine-protected-zone.html.
  76. Talya Minsberg, “In California, Confusion Abounds Over Status of 2 National Monuments,” The New York Times, March 22, 2025, available at https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/22/us/politics/california-monuments-white-house-trump.html; Jake Spring and Dino Grandoni, “Trump officials consider shrinking 6 national monuments in the West,” The Washington Post, April 24, 2025, available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2025/04/24/trump-national-monument-reductions-mining-oil/.
  77. The Wilderness Society, “New map illustrates public lands reach of Trump’s ‘energy dominance’ vision,” Press release, February 24, 2025, available at https://www.wilderness.org/articles/press-release/map-illustrate-public-lands-reach-trump-energy-dominance.
  78. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Unleashing American Energy”; The White House “Declaring a National Energy Emergency,” January 20, 2025, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/declaring-a-national-energy-emergency/.
  79. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Department of the Interior Implements Emergency Permitting Procedures to Strengthen Domestic Energy Supply,” Press release, April 23, 2025, available at https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/department-interior-implements-emergency-permitting-procedures-strengthen-domestic.
  80. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Interior Streamlines Oil and Gas Leasing to Advance Energy Independence and Economic Growth,” Press release, May 13, 2025, available at https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-streamlines-oil-and-gas-leasing-advance-energy-independence-and-economic.
  81. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Interior Secretary Takes Steps to Unleash Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential”; U.S. Department of the Interior, “Department of the Interior Moves to Expand Oil and Gas Development in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve.”
  82. Ben Lefebvre, “Judge reinstates ANWR oil leases voided by Biden,” Greenwire, March 26, 2025, available at https://www.eenews.net/articles/judge-reinstates-anwr-oil-leases-voided-by-biden/.
  83. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Biden-Harris Administration Takes Major Steps to Protect Arctic Lands and Wildlife in Alaska,” Press release, September 6, 2023, available at https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-harris-administration-takes-major-steps-protect-arctic-lands-and-wildlife-alaska.
  84. RegInfo.gov, “Executive Order Submissions Under Review,” available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eoReviewSearch (last accessed September 2025).
  85. Wild Montana, “Forest Service Plans to Increase Drilling on National Forests,” September 10, 2020, available at https://wildmontana.org/2020/09/10/insights/forest-service-plans-to-increase-drilling-in-national-forests/.
  86. The Wilderness Society, “Administration relaxes rules for oil and gas drilling in National Forests,” Press release, September 1, 2020, available at https://www.wilderness.org/articles/press-release/administration-relaxes-rules-oil-and-gas-drilling-national-forests.
  87. The Wilderness Society, “Open for Drilling: The Outsized Influence of Oil & Gas on Public Lands” (Washington: 2025), available at https://www.wilderness.org/sites/default/files/media/file/Open%20for%20Drilling_TWS%20Report.pdf; One Big Beautiful Bill Act, H.R. 1, 119th Cong., 1st sess. (July 4, 2025), Sec. 50101, available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1/text.
  88. Ibid., Secs. 50101(c), 50104, and 50105.
  89. Ibid., Sec. 50101.
  90. Kate Kelly, Jenny Rowland-Shea, and Nicole Gentile, “Backroom Deals: The Hidden World of Noncompetitive Oil and Gas Leasing” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2019), available at https://www.americanprogress.org/article/backroom-deals/; One Big Beautiful Bill Act, H.R. 1, Sec. 50101(a)(1).
  91. One Big Beautiful Bill Act, H.R. 1, Secs. 50202 and 50203.
  92. The White House, “Immediate Expansion of American Timber Production.”
  93. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Secretary Rollins Announces Sweeping Reforms to Protect National Forests and Boost Domestic Timber Production,” Press release, April 4, 2025, available at https://www.usda.gov/about-usda/news/press-releases/2025/04/04/secretary-rollins-announces-sweeping-reforms-protect-national-forests-and-boost-domestic-timber; Vera Smith, “Trump’s Timber ‘Emergency’ Paves Way for Logging Conservation Areas and Critical Habitat,” Defenders of Wildlife, May 29, 2025, available at
    https://defenders.org/blog/2025/05/trumps-timber-emergency-paves-way-logging-conservation-areas-and-critical-habitat.
  94. One Big Beautiful Bill Act, H.R. 1.
  95. Mike Lillis, “Budget office says GOP’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ will make rich richer, poor poorer,” The Hill, August 11, 2025, available at https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5447001-trump-tax-cuts-cbo-inequality/.
  96. One Big Beautiful Bill Act, H.R. 1, Sec. 50301.
  97. Section 50301 of the bill mandates a steady annual increase in timber sold, building to 2.25 billion more board feet sold from Forest Service lands and 180 million more board feet sold from BLM lands in fiscal year 2034, compared with 2025. This would represent a 78 percent increase from the 2.884 billion board feet sold by the Forest Service in 2024 and a 76 percent increase from the 237 million board feet offered for sale by the BLM in 2024. See U.S. Forest Service, “Cut and Sold (New) – CUTS203S, Cumulative FY 2024 Q1 to FY 2024 Q4,” available at https://www.fs.usda.gov/forestmanagement/documents/sold-harvest/reports/2024/2024_Q4_C&S_SW.pdf (last accessed August 2025); U.S. Bureau of Land Management, “Public Lands Statistics 2024” (Washington: U.S. Department of the Interior, 2025), available at https://www.blm.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2025-07/BLM-Public-Land-Statistics-2024.pdf.
  98. One Big Beautiful Bill Act, H.R. 1, Sec. 50301.
  99. The White House, “Immediate Measures to Increase American Mineral Production.”
  100. The executive order specifically requires that land management plans—the requirements that govern how public lands managers steward national forests and BLM lands—be revised to allow mining and generally to “support the intent of this order.” Additionally, the White House is currently reviewing a proposed rule from the Forest Service “Update and Clarification of the Locatable Minerals Regulations” aimed at expediting the review and approvals of mines on national forest lands. See RegInfo.gov, “Executive Order Submissions Under Review”; RegInfo.gov, ”View Rule: Update and Clarification of the Locatable Minerals Regulations,” available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202110&RIN=0596-AD32 (last accessed August 2025).
  101. Tracy, “Policy Topics and Background Related to Mining on Federal Lands.”
  102. The Wilderness Society “7 ways oil and gas drilling is bad for the environment,” July 9, 2021, available at https://www.wilderness.org/articles/blog/7-ways-oil-and-gas-drilling-bad-environment; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “National Management Measures to Control Nonpoint Source Pollution from Forestry” (Washington: 2005), available at https://www.epa.gov/nps/national-management-measures-control-nonpoint-source-pollution-forestry.
  103. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, “General Oil and Gas Leasing Instructions,” available at https://www.blm.gov/programs/energy-and-minerals/oil-and-gas/leasing/general-leasing (last accessed August 2025).
  104. Ibid. The return of noncompetitive leasing through the OBBBA means that leases can be acquired even more cheaply after a public auction concludes if no bids are made.
  105. Jenny Rowland-Shea and Mariel Lutz, “Opening More Lands and Waters for Oil Drilling Won’t Lower Energy Prices,” Center for American Progress, February 10, 2025, available at https://www.americanprogress.org/article/opening-more-lands-and-waters-for-oil-drilling-wont-lower-energy-prices/.
  106. Mark K. DeSantis, “Oil and Gas Companies Gain by Stockpiling America’s Federal Land” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2018), available at https://www.americanprogress.org/article/oil-gas-companies-gain-stockpiling-americas-federal-land/
  107. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, “Required Fees for Mining Claims or Sites,” Federal Register 89 (126) (2024): 54364–54368, available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/07/01/2024-14301/required-fees-for-mining-claims-or-sites; U.S. Bureau of Land Management, “Annual Maintenance and Assessment,” available at https://www.blm.gov/programs/energy-and-minerals/mining-and-minerals/locatable-materials/annual-maintenance (last accessed August 2025).
  108. Tracy, “Policy Topics and Background Related to Mining on Federal Lands.”
  109. National Parks Conservation Association, “The New Land Rush: Mining Claims Encroaching on National Parks,” April 3, 2025, available at https://www.npca.org/resources/3773-the-new-land-rush-mining-claims-encroaching-on-national-parks.
  110. Garrett Robinson, “The Legal and Legislative Fight to Protect the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness,” January 30, 2025, available at https://www.backcountryhunters.org/the_legal_and_legislative_fight_to_protect_the_boundary_waters_canoe_area_wilderness.
  111. One Big Beautiful Bill Act, H.R. 1.
  112. Colorado College, “State of The Rockies,” available at https://www.coloradocollege.edu/other/stateoftherockies/conservationinthewest/2025.html (last accessed August 2025).

The positions of American Progress, and our policy experts, are independent, and the findings and conclusions presented are those of American Progress alone. American Progress would like to acknowledge the many generous supporters who make our work possible.

Authors

Drew McConville

Senior Fellow

Mariel Lutz

Policy Analyst, Conservation Policy

Jenny Rowland-Shea

Director, Public Lands

Team

Conservation Policy

We work to protect our lands, waters, ocean, and wildlife to address the linked climate and biodiversity crises. This work helps to ensure that all people can access and benefit from nature and that conservation and climate investments build a resilient, just, and inclusive economy.

This field is hidden when viewing the form

Default Opt Ins

This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form

Variable Opt Ins

This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.