Trump Budget Calls For National Park, National Forest Sell Off

The administration’s FY2026 budget proposes selling national parks, forests

The administration just released its proposed budget for fiscal year 2026. It slashes spending on federal lands, and calls for the National Park Service to transfer some national parks and the Forest Service to transfer some national forests to state control, where both would be sold off. Here’s everything you need to know.

Bureau of Reclamation: -$609 million

“The Budget provides 1.2 billion for the Bureau of Reclamation and the Central Utah Project The Budget reduces funding for programs that have nothing to do with building and maintaining water infrastructure such as habitat restoration. Instead the Budget focuses Reclamation and the Central Utah Project on their core missions of maintaining assets that provide safe reliable and efficient management of water resources throughout the western United States.”

Trump Fy2026 Budget

20.5MB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

National Park Service: -$900 million

“The National Park Service responsibilities include large number of sites that are not National Parks in the traditionally understood sense many of which receive small numbers of mostly local visitors and are better categorized and managed as State level parks. The Budget would continue supporting many national treasures but there is an urgent need to streamline staffing and transfer certain properties to State level management [emphasis mine, same below] to ensure the long term health and sustainment of the National Park system.”

• I’m going to add annotations as bullet points where applicable.

• Any talk of “transfer” to state or local management is simply a pathway to a sell off. States don’t have budget to manage this much land, and that fact combines with their for-profit and balanced budget mandates to force sales post-transfer. You can read more about that at this link.

• “Streamline staffing” is also total bullshit. NPS was already 20 percent down on historic staffing levels, and every dollar spent on NPS generates over $18 for the economy.

NPS Historic Preservation Fund: -$158 million

“Many historic preservation projects have matching funds from State, local, and private sources, rendering the Historic Preservation Fund highly duplicative. Further, the projects are often of local, rather than national, significance. The Budget would continue funding projects in partnership with HBCUs, which have a unique history.”

• This sounds a lot like picking and choosing the history white christian nationalists prefer.

NPS Construction: -$73 million

"The Biden Administration wasted Federal funding on construction projects at sites that are more appropriately managed at the local level. This reduction complements the Administration's goals of federalism and transferring smaller, lesser visited parks to State and tribal governments. At the same time, the Budget allows NPS to prioritize larger projects at the Nation's crown jewel parks. The President's deregulatory agenda will ensure that the Great American Outdoors Act funding for construction would go further than ever before.”

• Park sites have all been designated by Congress. So this isn’t “federalism,” it’s just another gross abuse of executive authority.

• NPS’ maintenance backlog is currently $24 billion. Half of which was caused by damage during Trump’s first government shutdown in late 2018 and early 2019.

NPS National Recreation and Preservation: -$77 million

“Many National Recreation and Preservation grants are already supported by State, local, and private sector efforts, including large amounts of mandatory funding through the Land and Water Conservation Fund Stateside Grants. Further, these projects are not directly tied to maintaining national parks or public lands, which have a large backlog of maintenance and are more important to address than community recreation initiatives.”

• Many grant programs draw form multiple funding sources. This doesn’t make the federal portion any less important.

• This money helps preserve historic buildings, trails, and landscapes.

Bureau of Indian Affairs Programs that Support Tribal Self-Governance and Tribal Communities: -$617 million

“The Budget focuses on core programs for tribal communities. The Budget eliminates the Indian Guaranteed Loan program for tribal business development because it is duplicative of several other programs across the Federal Government that offer loans to small businesses and which tribal businesses are eligible for and receive. The Budget also terminates the Indian Land Consolidation Program, which has received bipartisan criticism for being ineffective. In addition, the Budget also reduces funding for programs that directly fund tribal operations such as roads, housing, and social services in order to focus on core priorities for tribal communities, such as law enforcement.”

• General small business loans aren’t the same thing as a dedicated loan program for Indigenous communities.

• Tribal operations are already desperately underfunded.

BIA Public Safety and Justice: -$107 million

“The Budget streamlines the tribal law enforcement program to reduce redundancies and inefficiencies with other law enforcement agencies. The Budget would encourage BIA's law enforcement program to improve accountability and reform its service to tribal communities. Further, tribal governments can apply for grants from DOJ and DHS for law enforcement and emergency services.”

• This will increase human trafficking and the disappearance of Indigenous women.

BIA Construction: -$187 million

“The Bureau of Indian Education Construction account has been plagued by poor program management, cost overruns, and delays in school construction and repairs. The reduction of inefficient projects from this account would accompany a renewed effort to improve the program's performance.”

• This eliminates money for housing programs Indigenous people rely on. Will worsen economic disparity on reservations.

U.S. Geological Survey: -$564 million

“USGS provides science information on natural hazards, ecosystems, water, energy and mineral resources, and mapping of Earth's features. The Budget eliminates programs that provide grants to universities, duplicate other Federal research programs and focus on social agendas (e.g., climate change) to instead focus on achieving dominance in energy and critical minerals.”

Bureau of Land Management: -$198 million

“The Obama Administration and the Biden Administration abused the Antiquities Act to designate vast swathes of land and water as off-limits to any development, recreation, grazing, hunting, mining, etc. This has hamstrung development of valuable energy and mineral resources. The Budget proposes deep reductions to undo these excessive designations. The Budget also reduces the Wildlife and Aquatic Habitat Management program to reduce funds given to left-wing environmental nonprofits that work against development of energy and mineral resources and have other sources of funding for their projects.”

• This means they’re going to shrink or eliminate some national monuments.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Conservation Grant Program: -$170 million

“These non-essential USFWS grant programs fund conservation of species managed by States, Tribes, and other nations, wasting taxpayer dollars on species better managed by local or international interests. These dollars are also duplicative of other Federal programs in USDA and the Department of Commerce, as well as the large amounts of mandatory funding available through the Land and Water Conservation Fund.”

USFWS Ecological Services: -$37 million

“USFWS' Ecological Services program and NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service Office of Protected Resources are jointly responsible for administering the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The Budget consolidates these two programs into a single program housed within DOI, consistent with the President's efforts to improve performance and reduce the Federal bureaucracy, as well as his deregulatory agenda.”

Natural Resource Conservation Service: -$754 million

“The Budget eliminates discretionary funding for conservation technical assistance because it has historically received over a billion dollars in mandatory funding, in addition to funding at the State and local levels. While funding has helped producers deploy conservation practices on their lands, many have been forced to participate in the program in order to comply with State environmental regulations such as California's Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program, which regulates agricultural runoff. These cost drivers should be connected to the resource demands they impose.”

U.S. Forest Service Management: -$392 million

“The Budget reduces salaries and expenses by $342 million, and saves an additional $50 million by eliminating funding for the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration program, and reducing funding for recreation, vegetation and watershed management, and land management regulation. The Budget fully supports the President's bold actions in Executive Order 14225, “Immediate Expansion of American Timber Production,” to improve forest management and increase domestic timber production, and the Administration's goal of restoring federalism by empowering States to assume a greater role in managing forest lands within their borders. The requested funding level supports the highest priorities in forest management, including timber sales, hazardous fuels removal, mineral extraction, grazing, and wildlife habitat management.”

• Again, state constitutions have balanced budget and for-profit mandates that will force land sales.

USFS Operations: $391 million

“The Budget reduces funding for expenses including salaries and facility leases to streamline the Agency's management structure and rightsize their real property footprint. This is in line with the President's goal of restoring federalism, by increasing State authority over land management within their borders.”

USFS Conservation Programs: -$303 million

“The Budget reduces grant programs that subsidize management of State and privately-owned forests. This program has been plagued by oversight issues, including allegations of impropriety by both the Agency and State governments. While the Budget provides robust support for Federal wildland fire management activities alongside States and local partners, these partners should be encouraged to fund their own community preparedness and risk mitigation activities.”

USFS Research: -$300 million

“The President has pledged to manage national forests for their intended purpose of producing timber. The Budget reduces funding for the Forest and Rangeland Research program because it is out of step with the practical needs of forest management for timber production, but maintains funding for Forest Inventory and Analysis, a longstanding census of forest resources and conditions.”

This is a developing story. Stay tuned.

Art: Thomas Moran / NPS

Wes Siler is your guide to leading a more exciting life outdoors. Upgrading to a paid subscription supports independent journalism and gives you personal access to his expertise and network, which he’ll use to help you plan trips, purchase gear, and solve problems. You can read more about what he’s doing on Substack through this link.