Wyoming Senators “Demand” Right To Sell Grand Teton National Park, Other Public Lands

With the exception of Yellowstone, Wyoming wants to take over, sell off all its public lands

Claiming a violation of the Constitution, state senators in Wyoming have filed a resolution “demanding” that the federal government turn over all public lands and mineral rights within their borders by October 1, excluding Yellowstone National Park. The 30 million acres they’re demanding include Grand Teton National Park, Devil’s Tower National Monument, several national forests, and BLM land. The state’s own constitution would then force those lands to be sold.

The joint resolution is the latest move in an all out assault on America’s unique public lands system. Already this year, the House of Representatives adopted a rule that will enable it to sell public lands without consideration of their value, the Ways and Means committee proposed selling public lands as a way to offset tax cuts for billionaires, legislation was introduced to Congress proposing the elimination of a President’s ability to create national monuments, and the Supreme Court decided not to take up a poorly conceived lawsuit from the state of Utah, thereby avoiding a ruling which may have added further precedent for protection of public lands.

That Utah lawsuit is relevant here. It attempted to argue that areas managed by the Bureau of Land Management are somehow “unappropriated,” and therefore the Constitution dictates they be sold off to Mike Lee’s campaign donors. And while the court didn’t give any reason why it declined to hear the case, it seems logical to conclude that argument simply wasn’t strong enough to override two century’s worth of legal rulings confirming the constitutionality of Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the actual Constitution, which states:

“The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.”

Wyoming (along with 13 other states) actually signed onto that lawsuit with Utah. Ambition by politicians there to take over federally managed land is nothing new, nor are harebrained, half-assed attempts to realize that.

Which brings us to the joint resolution filed by the Wyoming Senate’s Agriculture, State and Public Lands and Water Resources committee on Thursday. Its central arguments seem to be that A) if you stop reading that section of the Constitution after the word “dispose,” then you might come to the conclusion that it’s telling Congress to sell public lands. And B) eastern States don’t have as much public land as Wyoming, and that’s just not fair.

Aside from the limited attention spans and childlike sentiments here, there’s actually some real facts with which all of that is easily rebutted: A) the right to sell something is necessary to the right to own something, and two Supreme Court cases have confirmed that: first with United States v. San Francisco in 1940, and then with California Coastal Commission v. Granite Rock Co in 1987. B) the American people owned land in what’s now Wyoming (and in other western states) before it became a state, a fact acknowledged by the state’s own Act of Admission, which is what made it a state in the first place.

Section 12 of the Wyoming Act of Admission reads:

“The state of Wyoming shall not be entitled to any further or other grants of land for any purpose than as expressly provided in this act.”

Aside from the trust land granted to the state by the federal government upon its establishment, Wyoming ruled out entitlement to any other public lands as a condition of its creation.

And the state Senate is acknowledging the primacy of that Act. Because Yellowstone was made a national park before Wyoming became a state, they themselves say they have no right to it.

We should probably also address the parts of Wyoming’s Constitution that are going unstated in the joint resolution demanding the feds turn over Grand Teton National Park.

Like many other states, Wyoming’s Constitution mandates that state lands must be managed for profit. This stands in contrast to the mandates governing management of federal land: multiple use and sustained yield. In contrast to most states, the Department of the Interior and U.S. Department of Agriculture must consider the needs of the public, wildlife, the environment, and agriculture and industry in their management decisions, and they must manage resources to allow them to continue to benefit the nation in perpetuity.

Also like many other states, the Wyoming Constitution mandates a balanced budget. Unlike the federal government, the state does not permit itself to operate in deficit.

Put those two governing principles together with a transfer of land management from federal to state government and what they add up to is a recipe for a mass sell off.

And the crazy thing is, Wyoming has acknowledged this. In 2016, the state published the results of a feasibility study it commissioned into transferring 25 million acres of public land there to state control. The conclusion?

“We would not anticipate any substantial gains in revenue production or additional sources of revenue with any transfer of management—certainly not enough to offset the enormous costs such an endeavor would likely entail.”

Transferring federally managed public lands in Wyoming would result in a net annual loss of at least $170 million. Given the state’s constitutional mandates for profit and balanced budgets, that would force sales for at least that much revenue each year.

How much do you think they’d get for Grand Teton? The going rate for land within the park was recently set at $156,250 an acre. The park itself is 310,000 acres. Does $48.4 billion sound fair? Ultimately, that’s what Wyoming’s politicians are shooting for here.

While it’s easy to look at efforts like this one, or Utah’s lawsuit, and conclude that the perpetrators suffer from both a problematic relationship with the truth and limited competence, the sheer volume of efforts to force a mass sell-off of public lands must be taken seriously. As we’re seeing across the federal government right now, lying and incompetence don’t necessarily pose the barriers they once did. My fear is that one of these attempts is going to intersect rampant corruption at just the right moment, and that’s going to cost us America’s natural heritage.

Wes Siler is your guide to leading a more exciting life outdoors. You can read more about what he’s doing on Substack through this link. Want to read more articles like this one? Consider supporting independent journalism through a paid subscription.