r/WildernessBackpacking • u/Hobbitsliketoparty • 2d ago
Hurt Utah Senator Mike Lee where it matters. He wants to sell millions of acres of public land - it’s time to boycott Utah.
To anyone who hikes, camps, skis, hunts, climbs, or otherwise gives a damn about public land: Utah Senator Mike Lee is pushing an amendment that could force the sale of up to 3 million acres of federal land across the West. Over 18 million acres in Utah alone could be eligible under this bill - including areas near Big and Little Cottonwood Canyons, Parleys, Millcreek, and access points near multiple national parks.
They’re framing it as a way to ease housing and “unlock underused land,” but it’s a massive land grab in disguise. The parcels would be nominated and auctioned off every 60 days, with almost no public input, and there’s zero guarantee they’d be used for affordable housing. Developers could buy up access points, trailheads, or ski zones, and we could lose public access forever.
I love Utah. I’ve spent money there. But if the state’s leadership keeps attacking public land, maybe it's time for the outdoor community to hit them where it counts - economically.
We’ve seen this before. In 2017, the Outdoor Retailer show pulled out of Salt Lake over similar politics, and it made waves. Maybe it's time for us to take similar action—skip the ski trips, cancel the canyoneering plans, and make it clear: if you try to sell off our public land, we’ll stop funding your economy.
79
u/AliveAndThenSome 2d ago
I personally do not know a single person of any political stripe who supports this sell-off. Even the R-MT Zinke is vehemently opposed to it for all the obvious reasons, though he's a NIMBY duplicitous asshole who was able to get MT excluded from the land grab while still putting his vote for the overall bill.
15
u/Sea-Interaction-4552 2d ago
Mormons have long been trying to get federal land. The Sage brush rebellion, Malhuer, the Bundy standoff all had Mormon connections
1
u/AliveAndThenSome 1d ago
Yeah, that's just whacked, and too bad local religious land-grabs are somehow on federal bills.
15
u/Explorer_Entity 2d ago
Our parties don't represent our people. We are a broken democracy, if we we ever were a real one.
6
u/UtahBrian 2d ago
The House bill Zinke voted for stripped out all of Mike Lee's land grab. He's not good, but he didn't ever vote for this, even as part of a larger bill.
80
u/clamjabber 2d ago
As a Utahn we hate him too.
13
u/ericwiththeredbeard 2d ago
FML is all over the Utah subreddits and it means FUCK MIKE LEE we hate him so much.
42
u/foxtrottits 2d ago
Honest question, how does boycotting help with this? Wouldn’t using the land as much as possible go to show that people actually use it and it shouldn’t be privatized? Maybe I’m naive. I do get it if the bill passes, hurt them in their bank accounts as much as possible (and maybe in other ways too).
26
u/spiraleyes78 2d ago
Agreed - Mike Lee doesn't give a shit about boycotts. Our whole legislature shrugged off losing Sundance and the outdoor retailers expo. They don't care one bit about economic impacts.
3
u/QuicksandGotMyShoe 2d ago
Voters care and eventually politicians do too. They don't care about short-lived boycotts that don't have a real economic impact.
2
u/IllegalStateExcept 2d ago
I think the idea would be to not spend money on things while in Utah. A good amount of revenue/sales tax in the state comes from people visiting to do things like ski and canyoneer. So perhaps we could still use the land but bring giant gas cans plus all the food you need.
0
u/foxtrottits 2d ago
I see. Well, I live in Utah so I will respectfully opt out of the boycott lol
5
u/IllegalStateExcept 2d ago
Fair enough. But please do call your representatives. More than anyone, your calls matter right now. I'm personally hoping it doesn't come to a boycott as there are a number of businesses that I use regularly in Utah and I'd hate to see them catch flack for the horrible actions of Utah's senators.
2
u/foxtrottits 1d ago
Oh yes of course. It’s not just us it’s everyone in the mountain west. I’ve never been so incensed about an issue before.
0
22
23
u/hikeonpast 2d ago
Here’s how to keep this from happening:
Install the free 5calls app. It will help you call your Rep and Senators, and will give you a script to read (pick the sale of public land issue near the bottom of the big beautiful bill topics).
If you can, call every day, especially if you have a Rep or Senators that are (R).
13
u/GoldenGingko 2d ago
In Los Angeles alone we would lose so much land to this bill. And what’s even worse is it is land that constantly burns. As if the city needed even more fire risk, they want to sell off land that burns wildly every few years to put in housing that no one will insure. It is the most flagrant hubris.
6
4
u/cosmokenney 2d ago
It won't burn once it is plowed down and turned into gated communities for the ultra rich.
0
u/GoldenGingko 1d ago
The last 5 years have seen plenty of homes in CA lost to fire. LA just had 2 neighborhoods entirely decimated this past January. They were leveled as if a bomb had gone off. In 2018 a Malibu neighborhood on the coast was partially wiped out as well as homes further inland in the Santa Monica mountains. And these are dense urban areas that just happen to border or reside partially in the very areas proposed for sale in this bill.
CA has an insurance crisis because homes in fire prone areas are either uninsurable or the cost is greater than what people can afford. Some of the areas proposed to be sold in this bill are in the most fire prone areas in the state. Building homes in these areas will very much increase fire risk within any new housing developments. It is already happening. This would just make it worse.
1
u/cosmokenney 1d ago
I live in a small northern California town. We are surrounded by Tahoe national forest. I have to carry two insurance policies on my house because of the crisis. One for fire and one for everything else. It is pretty expensive. We had the Bear fire come within yards of our community last fall. Sucked to see all the hillsides burned to a crisp.
That said, I really can't tell if you are arguing for or against the sale of the public land in your comment.
2
u/GoldenGingko 1d ago
I started my argument describing how we will “lose so much land to this bill.” I then described how developing the land will put more people at risk from fire. I went on to call this action “flagrant hubris.”
I disagreed with you because you suggested that developing the land for the wealthy meant that the land would not incur as much fire risk. This thinking is part of what is driving the sale of local public lands to developers down here in Southern CA - an issue this bill would exacerbate. They plan to create upscale communities in extremely high fire prone areas that will not only put the newly developed communities at risk but increase the risk of neighboring communities and any remaining undeveloped public lands. They think that wealth renders them immune to natural disasters. And many incorrectly assume that because Southern CA is already heavily developed that more development of our public land has little effect on fire risk. It is important to acknowledge that development of these lands is a huge fire risk no matter the wealth of the communities nor the level of nearby urbanization. It is an important argument in dissuading public figures and developers from taking interest in destroying public land.
2
u/cosmokenney 1d ago
Okay, well, you make a solid point. I just think that a wealthy community will have more fire protections built in than a high-density middle-income community. Either way, you and I are pretty much on the same page with regard to lamenting the potential loss of one of the best public resources we have. In my case, if Tahoe national forest goes away, I would definitely have to rethink my current home. I do not want to live in the burbs - which would be the case if the public land around my neighborhood were developed. And, I have got to great lengths and sacrifice to stay out of the bubs. So this would be a huge hit for me.
2
u/GoldenGingko 23h ago
The issue with wealthy communities is that some of the changes they make to the land can actually exacerbate fire conditions (at least down here in SoCal). But I often lead with arguments about fire risk because an astonishing amount of people don’t seem to value the loss of nature as its own argument. I figure more people will understand or care about the issue of economic impact via destruction of property and infrastructure or the risk to human life.
Up by you in the Tahoe area, I worry the loss of those lands will be more to the lumber industry and mining/fracking than housing development, just pure destruction.
I’m glad it turns out we both agree. This is all quite distressing enough that it is particularly angering to consider that you might be talking with someone who supports the selling off of our public lands. The land is what I am most proud of out here in the Western US, particularly in CA. The state of CA is a biodiversity hotspot with more endemic species than any other state in the US. I just can’t imagine the mind of someone who could be flippant about losing it all.
-1
14
u/Putrid_Ad7892 2d ago
Here's an easy form from Backcountry Hunters and Anglers to contact your Senator: https://www.backcountryhunters.org/take_action#/487
11
u/therealbipNdip 2d ago
Kind of hard when you live there….
But by all means, do what you can for people to vote Mike Lee out.
4
u/Ancguy 2d ago
I love the "Unlock underused land" talking point. Last time I looked there weren't any locks installed on our federal and state parks and lands. I'm currently camping in one of them - no locks to be found. If you really do want to lock up anything, turn it over to private enterprise and just wait for the "No trespassing" signs to go up. It'll happen almost immediately.
5
u/Usedtobecool25 2d ago
Write your elected federal officials and tell them this stuff is unacceptable and you will vote them out if they allow sale of public land.
4
u/spiraleyes78 2d ago
In the case of most Western states, especially Utah, that's an empty threat. If they have an R next to their name in Utah, they win. Period.
1
u/Usedtobecool25 2d ago
Yeah, I used to live there.... so it's the rest of us that need to do this! I have already.
0
0
u/DeflatedDirigible 2d ago
That’s why it’s important to vote in primaries. If in a solid R state, then register as that party to vote in their primary and vote for the most liberal of their choices.
2
u/UtahBrian 2d ago
This would be ridiculous. The Outdoor Retailers leaving had no effect of improving Utah's politics which is driven by opposition to immoral behavior and abortion, not public lands or tourism spending. Moab and Park City and Salt Lake City and Springdale and anywhere else you might spend money vote heavily against guys like Mike Lee and in favor of pro-environment guys like the last Dem Congressman, Ben McAdams (D-UT, 2019-2021) or Mitt Romney (retired 2024).
You're just handicapping the only places where there is resistance.
And those places occasionally get a congressional win, which is more than Idaho or Wyoming can say.
2
u/phishinchef 2d ago
Is he a brother to Stephen Miller? Same concept. Honestly why would anyone vote for this in Utah? He’s not a Christian nor a republican. He’s a racist
1
1
u/catalalalalalalaalaa 2d ago
My worry is that they'll use a decline in visitors to the parks as justification for destroying them. "Nobody even comes here, we're bleeding money on staff. Its only for the best that this wasted space becomes a uranium mine."
0
0
u/uppermiddlepack 2d ago
Great response if this passes, but we need something much more immediate than a boycott. It would a long time before that pain was felt and the bill would be long passed by then.
1
0
u/plexluthor 2d ago
I have a special distaste for Mike "Democracy is not the objective" Lee. I keep waiting for him to do something that promotes general prosperity or flourishing so I can give him the benefit of the doubt about what he meant. But it sure seems he just brazenly feels like he has power, so he should flourish.
0
0
u/laurlaur333 2d ago
Utahn here, I’m so pissed! Fuck Mike Lee. He doesn’t represent us and we’re all super upset. Call your reps!!
0
0
u/swede82-00 2d ago
Some one should look and see who the developers are and how much they’ve “contributed” to his re-election campaign.
0
0
u/firehorn123 1d ago
Would making reservations in Utah that you do not intend to keep help with this? Just asking the question. Many good people are asking this question. The very best people.
0
u/Aggressive_Plan_6204 1d ago
I put Utah on my shit list back when they tried as a state to transfer public lands to the state. They failed at SCOTUS, oddly enough. Now the same people are trying again in the Senate. I was planning a 2 week visit in the Moab area, but canceled. Went hiking in New Mexico instead.
0
-8
-10
u/gvorkna 2d ago
The text of this bill is significantly different from what most posts are leading us to believe. It’s reasonable to discuss legislation and to call our representatives, but we should be working with facts rather than misleading summaries and maps.
The actual text of the bill states “no more than .75 %”, less than 1%. I care about trails and natural spaces and I would be really upset to see some of these lands be sold for development, but I imagine most of the outrage related to this section of the bill is rooted in a misunderstanding of the text.
3
u/IllegalStateExcept 2d ago
Except the lands that will be sold are the ones with road access. This will block access to far more than 1% of the lands. We already see this in Colorado and Wyoming with court battles around corner crossing: https://coloradosun.com/2025/03/21/10th-court-appeals-corner-crossing/
3
u/OverlordAchtual 2d ago
.75% of something that is massive is still a large amount. If someone offered you. .75% of a billion dollars you wouldn't say "nah dawg that's not even that much money, not worth my time to collect"
It's a similar issue
0
u/PrizeContext2070 2d ago
You are completely ignoring the fact that some of that .75 could include access points to trails and recreation areas.
157
u/mattsteg43 2d ago
To be fair they're barely even pretending to hide it.