The Trump administration wants another sale of public lands

With Democrats expected to take control of the House and Senate on Jan. 3, the Trump administration is proposing multiple policies that could impact U.S. national parks and other public lands.

Proposals include, among others, a massive sale of land controlled by the Department of the Interior, limiting public participation in decisions made by the Bureau of Land Management, and a radical restructuring of the National Park Service (NPS). The plans have drawn sharp criticism from nonprofits, conservation groups and lawmakers.

“It’s like they’re trying to rush these things in the dark of night,” said Edward Stierli, vice president of government affairs for the National Parks Conservation Association. Out. “We know that they are trying to do these reorganizations before the end of the year, because they know that in 2027 the level of accountability will be higher.”

Here’s a look at some of the controversial public lands policies the administration is considering.

A radical reorganization of the National Park Service

On November 7, The Washington Post released a report indicating that the Department of the Interior (DOI) was planning a radical restructuring of the National Park Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Citing internal DOI documents, the WaPo said DOI officials are considering “pending duty station changes” in locations where NPS personnel work. Out reached out to the DOI for comment but did not hear back before publishing this story.

The report comes two months after the Washington Sun reported that the DOI was considering realigning its 433 NPS units under a so-called hub-and-spoke management model. Currently, the 433 units of the NPS retain some autonomy in making their own decisions.

According to the proposed model, decision-making power would be centralized in large parks, while small park units “on the shelf” would lose some power.

Stierli said Out that there are already regional hub-and-spoke models around resource sharing in the NPS that are effective. But moving to a large hub-and-spoke management model would likely result in a loss of staff and expertise at smaller sites.

“When you go to the Flight 93 National Memorial in Pennsylvania, the tour you get there is incredible; it makes everyone cry, because it was designed by someone who is steeped in the history of there,” Stireli said. “If you were to move this position to another park, or to a variety of different parks, you wouldn’t get the same level of expertise. »

Even if the hub-and-spoke model does not move forward, other projects are underway for the agency. In its new strategic plan for 2026 to 2030, the DOI has put forward an approach aimed at “consolidating its workforce to improve operational efficiency”. The agency has already been hamstrung by consolidation: By 2025, the NPS lost nearly a quarter of its full-time staff to buyouts and layoffs.

A plan to sell off huge tracts of public land

On November 11, the DOI released a broad strategic plan for 2026 to 2030 that outlines a broad-based path forward for managing the 11 agencies under its control, including the National Park Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

In his opening letter, DOI Secretary Douglas Burgum said the agency’s primary goal is to make public lands available for the nation’s energy production and industrial goals.

The document also stated that the DOI would “work to reduce the size of the federal estate by providing states, localities, and tribes with the opportunity to purchase federal lands.”

“Through these sales, the Department will be able to focus its resources on core Federal responsibilities and federal lands of national significance,” the plan states.

The proposal to sell public lands has drawn strong objections from critics.

“Secretary Burgum’s plan threatens the lands where families hike, camp, hunt and fish, the wildlife habitats that support our ecosystems, and the natural, cultural and historic treasures we have a responsibility to protect for future generations,” Loren Blackford, executive director of the Sierra Club, said in a statement. “The administration should invest in protecting our public lands and the people who manage them, not looking for ways to reduce them or block public access. »

This is the second attempted mass sale of public lands by the Trump administration. In June 2025, Utah Senator Mike Lee launched a plan to sell 3 million acres of land managed by the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service. The plan was ultimately torpedoed in the face of growing bipartisan opposition.

Changing BLM Rules to Limit Public Comments

On November 10, the Bureau of Land Management released a proposal titled Review of Planning, Programming, and Budgeting Regulations, which includes a series of fundamental changes to how the agency makes decisions about public lands. The BLM manages 245 million acres of public lands, more than any agency.

Top of the list would be limiting the public’s ability to comment on BLM plans for parcels of public land and eliminating the need for the agency to produce a document called an environmental impact statement, which describes the impact of the move on local flora and fauna, before a change.

Currently, the public has 90 days to comment on major changes to how the BLM manages land. The proposal would reduce that to 30 days or replace a comment period with public meetings in certain situations.

BLM Director Steve Pearce said the changes would streamline the approval process for new BLM projects.

“The current planning process is too slow, too complicated and weighed down by outdated requirements,” Pearce said in a statement. “These proposed changes would help the BLM make more effective decisions, reduce costs to taxpayers, and improve coordination with people and communities who rely on public lands.”

But critics argue that the 90-day public comment period is imperative.

“Removing requirements for transparency, review and public engagement in the West’s most ecologically sensitive wildlife corridors, watersheds and cultural resources are the actions of cowards trying to accelerate industrial development at all social costs,” Kara Matsumoto, senior policy director at the Conservation Lands Foundation, said in a statement.

Big Bend border wall continues

In Texas, advocates await the return of bulldozers and trucks to Big Bend National Park, where construction of a barrier along the U.S.-Mexico border has been suspended since September.

On November 9, the United States Supreme Court allowed the work to continue, overturning a federal judge’s decision to stop it. In October, the Trump administration filed papers challenging the order and fast-tracking the case to the Supreme Court. With this approval, the administration will likely move forward with a project that has been criticized by residents, Texas law enforcement and even state politicians.