Public lands activists usually come in outfits worn by what some would consider extremists. Now arises a more middle-of-the-road group, who are opposing the potential of selling of public lands. In this case, the Outdoor Recreation Roundtable has fired off a strong letter to the U.S. Senate’s Energy and Natural Resources Committee. This industry group opposes public lands sale. Interestingly, the roundtable seems to represent the interests of RVers.
Just who is the Outdoor Recreation Roundtable (ORR)? The group is a coalition of outdoor recreation trade associations. It represents a wide range of businesses and activities tied to public lands and waters. Included in its membership are the RV Industry Association (RVIA), the National Association of RV Parks and Campgrounds (ARVC), and the Recreation Vehicle Dealers Association (RVDA). While this trio are all industry groups, all three recognize one thing. Anything that could affect the recreational activity of RVers will cut into the profits of their membership supporters.
Industry group opposes public lands sale: “serious threat”
Boiling down the issue, ORR is opposing a proposal from the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. It would mandate the sale of public lands, arguing it poses a serious threat to outdoor recreation access, the $1.2 trillion recreation economy, and the five million jobs it supports. ORR contends the proposal bypasses established, bipartisan processes meant to ensure land sales consider public access and conservation, and warns that diverting proceeds to the general Treasury instead of reinvesting them in recreation would result in long-term losses.
The group emphasizes that once public lands are sold to private interests, communities could lose valuable spaces used for hiking, hunting, biking, and other activities—permanently. ORR stresses that solving issues like housing affordability and public land management challenges should not come at the expense of public access. Instead, they urge investment in land agency infrastructure and staffing, and commit to working with policymakers on balanced, bipartisan solutions that support both recreation and rural housing needs. What follows is the ORR statement to the Senate committee.
ORR statement opposing public lands sale
“ORR has long worked with the administration, Republicans, and Democrats on the bipartisan objectives of improving access and infrastructure for all recreation activities and also understands the needs of Senator Lee’s constituents for long-term affordable housing. However, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee’s reconciliation proposal is at odds with these objectives as it could threaten our $1.2 trillion outdoor recreation economy, the 5 million jobs it supports, and the thousands of businesses and communities that rely on access to public land and water.
“Additionally, this provision has not been vetted through the appropriate Congressional process to ensure it meets all of the needs of the communities in the listed states. We urge Congress to keep the sale of public lands out of the federal budget reconciliation process as we saw how unpopular and out of touch it was with American businesses the public. The House of Representatives stripped selloff from this legislation just last month for these reasons.
“There is a long-standing process in place regarding public lands selloff, leasing, and exchanges that has been successfully utilized for decades and contains necessary guardrails to protect public interest and is compliant with current laws and regulations. Existing procedure under this process stipulates that transactions must guarantee recreation access is taken into consideration, and that revenue from lands sold is reinvested directly into conservation or access improvements, or to acquire new, high-value recreational or conservation areas.”
“Opening the door to loss of public lands to private interests”
“However, the new proposal changes those guidelines risking reduced recreational access, redirecting revenue away from recreation to the general Treasury, and opening the door to permanent loss of multi-use public lands to private interests. What some may see as a barren lot on a map on a Senator’s desk may actually be where a community hikes after work, rides their ATV, or teaches their kids how to hunt turkey or ride a bike. And once these treasured places are sold to private industry, they are gone forever, and in the case of this proposal, can be used for any purpose after ten years.
“Selling off public lands in this manner will not solve the real challenges our federal land agencies face—including underfunding, crumbling infrastructure, and staffing shortages. To truly sustain and grow our $1.2 trillion outdoor recreation economy, we must address these head-on through smart investments in our land management agencies, innovation, technology, partnerships, and bipartisan policy solutions.
“ORR stands ready to work with all policymakers and partners to create meaningful outcomes for what communities’ care about and businesses really need–certainty that public lands will remain public for recreation as well as long-term affordable housing solutions in rural areas.”
For more information on public lands sales, click here.
RVT1214b
Based on the first line of your article, I guess you can call me an “extremist.” I’ve been an advocate for preserving public lands all my life. My family brought me on camping trips as a toddler and now, I’m bringing my grandchildren. Public lands are for all to enjoy, camping, hiking, boating, sightseeing, birding, picnicking, swimming, etc. They are owned by all Americans, and it’s short sighted to sell them off to private developers to build private resorts, golf courses, condos, mines, or saw mills. Let’s not steal the enjoyment of these resources from future generations.
Finish this for me, “don’t it always seem to go, that you don’t know what you’ve got ‘till its gone….”
You have my vote.
Ditto.
Totally agree. Selling rights to big corporations or private entities will destroy the natural wonder that is now our public lands, only to line their own pockets.
The current administration only thinks of themselves.
Just look at the BIG place in Florida.
A privately owned National Landmark, that cannot be enjoyed by the public.
The current administration only thinks about what is best for America. However, the last administration only thought about themselves as is evident in absolutely everything they put the country through and we have been witness to for 4 dreadfully long years.
Well stated, thank-you!
False.
“The current administration only thinks about what is best for America.” That is by far the most ridiculous sentence I have read in a long time. Talk about LOL!!!
Since no one answered your call…”They paved paradise, And put up a parking lot”. Big Yellow Taxi – Joni Mitchell
I haven’t met a single person ever that thinks auctioning off national park land or recreation areas like Yellowstone or Lake Mead, is a good idea. Its not like the Feds are contemplating seliing parcels of land on the North Rim of the Grand Canyon for condos. They are however looking to auction off 5, 10, 20 and 50 acre parcels they control in the middle of metropolitan areas in order to develop condos next door to condos not giant redwoods, and houses next door to houses not geysers.
If the next generation wants to own a home, land will be needed.
Happy trails ✌️ 😎
Too many people are automatically triggered without having any information to back up their ‘thoughts’ other than their emotional responses.
There’s far more to this story than what’s been presented here. A lot more.
The proposal seeks to repeal legislation containing unintended consequences from the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 that’s was amended into the Mineral Lease Act of 1920.
The proposal specifically excludes National and State Parks, Monuments, Preserves, Wilderness Areas, etc.
Do you think it’s accidental the storytellers “forget” to mention that?
Please folks – Read the proposal, not just the spin and make an informed conclusion, not a manipulated one.
https://www.energy.senate.gov/services/files/DF7B7FBE-9866-4B69-8ACA-C661A4F18096
Thanks for this!
Just awful when facts get in the way of a preferred narative.
Happy trails Vince ✌️ 😎
“ORR stands ready to work with all policymakers and partners to create meaningful outcomes for what communities’ care about and businesses really need–certainty that public lands will remain public for recreation as well as long-term affordable housing solutions in rural areas.”
Sounds great, but how?
Exactly!!! Typical platitudes. No actual solutions or ideas offered, simply a commitment to work together in furtherance of more conversations about the need for having some more conversations in a bipartisan fashion to ensure conversations about the need for more conversations take place in a bipartisan fashion.
Thank you for sharing this information, Russ and Tina! I don’t hunt and never have, and thus I have little (no?) knowledge of such things. I had the impression that no hunting was allowed, but not so. So, I am less naive; thank you! Alternately, it does seem as though there is too much public land. It seems as though it is far too easy to make land “public” and far too difficult to unmake land “public.” I suspect this opinion is far less likely held by a “westerner” who routinely escapes into public land, than by an “easterner” who rarely does so. Still an interesting bit of news. Have a great weekend and safe travels!