Is Idaho your “adopted” state? If so, why did you move here? Most people list Idaho’s relatively conservative culture, smaller population, and access to public lands among their answers. Idaho is a state renowned for its vast landscapes, rugged mountains, abundant natural resources, and accessible outdoor recreation; however, we have one of the highest percentages of federally owned and maintained land in the country. Roughly 62% of Idaho lands — approximately 32.8 million of 52.9 million total acres — belong to the federal government. A mere 38 to 39% of Idaho is owned privately or by the state. After accounting for land owned by the state, tribal groups, and military bases, only 29.4% of Idaho is privately owned. This ranks Idaho fourth in the nation for public land concentration. In comparison, 60.2% of U.S. lands overall are privately owned.
The federal government manages its lands in Idaho through agencies such as the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), which oversees national forests; the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), responsible for rangelands and multiple-use lands; and the National Park Service (NPS), which has jurisdiction over areas such as Craters of the Moon. Federal regulations impose significant restrictions on Idaho’s decision-making regarding grazing, logging, mining, and energy development.
Earlier this year, Utah Sen. Mike Lee proposed a bill that would require the federal government to sell a small percentage of federally owned and managed lands in multiple Western states including Idaho. The bill would allow for underutilized federal land to be used for housing, infrastructure, and community development. All of this would happen without Idaho having the final say over land sales. In other words, the bill would allow Idaho and other entities to purchase federal land but would not afford Idaho the sole authority to approve or block sales.
Sen. Lee’s bill resurfaced a long-standing debate over using public lands for growth or conserving them for future generations. Ultimately, however, the Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF) believes Idaho should decide how to use the lands and resources within our state whether that be for development or preserving them for recreational purposes.
Idaho should be able to make the decisions on whether to use these lands to relieve housing issues, expand local tax bases, or better manage its lumber and minerals. This land could be a potential solution to infrastructure issues and provide better access to resources. The Founders saw the American frontier as a place of opportunity where land should be worked, settled, and transformed into thriving settlements.
Idaho should also reserve the right to preserve these lands. Once public lands are sold, they are lost forever — along with recreational areas and wildlife habitats. The Founding Fathers saw the wilderness as a source of national character — a place where hunting, pioneering, roaming, and exploration instilled independence and civic virtue. In this view, Idaho’s frontier — spaces that belong to all residents, not simply private interests — should be preserved to ensure future generations can experience the same freedom to roam, explore, and use the land to sustain life.
Land ownership and the decentralization of governmental power were two of the highest priorities for the Founding Fathers. Their vision for the Republic rested on a federal framework balancing national cohesion with robust state sovereignty. Keeping with Founding-Era tradition, Idaho should assume control of our lands and resources as our state government is the closest governing entity to the people.
The Founders viewed land not only as a critical resource but as the backbone of liberty and self-governance. In their view, land ownership empowered citizens, encouraged settlement, and fostered independence from centralized authority. This philosophy carried into the Constitution, where most powers and rights were reserved for the states and the people, in order to prevent federal overreach.
The IFF understands the federal retention of Idaho lands to be in conflict with the Founders’ understanding of federalism and, as such, we support putting Idaho lands in Idaho’s hands.
We believe Idaho is better equipped to manage the lands and resources within our borders in ways reflecting the market and regional needs — whether related to agriculture, energy development, infrastructure, or wildlife preservation.
Furthermore, placing land control in the hands of Idaho reinforces the Founders’ emphasis on state sovereignty. It strengthens the principle that states are not subordinate administrative units of Washington, D.C., but the federal government’s superiors in a constitutional system designed to preserve liberty and foster prosperity.
