The nomination of Steve Pearce to head the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has sparked intense debate among Western senators about the future of public lands in the United States. Pearce, who served as a congressman from New Mexico, has a history of advocating for the privatization of national public lands, raising concerns about his ability to manage the agency responsible for overseeing approximately 245 million acres of public territory.
Throughout his political career, Pearce has consistently pushed for the sale of public lands. In a notable instance in 2012, he wrote a letter to House leadership asserting that the federal government holds “vast” land holdings, many of which he deemed unnecessary. He proposed a significant sell-off of these lands to help reduce the national debt, a perspective that runs counter to the principles of conservation and stewardship expected from the BLM.
This nomination is particularly contentious given the backdrop of similar past appointments. During President Donald Trump’s first term, the administration nominated William Perry Pendley, a known opponent of public land ownership, to lead the BLM. Pendley’s nomination faced such backlash that it was ultimately withdrawn due to public outcry about his record. Pearce’s nomination, however, may pose an even greater threat to public lands, according to critics.
Concerns about Pearce’s intentions are heightened by the current administration’s broader approach to public land management. Since taking office, Trump has appointed key figures like Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, both of whom view public lands primarily as resources for extraction through drilling, mining, and logging. Critics argue that Pearce would further this agenda, potentially leading to the liquidation of public lands to private entities, including corporations and luxury developers.
The unpopularity of such measures is evident. Earlier this year, Utah Senator Mike Lee attempted to include a provision in a budget bill that would have mandated the sale of 2-3 million acres of BLM and Forest Service lands, framing it as a means to address housing shortages. The proposal quickly met resistance from outdoor recreation groups, hunters, and other stakeholders, prompting Lee to withdraw his amendment. This reaction underscores the general sentiment against privatizing public lands.
As the BLM’s mission involves balancing various interests—energy, grazing, recreation, and conservation—Pearce’s nomination represents a critical test for the newly formed Senate Stewardship Caucus. Co-chaired by Republican Tim Sheehy of Montana and Democrat Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, the Caucus aims to promote bipartisan efforts to conserve the nation’s lands and waters through science-based policies.
The members of the Stewardship Caucus now face a pivotal decision. If they fail to oppose Pearce’s nomination, which reflects a long history of attempts to undermine public land protections, it could suggest a lack of genuine commitment to their stewardship goals. The stakes are high; neglecting responsible management of public lands could have detrimental effects on rural economies and public access to natural resources.
The ongoing discussions around Pearce’s nomination serve as a referendum on whether Congress values public lands as a shared legacy for all Americans. Advocates for conservation and responsible land management are urging every senator, especially those with a vested interest in the West’s outdoor heritage, to reject Pearce’s nomination. America’s public lands are not merely assets to be liquidated but a vital component of national heritage meant to be preserved for future generations.
Aaron Weiss, a contributor to Writers on the Range and deputy director of the Center for Western Priorities, emphasizes the importance of this nomination in the context of long-term public land stewardship. As the Senate deliberates, the outcome will reflect broader values regarding environmental conservation and public access to shared resources.
