HJR 008: Idaho’s State and National Public Lands (2026)
Summary: House Joint Resolution 008 would amend Section 8, Article IX of the Idaho Constitution to revise how state-owned public lands and any future lands acquired from the federal government are managed. The amendment would prioritize revenue-generating activities and public access for recreation, hunting, fishing, and trapping over the sale or exchange of such lands, and would create a dedicated fund for revenues generated from future-acquired lands.
ICL’s Position: Under Review
Current Bill Status: Committee - House State Affairs
Issue Areas: State Public Lands, National Public Lands, Recreation, Natural Resources
House Joint Resolution 8, introduced by Rep. Britt Raybould (R-District-34), proposes to amend Idaho’s constitution regarding state-owned endowment lands managed by the Idaho Department of Lands. The constitution currently requires that endowment lands be managed solely for the “maximum long term financial return” for state beneficiaries such as public schools. The amendment retains the primary focus on revenue generation for beneficiaries, but expands the purpose slightly to also include consideration of public access for recreation, hunting, fishing, and trapping. It further specifies that these combined uses shall be prioritized over the sale or exchange of such lands.
We appreciate Representative Britt Raybould’s leadership in elevating the conversation around state public lands and in exploring how constitutional language can better reflect the values Idahoans associate with these landscapes. Since statehood, Idaho has sold more than 30 percent of its original endowment lands, and the remaining 2.5 million acres continue to operate under a financial-return framework that has, at times, created tension between financial gain for beneficiaries and other public values. Just recently, 160 acres of state land near Driggs were sold due to the mandate for maximizing financial return. Under the proposed amendment, the priority for state public land would remain revenue generation, with added recognition of recreational uses consistent with that objective. While the sale or exchange of state public lands would still be possible, the Land Board would at least be required to consider public recreation and access before proceeding.
The amendment would also establish a management framework for lands Idaho may acquire from the federal government after July 1, 2026, directing that revenues from such lands be deposited into a fund dedicated to maintaining and operating those lands. Currently, Idaho lacks a clearly defined constitutional structure for managing newly acquired public lands, and this proposal attempts to provide one.
At the same time, the amendment raises significant policy questions. As with prior proposals to alter Idaho’s constitutional treatment of public lands, we remain concerned about the broader implications of creating a structure that could make state acquisition of national public lands appear more feasible than it is in practice. Independent analyses have estimated that state management of Idaho’s national public lands at current levels would cost hundreds of millions of dollars annually (far beyond what land-generated revenue alone could realistically sustain). Absent enormous commitments of new taxpayer funding, the state would likely be forced to first prioritize short term extraction and then sell off large tracts of newly acquired lands to wealthy private owners.
In addition, while the amendment expands the decision-making calculus beyond pure financial return and explicitly acknowledges recreation-based values, it does not explicitly recognize conservation, ecosystem integrity, or the intrinsic value of intact landscapes. Public lands provide more than revenue and recreation; they safeguard clean water, wildlife habitat, cultural resources, and open space that underpin Idaho’s long-term environmental and economic health. If Idaho is to amend its constitution on such a foundational issue, it is important that the full range of public land values be carefully considered and clearly articulated.
Finally, directing all revenues from certain future-acquired lands into a land management fund may have unintended consequences. Federal public lands currently support rural communities through programs such as Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) and Secure Rural Schools (SRS). Any structural change that shifts revenue streams without clear replacement mechanisms warrants careful scrutiny, particularly in light of ongoing fiscal pressures at the state level.
We are encouraged to see thoughtful engagement on the future of Idaho’s state and national public lands and appreciate the effort to grapple with long-standing structural questions. There are clear benefits in parts of this proposal, including reducing the singular focus on maximum financial return, elevating public access as a constitutional priority, and creating a defined framework for any lands Idaho may acquire in the future. At the same time, amending the constitution is a consequential step, and the potential fiscal, management, and long-term policy implications warrant careful consideration. We are continuing to review HJR 008 and look forward to additional analysis and stakeholder input to better assess whether the benefits meaningfully outweigh the risks, and to ensure that any changes are durable, fiscally responsible, and protective of the full suite of values Idahoans expect from their public lands.
