SJR 102: Senator Adams' Idaho Public Lands Constitutional Amendment (2026)

Summary: Senator Ben Adams’ proposed constitutional amendment would revise Section 8, Article IX of the Idaho Constitution with the stated goal of protecting public lands in Idaho. If approved, the amendment would prohibit the sale of any lands acquired by the State of Idaho from the federal government after July 1, 2026; establish management requirements for those lands; and create a public lands trust fund into which all related revenues would be deposited, along with guidelines governing how the legislature may appropriate those funds.

ICL’s Position: Oppose

Current Bill Status: Committee - Senate State Affairs

Issue Areas: Public Lands, Endowment Lands, Recreation, Natural Resources

Official Legislative Site

Senate Joint Resolution 102, introduced by Senator Ben Adams (R–District 12), reflects a growing recognition at the Statehouse that Idaho’s national public lands, such as those managed by the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, are worth protecting. The Idaho Conservation League, like 96 percent of Idaho voters, strongly supports the principle that federal public lands should remain in public hands. We are grateful to Senator Adams for elevating this issue and for his willingness to champion national public lands during this legislative session.

That said, while the intent of the amendment is commendable, its protections are ultimately limited and leave important gaps unaddressed. Multiple studies have shown that if national public lands were transferred to the state, management would be unaffordable and would create significant pressure to sell those lands to private interests. While the vast majority of Idahoans oppose the privatization of public lands, some special interests continue to advocate for land transfers in hopes of eventually acquiring these lands for private use.

Senator Adams’s proposed constitutional amendment would place any newly acquired national lands into a new category of public lands required to permanently remain in public ownership, preventing their outright sale and privatization; a laudable goal. This provision may reduce incentives for some land transfers. However, it does not resolve broader concerns about how any lands that are transferred would be responsibly managed over the long term.

Idaho currently lacks the staffing, funding, and institutional capacity necessary to fully fund and carry out responsible, multiple-use public land management for sizable new land acquisitions. Without reliable management capacity, newly acquired lands would likely create significant financial strain and increased conflict over land use priorities. Unlike national public lands, this new category of state land would lack necessary mechanisms to balance multiple uses, ensure robust public comment, or hold the state accountable to the public.

In addition, the amendment would require revenue generated from newly acquired lands to be deposited into a public lands trust fund and used not only for land operations and management, but also for county compensation, public access improvements, and public education facilities. While these are broadly supported goals, tying management funding directly to land-derived revenue risks creating perverse incentives. Without dedicated replacement funding from the state, land managers would be forced to prioritize short-term revenue generation over long-term stewardship, including clean water protections, wildlife habitat, and recreational values that are currently considered on national public lands.

Lastly, the amendment would apply only to lands Idaho may acquire from the federal government after July 1, 2026. Idaho’s existing 2.5 million acres of endowment lands, lands that already face ongoing pressure to generate “maximum financial return” for state-identified institutions, would receive no additional constitutional protections for the public under this proposal. If the goal is to ensure that public lands remain public and are managed for long-term public benefit rather than profit, it is worth asking whether protections should extend beyond newly acquired lands alone.

The Idaho Conservation League is encouraged to see serious discussion around public land protections this session and sincerely appreciates the leadership shown in bringing this issue forward. At the same time, we remain hopeful that future efforts will build on this momentum by reaffirming the importance of keeping national public lands under federal management and pairing that commitment with realistic, sustainable funding, staffing, and management strategies. Ensuring that national public lands remain public should also mean ensuring they are managed in ways that protect the long-term ecological, recreational, economic, and community values that Idahoans rely on.