On June 1, 2026, the Bureau of Land Management announced that it plans to move forward with the full leasing alternative for its Montana-Dakotas third-quarter oil and gas lease sale.
The sale, currently scheduled for July 14, would offer 66 parcels totaling 29,087 acres in Montana and North Dakota for oil and gas development.
During the public comment period, Montana Wildlife Federation and other organizations asked the BLM to consider deferring parcels where leasing could conflict with critical wildlife habitat and other sensitive areas. These lands are important to hunters, anglers, local communities and others who rely on healthy public lands and waters.
The BLM’s response raises concerns that reach far beyond this individual lease sale.
The BLM Says Its Hands Are Tied
In response to public comments, the BLM stated that the One Big Beautiful Bill Act has restricted its authority to exercise discretion and defer individual parcels during the leasing process. According to the BLM, decisions about which lands may be offered for oil and gas leasing must be made during the broader land-use planning process—not during the scoping or public comment period for an individual lease sale.
That interpretation means the BLM may be unable to respond when hunters, anglers, ranchers, local communities and other members of the public raise valid concerns about current threats to wildlife habitat, recreation or water resources. It also locks leasing decisions into Resource Management Plans that may be decades old and no longer reflect changing conditions on the ground.
Public comment should give citizens a meaningful opportunity to influence decisions affecting public lands. It should not be a box-checking exercise conducted after the most important decisions have already been made.
A Dangerous Precedent for Public Lands
In response to the BLM’s position, Montana Wildlife Federation Executive Director Frank Szollosi released the following statement:
“The BLM’s claim that it cannot defer parcels during the public comment phase of oil and gas lease sales highlights the sheer absurdity of the legislative mess Congress created last year with its new leasing requirements. By arguing its hands are tied, the BLM is locking itself into Resource Management Plans that are often 20 to 30 years old—outdated frameworks that completely fail to reflect the changing conditions and realities on the ground today. Rather than forcing agencies to rely on decades-old planning decisions, Congress must step in immediately and explicitly restore the BLM’s authority to use some common-sense discretion to defer specific parcels when valid concerns are raised.”
The consequences of the BLM’s position could extend to future oil and gas lease sales in Montana and across the country.
Congress must restore the agency’s ability to consider current information, respond to public concerns and defer individual parcels when development could put wildlife, recreation, water resources or local communities at risk.
A new statewide poll from the University of Montana’s Crown of the Continent and Greater Yellowstone Initiative sends a clear message: Montanans want public lands kept public, access protected, and conservation prioritized.
The 2026 UM Public Lands Poll found strong bipartisan support for public lands and conservation policies, along with rising concern about access, drought, and the effects of staffing and funding cuts on public lands management.
For Montanans, this is not an abstract issue. Public lands are where people hunt, fish, camp, hike, and make a living. They support wildlife habitat, clean water, and the outdoor traditions that define this state.
“Public lands are central to Montana’s identity, and this poll makes clear that support for keeping them accessible, well-managed, and protected runs deep across the political spectrum,” said Frank Szollosi, Montana Wildlife Federation Executive Director.
“Montanans are fed up with cuts that leave our lands, waters, wildlife, and fisheries shortchanged. For hunters, anglers, and everyone who values clean water, healthy habitat, and the freedom to get outside, these findings are a reminder that conservation remains one of the issues that brings Montanans together most strongly.”
Access to Public Lands Is a Growing Concern
One of the clearest findings in the poll is the sharp rise in concern over access.
Today, 71% of Montanans say loss of access to public lands is an extremely or very serious problem. That is a 30-point increase since 2022.
That jump matters. Access is central to Montana’s outdoor heritage and way of life. Public lands only stay public in a meaningful sense if people can actually reach and use them.
The poll also found overwhelming support for keeping those lands in public hands. Eighty-four percent of respondents support banning the sale or transfer of federal public lands, including 65% who strongly support such a ban.
Montanans Are Fed Up With Cuts to Public Lands Management
The poll found widespread concern about recent firings, staffing losses, and funding cuts affecting public lands.
Nearly three in five voters said they are extremely or very concerned about those cuts. When including those who are somewhat concerned, that number climbs above 80%.
A majority of respondents said those cuts would hurt every area tested, with wildfire management topping the list.
That tracks with what many Montanans already understand: well-managed public lands require staff, stewardship, and on-the-ground capacity. Cuts do not stay on paper. They show up in delayed maintenance, reduced habitat work, less oversight, and weaker wildfire response.
Conservation Remains a Top Montana Voting Issue
The poll also shows that conservation remains one of the strongest areas of agreement across party lines.
Nine in 10 Montanans said conservation issues are important when deciding whether to support an elected official, including:
82% of Republicans
92% of independents
99% of Democrats
That kind of alignment is notable. In Montana, public lands, wildlife habitat, clean water, and access are not niche issues. They are core values.
“Since this poll began a dozen years ago, Montanans’ interest in protecting public lands has only grown stronger,” said UM initiative director Rick Graetz. “Bipartisan support for conservation is undeniable and deeply rooted. Wherever I go in Montana, I hear from people wanting to safeguard their quality of life and their freedom to visit public lands and waters. There is no appetite for sell-off or industrialization of public lands here and that clearly shows in the data.”
Montanans Support Strong Public Lands Protections
The survey tested a range of public lands and conservation policies. Support remained broad and consistent across the board.
Key findings include:
84% support banning the sale or transfer of public lands
Two-thirds prefer continued Land and Water Conservation Fund funding for conservation over infrastructure uses
A plurality support maintaining current Wilderness Study Area protections, with growing support for increasing them
Only 7% support eliminating WSA protections altogether
87% support presidential authority to designate national monuments
76% support corner crossing to access public lands
About two-thirds oppose rare earth mineral mining in public lands areas
Similar numbers oppose reducing protections for WSAs
The poll also found that Montanans widely agree on the importance of public input in public lands decisions.
Drought, Snowpack, and Other Pressures Are Top of Mind
Compared to prior surveys, more Montanans say they are worried about low snowpack and drought.
That concern reflects the reality people are seeing on the ground: lower flows, drier conditions, stressed fisheries, and heightened wildfire risk. It also shows that voters are connecting the dots between land management, water, habitat, and long-term conservation.
The poll tested views on data centers as well. More than two-thirds of respondents said they believe data centers would negatively affect water availability, the reliability of the electric grid, and electricity costs.
What This Poll Means
The takeaway is straightforward: Montanans want public lands protected, access maintained, and conservation treated as a real priority.
They want:
Public lands kept public
Access protected
Habitat conserved
Agencies properly staffed and funded
Public input respected
Long-term stewardship prioritized over short-term exploitation
That is a strong mandate for decision-makers in Montana and beyond.
The 2026 UM Public Lands Poll reinforces what sportsmen and women, conservationists, and public lands advocates have been saying for years: these lands matter, and Montanans expect leaders to treat them that way.
Read the full 2026 Voter Survey, summary, and press release here.
On Aug. 27, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins announced that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is moving forward with plans to rescind the 2001 Roadless Rule. A notice is now live on the Federal Register, where the public can comment on the repeal in a mere three-week window, from now until Sept. 19.
The proposal would lift roadless protections from nearly 45 million acres of roadless national forest lands across the country, including more than 6 million acres in Montana. For hunters, anglers, and outdoor enthusiasts, the stakes could not be higher.
“Montanans have consistently supported strong protections for our backcountry lands,” said Mike Mershon, board president of the Montana Wildlife Federation. “Rolling back the Roadless Rule would not only put elk and native trout at risk, it would also strip away the very opportunities that make Montana special. We need more time to ensure our voices are heard.”
Since its creation nearly a quarter century ago, the Roadless Rule has safeguarded large, unfragmented areas of national forest by generally prohibiting new road construction. These lands include headwater streams that feed Montana’s rivers, critical elk security habitat, and some of the most sought-after backcountry hunting and fishing destinations across the country—and in Montana.
These forests only remain intact because of the Forest Service’s commitment not to allow roads for destructive industrial activities like major logging or oil and gas drilling, although the rule already provides access for pre-existing oil and gas leases, and new oil and gas leases can be accessed through directional drilling.
Rescinding the rule would open the door to large-scale development that would fragment habitat, pollute waterways, and forever change the character of places generations of Americans have relied on for solitude, fish, and game.
Let’s be clear: the Roadless Rule is flexible: it allows for off-highway vehicle riding on existing trails, firewood cutting, grazing, and active management projects such as thinning and prescribed burning. It is not wilderness. In fact, the Forest Service and its partners have used the Roadless Rule framework to carry out hundreds of restoration projects in Montana that improve forest health and fish habitat while supporting rural jobs.
These areas are vital for wildlife, and they’re also used for recreation by millions of Americans. Roadless areas protect more than 43,000 miles of trail, over 20,000 mountain biking routes, 11,000 climbing routes, and more than 1,000 whitewater paddling runs. Large sections of the Continental Divide Trail, the Pacific Crest Trail, and the Appalachian Trail cross through them. Rolling back protections would jeopardize access to some of the most iconic outdoor experiences in the country.
Fire and Forest Health
Proponents of repealing the Roadless Rule have argued that it limits wildfire suppression efforts. However, a 2025 study found that logging and road building disrupts forest ecosystems, leading organic materials to become more flammable. In short, wildfires are far more likely to start near roads. New research from The Wilderness Society, now in peer review, shows that from 1992 to 2024, wildfires were four times as likely to start in areas with roads than in roadless tracts. Seventy-eight percent of human-caused fires on National Forests nationwide start within a half-mile of a road (85% of all wildfires are human-caused).
The Roadless Rule already allows for fire mitigation using mechanized thinning and prescribed burning. Since the Roadless Rule was enacted in 2001, more than 188,000 acres of Montana’s roadless lands have been treated for hazardous fuels reduction, representing more than 20% all treatments in our state during this timeframe.
Without the rule, these areas would be vulnerable to new roadbuilding that fragments wildlife habitat, degrades water quality, and pushes elk onto private lands where public access is often limited. Hunters who rely on these areas to find solitude and game would see those opportunities diminish.
Roadless areas provide irreplaceable big-game habitat and security cover which keeps big game species on public land and provide the backcountry experiences many hunters seek. Photo by Mike Mershon.
Why Hunters and Anglers Should Care
For sportsmen and women who lace up our boots at 4 a.m. and walk into the dark to hunt elk, the connection is clear: fewer intact landscapes mean fewer elk on public land, less secure cover for wildlife, and more hunters stacked up at the same crowded trailheads. Elk rely on secure habitat to avoid heavy hunting pressure, and roadless lands provide exactly that. According to the USDA’s own data, fewer roads correlate directly with more elk and greater hunter satisfaction.
Hunters know this and the outdoor industry has built entire tools around it. Recently, GOHUNT rolled out a new mapping feature — a Road Density layer — that they’re calling a “game-changer” for finding elk away from pressure. Montana-based OnX has offered a roadless layer for years, making it easier for hunters to identify the very places the Roadless Rule was designed to protect. These tools are popular because they point hunters toward opportunity: the intact, unroaded landscapes where elk still behave like elk and where hunting traditions can be passed down.
For anglers, the stakes are just as clear. Roadless areas shelter the headwater streams where native trout and salmon still hold on. These are the places worth a backcountry trek with a fly rod strapped to your pack—rivers shaded by old-growth spruce and fir, where the water runs cold enough to sustain fragile species. Industrial logging threatens that balance. Logging proposals often target the biggest, oldest trees—the very ones that store the most carbon, create a canopy that cools stream temperatures, and sustain entire aquatic ecosystems. The same roads that scatter elk herds also bleed sediment into streams, smothering spawning beds. What’s left is warmer water, fewer trout, and the slow unraveling of fishing traditions that depend on intact watersheds. Removing them would mean a direct hit to climate resilience, fish habitat, and big game security.
More Roads, More Costs
The value of roadless country stretches beyond our elk and native trout. Across the United States, national forests supply drinking water to more than 60 million people. Opening these lands to development is an invoice to taxpayers, who will be left paying for filtration plants and restoration projects once clean water sources are compromised.
On top of that, we don’t have the resources to manage the roads already in existence. The Forest Service already manages 380,000 miles of roads through national forests—twice the length of the national highway system. The agency has a multibillion-dollar backlog of maintenance needs for this network, and ongoing staff shortages mean it cannot even manage what exists today. Building new roads in backcountry forests would saddle taxpayers with billions more in costs and maintenance liabilities.
These roads would also fragment big-game migration corridors, undermine habitat security for species from elk to grizzlies, and put culturally important hunting, fishing, and gathering areas at risk.
TAKE ACTION
The administration has given the public just 21 days to weigh in on a proposal that would reshape the management of nearly one-fifth of the National Forest System. That is simply not enough time for hunters, anglers, local communities, and conservationists to have their say.
The public comment period runs only through Sept. 19. Public comments will be considered during the development of the draft environmental impact statement, and additional opportunities to comment will occur as the rulemaking process continues, according to the USDA.
If you care about keeping Montana’s backcountry open, intact, and teeming with fish and wildlife, now is the time to speak up.
You can submit your comment directly through the Federal Register here. Tell USDA to keep the Roadless Rule in place, extend the comment period, and protect the public lands that define our way of life.
Montana’s public lands define who we are. They’re where we hunt, fish, hike, and pass down our outdoor traditions and way of life to our families. They support our economy, sustain our wildlife, and connect us to the places we love most.
But a new report released today warns that a growing political movement to transfer federal public lands to state control could devastate Montana’s economy, upend public access, and put our outdoor way of life at risk.
The report, authored by longtime state and federal land manager John Tubbs, was developed in partnership with the Montana Wildlife Federation, Backcountry Hunters & Anglers, Montana Conservation Voters Education Fund, and Mountain Mamas. It offers the most comprehensive look yet at what a federal land transfer would actually cost Montana—and the numbers are staggering.
The Bottom Line: $7.9 Billion
According to the report, if Montana were to take over the responsibility of managing federal public lands currently overseen by agencies like the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, it would come with a conservatively estimated $7.9 billion price tag over the next 20 years.
That includes:
$5.5 billion in wildfire suppression and mitigation
$1 billion in abandoned mine cleanup
$623 million in deferred infrastructure maintenance (roads, bridges, trails, campgrounds)
An annual loss of $40 million in federal PILT (Payments in Lieu of Taxes) that counties depend on for schools, emergency services, and road crews
A 1,600% increase in grazing fees for Montana ranchers
These costs would fall squarely on the shoulders of Montana taxpayers—many of whom already live in rural areas with limited tax bases. The state does not currently have the infrastructure, personnel, or budget to manage these lands at the scale and level the federal government provides.
And if the state can’t afford the cost? It would likely be forced to sell those lands off to the highest bidder.
More Than Just Numbers
The report goes beyond dollars and cents. It paints a clear picture of what’s at stake if this movement succeeds: restricted access, lost wildlife habitat, and diminished public oversight of lands that currently belong to every American.
“Montanans should be aware of the staggering financial and economic toll a federal land transfer would take on taxpayers, our state, and our outdoor way of life,” said John Tubbs. “This research shows how the land transfer movement would both send our state’s economy into a tailspin and open the door for privatization of public lands. These impacts would be unsustainable—and irreversible.”
It’s not just the cost of managing the land. It’s the loss of what that land provides: wildlife corridors, hunting opportunities, intact habitat, clean water, and freedom to roam. These are the pillars of Montana’s $5.4 billion outdoor recreation economy and the foundation of our public land heritage.
Why Now?
The land transfer movement is gaining momentum. We’ve seen a renewed push to move federal lands into state hands or open them up for sale.
Recent examples include:
The Department of Housing and Urban Development and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum proposing public land sales as part of affordable housing strategies
Congressional rule changes aimed at expediting development and reducing public oversight on federal lands
State-level resolutions, including in Montana, have attempted to support lawsuits like Utah’s effort to seize federal lands
A wave of federal bills pushing for land transfers or outright liquidation of public assets
This report makes it clear: this isn’t a hypothetical. It’s already underway.
What We Stand to Lose
If Montana were to absorb the management of federal lands without the accompanying federal support, it would quickly face an impossible choice: raise taxes dramatically, cut vital public services, or sell off public lands.
And once they’re gone, we don’t get them back.
Transferring ownership or management of federal public lands would undercut the very systems that have made Montana a leader in wildlife management, public access, and land stewardship. It would undermine generations of work by hunters, anglers, landowners, and conservationists who’ve fought to keep these places open, productive, and wild.
At Montana Wildlife Federation, we believe that public lands should stay in public hands—and that Montanans shouldn’t have to pay more just to lose what’s already ours. We’re proud to stand alongside partners like BHA, Mountain Mamas, and MCV Education Fund in co-releasing this report and sounding the alarm on what’s at stake.
Montana’s wildlife, working lands, and outdoor heritage are central to who we are. The rivers we fish, the ranges we hunt, and the open spaces we roam all require ongoing stewardship. Keeping this land wild, working, and accessible takes funding, coordination, and a long-term strategy.
The Habitat Legacy Account—established by HB 932—delivers just that.
At its core, the Habitat Legacy Account is designed to support and strengthen the very programs that keep Montana’s wildlife habitat healthy, its working lands productive, and its outdoor traditions alive. Here’s how it works, what it funds, and why it matters.
Why It Matters
Montana has many tools to conserve public and private lands, but we lack one critical tool: A robust funding mechanism to restore our land, wildlife and water resources in the face of drought, wildfire, invasive species and deteriorating wildlife habitat conditions.
In 2021, the Montana Legislature passed HB 701, which allocated 20% of the state’s recreational marijuana tax revenue to Fish, Wildlife & Parks’ Habitat Montana program. This was a step forward, but as conservation challenges have grown more complex and more urgent, stakeholders recognized the need to build on that success and create something more flexible with even broader reach.
The Habitat Legacy Account is a historic opportunity to channel Montana’s marijuana tax revenue into a suite of Montana’s most important conservation and access programs—expanding their reach, increasing flexibility, and ensuring long-term funding stability.
Creating the Habitat Legacy Account
The Montana legislature is currently considering two legislative proposals to establish the Habitat Legacy Account, House Bill 932, sponsored by Rep. Ken Walsh, R-Twin Bridges, and Senate Bill 537, sponsored by Sen. Daniel Zolnikov, R-Billings.
The proposals uphold the conservation funding allocated by the Montana Legislature in 2021 and are supported by Montana’s conservation and hunting communities. It would ensure that the Habitat Legacy Account is properly funded, allowing for a more comprehensive and flexible approach to land, wildlife and water conservation.
What the Habitat Legacy Account Would Fund
The Habitat Legacy Account is a long-term commitment to ensuring conservation keeps pace with the demands on our land and water. Key focus areas include the following:
1. Habitat Montana
The Habitat Montana program is one of the most successful tools in the state for wildlife conservation and public access. It funds both short-term and perpetual conservation easements, FWP land acquisitions, and access improvements.
Thanks to Habitat Montana, projects like the Big Snowy Mountains Wildlife Management Area—providing access to nearly 100,000 acres of public land—and the Montana Great Outdoors Project in northwest Montana have preserved critical habitat while opening up new ground for hunters, anglers, and other recreationists. The Habitat Legacy Account ensures Habitat Montana has the funding it needs to continue seizing big opportunities as they arise, including habitat leasing and partnerships with willing landowners.
Using funding from the Habitat Montana program, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks secured nearly 6,000 acres of native prairie and foothill habitat at the base of the Big Snowies to create a new Wildlife Management Area. The WMA opens access to nearly 100,000 acres of previously landlocked public land, provides critical year-round range for elk, deer, and antelope, and protects some of the state’s most intact native grassland and conifer woodland ecosystems. Photo from Montana FWP.
2. WHIP Legacy Expansion
The Wildlife Habitat Improvement Program (WHIP) has already played a role in tackling noxious weeds and improving habitat on both public and private land. But the scope of the program has been narrow—until now.
A Habitat Legacy Account would expand WHIP through the new WHIP Legacy initiative, funding landscape-scale restoration and stewardship work across rural Montana. The program would support ranchers, Tribes, conservation districts, local governments, hunters, and nonprofits in their efforts to heal degraded land and improve fish and wildlife habitat.
Eligible projects would include the following:
Rangeland and soil restoration
Invasive species removal
Fence modifications for improved wildlife movement
Water retention and development
Aspen and wetland enhancement
Fish passage and irrigation upgrades
These types of projects directly improve wildlife habitat and water quality, while helping working lands stay productive. Importantly, this program puts funding in the hands of people who know the land best—those who live and work on it.
3. Wildlife Crossings
Montana ranks second in the nation for wildlife-vehicle collisions. Every year, more than 6,000 big game animals are struck and killed on our roads. These crashes cost Montanans more than $119 million annually in vehicle damages, injuries, and emergency services. Worse still, they threaten the health of our big game herds and the safety of our communities.
The Habitat Legacy Account would create a dedicated funding stream for wildlife accommodations—overpasses, underpasses, and fencing that allow animals to safely cross highways and keep drivers safe. According to recent surveys, 77% of Montanans support more investments in wildlife crossings. With this bill, we can turn that public support into action.
Wildlife crossings are also cost-efficient. By helping species like elk, deer, moose, bears and pronghorn move safely across the landscape, these structures improve long-term herd vitality and prevent roadkill-related costs. They’re a win-win for wildlife and public safety.
Why Now?
Montana has many tools for conserving public and private lands, but we lack one essential piece: a robust, reliable funding mechanism for habitat stewardship. With changing climate conditions and growing land-use pressures, we can’t afford to wait.
The Habitat Legacy Account fills that gap by creating a framework that’s flexible, efficient, and grounded in local knowledge. It supports the people who know the land best—ranchers, Tribes, land managers, hunters, and conservationists—and gives us the tools to get the work done.
Take Action
Montanans overwhelmingly support conservation, wildlife, and access. HB 932 proposes strategic, common-sense investments in all three legs of the stool.
Contact your legislators and urge them to support HB 932. It’s how we keep Montana wild, working, and open for the next generation.
To provide testimony and/or written comments, visit https://participate.legmt.gov. You can also send a message to legislators through the public participation portal.
Jeff Lukas
Conservation Director
Jeff Lukas is a passionate conservationist who has been fishing and hunting his entire life. Whether it’s floating a small stream chasing trout, pursuing elk in the high country, or waiting in a blind for ducks to set their wings, Jeff is always trying to bring more people afield to show them what we are trying to protect. He loves being in the arena, and he will never shy away from conversations about the beautiful and unique corners of Big Sky country.
