To amend the Military Land Withdrawals Act of 2013 to withdraw and reserve certain public land in the vicinity of Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona.
Introduced May 7, 2026 · Last action June 10, 2026
Plain English Summary
This bill permanently withdraws approximately 22,032 acres of federal public land near Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona from public use, mining, and energy development, and reserves it exclusively for U.S. Army military purposes. The Army can manage the land directly or delegate management to the Interior Department, but military needs take priority over all other uses including hunting, wildlife recreation, and utility projects—except for a carve-out allowing utility companies to install transmission infrastructure through an existing utility corridor with Interior Department approval but without Army consent.
Who benefits
The U.S. Army and Department of Defense gain exclusive control over 22,032 acres for military testing, training, and operations at Yuma Proving Ground. Utility companies operating the Parker-Blaisdell Utility Corridor gain a carve-out allowing them to install transmission infrastructure across the withdrawn land without Army veto power. The State of Arizona retains subsurface mineral rights to approximately 800 acres. Rep. Paul Gosar's constituents in Arizona's 9th congressional district benefit from permanent military installation security and economic activity associated with the proving ground.
Who pays / loses
Mining companies, geothermal energy developers, and oil and gas operators lose access to 22,032 acres of federal public land for mineral leasing and extraction. Hunting and recreation advocates lose public access to those lands for consumptive and non-consumptive uses, except where the Army permits. Ranchers and wildlife managers lose grazing and habitat management flexibility; activities are now subordinate to military needs. The general public loses the ability to enter or use these formerly available public lands. Native American tribes with historic ties to the area lose access to culturally significant lands.
Funding & Lobbying Interests
No PAC contributions listed for Rep. Gosar in the 2024 cycle. The primary financial interests backing this bill are: (1) military contractors and defense industries that operate at Yuma Proving Ground and benefit from expanded, secured testing ranges; (2) regional utility companies seeking guaranteed access through the utility corridor carve-out without military veto; (3) the U.S. Army and Department of Defense as institutional beneficiaries. The bill's sponsor received $293,792.60 from 'Other' category contributions in 2024, which typically includes real estate, construction, and defense-adjacent interests, though specific donor breakdowns are not itemized.
Political Impact
Affected Groups
Most directly affected: (1) active mining and geothermal energy companies operating in southwestern Arizona lose lease opportunities; (2) sportsmen and outdoor recreation users (estimated in tens of thousands across Arizona) lose public land access; (3) utility transmission companies gain operational certainty; (4) Department of Defense and 22,000+ military and civilian workers at Yuma Proving Ground gain permanent land security; (5) residents of Yuma County and neighboring counties experience reduced public land availability but potentially increased local military economic activity; (6) Native American tribes with documented ancestral ties to the Yuma area lose federal public land access.
Political Subtext
Proponents argue this bill enhances U.S. military readiness and testing capabilities at a critical proving ground by permanently securing land from development and competing uses. They cite national security imperatives for uninterrupted military operations. Critics argue the bill represents an unnecessary permanent land withdrawal that forecloses mining, renewable energy development, and public recreation on federal lands that could support multiple uses. Some environmental and recreation groups view it as excessive militarization of the public domain. Non-partisan analysis from the Congressional Research Service and Government Accountability Office historically shows that military land withdrawals can restrict economic development but do not inherently improve readiness if the underlying infrastructure investments are not coupled with operational expansion—the bill does not authorize new spending, equipment, or personnel.
Real-World Stakes
If this passes: The Army gains an indefinite, veto-proof withdrawal protecting approximately 22,032 acres from mining, energy, and public use. No future congressional action is required to maintain the withdrawal unless the Army voluntarily relinquishes it. Yuma Proving Ground becomes a permanently secured testing range with expanded operational buffer. Utility companies secure transmission access via the Parker-Blaisdell corridor without Army consent authority, though Army consultation requirements remain. Arizona loses potential mineral leasing revenue and mineral tax receipts from federal lands within the withdrawal boundary. Public lands hunting and recreation in the area contract. Analogous precedent: The Military Land Withdrawals Act of 2013 (the statute this bill amends) established permanent withdrawals for other military installations; no state-level withdrawals of comparable scale have been reversed, indicating indefinite withdrawals are typically permanent in practice. The Department of Interior and Army operate approximately 25 million acres of withdrawn military lands nationwide under similar indefinite arrangements; land use conflicts have been documented in Congressional GAO reports (e.g., 2019 GAO report on military land management) but military operational priority has never been overridden by competing civilian uses once withdrawn.
What's Inside This Bill
Non-obvious provisions not apparent from the headline summary.
Utility Corridor Bypass of Military Authority
Utility companies can install transmission infrastructure through an existing utility corridor with only Interior Department approval, explicitly without requiring Army consent or coordination, creating a potential conflict between military operations and utility infrastructure on withdrawn military land.
AffectsU.S. Army's ability to control military operations and security at Yuma Proving Ground; utility companies gain unilateral development rights; potentially affects military training, weapons testing, and operational security if utilities are installed against Army preferences.
Delegation Without Explicit Limits on Interior Department Authority
The Army can delegate land management to the Interior Department, but the bill does not explicitly define the scope of delegated authority or whether Interior can make decisions that contradict Army military priorities, potentially creating ambiguity about management control.
AffectsInterior Department may gain de facto management authority over military land with unclear boundaries; land managers uncertain whether military veto power applies to Interior Department decisions; potential for disputes over land use classification and resource allocation.
Permanent Withdrawal with No Sunset or Reversion Clause
The withdrawal is stated as permanent with no time limit, review mechanism, or condition under which the land reverts to public use, creating irreversible loss of public access and resource availability.
AffectsFuture generations and administrations; public permanently loses hunting, recreation, and resource access; no pathway for Congressional reconsideration even if military needs change; state and local communities lose potential economic opportunities from public land use.
Preemption of State Wildlife and Recreation Authority
The bill explicitly prohibits hunting and wildlife recreation, overriding state authority over fish and wildlife management that would normally apply to federal lands under Pittman-Robertson framework.
AffectsState fish and wildlife agencies lose management authority and hunting license revenue; hunters and wildlife enthusiasts lose access; states have no mechanism to negotiate or appeal military preemption of traditional public land hunting rights.
Sponsor
Vote Record
No recorded votes.
Campaign Finance — Primary Sponsor
Top contributing industries
Other$293,792.6
Finance$10,900
Energy$2,500
Healthcare$1,800
Technology$1,250
501(c)(4) disclosure: Contributions from 501(c)(4) "dark money" organizations are not required to be publicly disclosed and are not reflected in the figures above. Data sourced from FEC public disclosure filings.
Community Discussion
Share this bill
Sign in to join the discussion.
No comments yet. Be the first.