Wyoming committee urges congressional push for primacy and bigger royalty share, delegation staff warns of uphill fight

Wyoming legislators on the Select Committee on Federal Natural Resource Management discussed two resolutions asking the state's congressional delegation to pursue (1) statutory primacy over federal mineral leasing and (2) a large increase in the federal mineral royalty share (which the memo traces from 37.5% to 50% under FLPMA). The committee heard testimony from delegation staff and the Legislative Service Office and debated strategy for advancing the measures in Washington.

Brad Bunning, chief of staff for Senator Barasso, told the committee he came from Washington to signal that the delegation is "paying attention" but that putting both proposals into federal legislation immediately would likely get "zero traction." He said shifting a large portion of federal receipts to Wyoming would provoke opponents on appropriations and elsewhere and recommended further discussions with Interior, other western delegations and federal partners to craft a more sustainable path.

"There will be folks that will oppose this tooth and nail no matter what we do," Bunning said, urging the committee to pursue coalition-building and to consult agencies before introducing bills.

Committee members replied that the measures are a strategic priority for Wyoming and argued that a coordinated western-state effort would improve the odds. Co-Chairman Warf said the resolutions represent a "sea-changing moment" if the state can press its case while the administration is receptive. Representative Davis urged outreach to neighboring western states so Wyoming would not stand alone.

Savannah Collins, legislative attorney with LSO, presented a memorandum detailing the legal and legislative history: the Mineral Leasing Act (1920) established federal leasing with a 12.5% royalty paid to the federal government and a share returned to states; Congress raised the state share in 1976 during passage of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) to 50% (later adjusted by a 2% federal administrative set-aside, effectively 48% to states). Collins noted recent statutory changes and estimates that the 2025 rate reversals could change state receipts by an estimated $600,000 to $4 million in the 2026–2030 window, depending on markets.

Several legislators asked LSO to research which states used similar enabling-act language at admission and to examine historical examples of successful public-land transfers. Veronica Larvy, a former Interior solicitor and administrative law judge, urged the committee to consider alternatives to a broad royalty fight, including focused public-land management acts (for example, the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act) and reforms to NEPA that she said are a major impediment to increased production.

The committee made no formal recommendation to file federal legislation at the meeting. Members asked delegation staff to convene further discussions with Interior and Congressional colleagues and requested follow-up research from LSO on historical transfers and the statutory language among other states. The committee emphasized it wants more feedback from the delegation before pursuing legislation.

Next steps: LSO will produce comparative research on enabling acts and prior public-land transfers; delegation staff will circle the rest of the Utah/Wyoming delegation and report back on what the administration and relevant committees in Congress might support.