The Western Landowners Alliance applauds the formation of the bipartisan public lands caucus to protect our public lands. Better management of our public lands is a shared priority across party lines and fence lines in the West. Western Landowners Alliance members steward tens of millions of acres of private and public land, and recognize the challenges facing federal land management and budgets. We are also acutely aware of the nation’s real housing deficit. However, disposal of federal land is not a practical solution to either problem.

Therefore, with limited exceptions, Western Landowners Alliance does not support the sale of federally managed public lands. We do support voluntary, equitable land exchanges to resolve checker boarding and inholding issues in the interest of both parties. We believe the integrity of the Federal Land Policy Management Act needs to be maintained and that public lands should be managed in accordance with the multiple-use mandate contained therein.

Multiple use lands are a shared natural heritage, essential to meeting current and future natural resource needs. Public lands provide for timber, grazing, energy, water, wildlife and recreation. These resources become ever more valuable and important with a growing population and the competition for diminishing natural resources around the world. The conversion of public lands to urban development, and the attendant loss of the many resources they supply, is a direct threat to national prosperity and national security. The nation’s housing needs can be met through better land use planning that reduces sprawl, confronts water resource limitations, and tempers real estate speculation.

Sustained public investment in public lands is essential. At the same time, the current federal lands management system is hamstrung with regulations, staffing issues, budget shortfalls, stakeholder conflict and litigation. The solution is not to dispose of federal lands and natural resources but to improve their management in collaboration with states, local communities and affected stakeholders. Partnership-based approaches such as Good Neighbor Authority, stewardship contracting, and the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program have repeatedly demonstrated the success and positive outcomes that result from strong collaborative approaches. These efforts have led to reduced bureaucracy, red-tape, litigation and costs. Federal policies and investments should focus first and foremost on strengthening these approaches and the capacities of federal, state, local and private partners to participate.

USTR calls out misuse of geographical indications as major trade barrier

The Consortium for Common Food Names, National Milk Producers Federation and U.S. Dairy Export Council said they appreciated the U.S. Trade Representative’s decision to spotlight protection of common food names in the agency’s 2025 Special 301 Report released April 29.

The annual report outlines major global intellectual property concerns. It highlighted the European Union’s persistent campaign to monopolize common names — such as “parmesan” and “feta”— through protectionist geographical indication (GI) policies. These efforts restrict the use of widely recognized food and beverage terms to only specific European producers and effectively cut U.S. producers out of certain key markets.  

“The European Union’s approach to geographical indications is entirely unacceptable. It intentionally crowds out fair competition by restricting market access for U.S. and international producers,” said Jaime Castaneda, executive director of CCFN. “Too many trading partners have been coerced into imposing trade barriers for products using common food and beverage names. We appreciate USTR’s ongoing recognition of this issue but urge the U.S. government to stop trading partners to succumbing to European pressures and imposing trade barriers on U.S. products.”

“Europe’s misuse of geographical indications is nothing more than a trade barrier dressed up as intellectual property protection,” said Krysta Harden, president and CEO of USDEC. “It not only unfairly strips American producers of the right to use common, widely understood terms, but significantly handcuffs commercial export opportunities. We welcome USTR’s focus on this issue and appreciate the administration’s dedication to protecting U.S. market access rights.”

“Last year, the United States imported nearly $3 billion more in dairy products from the European Union than we exported to Europe. Europe’s abuse of the GI system is a significant reason for that deficit,” said Gregg Doud, president and CEO of NMPF. “EU GI schemes create a two-tiered system that benefits European producers and stamps out competition. We appreciate that USTR is addressing this unfair practice and look forward to continuing to work together to level the playing field for U.S. dairy producers.”

CCFN submitted comments to the agency in January, which broke down the many markets where U.S. dairy producers’ common name rights are being threatened. NMPF and USDEC filed supporting comments noting the urgency for action to address this pressing trade barrier. CCFN Senior Director Shawna Morris built on those comments at a Feb. 19 USTR hearing, where she underlined how the EU misuses geographical indications and why it’s imperative for the U.S. government to match the EU’s efforts on common names.