FAQ: Sell-Off Efforts at Yosemite

The Department of the Interior and National Park Service have been secretly working for over a year to sell off a piece of Yosemite National Park to a private equity firm. This sale would allow the firm to build a new road inside the park, giving it exclusive private access for luxury lodging and commercial developments it plans to build on Yosemite National Park’s border.

Every inch of Yosemite, the first land the U.S. government ever set aside for the benefit of the public, is sacred and beloved by millions from across the world. After news of the plan broke, public outcry was swift and strong: Yosemite is not for sale!

Why is the administration looking to sell off a piece of Yosemite?

As first reported in August by the Washington Sun (formerly NOTUS), the Trump administration, led by high-level officials at the Department of the Interior and Yosemite’s recently installed superintendent, hatched a secretive plan to sell off a small piece of Yosemite at the behest of the private equity and real estate development firm Kingsbarn Realty Capital. Through a shell company called Sanctuary at Yosemite LLC, the firm bought more than 80 acres directly adjacent to the park in 2024 and aims to build large lodging and commercial developments. However, the firm would need to build a short private road through land currently within Yosemite National Park to make this development a reality.

What’s the history behind this development?

Private developers have wanted to build upscale lodging on this land since the early 2000s. A developer tried to force through a similar proposal, even going so far as to sue the Park Service, claiming the right to build a road through the park. Thankfully, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed and threw out his case. And while previous administrations, Republican and Democrat alike, have opposed this plan for decades, the Trump administration now supports the private equity firm’s request to give it a piece of Yosemite to build their own private road.

Can the administration really just sell off a piece of Yosemite?

Park Service laws do not support this privatization scheme. Despite this, the administration and developer are trying to make the sell-off possible through a land swap, relying on a seldom used law that allows the Department of the Interior to exchange land in a national park for private land anywhere within the Department’s jurisdiction, so long as it’s within the same state. Land exchanges under this statute are rare and have only been used for a specific national park conservation or management purpose — not for the benefit of a wealthy private interest.

The laws and regulations creating the National Park Service and Yosemite National Park laid out a clear mission requiring that parks be managed to protect their incredible natural and cultural resources for the benefit of this and future generations. Selling or exchanging land in Yosemite to help a private equity firm develop a massive luxury commercial development would do nothing to benefit Yosemite or the public. Instead, it would harm the park and its connected landscapes in multiple ways. Therefore, this proposed exchange would be unlawful and should not be allowed to proceed.

What would this proposed plan mean for the Park Service and Yosemite?

The development would have five key impacts:

• Precedent — Selling off any amount of land in Yosemite, be it one inch or a hundred acres, for the benefit of a commercial private interest would set a dangerous precedent for our national parks. It would send a clear signal to wealthy interests everywhere that our national parks are up for sale, so long as you have enough money and the right political connections.

• Environmental damage — Clearing the way for the private road would likely see dozens of large, mature trees within the park chopped down and the hillside bulldozed. The resulting habitat destruction and fragmentation from both the road and commercial development would negatively impact local wildlife that thrive in the area, including endangered species such as the Pacific fisher, great gray owl and spotted owl.

• Increased fire risk — Building a large development in an area without any existing utilities or large-scale infrastructure would also create a significant fire risk in a region currently designated as being at “very high” risk.

• Diminished air and water quality — There are water scarcity and water quality concerns, as well as air quality, viewshed and soundscape impacts that would result from the construction and operation of the proposed development.

• Limited emergency services — Given its remote location, this proposed development would have limited emergency egress and would likely need to rely on fire and other emergency services provided by the park, which is already severely overburdened after deep cuts to Park Service funding and staffing under this administration.

Isn’t the area around Yosemite already overdeveloped?

Yes. For decades, Yosemite has been dealing with significant overcrowding issues, which ballooned into a full-blown crisis this year following the current superintendent’s decision to eliminate Yosemite’s successful day-use reservation system. If this development is built, it could be one of the biggest lodging developments in the area, if not the biggest, funneling thousands of additional visitors and their vehicles into the park every year.

However, unlike other visitors staying outside of the park who might wait hours at entrance stations, people who stay at this luxury development would have their own private driveway into the park. These guests would have exclusive access, skipping the morning lines and taking up hundreds of the highly competitive parking spaces in Yosemite Valley and other park destinations each day.

What’s NPCA doing about it?

NPCA has been closely tracking this story from the beginning and working overtime to do everything we can to stop this land sale in its tracks before it ever goes through. We’ve led efforts to educate and activate local residents and conservation partners, national environmental and public lands groups, national, state and local elected officials, as well as park supporters from across the country.

A total of 157 bipartisan members of the U.S. House and Senate signed our letter to Interior Sec. Doug Burgum urging him to reject the proposal, along with 61 members of the California State Legislature signing a separate NPCA letter to him. Nearly 10,000 people quickly signed our action alert, also urging Sec. Burgum to reject the proposal.

What can people do?

Anyone interested in helping NPCA speak out against this proposal may sign our national letter to Sec. Burgum. You can also help by reaching out to your members of Congress and educate others about this issue.