Trump administration to industry: Come mine and drill our national monuments
Draft management plans for lands illegally cut from Grand Staircase-Escalante, Bears Ears seek widespread resource extraction, minimize protections
Less than nine months ago, in the largest reduction of public lands protections in history, President Trump signed a proclamation attempting to eliminate more than two million acres from Grand Staircase-Escalante and Bears Ears National Monuments in Utah. Now, the administration’s decision is mired in litigation. Legal scholars agree the president does not have the authority to eliminate or dramatically shrink national monuments. Remarkably, instead of waiting for lawsuits to be resolved, Trump’s Interior Department has raced forward with plans to throw open the lands carved from these monuments to mining and drilling.
Today, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) released two draft management plans — one for the more than 880,000 acres eliminated from Grand Staircase-Escalante and one for the 200,000 acres remaining in Bears Ears. A quick examination confirms the worst fears of many — instead of conserving these scenic and sacred landscapes, the Trump administration will prioritize resource extraction.
Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument
Established in 1996, Grand-Staircase-Escalante was protected for its world-class fossil beds, unique geologic features, and vast tracts of red rock wilderness. Under the BLM’s proposed management plan, the 880,000 acres carved from the monument — nearly half of its original size — would be managed primarily for resource extraction. Additionally, 1,610 acres of public land formerly inside the monument could be auctioned off to private interests.
Tellingly, included in the released documents is a 100-page study of mineral potential in the lands cut from Grand Staircase, requested by the BLM. Conducted by the Utah Geological Survey, the study painstakingly details the availability of a broad range of minerals, including coal, oil, tar sands, uranium, sand, and gravel. Although Interior Secretary Zinke has repeatedly said his quest to cut monuments was not about resource extraction, this study, these plans, and recently released documents make clear that extraction was the plan all along.
Of the four courses of action included in the draft management plan, the agency is proposing to adopt the most industry-friendly option. Here’s how the BLM describes their own preferred alternative in its required environmental impact statement:
“Alternative D emphasizes resource uses and reduces constraints while ensuring the proper care and management of monument objects and maintaining compliance with existing laws and regulations designed to protect physical, biological, cultural, and visual resources. Compared to other alternatives, Alternative D conserves the least land area for physical, biological, and cultural resources; designates no Areas of Critical Environmental Concern or Special Recreation Management Areas; and is the least restrictive to energy and mineral development.”
Translation — the agency’s prefered alternative maximizes land available for development and minimizes protections for physical, biological, and cultural resources. Specifically, the plan would allow increased commercial logging and open more than 650,000 acres for oil, gas, and coal leasing.
The BLM is aware that this plan will have major impacts. In their executive summary, they discuss the impacts to cultural and environmental resources in the planning area (KEPA), noting:
“Alternative D has the least amount of special designations and allocations that would protect or maintain resource values and designates no Areas of Critical Environmental Concern in KEPA, does not specifically manage lands for wilderness characteristics, and does not designate any Special Recreation Management Areas for targeted recreational opportunities. Based on the increased potential for development and resource use, especially in KEPA, Alternative D is most likely to increase the potential for management conflicts and associated impacts on lands adjacent to the Planning Area.”
In a table breaking down their options, BLM further acknowledges the plan would have negative impacts on fish and wildlife habitat, increase the likelihood of vandalism and unlawful collecting of paleontological resources, increase damage to critical soil crusts that prevent erosion, impact dark night skies with increased light pollution, and increase the potential for the spread of invasive species.
Bears Ears National Monument
Established in 2016, Bears Ears protects a landscape of ridges and canyons filled with ruins, rock art, and cultural sites that is sacred to numerous Native American tribes. In his proclamation, President Trump carved out more than 85 percent of this national monument, leaving just 200,000 acres.
The management plan proposal for Bears Ears suggests the 1.15 million acres cut from the monument will simply revert to the old plans under which they were managed. Notably, it is under these old management plans that the region faced looting, vandalism, and development pressures, convincing President Obama to designate Bears Ears a national monument.
For the acres remaining in two new, much smaller, national monuments, the BLM proposes to continue managing for multiple uses and maintaining recreation levels, while attempting to protect “Monument objects and values.”
It is worth noting that these proposed management plans were not made with any meaningful consultation from Native American tribes. While the BLM invited more than 30 tribes and pueblos to participate in the process, all of them declined. This should come as no surprise to the administration. After all, these tribes advocated for President Obama to establish Bears Ears National Monument, demanded that President Trump leave it intact, and many are now suing the administration over its order to shrink the monument. In eliminating vast swaths of Bears Ears, much of their input was already rejected.
Now, the BLM is opening a 90-day comment period, asking the public to comment on how these two areas should be managed. This request for public input is a sham and there’s little doubt the American public is prepared to let the Trump administration know as much. When the administration asked Americans whether they should alter national monuments during a comment period last year, more than 2.8 million — more than 99 percent of comments submitted — asked them to leave our national monuments alone.
Just as it has all along, this Interior Department will ignore Americans who want to see these monumental landscapes protected, and bulldoze its way forward with plans to throw open the gates for more mining, logging, and drilling.
Luckily, the courts will have the ultimate say.
For more information, sign up for Look West to get daily public lands and energy news sent to your inbox, or subscribe to Go West, Young Podcast.
