Latest news with #TheWildernessSociety
E&E News
22-07-2025
- Politics
- E&E News
Conservationists sound alarm over spending bill's impact on Utah monument
Nearly 900,000 acres of public lands in Utah could be left in an administrative limbo unless House lawmakers strike language from the annual Interior Department appropriations bill, conservationists say. More than 60 organizations — including the Conservation Lands Foundation, Grand Canyon Trust, Grand Staircase Escalante Partners, New Mexico Wildlife Federation, The Wilderness Society and the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance — signed onto a Monday letter asking House leaders to remove a provision targeting the Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument from the fiscal 2026 spending bill. 'Among the most beloved of the National Conservation Lands, Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah is the first and largest national monument entrusted to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to conserve, restore, and protect,' the groups wrote in the letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), and Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) and ranking member Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.). Advertisement The current spending bill would direct BLM to follow a 2020 Trump administration land-use plan for the monument in southwestern Utah.
24-06-2025
- Politics
Environmental advocates sound alarm over Trump admin's plan to repeal forest protections
The Trump administration's move to end protections for 58 million acres of national forests will open up the federal lands to immense destruction, according to environmental advocates. On Monday, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins announced that the "Roadless Rule," enacted in 2001 to preserve federal forestlands, would be repealed. The rule establishes prohibitions on road construction, road reconstruction and timber harvesting on 58.5 million acres of roadless areas throughout the National Forest System -- about a third of the total land within the system, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The regulation was first proposed by the Clinton administration in 1999 and was signed by President Bill Clinton before he left office in 2001, after years of formulation and public comment, resulting in broad support. But Rollins claimed the regulation was "outdated" and "overly restrictive." "This outdated administrative rule contradicts the will of Congress and goes against the mandate of the USDA Forest Service to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the nation's forests and grasslands," the USDA said in a press release on Monday. "Rescinding this rule will remove prohibitions on road construction, reconstruction, and timber harvest on nearly 59 million acres of the National Forest System, allowing for fire prevention and responsible timber production." The administrative rule has resulted in nearly 60% of forest service land in Utah being restricted from road development and unable to be managed for fire risk, according to the USDA. In Montana, 58% of federal forest land is restricted, and about 92% of Alaska's Tongass National Forest, the USDA said. About 28 million acres of federal forest that fall under the Roadless Rule are at "high or very high risk" of wildfires, the USDA said. But environmental advocates are sounding the alarm at the high level of damage that could be done to federal wildlands should the Roadless Rule be walked back, and accused the Trump administration of showing preference to private industry over environmental protections. "Our nation's public forests belong to all of us, but the Trump Administration is treating them as property for the private industry to clearcut, drill and profit," Josh Hicks, conservation campaigns director at The Wilderness Society, said in a statement to ABC News. Revoking the Roadless Rule could actually cause more fires because ignitions are more likely in roaded landscapes, said Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife and oceans at Earthjustice. Wildfires are nearly four times more likely to start in forest areas that have roads, in comparison with roadless areas, according to a recent analysis by The Wilderness Society, which analyzed wildfire data from 1992 to 2024. The repeal also lays the groundwork for a major increase in industrial logging across federal forests, Caputo said in a statement to ABC News. "The Trump administration now wants to throw these forest protections overboard so the timber industry can make huge money from unrestrained logging," Caputo said. The Roadless Rule has been "remarkably successful" in protecting the nation's forest from destructive energy development, mining, logging and road building, Hicks said. The rule has also helped to safeguard the lands used for outdoor recreation, habitat for wildlife and protections for clean drinking water that flows through the forest streams, Hicks said. "Any attempt to revoke it is an attack on the air and water we breath and drink, abundant recreational opportunities which millions of people enjoy each year, havens for wildlife and critical buffers for communities threatened by increasingly severe wildfire seasons," Hicks said. Roadless areas are sources of clean water and some of the best hunting and fishing opportunities on the planet, Chris Wood, President and CEO of Trout Unlimited, an environmental organization focusing on the care and recovery of rivers, said in a statement to ABC News. "Gifford Pinchot, the first chief of the Forest Service, once described conservation as 'the application of common sense to common problems for the common good,'" Wood said. "Let's hope common sense prevails and the Administration reconsiders its proposal." Vera Smith, director of the national forests and public lands program at Defenders of Wildlife, detailed the repeal as "taking a blowtorch" to the landmark rule that has shielded nearly 60 million acres of national forests from the serious impacts of development. "America's roadless forests are crucial strongholds for wildlife, including at-risk species that are battling extinction," Smith said. "Sec. Rollins' boon to industry is yet another punishing blow to the American people and the wildlife and wild places we all hold dear." The repeal of the Roadless Rule aligns with Trump's deregulation agenda, according to the USDA. The action will also allow more decisions to be made at the local level, the USDA said. In March, Trump announced an executive order for the expansion of timber production in the U.S., stating that the production of timber is "essential" for crucial activities such as construction and energy production. "Once again, President Trump is removing absurd obstacles to common sense management of our natural resources by rescinding the overly restrictive roadless rule," Rollins said. "This move opens a new era of consistency and sustainability for our nation's forests. It is abundantly clear that properly managing our forests preserves them from devastating fires and allows future generations of Americans to enjoy and reap the benefits of this great land." A formal notice of the rollback will be issued in the coming weeks, according to the U.S. Forest Service. The move will be met with resistance by environmental organizations. "We will stand for America's national forests and the wildlife that depend on them," Caputo said. "If the Trump administration actually revokes the roadless rule, we'll see them in court."
Axios
24-06-2025
- Politics
- Axios
Controversial land bill faces rewrite after public backlash
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) says he's revising a proposal to sell millions of acres of public land to housing developers after backlash from outdoor rec enthusiasts, Axios' Erin Alberty reports. State of play: Across California, land around Mount Shasta, Big Sur, Mendocino, the Eastern Sierra and along the Pacific Crest Trail could be eligible for sale under the current draft, according to a recent analysis by a conservation nonprofit. Why it matters: Privatizing that land could limit access to popular hiking, camping and picnic areas near destinations frequented by San Franciscans, including around Yosemite National Park and Lake Tahoe, The Wilderness Society found. The big picture: The Republican-led proposal would require the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management to put up to 3.3 million acres on the market for housing development. The bill's focus is on parcels outside of protected lands like national parks, monuments and wilderness areas — which are exempt — but near roads and other development deemed suitable by local and state lawmakers. More than 250 million acres across 11 Western states could be eligible for sale. Caveat: National parks, monuments, recreation areas and other federally protected lands would be excluded. The intrigue: The proposal has sparked outrage in longtime Republican strongholds in rural parts of the state. Outdoor writer Todd Tanner has long warned of a conservative contradiction — a love for public land alongside support for a party that has threatened to sell it, SFGATE reports. Follow the money: Most proceeds from the potential sale of those public lands — projected to bring in between $5 billion and $10 billion over the next decade — would go to the U.S. Treasury. Just 5% would go to local governments. What they're saying:"If Republicans have their way, we will never get our public lands back once they are privatized," Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said in a statement to Axios. What we're watching: Whether a revised proposal could include protections for long-used public trails for hiking and skiing access.
The Hill
19-06-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Proposed sale of millions of acres of public land under GOP budget bill prompts backlash
Related video above: Trump and Musk feud continues over 'Big, Beautiful bill' (NEXSTAR) – Over 2 million acres of public land would go up for sale across 11 states under the current version of the Republican budget bill – a proposal that has met criticism from conservationists, hunting groups, local politicians and even some conservatives. Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee, who chairs the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, included the sale of federal lands – a longtime ambition of Western conservatives to cede lands to local control – in a draft provision of the so-called 'One Big Beautiful Bill.' Lee has defended the plan as a way to boost domestic energy production, create new revenue streams and increase housing. The Republican said in a video released by his office that the sales would not include national parks, national monuments or wilderness. They would instead target 'isolated parcels' that could be used for housing or infrastructure, he said. 'Washington has proven time and again it can't manage this land. This bill puts it in better hands,' Lee said last Thursday. Lee has struggled to convince some members of his own party, however, and a similar measure was rejected by the House. Montana Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke led an effort to strip land sales out of the House version, saying he was a 'hard no' on similar measures. Montana was removed from the proposal over the protests of Zinke and other local officials. An analysis by The Wilderness Society found that more than 250 million acres currently under the Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service are at risk of sale. Lee's proposal does not specify what properties would be sold. It directs the secretaries of interior and agriculture to sell or transfer at least 0.5% and up to 0.75% of U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management holdings. That equals at least 2.1 million acres (868,000 hectares) and up to 3.2 million acres (1.3 million hectares). The states potentially affected by the proposal are Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming. The Wilderness Society and other conservation groups have reacted with outrage, saying it would set a precedent to fast-track the handover of cherished lands to developers. 'Shoving the sale of public lands back into the budget reconciliation bill, all to fund tax cuts for the wealthy, is a betrayal of future generations and folks on both sides of the aisle,' said Michael Carroll with The Wilderness Society. Others have expressed doubt that the lands potentially up for sale would ever be suitable for housing development. Some of the parcels up for sale in Utah and Nevada under the House proposal were far from developed areas. 'I don't think it's clear that we would even get substantial housing as a result of this,' Sen. Martin Heinrich, the ranking Democrat on the energy committee, said of the Senate version. 'What I know would happen is people would lose access to places they know and care about and that drive our Western economies.' Benji Backer, author of 'The Conservative Environmentalist,' has accused Sen. Lee on social media of 'secretly trying to sell' America's public land for development. 'I've never seen so many conservatives AND liberals stand together as I've seen in opposition of this proposed mass sale of public lands,' Backer posted on X. 'Conservation of our nation's beauty is a deeply patriotic and nonpartisan value.' An April poll sponsored by the Trust for Public and and conducted by YouGov found that, of the 4,000 Americans surveyed, 71% opposed the sale of public land. The opposition was bipartisan: 61% were Trump voters in 2024, and 85% Harris voters. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Yahoo
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump can revoke national monument designations, Justice Department says
President Donald Trump has broad authority to revoke protected land designated as national monuments by past presidents, the Justice Department said in a new legal opinion. The May 27 legal opinion from the Justice Department found that presidents can move broadly to cancel national monuments, challenging a 1938 determination saying monuments created under the Antiquities Act cannot be rescinded and removed from protection. The memo could serve as a legal basis to attempt to withdraw vast amounts of land from protected status. Trump's administration wants to prioritize fossil fuel and energy development, such as drilling for oil and gas and mining for coal and critical minerals, including on federal lands. 'For the Antiquities Act, the power to declare carries with it the power to revoke,' the Justice Department memo states. 'If the President can declare that his predecessor was wrong regarding the value of preserving one such object on a given parcel, there is nothing preventing him from declaring that his predecessor was wrong about all such objects on a given parcel.' The DOJ memo mentioned two California national monuments designated by former President Joe Biden shortly before leaving office. In Trump's first term, the president shrank the size of two national monuments in Utah, Bears Ears and Grand Staircase Escalante, and reduced the size of a national marine monument in the Atlantic Ocean. Biden restored the three areas upon taking office and designated or expanded 12 national monuments during his term. Environmental groups blasted the DOJ opinion. 'This opinion flies in the face of a century of interpretation of the Antiquities Act,' Axie Navas, designations director of conservation programs and policy at The Wilderness Society, said in a statement. 'Americans overwhelmingly support our public lands and oppose seeing them dismantled or destroyed.'
