Donald Trump is going to test his magical ability to shrink land.
CNN reports the president has signed an executive order that may have remarkable effects on dozens of national monuments. The report explained the order essentially "reviews enforcement of the law that gives him power to designate lands as national monuments."
The move is championed as a way to give power to the states as pertains to its coveted land and prized monuments - calling into question the Antiquities Act that has allowed presidents to designate various parcels for the national interest.
Of course, this has allowed the government to grow its complement of federally protected land. Trump, through this order, is attempting to shrink that land by way of the review.
The report explains the move puts an extensive number of federally recognized land at stake. This includes land designated from September 1996: "24 national monuments, including Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument, Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument and Basin and Range National Monument, as well as a host of Pacific Ocean monuments, including the World War II Valor in the Pacific National Monument."
ABC News quotes the president who states the following in the order: "The Antiquities Act does not give the federal government unlimited power to lock up millions of acres of land and water."
Trump-nominated Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke championed the order: "We feel that the public, the people that monuments affect, should be considered and that is why the President is asking for a review of the monuments designated in the last 20 years."
The impetus and debate over the executive order can be whittled down to one concentrated area: Bears Ears National Monument.
[READMORE]READ MORE: Avoid the Crowds at These Hidden Spots in US National Parks [/READMORE]
CNN highlights this particular 1.3-million-acre section of land in Utah to illustrate the polarizing issues at stake.
On one side, there are those who believe past presidents, including Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama, have overstepped their respective authority in grabbing land under the Antiquities Act - usurping the state's ability to govern its own land.
Trump added the move is meant, "to end another egregious abuse of federal power and to give that power back to the states and to the people where it belongs."
Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), in an opinion piece posted at The Washington Post, condemned the past administration, particularly in regards to Bears Ears: "By leveraging his authority under the Antiquities Act, Obama seized millions of acres of public land through his Bears Ears monument designation, violating both the spirit, and arguably, the letter of the law. Such actions represent the height of executive hubris."
The other side views Trump's order as a way to allow energy companies to pillage the area for natural resources.
CNN notes this order is simply a review of the process, and any change in designation will happen at a later date.
It still has its opponents, such as Rose Marcario, president and CEO of Patagonia: "Bears Ears and other national monuments were designated after significant community input because they are a critical part of our national heritage and have exceptional ecological characteristics worth protecting for future generations. It's extremely disturbing to see the Trump administration apparently laying the groundwork to remove protections on our public lands."
The most obvious danger for activists is that from mining companies itching to take advantage of the area rich in resources.
CNN notes: "EOG Resources, a Texas-based company, was recently approved to drill near Bears Ears."
If the land falls out of federal protection it becomes far easier for EOG Resources and other firms to lock up contracts for the area. Yet, if the locals want the economic infusion, then so be it. Right?
Well, opponents contend that it's far more lucrative for tourism to be allowed to boom, infusing a relatively impoverished area with visitor's cash.
CNN quotes Ashley Korenblat from Public Land Solutions - a notably pro-Federal group. Korenblat states: "We are confident that a fact-based review of the national parks and public lands protected as monuments by the Antiquities Act will show year-over-year economic growth."
The LA Times cites an email from the executive director of the Center for Western Priorities, Jennifer Rokala: "An executive order that undermines national monuments is not only an attack on America's heritage and history, it's an attack on the millions of jobs and hundreds of billions of dollars that depend on our parks, monuments, and other public land."
Rokala also noted a study from the Outdoor Industry Association that contends the outdoor economy amounts to "$900 billion in annual spending."
Another intriguing note is how this particular policy represents a shift for not only Trump but Interior Secretary Zinke.
During confirmation, Zinke is quoted as stating: "I am absolutely against transfer and sale of public lands. I can't be more clear,"
Trump, pressed on the prospect of taking back land back in January 2015, had similar views: "I don't like the idea because I want to keep the lands great."
This isn't the only time Trump has infused the administration with a bit of cognitive dissonance.
Back in April, the president vowed to donate his salary for the first quarter of the year to the National Park Service, $78,333.32. As noted at the time, this was a head-scratching move as the NPS continues to face Trump cuts that amount to $1.5 billion.
While lands are safe, it may only be for the duration of a review process. Proponents will ballyhoo state's rights and the will of its people to make money and increase jobs.
Opponents will offer the move is nothing more than a way to secure mining contracts at the behest of a lucrative tourism industry.
For the latest travel news, updates and deals, subscribe to the daily TravelPulse newsletter.
Topics From This Article to Explore
