Congress of the United States Washington, DE 20515 June 30, 2017 The Honorable Ryan Zinke Secretary c/o Mr. Micah Chambers Acting Director, Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs U.S. Department of Interior 1849 C Street, NW Washington, DC 20240 Dear Secretary Zinke: ‘We write in response to your request for congressional input on 27 different land and marine monuments under your initial review as a result of President Trump's Executive Order (EO) 13792 issued on April 26, 2017. As you know, the EO directed you to provide a thorough review of national monuments created under the Antiquities Act — particularly those created since January 1, 1996 that are larger than 100,000 acres in size and/or that lacked sufficient public outreach and coordination, Over the past 20 years, presidents from both sides of the aisle have used the stroke of a pen to unilaterally lock up hundreds of millions of acres using the oft-abused Antiquities Act. As with many laws, the Antiquities Act originated with good intentions; however, it has transformed into a tyrannical tool that presidents have manipulated to exercise unfettered land grabs to the detriment of state and local interests. It should come as no surprise that of those 27 designations and 773.8 million acres under review, 14 monuments and more than 553.4 million acres were withdrawn by the Obama Administration, In fact, President Obama abused the Antiquities Act more than any other president in history, designating ot expanding 34 national monuments and locking-up 553.6 million acres of total land and water. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, past presidents have used this outdated authority to unilaterally designate 157 national monuments comprising “approximately 774 million acres, or about 92% of all monument acreage proclaimed since enactment of the Antiquities Act.”' The rest of the federal estate includes another 640 million acres. This Antiquities Act was intended to protect prehistoric Indian ruins and artifacts on federal lands in the West and includes language to limit monument designations under this law to “the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects.” Compared to the carly application of the Antiquities Act, where the average size of a national monument was 422 acres, it became commonplace for President Obama’s designated monuments to exceed one million acres in size. * Congressional Research Service, “Executive Order for Review of National Monuments”, May 2017. * httos://fas.orz/sep/ers/misc/R42346.odt 1Misuse of this outdated 1906 Act has jeopardized the daily activities, livelihoods and traditions of local communities. National monument designations more often than not severely impair energy development, water rights, wildfire prevention efforts, grazing rights and other vital land ‘management activities. These massive declarations have also resulted in restrictive land-use regulations that have limited hunting, fishing, Off Highway Vehicle (OHV) use and other recreational activities. By going back to the drawing board and coordinating with state and local stakeholders, the Department of the Interior (DOI) has an excellent opportunity to ensure communities are not harmed by the executive overreach of previous presidents and that these designations follow the spirit and letter of the law. While a precious few monuments currently included in your review reflect the judicious application of the Antiquities Act, far too many represent egregious overreach and legacy building efforts that catered to out-of-state special-interest groups and in one case, a blatant example of pay-to-play politics. ‘Your analysis is important to so many of our constituents throughout the country who share our concems. We are encouraged by your dedication and commitment to ensuring proper application of the Antiquities Act and prioritization of local coordination, and are pleased to provide the following analysis of the 27 monuments currently under your review. Comments on National Monuments Under Initial Review Basin and Range, Nevada Designated in 2015, the Basin and Range National Monument is larger than the state of Rhode Island at 704,000 acres, and was a personal favor to then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid. According to a former Obama adviser, “it is only due to Harry Reid that [Basin and Range] is getting done.”? As with many states in the West, the federal government already owns more than 80 percent of Nevada's land. However, the vast majority of that land belongs to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and supports a multiple-use management plan. The designation of monuments like the Basin and Range wall off lands crucial to recreation, grazing and resource development. ‘The Nevada Farm Bureau (NVFB) expressed concerns that “the designation will make those preservation efforts more difficult and will negatively affect local ranchers who diligently conserve the land while feeding our growing population... This decision eliminated local input of those individuals who are * inttos://wwrw.washingtonpost.com/politics/with-obarnas-help-harry-reid-leaving-an-indelible-mark.in-the- nevada-desert/2015/07/07/ -11¢5-aeb9-a411984¢9d55_story.htmi2utm_term=.f0ba83cd7988 2rectly affected by the designation and who possess the expertise to make decisions about lands in Nevada." Nye County Commissioner Lorinda Wichman called the monument “an excellent example of hypocrisy” noting that it was Senator Reid “that insisted we must have a consent-based location for the nation’s spent nuclear fuel and it was our former senior senator that gifted us with a monster of a monument without consent.” Similarly, Lincoln County Commission Chair Kevin Phillips called the monument “disgusting... loathsome... illegal... [and] unfair,” and stated that the county had fought the monument for years. The designation does not meet the letter or intent of the Antiquities Act, which specifically requires national monuments to protect objects of antiquity. The City, one of the most prominent “objects” in the monument, is a modem art installation on a mile and ahalf stretch of private land.” Additional antiquities include petroglyphs that already receive protection under the National Register of Historic Places and as Wilderness Areas.’ These areas, which are already protected, are only a few acres and hardly warrant 700,000 acre monument. Recommendation: We recommend the Basin and Range National Monument be “confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected,” approximately 2,500 acres in our estimation, in coordination with state and local stakeholders. Bears Ears, Utah As the final hours of the Obama Administration wound down, monument designations ramped up. President Obama designated the Bears Ears National Monument (BENM), spanning 1.3 million acres on December 28, 2016 despite vehement opposition to the ‘monument by tribal, local, state and congressional stakeholders. The concept of the ‘monument arose from a brain-trust meeting of environmental groups in San Francisco. Knowing that there could be strong tribal opposition to a monument in southeastern Utah, stopped using a tribal name for the initiative, instead opting for “Bears Ears.”” In fact, San Juan County Commissioner Rebecca Benally, a Diné and Navajo woman stated, “Bears Ears National Monument campaign is a cynical political stunt that...will deny ‘grass roots Utah Navajos access to their sacred spiritual grounds. .. Traditional Utah * hup:/Avww lecentral.com/2015/07/17/basin-and-range-declared-national-monument Intp:/ www. lecentral,com/2015/07/1 Tibasin-and-range-declared-national-monument! Nevada Association of Counties, “Designation on National Monuments Using the Antiquities Act”, April 2016. ups/www nvnaco. orgy wp-contentuploads/4-13-16-FINAL-White-Paper- Antiguities-Act-Basin-and-Range| pdf "bia, ° http:conservationlands.org/wp-contentuploady/2015/05/Fall-2014-mecting-minutes.pdf 3Navajo people are not magazine environmentalists but are real stewards of the land ‘whose interests will be destroyed by a [BENM].”"” Further, 109,000 acres of Utah School and Institutional Trust Administration (SITLA) land were locked up.'' SITLA land generates revenue from mineral and energy development, forestry activities and grazing. This revenue is then deposited into the State School Fund that supports the state’s K-12 public education system. Locking up SITLA land has sweeping repercussions for the education system and schoolchildren statewide. Equally troubling, Energydesk estimates that 90% of Bears Ears sits above potential oil and gas leases.'* A locally-driven, comprehensive land management bill, the Utah Public Lands Initiative Partner Act, was introduced last Congress by House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (UT-O1) and Rep. Jason Chaffetz (UT-03) in an effort to build a consensus to solve some of the most challenging land use issues, including protections for certain areas of the Bears Ears region. Instead of negotiating in good faith with Members of Congress, the administration waited until the last moment to designate this national monument, over the strong objections of the Congressional delegation, Despite promising to give the tribes important authorities, such as co-management authority, the executive designation failed to include this provision or engage with the tribes in any meaningful way. Overwhelming opposition to BENM is evidenced by the fact that a mere 17 percent of ‘Utahans favored the designation.'? Further, the entirety of the Utah Congressional delegation voiced unanimous support of the rescission of the monument and called for “the establishment of a new precedent for designating national monuments —one that, corrects past abuses and remains consistent with the original intent of the Antiquities Act.”'4 We concur with this sentiment and encourage this tack as you continue your evaluation of national monuments identified for review. Recommendation: We recommend a total rescission of the Bears Ears National Monument. Berryessa Snow Mountain, California Berryessa Snow Mountain National Monument (Berryessa) designated by President Obama in 2015, consists of 330,780 acres in northern California, President Obama falsely claimed the boundaries of this monument were “confined to the smallest area compatible ® htips://naturalresources house.gov/uploadedfiles/testimony benall * https: //trustlands.utah.gov/109k-acres-of-school-trust-land-captured-in-bears-ears-national-monument/ » hitp://energydesk greenpeace.org/2017/05/10/donald-trump-national-monuments hutp://utahpolicy com/index. shp/features/today-at-utah-policy/9551-poll-only-17-of-utahns-want-obama-to- esignate-bears-ears-as-a-national-monument + httos://www hatch senate,nov/public/index.cfm/2017/5/hatch-congressional-delegation-urge-full-rescssion-of- bears-earsin-letter-to-zinkewith proper care and management of the objects to be protected.” We disagree with that claim, According to a column in the Lake Berryessa News, “The original proposal for some form of federal designation for a small part of Northern California ballooned into an attempt to create a large conglomerate National Conservation Area stretching across most of Norther California, When the NCA proposal met strong resistance by local governments and citizens groups, it could not move forward on its own merits. The strategy of the proponents then tuned to having President Obama create a National Monument in the final days of his presidency.”"* The Lake Berryessa Chamber of Commerce voted to oppose the creation of this, ‘monument. Chamber President Craig Morton stated, “It is a geographically and ecologically incoherent patchwork of federal parcels. Lake Berryessa is not even ‘geographically connected on the map to the rest of the proposed National Monument, which stretches far into Northem California, The eastern boundary of the map is coincident with the borders of Glenn and Colusa counties. The reason is political, not ‘ecological.”"* This misguided effort was pushed by extremist special-interest groups and does not warrant national monument status. ' Recommendation: We recommend a total rescission of the Berryessa National Monument. Canyons of the Ancients, Colorado Designated by President Clinton in 2000, Canyons of the Ancients (Canyons) is an example of the judicious and restrained application of the Antiquities Act. Canyons has and extremely high density of archeological sites with roughly 6,000 sites already recorded, and an estimated total of 20,000-30,000 sites within the 175,160-acre ‘monument, According to BLM, “lands within and around the Monument have been used or inhabited by humans, including the Northem Ancestral Puebloan culture, for 10,000 years, and continue to be used by humans today. Historic uses of the Monument include recreation, hunting, livestock grazing and energy development.”"* On May 23, 2017, Senator Cory Gardner (R-CO) and Congressman Scott Tipton (CO-03) sent you a letter regarding the monument stating, “Any review of Canyons should conclude that no changes to the designation are necessary." We coneur with their assessment and encourage the preservation of Canyons of the Ancients as designated by 1; httoiflakeberryessanews.com/berryessa-snow-mountain. html * htto-/Awew.dailydemocrat.com/article/Z2/20150114/NEWS/150117514 hep://wwn sierraclub.org/redwood/bern * hetos://wemw.blm zov/programs/national-conservatir **http://westerncaucus house.gov/sites/westerncaucus.house.gov/files/Gardner%20%20Tipton Canyons%200/%2 (othes:20Ancients.pafPresident Clinton. Further, we applaud the proper application of the Antiquities Act in designating the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the object. to be protected. Recommendation: We recommend no changes to the boundaries of the monument. Carrizo Plain, California In 1988, BLM, the California Department of Game and Fish, and the Nature Conservancy purchased 82,000 acres of land to preserve the area known as Carrizo Plain and in 1996 formed a joint initiative called the Carrizo Plain Natural Area Plan. Eight days before the end of his administration, President Clinton designated 204,107 acres of land as the Carrizo Plain National Monument (CPNM). Despite bipartisan legislation to protect and preserve the plan in coordination with local stakeholders”, President Clinton tuned to the Antiquities Act in an effort to block any oil and gas exploration, once again using the stroke of a pen to unilaterally cut Congress and the will of the people out of the conversation. ‘The nonpartisan Energy Information Administration estimates that more than a quarter of the 204,107-acre monument sits above rich fossil fuel basins.! BLM estimated in 2010 that there were 45 oil wells within the monument, 15 wells were actively in production and that giant fields with billions of barrels of reserves surround the monument.” Recommendation: We recommend the reduction of the Carrizo Plain National ‘Monument consistent with the original Carrizo Plain Natural Area Plan and ‘confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected” in coordination with state and local stakeholders. Cascade Siskiyou, Oregon * hups: During the waning days of his administration, President Obama expanded the Cascade Siskiyou National Monument (CSNM) by 47,624 acres. The original monument unilaterally designated by President Clinton comprised 52,000 acres, allowed for grazing leases to be retired and prohibited vegetative management as well as timber harvesting, ‘The American Forest Resource Council and BLM identified the lands within the CSNM expansion as being at high risk for wildfire.” Despite these facts and other science-based pleas not to designate more land within the region as a national monument, President /wwnw.congress gov/bill/106th-congress/house- bill/17512q=86789%22search¥s22%3A%56%22IoIs#capps%22%SD%7D hte 2 hy * https: /eneraydesk.greenpeace.org/2017/05/10/donald-trump-national-monuments; \wouw npshistory.com/ publications/blm/carrizo-plain/rod-rmp-2010.0df naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedtiles/american forest resource council letter.pdf 6Obama placed legacy-building above the safety of communities and forests when expanding CSNM. Natural Resources Chaitman Rob Bishop aptly noted that “The local communities did not vote for this and do not support it. When they fought to prevent it, the president looked the other way. He didn’t listen or care. It’s clear this decision was self-serving. It was ‘made to dignify national special interests rather than the people impacted. Our committee will fight to make local voices heard and undo the damage created by the president’s unrelenting abuse of power.”* ‘This unilateral designation took millions of acres of board feet that had already gone through the environmental process out of production and is already causing significant harm to communities in Oregon. In fact, 18 counties filed a lawsuit as a result of President Obama’s expansion. “Douglas County stands to lose the most. That’s because the county takes the biggest share of receipts from timber harvested on O&C timberlands, and the monument’s expanded boundaries swallow up about 40,000 acres of those lands, Because it’s a national monument — managed much like a national park — the forests on those lands would be locked up and unavailable for timber harvests... Douglas County Commissioner Tim Freeman said a rough estimate is that those lands could have brought $2.5 million a year into the county’s general fund. That’s more than the annual cost of the library system which is about to shut down for lack of funds.””* Chairman Bishop and the Members of Congress who represent the area in question predicted this occurrence and sent a letter to President Obama urging him not to expand CSNM warning of the devastating impacts a designation would have on forest health and ‘water abundance.”° This plea that was arrogantly ignored. Rep. Greg Walden (OR-02) put out a strong statement denouncing President Obama's action stating, “The outgoing administration is locking up more of our public lands through a process that cut out many in the surrounding communities. [ will work with the ‘Trump Administration to do what we can to rol] back this midnight expansion.””” In addition, we believe the administration also ignored compelling evidence that this designation was illegal and ignored the will and intent of Congress by violating the Oregon and California Revested Lands Sustained Yield Management Act. According to a 1940 opinion from DOI Solicitor General Nathan R. Margold, “There can be no doubt that the administration of the lands for national monument purposes would be inconsistent with the utilization of the O&C lands as directed by Congress. It is well settled that where Congress has set aside lands for a specific purpose the President is * huips://naturalresources house.gov/newsroom /documentsingle.aspx?DocumentiD=401463 * httpi//wmw.nrtoday.com/news/government/douglas county government/o-c-counties-sue-feds-over-cascade- iskiyou-monument-exnansion/article b924d117-5783-546a-abcf-9095e96178°8,html hetpsi//naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/letter_to_wh_natlmonument_designation.pdf * http://www.opb.org/news/article/cascade-siskiyou-mé i-expansion-obamaywithout authority to reserve lands for another purpose inconsistent with that specified by Congress.””* Congress specifically mandated that these lands be used for sustained yield and permanent forest production and the Department should rescind any designation that conflicts with the clear intent of Congress. Recommendation: We recommend a complete rescission of the Clinton-era and Obama- era Cascade Siskiyou National Monument designations. Craters of the Moon, Idaho ‘The Craters of the Moon National Monument was first established by Presidential Proclamation in 1924 and originally comprised 54,000 acres. Following the recommendation of then Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt, President Clinton expanded the boundaries of the monument to comprise a total acreage of 661,287 acres in 2000. This expansion was met with resistance from Members of Congress. “Babbitt's efforts to solicit public input as a pale imitation of the public comment collected before Congress makes land-use decisions. Three public meetings that Babbitt held in Idaho to gather opinions about expanding Craters of the Moon National Monument were the equivalent of "a drive-by shooting,” Senator Craig said. In speech on the House floor on June 15, 2000, Rep. Mike Simpson (ID-02) stated, “What I am opposed to is a process by which any administration, Republican or Democrat administration, can ignore the input of local- and State- and Federal-elected officials and Congress can ignore its constitutional responsibility to dictate land management policies. It is a process that is the problem here.”* Rep. Simpson went on to state, “Mr. Chairman, I have requested information on the designation... They are supposed to use the least amount of land to protect this area, The Secretary has not sent me information on that. Thirdly, the area being protected is supposed to be of some geological scientific or historic nature. The Secretary has not told me what the nature that he is trying to preserve of this area is. But fourthly, the most important thing is the area is supposed to be under some threat, some imminent threat, So far, the Secretary has refused to tell me what the imminent threat is in this area, Mr, Chairman, this is not pristine habitat or natural forests or salmon habitat or anything like that. What itis is lava rocks. It is under no threat currently, and the Secretary refuses to acknowledge that.” *” ® Department of the Interior Solicitor General Nathan R. Margold, M. 30506, 03/09/40, pgs. 3-4 ® Congressional Record of the House, June 15, 2000. * Ibid,Recommendation: We recommend a reduction of the Craters of the Moon National Monument so that the monument is “confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected” in coordination with state and local stakeholders. Giant Sequoia, California ‘The unique beauty of the Sierra and Sequoia National Forests is undeniable. However, despite lacking local and congressional support, President Clinton designated the 327,760-acre Giant Sequoia National Monument in 2000, While well intentioned, this designation had the adverse effect of putting the Giant Sequoia groves in imminent risk of destruction due to catastrophic wildfire as a result of the lack of active management in the surrounding forest. In order to maintain the health and safety of this forest, not to mention its scenic and historic beauty, responsible, active forest management must be a priority. In Clinton’s Presidential Proclamation, the monument was subject to valid existing rights and authorized the removal of trees for the purposes of “ecological restoration and maintenance or public safety.”*' Since that time, frivolous lawsuits have prevented such maintenance of the forest and legislation to pursue such endeavors has stalled.°*"* In order to preserve the Sierra and National Forests and the Giant Sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum) groves, it is essential that active management take place in the surrounding forest to reduce hazardous fuels and the risk of catastrophic wildfire. Recommendation: We recommend a reduction of the Giant Sequoia National Monument so that the monument is “confined to the smallest area compatible with proper eare and management of the objects to be protected” in coordination with state and local stakeholders. Further, any review ought to consider and implement policies for active forest management so as to preserve the monument for generations to come. Gold Butte, Nevada In the last month of his administration, President Obama designated 296,937 acres in southeastern Nevada as the Gold Butte National Monument (GBNM) without the support of state or local stakeholders and in opposition to nearly all of Nevada's Congressional delegation. The Presidential Proclamation explicitly banned grazing. > https://wrunw.pp0.gow/fdsys/ke/ER-2000-04-25/pdt/00-10312.pdf * htos:/naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedflles/duysentestimony07.27.05,pdf * httos://www. congress gov/bill/ 03th-congress/house- bil/57607q=9478%622search%22%3A%SB%22%65 C%22GiantsSequola+National+Monument%SC%22%22%SD%7DBtLike the Basin and Range National Monument, this designation came at the urging of former Senator Harry Reid as political retribution to the Bundy family, which once ‘grazed in the area. It is irresponsible for the executive branch to use its power for this purpose, yet nonetheless President Obama designated this area during the waning days of his administration to appease Senator Reid and deliver a strong rebuke to the Bundy family. ‘Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval aptly observed that, “[The monument] bypassed Congress and the public. I believe that our Congressional delegation should have had a primary role in working to build consensus as has been accomplished successfully in the past.” Senator Heller (R-NV) wrote a letter to President Obama informing him of the thoughtful ways in which Nevadans collaborate with state and local governments and stakeholders to develop management plans for their public lands, and urging him not to unilaterally lock up hundreds of thousands of acres with the stroke of a pen.** Unfortunately, this request and many others fell on deaf ears and President Obama created the Gold Butte National Monument. Former Rep. Cresent Hardy (NV-04) stated, “If you want to protect the petroglyphs, and you want to designate that as the monument, that’s what the Antiquities Act was set up to do, is protect the minimum possible footprint of that of what you're trying to designate. Not an extra 300,000 acres on top of the 50-100 acres that you could have protected."** Recommendation: We recommend Gold Butte National Monument be “confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected,” in coordination with state and local stakeholders. Grand Canyon — Parashant, Arizona Designated in 2000, the Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument (GCPNM) designation covers a staggering 1.01 million acres of land in northwestem Arizona. GCPNM is a glaring example of overreach that used the Antiquities Act as a scapegoat. According to a report by the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AZGFD), prior to the designation, BLM provided a map detailing an appropriate boundary for a possible ‘monument. This map “encompassed approximately 570,000 acres. However when [GCPNM] was designated, the size almost doubled.*’ A lack of sufficient public input or coordination with BLM and the massive increase in acreage indicate that the monument https://www.heller.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/¢12324dc-c094-4947-Bf81- a00a6379e27/11172016%20Heller%70L etter %20t0%70P resident%200bama%200n%20National%20Monument% 0Designati...pdf * hitp://vw.pbs.org/newshour/bb/gold-butte-national-monument-controversial-locals "http: //westerncaucus.house.gov/sites/westemcaucus. house.gov/files/National3420Monument%20E0%20AGED 20working9420draft%20final¥%206-1-17%20%283%29 pdf 10does not reflect the “smallest area compatible” and “provides evidence that coordination with affected state and local management agencies was severely lacking,”** Additionally, it appears that then-Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt wielded his position to inflict his own will on the state he once served as governor, albeit for little more than a year. Instead of coordinating with those who knew the area and its needs best, Secretary Babbitt ignored the legislative efforts of Congressman Bob Stump that would have preserved the “native biodiversity and ecological richness... while at the same time increasing public awareness, outdoor recreation use and enjoyment.”*? Equally as important, “[Stump’s bill] preserved the ranching lifestyle and maintains existing, historic and traditional uses of the [Iand].° The bill encompassed the aforementioned 570,000 acres, Further troubling is the disruption to collaborative fish and wildlife management and recreational activities. By locking up 1.01 million acres from collaborative efforts to preserve multiple-use management plans, important stakeholders were cut out of the conversation and have suffered as a result. Additionally, at a time when DOI has a ‘maintenance backlog of roughly $15.4 billion (more than $353.4 million of which belonging to the Grand Canyon National Park alone"'), the designation of a national ‘monument such as GCPNM places an unnecessary and often insurmountable administrative burden on an already stretched agency. Recommendation: We recommend a total rescission of the Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument. Grand Staircase- Escalante, Utah Utah has fallen victim to legacy building and land grabs on a massive scale under both the Clinton and Obama Administrations. In 1996, President Clinton designated 1.7 rillion acres as the Grand Staircase ~ Escalante National Monument (GSENM), blatantly trampling the requirement to designate the “smallest area compatible.” Grazing, mineral royalties and coal reserve leases were jeopardized by this designation, having an extremely costly and detrimental effect on the economy of Utah. According to Demoeratic Carbon County Commissioner John Jones from Utah, when President Clinton failed to engage Utahans, much less give local officials any advance notice in the creation of the monument, he also “deprived the peaple of Utah and the nation of its cleanest low sulfur-high BTU coal supply across the Kaiparowits Plateau.” * bid, * http //westerncaucus.house.gov/sites/westerncaucus.house gov/files/Parshant%20stump%20Testimony.pdf * id, * https://www.nps.gov/subjects/plandesignconstruct/loader cim?csModule-security/getflle& PagelD=5547454 * https://naturalresources house.nov/uploadedfiles/jonestestimony04-16-13.pd1 uu