[ { "site_name": "Arctic National Wildlife Refuge \u2014 Coastal Plain", "slug": "arctic-refuge", "location": "Northeastern Alaska", "designation_type": "National Wildlife Refuge (Coastal Plain oil and gas leasing program)", "governing_agency": "U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (refuge); Bureau of Land Management (leasing program)", "threat_category": "Oil and gas drilling \u2014 Coastal Plain lease sales", "status": "Active \u2014 first of four mandated lease sales completed", "coordinates": [ 69.5, -143.0 ], "last_verified": "2026-08-12", "maintainer": "Alicen M.", "one_line_summary": "First of four mandatory Coastal Plain lease sales held June 2026; major oil companies declined to bid.", "sections": { "history": "The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge spans more than 19 million acres of wilderness in\nnortheastern Alaska, including some of the most undeveloped land in the United States, with no\nroads, marked trails, or campgrounds. In 1960, the Department of the Interior designated 9.8\nmillion acres of the area as the Arctic National Wildlife Range. A 1980 federal law (ANILCA)\nexpanded the refuge and prohibited oil and gas activity in its 1.5-million-acre Coastal Plain\nunless explicitly authorized by Congress. The Coastal Plain provides denning habitat for polar\nbears and calving grounds for the Porcupine caribou herd, and holds significance for the\nGwich'in people, who call it \"the sacred place where life begins.\"\n", "current_threat": "The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act directed the Interior Secretary to hold at least two Coastal\nPlain lease sales within 10 years. A first sale was held in January 2021 under the first Trump\nadministration, yielding leases on 437,804 acres; most bids came from the Alaska Industrial\nDevelopment and Export Authority (AIDEA), a state-established corporation. Biden's Executive\nOrder 13990 paused Coastal Plain activity and Interior later canceled the seven remaining\nleases; a federal court struck down that cancellation in March 2025. The One Big Beautiful Bill\nAct (P.L. 119-21), signed July 2025, mandated four additional lease sales through 2035, each\noffering at least 400,000 acres. In October 2025, Interior reinstated the leasing program\nacross the full 1.56-million-acre Coastal Plain. The first sale under this mandate was held\nJune 5, 2026, offering 58 tracts covering approximately 688,829 acres. All major oil companies\ndeclined to bid; only AIDEA and a small Alaska company, Hex LLC \u2014 neither with Arctic drilling\nexperience \u2014 submitted bids, on five parcels total.\n", "impact_environmental": "**Geology & Land:** The Coastal Plain (the \"1002 Area\") is roughly 1.56 million acres of\nArctic tundra along Alaska's North Slope, underlain by permafrost, with a short growing season\nand extreme seasonal temperature range (average winter lows near -40\u00b0F, summer highs near 50\u00b0F).\n\n**Climate:** Winter temperatures in the Alaska/western Canada Arctic region have already risen\nas much as 7\u00b0F over the past 50 years per available research, with snow-covered area declining\nroughly 10% over the past 30 years \u2014 trends most pronounced in April and May, the exact window\nrelevant to caribou calving and polar bear den emergence. A 25-year USGS research review found\nno statistically significant change in vegetation, soil conditions, or permafrost thaw\nspecifically within the 1002 Area over that period, alongside persistent scientific uncertainty\nabout the longer-term effects of industrial development on the Coastal Plain's wildlife.\nSeparately, oil and gas development in the Arctic broadly is documented to compound climate\nchange through associated greenhouse gas emissions, and Alaska overall is warming roughly four\ntimes faster than the global average, contributing to decreased sea ice, coastal erosion, and\nocean acidification.\n\n**Habitat & Endangered Species:** The Coastal Plain provides calving grounds for the Porcupine\ncaribou herd (nearly 200,000 animals, migrating roughly 1,500 miles annually \u2014 one of the\nlongest land migrations of any animal). It also holds the most significant U.S. denning habitat\nfor polar bears: up to 29 pregnant females den in the Coastal Plain in a given winter, digging\nshelters 7-10 feet into snow drifts, and the area is documented to contain nearly half of all\nidentified mainland polar bear dens; as sea ice has thinned, increasing numbers of polar bears\nden on land rather than ice, raising the relative importance of this specific habitat. Muskoxen\nnumbers in the 1002 Area have already declined per USGS research, and the herd has shown\nvariable use of the calving area over the same period. The plain also supports over 200\nmigratory bird species and up to 300,000 snow geese each fall, plus endangered bowhead whales\nmigrating offshore, which are documented as highly sensitive to industrial disturbance\nincluding potential oil spills.\n\n**Long-Term Effects:** A Canadian Wildlife Service study found 19% higher caribou calf\nmortality in years when snow patterns forced the herd away from its preferred calving grounds \u2014\nillustrating how sensitive calving success is to disturbance or displacement, a relevant\nconsideration for permanent industrial infrastructure sited within that same calving range.\nScientists and Gwich'in leaders have specifically warned that combined climate stress and\nrenewed drilling pressure could threaten the long-term viability of the Porcupine caribou herd\nin a manner comparable to historical bison population collapse.\n", "impact_cultural": "The Coastal Plain holds documented significance for the Gwich'in people's way of life, who have\ndepended on the Porcupine caribou herd for thousands of years and specifically oppose Coastal\nPlain development; the National Wildlife Federation has stated drilling activity threatens\nGwich'in interests alongside wildlife habitat.\n", "impact_economic": "Prior Coastal Plain lease sales have drawn minimal industry interest: the 2021 sale generated\n$14.4 million in high bids across nine tracts (minimum bid $25/acre), and a 2025 sale drew no\nbids at all. The June 2026 sale set minimum bid at $25/acre, rent at $10/acre, and royalty at\n16.67% \u2014 with only 5 of 58 offered tracts drawing any bid, and no major oil company\nparticipating. The lack of major-company participation was cited by conservation and taxpayer\nwatchdog groups as evidence that Arctic Refuge drilling is not a commercially viable response\nto current energy costs, despite ongoing federal outlay to administer four mandated sales\nthrough 2035. A total federal cost of administering the mandated sale program was not\nidentified in current sourcing.\n", "impact_legal": "A lawsuit filed by the Natural Resources Defense Council, Center for Biological Diversity, and\nFriends of the Earth U.S. \u2014 originally filed in 2020 and amended in 2026 \u2014 challenges the\nInterior Department's October 2025 decision to maximize Coastal Plain leasing, and separately\nchallenges the legality of leases AIDEA obtained during the first Trump administration. The\nlawsuit remained active as of this page's last verification.\n", "impact_health": "Not yet documented \u2014 no dedicated human-health impact study specific to Coastal Plain leasing\nwas identified in current sourcing; documented impacts to date are ecological (wildlife) and\nsubsistence-lifestyle-related (Gwich'in) rather than direct physical-health findings.\n", "consultation_status": "Gwich'in leadership has been engaged in opposition advocacy for decades, but a formal,\nproject-specific tribal consultation record for the June 2026 lease sale was not identified in\ncurrent sourcing. The Refuge's cultural framing by the Gwich'in as \"the sacred place where life\nbegins\" is documented, but the government-to-government consultation process status specific to\nthis sale is not yet documented.\n" }, "contractors": [ { "name": "Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA)", "role": "Leaseholder \u2014 state-established public corporation", "responsibility": "Held the high bid on 3 of 5 parcels sold in the June 2026 sale; also held 7 of 9 leases issued in the 2021 sale, covering the majority of leased Coastal Plain acreage to date", "value": "Not yet documented \u2014 AIDEA's specific 2026 bid total not established in current sourcing", "url": "https://earthjustice.org/press/2026/lease-sale-threatens-to-transform-arctic-national-wildlife-refuge-into-a-fossil-fuel-industrial-zone" }, { "name": "Hex LLC", "role": "Leaseholder \u2014 small Alaska-based company", "responsibility": "Held the high bid on 2 of 5 parcels sold in the June 2026 sale; has no prior Arctic drilling experience", "value": "Not yet documented", "url": "https://earthjustice.org/press/2026/lease-sale-threatens-to-transform-arctic-national-wildlife-refuge-into-a-fossil-fuel-industrial-zone" }, { "name": "Bureau of Land Management, Alaska State Office", "role": "Administering agency", "responsibility": "Conducts the four mandated Coastal Plain lease sales through 2035 under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act", "value": "", "url": "https://www.blm.gov/press-release/blm-announces-2026-oil-and-gas-lease-sale-alaskas-coastal-plain" } ], "opposition_support": [ { "name": "National Wildlife Federation", "position": "Opposes Coastal Plain drilling; noted major oil companies' non-participation in June 2026 sale", "date": "2026-06-05", "url": "https://www.nwf.org/Home/Latest-News/Press-Releases/2026/6-5-2026-ANWR-Lease-Sale" }, { "name": "Natural Resources Defense Council, Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth U.S.", "position": "Litigating against the October 2025 Record of Decision maximizing Coastal Plain leasing", "date": "2026", "url": "https://earthjustice.org/press/2026/lease-sale-threatens-to-transform-arctic-national-wildlife-refuge-into-a-fossil-fuel-industrial-zone" }, { "name": "Gwich'in Steering Committee / Gwich'in leadership", "position": "Opposes Coastal Plain drilling due to threat to the Porcupine caribou herd and Gwich'in subsistence way of life", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.nwf.org/Magazines/National-Wildlife/2010/Arctic-Refuge-Turns-Fifty" }, { "name": "Defenders of Wildlife", "position": "Opposes drilling, citing polar bear denning habitat risk", "date": "2025-01-16", "url": "https://defenders.org/blog/2025/01/protecting-arctic-refuge-again" }, { "name": "Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA)", "position": "Bid on and holds leases in the Coastal Plain", "date": "2026-06-05", "url": "https://earthjustice.org/press/2026/lease-sale-threatens-to-transform-arctic-national-wildlife-refuge-into-a-fossil-fuel-industrial-zone" } ], "timeline": [ { "date": "1960", "event": "Interior designates 9.8 million acres as the Arctic National Wildlife Range." }, { "date": "1980", "event": "ANILCA expands the refuge and restricts Coastal Plain oil and gas activity absent congressional authorization." }, { "date": "2017-12", "event": "Tax Cuts and Jobs Act mandates at least two Coastal Plain lease sales within 10 years." }, { "date": "2021-01", "event": "First Coastal Plain lease sale held; 437,804 acres leased, mostly to AIDEA." }, { "date": "2021 (early)", "event": "Biden Executive Order 13990 pauses Coastal Plain leasing activity." }, { "date": "2025-03", "event": "Federal court strikes down cancellation of remaining leases." }, { "date": "2025-07", "event": "One Big Beautiful Bill Act mandates four additional lease sales through 2035." }, { "date": "2025-10-23", "event": "Interior reinstates the Coastal Plain leasing program across the full 1.56 million acres." }, { "date": "2026-06-05", "event": "First sale under the new mandate held; only AIDEA and Hex LLC bid, on five parcels." } ], "sources_primary": [ { "label": "BLM announces 2026 oil and gas lease sale in Alaska's Coastal Plain", "publisher": "Bureau of Land Management", "date": "2026-04-17", "url": "https://www.blm.gov/press-release/blm-announces-2026-oil-and-gas-lease-sale-alaskas-coastal-plain", "supports": "Sale date, acreage mandate, legal authority cited" }, { "label": "Notice of 2026 Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Lease Sale", "publisher": "Federal Register", "date": "2026-04-20", "url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/public-inspection/2026-07667/oil-and-gas-lease-sale-2026-coastal-plain", "supports": "Bid opening logistics and dates" }, { "label": "Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Status of Oil and Gas Program", "publisher": "Congressional Research Service (Congress.gov)", "date": "2026", "url": "https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12006", "supports": "Legislative and leasing history, 2021 sale results" }, { "label": "Regulatory Tracker \u2014 Arctic National Wildlife Refuge \u2014 Oil and Gas Development", "publisher": "Harvard Environmental & Energy Law Program", "date": "2026-01-13", "url": "https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/tracker/arctic-national-wildlife-refuge-oil-and-gas-development/", "supports": "Full regulatory timeline, refuge size, habitat description" }, { "label": "Summary of wildlife-related research on the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska, 2002-17", "publisher": "U.S. Geological Survey", "date": "2018-01-23", "url": "https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/ofr20181003", "supports": "25-year permafrost/vegetation stability finding, muskox decline, caribou variability, scientific uncertainty framing" } ], "sources_secondary": [ { "label": "Lack of Interest in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Lease Sale Confirms Inviable Solution to Current Energy Demands", "publisher": "National Wildlife Federation", "date": "2026-06-05", "url": "https://www.nwf.org/Home/Latest-News/Press-Releases/2026/6-5-2026-ANWR-Lease-Sale", "supports": "Major companies' non-participation" }, { "label": "Arctic Refuge Oil and Gas Lease Sale Recycles Previously Offered Acres", "publisher": "Taxpayers for Common Sense", "date": "2026-04-29", "url": "https://www.taxpayer.net/energy-natural-resources/arctic-refuge-oil-and-gas-lease-sale-recycles-previously-offered-acres/", "supports": "Tract count, minimum bid/rent/royalty figures" }, { "label": "Lease Sale Seeks to Transform Arctic National Wildlife Refuge into a Fossil Fuel Industrial Zone", "publisher": "Earthjustice", "date": "2026-06-05", "url": "https://earthjustice.org/press/2026/lease-sale-threatens-to-transform-arctic-national-wildlife-refuge-into-a-fossil-fuel-industrial-zone", "supports": "Bidder identities, habitat impact, litigation" }, { "label": "Trump Administration Offers Vast Tracts within the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to Big Oil Drilling", "publisher": "Earthjustice", "date": "2026-04-21", "url": "https://earthjustice.org/press/2026/trump-administration-offers-vast-tracts-within-the-arctic-national-wildlife-refuge-to-big-oil-drilling", "supports": "Species list, acreage figures, litigation details" }, { "label": "What Will We Lose if Oil and Gas Drilling Expands in Arctic?", "publisher": "Earthjustice", "date": "2026-04-01", "url": "https://earthjustice.org/article/what-will-we-lose-if-oil-and-gas-drilling-expands-in-arctic", "supports": "Bowhead whale sensitivity, Alaska warming rate, caribou/polar bear habitat overlap" }, { "label": "Trump Administration Opens the Entire Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to Oil and Gas Leasing", "publisher": "Earthjustice", "date": "2025-10-24", "url": "https://earthjustice.org/press/2025/trump-administration-opens-the-entire-coastal-plain-of-the-arctic-national-wildlife-refuge-to-oil-and-gas-leasing", "supports": "Species diversity list, October 2025 reinstatement" }, { "label": "Fifty Years of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge", "publisher": "National Wildlife Federation", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.nwf.org/Magazines/National-Wildlife/2010/Arctic-Refuge-Turns-Fifty", "supports": "Winter temperature rise, snow cover decline, Gwich'in statement, caribou calf mortality study" }, { "label": "Protecting the Arctic Refuge \u2014 Again!", "publisher": "Defenders of Wildlife", "date": "2025-01-16", "url": "https://defenders.org/blog/2025/01/protecting-arctic-refuge-again", "supports": "Polar bear vulnerability framing, seismic exploration risk" }, { "label": "Sacred Ground", "publisher": "National Wildlife Federation (National Wildlife magazine)", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.nwf.org/Magazines/National-Wildlife/2020/August-September/Conservation/ANWR", "supports": "Polar bear den count (up to 29), den depth, share of mainland dens figure" }, { "label": "The Arctic", "publisher": "National Wildlife Federation", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.nwf.org/Educational-Resources/Wildlife-Guide/Wild-Places/Arctic", "supports": "Migratory bird species count, snow geese population, temperature range, permafrost description" } ], "action": { "petition_url": "https://earthjustice.org/press/2026/lease-sale-threatens-to-transform-arctic-national-wildlife-refuge-into-a-fossil-fuel-industrial-zone", "comment_deadline": "No published federal comment deadline on record; three further mandated lease sales remain through 2035." }, "corrections_log": "None on record as of 2026-08-12 (page last substantially expanded).\n" }, { "site_name": "Bears Ears National Monument", "slug": "bears-ears", "location": "San Juan County, southeastern Utah", "designation_type": "National Monument (reduced boundary as of July 2026)", "governing_agency": "Bureau of Land Management / U.S. Forest Service", "threat_category": "Monument boundary rollback / mining and drilling", "status": "Boundary cut \u2014 reopening to mining claims in progress", "coordinates": [ 37.6167, -109.9167 ], "last_verified": "2026-08-12", "maintainer": "Alicen M.", "one_line_summary": "Monument cut by over 90% in July 2026; excluded land reopens to mining after 60 days.", "sections": { "history": "The Bears Ears Cultural Landscape holds documented human presence going back roughly 12,000\nyears, including cliff dwellings, petroglyphs, ancient roads, and thousands of archaeological\nsites. In 2015, five sovereign tribal nations \u2014 the Hopi Tribe, Navajo Nation, Ute Indian Tribe\nof the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, and Zuni Tribe \u2014 formed the Bears\nEars Inter-Tribal Coalition, the first time multiple tribes had jointly petitioned for a\nnational monument. President Obama designated Bears Ears National Monument on December 28,\n2016, at 1.36 million acres, with a management structure including the Bears Ears Commission,\na body of tribal representatives working alongside the BLM and Forest Service.\n", "current_threat": "In December 2017, the first Trump administration cut Bears Ears by roughly 85%. President\nBiden fully restored the monument's original boundaries in October 2021, a restoration federal\ncourts upheld. On July 13, 2026, President Trump signed a new proclamation cutting Bears Ears\nfrom approximately 1.36 million acres to 121,096 acres \u2014 a reduction of more than 90%, deeper\nthan the 2017 cut \u2014 and purported to terminate the Bears Ears Commission. The proclamation\ndirects that the roughly 1.24 million acres removed from the monument may reopen to mineral\nleasing, mining claims, and other public land dispositions 60 days after signing (on or around\nSeptember 11, 2026). The stated rationale cited critical minerals including silver, copper,\nmolybdenum, lead, uranium, vanadium, and zinc.\n", "impact_environmental": "**Geology:** The excluded land sits atop the San Juan Basin/White Canyon uranium district and\nholds documented uranium and vanadium deposits; over 300 uranium mining leases and more than\n350 uranium claims have historically been tied to the broader monument footprint, more than a\nthird owned by a single company subsidiary (see Named Companies section).\n\n**Water & Contamination:** The nearest operating uranium processing facility, the White Mesa\nMill (about 1 mile from the monument boundary and 2-3 miles from the White Mesa Ute community),\nhas documented regulatory history relevant to any expanded regional uranium activity: the EPA\nbarred it in 2025 from accepting radioactive Superfund waste after finding an \"egregious\"\nviolation; the facility's oldest waste ponds use a single-liner design (versus the\ndouble-liner-with-leak-detection standard required for new facilities), and White Mesa\ncommunity members and the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe have raised longstanding concern that\ngroundwater beneath the mill flows toward their drinking water source. The mill holds over 700\nmillion pounds of accumulated waste as of recent reporting. State regulators (Utah DEQ) state\nthe mill complies with NRC exposure limits and holds a state groundwater permit.\n\n**Air Quality:** The mill is documented to emit radon, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxide;\nradon is the leading cause of lung cancer among non-smokers. Increased regional uranium hauling\n(trucking ore from mines including one near the Grand Canyon, through Navajo Nation land) is\ntied to this facility's operations.\n\n**Habitat & Endangered Species:** Bears Ears is home to at least 18 species listed under the\nEndangered Species Act.\n\n**Cultural Sites:** The excluded lands include thousands of archaeological and cultural sites \u2014\ncliff dwellings, petroglyphs, ancient roads, and burial sites \u2014 that lose federal monument\nprotection once the boundary reduction takes effect, increasing vulnerability to looting and\nvandalism, a documented, longstanding problem at this site prior to 2016 designation.\n\n**Long-Term Effects:** Uranium mining and milling waste in this region has multi-decade to\nmulti-century decay timescales; tribal leaders and residents have specifically framed\ngroundwater contamination risk as a multigenerational concern (\"poison drinking water for\nfuture generations\").\n", "impact_cultural": "See cultural-sites detail folded into the environmental section above; a dedicated\narchaeological site count specific to the 1.24-million-acre excluded area (distinct from the\nmonument-wide totals already cited) is not yet documented.\n", "impact_economic": "Congressional Democrats (Reps. Jared Huffman and Maxine Dexter) opened an investigation in\nAugust 2026 into whether Energy Fuels executives engaged in insider trading: CEO Ross Bhappu\npurchased 74,000 shares of company stock on July 7, 2026, and board chair Bruce Hansen\npurchased 4,000 shares the following day \u2014 six days before Trump signed the July 13 proclamation\nreducing the monument. Energy Fuels has stated it holds no properties, mining claims, or\neconomic interests within the monument and has not advocated for changes to it under the\ncurrent administration; this contradicts the company's documented 2017 lobbying record cited\nin the Named Companies section. Separately, Energy Fuels has received at least $1.75 million in\nU.S. Department of Energy taxpayer subsidies for a related rare-earths processing line at its\nadjacent White Mesa Mill, and has committed to paying the Navajo Nation $0.50 per pound of\nrecovered uranium transported across Navajo land plus a $1.2 million community/environmental\ntrust contribution. A broader fiscal analysis of the reduction's impact to the federal\ngovernment (lost recreation revenue, opportunity cost of foregone monument-status protections)\nis not yet documented.\n", "impact_legal": "Litigation over the 2017 cuts (NRDC et al. v. Trump et al.) remains stayed pending resolution\nof Garfield County et al. v. Biden et al. in the Tenth Circuit, which returned the case to\ndistrict court in June 2026 for further review. The state of Utah separately challenged the\n2021 Biden restoration; a federal court upheld the restoration. New legal challenges to the\nJuly 2026 proclamation were anticipated but not yet filed as of this page's last verification.\n", "impact_health": "White Mesa community members and the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe have raised documented health\nconcerns tied to the adjacent mill, including a specific account of a young family member born\nwith breathing complications requiring emergency hospitalization, attributed by residents to\nair quality near the mill (see also Air Quality detail in the environmental section). Radon \u2014\nthe leading cause of lung cancer among non-smokers \u2014 is a documented mill emission. A dedicated\nepidemiological study specific to the reduced-monument mining reopening (as distinct from the\nexisting mill's operations) was not identified in current sourcing.\n", "consultation_status": "The July 13, 2026 proclamation itself terminated the Bears Ears Commission, the formal tribal\nconsultation body that had been in place since the 2016 designation to guide co-management with\nthe five sovereign tribal nations. This is a documented, direct rollback of an existing\nconsultation structure, not merely an absence of consultation \u2014 the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal\nCoalition's July 14, 2026 response explicitly protests both the boundary reduction and the\nCommission's termination.\n" }, "contractors": [ { "name": "Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. (subsidiary of Energy Fuels Inc., Canada)", "role": "Adjacent mine/mill operator; documented lobbying party in both the 2017 and 2026 boundary reductions", "responsibility": "Owns and operates the White Mesa uranium/vanadium/rare-earths processing mill (~1 mile from the monument boundary, the only conventional uranium mill operating in the U.S.) and the Daneros Mine (~15 miles from the boundary); held or was tied to over 350 uranium claims in or near the original monument footprint as of the 2016 designation; currently under congressional investigation for possible insider trading tied to the July 2026 boundary reduction", "value": "Market activity under investigation: CEO stock purchase of 74,000 shares (7/7/26) and board chair purchase of 4,000 shares (7/8/26), six days before the proclamation", "url": "https://www.eenews.net/articles/dems-probe-uranium-company-for-insider-trading-tied-to-bears-ears/" }, { "name": "Tigris Uranium Corp. (subsidiary of enCore Energy Corporation)", "role": "Claim holder", "responsibility": "Holds over 100 uranium mining claims within the original monument boundaries, acquired in 2015", "value": "Not yet documented", "url": "https://rollcall.com/2019/03/04/seeking-to-shrink-bears-ears-uranium-firm-met-with-interior-before-review/" }, { "name": "Bureau of Land Management / U.S. Forest Service", "role": "Administering agencies", "responsibility": "Manage the reduced monument and the reopened lands; process new mining claims after September 11, 2026", "value": "", "url": "https://www.bearsearscoalition.org/bears-ears-monument-reduction-2026/" } ], "opposition_support": [ { "name": "National Trust for Historic Preservation", "position": "Opposes the July 2026 revocation; has listed Bears Ears as endangered since 2016", "date": "2026-07-13", "url": "https://savingplaces.org/press-center/media-resources/statement-in-response-to-a-july-13-presidential-action-bears-ears" }, { "name": "Native American Rights Fund, representing Hopi Tribe, Pueblo of Zuni, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe", "position": "Continuing to fight to defend Bears Ears' protected status", "date": "2026-07", "url": "https://narf.org/cases/bears-ears/" }, { "name": "Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition", "position": "Opposes reduction and termination of the Bears Ears Commission", "date": "2026-07-14", "url": "https://www.bearsearscoalition.org/bears-ears-monument-reduction-2026/" }, { "name": "National Cattlemen's Beef Association / Public Lands Council", "position": "Supports the reduction, citing impacts of monument designation on grazing and communities", "date": "2026-07-14", "url": "https://morethanjustparks.com/monument-watch" }, { "name": "Rep. Jared Huffman and Rep. Maxine Dexter (House Natural Resources Committee)", "position": "Investigating possible insider trading by Energy Fuels executives", "date": "2026-08", "url": "https://www.eenews.net/articles/dems-probe-uranium-company-for-insider-trading-tied-to-bears-ears/" }, { "name": "Regina Lopez-Whiteskunk (Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, former Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition co-chair)", "position": "Raised health concerns for White Mesa community members near the mill", "date": "2026", "url": "https://moabsunnews.com/2022/03/25/the-half-life-of-white-mesa-mill/" } ], "timeline": [ { "date": "2016-12-28", "event": "President Obama designates Bears Ears National Monument at 1.36 million acres." }, { "date": "2017-12", "event": "First Trump administration cuts the monument by roughly 85%." }, { "date": "2021-10", "event": "President Biden fully restores the monument's original boundaries." }, { "date": "2025", "event": "EPA bars White Mesa Mill from accepting Superfund radioactive waste after an 'egregious' violation." }, { "date": "2026-06", "event": "Tenth Circuit returns related litigation to district court for further review." }, { "date": "2026-07-07", "event": "Energy Fuels CEO Ross Bhappu purchases 74,000 shares of company stock." }, { "date": "2026-07-08", "event": "Energy Fuels board chair Bruce Hansen purchases 4,000 shares." }, { "date": "2026-07-13", "event": "Trump signs proclamation cutting the monument to 121,096 acres and purporting to terminate the Bears Ears Commission." }, { "date": "2026-08", "event": "House Democrats open insider-trading investigation into Energy Fuels executives' stock purchases." }, { "date": "2026-09-11", "event": "Excluded lands scheduled to reopen to new mining claims and mineral leasing, per the proclamation's 60-day provision." } ], "sources_primary": [ { "label": "Statement in Response to July 13 Presidential Action Modifying the Bears Ears National Monument", "publisher": "National Trust for Historic Preservation", "date": "2026-07-13", "url": "https://savingplaces.org/press-center/media-resources/statement-in-response-to-a-july-13-presidential-action-bears-ears", "supports": "Proclamation details, acreage figures, Commission termination" }, { "label": "NRDC et al. v. Trump et al. (Bears Ears National Monument) case tracker", "publisher": "Natural Resources Defense Council", "date": "2026", "url": "https://www.nrdc.org/court-battles/nrdc-et-v-trump-bears-ears", "supports": "Litigation status" }, { "label": "NARF Stands Strong with Tribes for Bears Ears National Monument", "publisher": "Native American Rights Fund", "date": "2026-07", "url": "https://narf.org/cases/bears-ears/", "supports": "60-day reopening provision, tribal legal representation" }, { "label": "Dems probe uranium company for insider trading tied to Bears Ears", "publisher": "E&E News by POLITICO", "date": "2026-08", "url": "https://www.eenews.net/articles/dems-probe-uranium-company-for-insider-trading-tied-to-bears-ears/", "supports": "Insider-trading investigation details, stock purchase dates and amounts" } ], "sources_secondary": [ { "label": "Bears Ears National Monument, Utah", "publisher": "National Trust for Historic Preservation", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://savingplaces.org/places/ancestral-places-of-southeast-utah", "supports": "12,000-year history, 2026 acreage figures" }, { "label": "Bears Ears & Grand Staircase Monument Watch", "publisher": "More Than Just Parks", "date": "2026", "url": "https://morethanjustparks.com/monument-watch", "supports": "Timeline, acreage figures, stakeholder quote" }, { "label": "Tribal Nations Respond to Bears Ears Monument Reduction", "publisher": "Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition", "date": "2026-07-14", "url": "https://www.bearsearscoalition.org/bears-ears-monument-reduction-2026/", "supports": "Commission structure, reopening provision" }, { "label": "National Monuments: Bears Ears", "publisher": "The Wilderness Society", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.wilderness.org/wild-places/utah/national-monuments-bears-ears", "supports": "Endangered species count, litigation history" }, { "label": "5 Things Hikers Should Know About the Battle Over Bears Ears", "publisher": "Backpacker", "date": "2026-07", "url": "https://www.backpacker.com/news-and-events/news/5-things-hikers-should-know-about-the-battle-over-bears-ears/", "supports": "Stated mineral rationale for the reduction" }, { "label": "White Mesa Uranium Mill", "publisher": "Grand Canyon Trust", "date": "2025-02-04", "url": "https://www.grandcanyontrust.org/white-mesa-uranium-mill/", "supports": "Waste pond liner design, air pollutant emissions, groundwater flow direction, waste volume" }, { "label": "EPA Halts Waste Shipment to Uranium Mill Near Bears Ears", "publisher": "Grand Canyon Trust", "date": "2025-01-02", "url": "https://www.grandcanyontrust.org/blog/epa-halts-waste-shipment-uranium-mill-near-bears-ears/", "supports": "2025 EPA Superfund-waste violation finding" }, { "label": "The half-life of White Mesa Mill", "publisher": "Moab Sun News", "date": "2022-05-01", "url": "https://moabsunnews.com/2022/03/25/the-half-life-of-white-mesa-mill/", "supports": "Mill distance from monument and White Mesa community, resident health concerns" }, { "label": "Nuclear power push ramps up uranium mill \u2014 and tribal health concerns", "publisher": "NPR", "date": "2026-08-12", "url": "https://www.npr.org/2026/08/12/nx-s1-5927298/nuclear-power-uranium-health-concerns", "supports": "Current uranium boom context, ore trucking routes through Navajo Nation, tribal opposition" }, { "label": "ENERGY FUELS INC - Form DEF 14A - FY2026", "publisher": "SEC EDGAR filing", "date": "2026", "url": "https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1385849/000106299326002046/formdef14a.htm", "supports": "DOE subsidy figure, Navajo trust contribution figures" } ], "action": { "petition_url": "https://www.bearsearscoalition.org/", "comment_deadline": "No published federal comment deadline on record as of last verification; lands reopen to claims September 11, 2026." }, "corrections_log": "None on record as of 2026-08-12 (page last substantially expanded).\n" }, { "site_name": "Big Bend National Park", "slug": "big-bend", "location": "West Texas, along the Rio Grande", "designation_type": "National Park (adjacent: Big Bend Ranch State Park, Black Gap Wildlife Management Area)", "governing_agency": "National Park Service (park); Texas Parks and Wildlife (adjacent state park)", "threat_category": "Border wall / vehicle barrier construction", "status": "Contracted \u2014 construction underway in phases", "coordinates": [ 29.1275, -103.2425 ], "last_verified": "2026-08-12", "maintainer": "Alicen M.", "one_line_summary": "111+ miles of border barrier contracted through Big Bend under waived environmental law.", "sections": { "history": "People have documented presence in the Big Bend region going back roughly 7,500 years.\nSpanish expeditions passed through the area beginning around 1535, and a line of presidios\n(forts) was built along the Rio Grande in the late 1700s to control the northern frontier\nof New Spain. The Comanche and, before them, the Chisos and Apache used the region as part\nof a travel corridor later known as the Comanche Trail. Big Bend became part of the Texas\nranching frontier beginning around the 1870s.\n\nIn the 1930s, Texas passed legislation to acquire land for what was originally established as\nTexas Canyons State Park. Congress authorized a national park in 1935. The State of Texas\ndeeded the acquired land to the federal government in September 1943, and on June 12, 1944 \u2014\nsix days after the D-Day landings \u2014 President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the bill officially\nestablishing Big Bend National Park. The park opened to visitors on July 1, 1944, and was\ndescribed at the time as \"Texas' Gift to the Nation.\" In 1944, Roosevelt and Mexican President\nManuel \u00c1vila Camacho also proposed a binational protected complex spanning the border; that\nvision was not fully realized.\n", "current_threat": "Beginning in late 2025, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem published a series of notices in the Federal\nRegister authorizing construction of border barriers across Texas, including waivers of\nfederal environmental and cultural-resource review laws. In June 2026, DHS waived roughly 28\nfederal laws \u2014 including the National Park Service Organic Act, the Endangered Species Act,\nthe Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, and several\nNative American and historic-preservation statutes \u2014 to authorize construction of barriers,\nroads, and lighting through Big Bend National Park itself; this was the first time the federal\ngovernment had waived such a broad set of environmental protections for construction inside a\nnational park. CBP's plan area is broken into contracted segments covering a 175-mile stretch\nacross Hudspeth, Jeff Davis, and Presidio counties, with contracts awarded to Barnard\nConstruction and Fisher Sand and Gravel. A separate $1.7 billion contract awarded in May 2026\nto Southwest Valley Constructors covers roughly 17 miles of \"vehicle barrier system\" plus\nabout 205 miles of \"system attributes\" (patrol roads and surveillance technology) specifically\ninside and around Big Bend National Park, Big Bend Ranch State Park, and the Black Gap Wildlife\nManagement Area. CBP updated project maps to reclassify the corridor from surveillance-only to\n\"Primary Wall,\" confirming steel bollard barrier construction. Federal contractors began\nphysical construction inside Big Bend National Park in early August 2026. Advocacy groups filed\nsuit in April 2026 challenging the legality of the environmental-law waivers, and the Center for\nBiological Diversity filed a separate constitutional challenge after construction began.\n", "impact_environmental": "**Geology & Land:** Construction runs through roadless canyon country and the most intact\nChihuahuan Desert ecosystem in the United States, including terrain along the Rio Grande's\ndesignated Wild and Scenic River corridor.\n\n**Water:** The Rio Grande floodplain has previously demonstrated it is not suited to rigid\nbarrier construction: a documented storm event elsewhere on the border caused debris to dam\nagainst fencing, raising floodwaters to 7 feet deep and scouring barrier foundations. Opponents\nhave raised concern that construction could damage artesian wells and groundwater systems and\nalter natural water flow. The region is in ongoing drought \u2014 already a stress factor on the\nRio Grande's flow and on wildlife water access \u2014 which construction-related access barriers\nwould compound.\n\n**Habitat & Endangered Species:** The park is documented as one of the most biodiverse in the\nNational Park System, with 75 mammal species, 400 bird species, and 1,200 plant species, many\nfound nowhere else. Named species of concern include the Mexican black bear (endangered in\nMexico, threatened in Texas, representing the northern edge of a population centered in\nMexico's Sierra Madre), mountain lion, and two aquatic species listed or proposed for listing\nunder the Endangered Species Act: the Texas hornshell mussel and the Salina mucket. A 2024\ncamera-trap study of steel bollard wall elsewhere on the border (100-mile study, Frontiers in\nEcology and Evolution) found only 9% of wildlife interactions with the barrier resulted in a\nsuccessful crossing \u2014 an 86% reduction versus vehicle barriers \u2014 with 0% successful crossings\nrecorded for deer, black bear, mountain lion, and turkey.\n\n**Climate / Light Pollution:** Big Bend holds an International Dark Sky Association\ndesignation; proposed surveillance towers and lighting systems would introduce artificial\nlight into one of the darkest night skies in the country.\n\n**Long-Term Effects:** No environmental impact study was conducted for this project, a direct\nconsequence of the law waivers described above. Conservation groups characterize resulting\nhabitat fragmentation as irreversible once construction is complete, permanently blocking\nmigration routes used by mountain lions, Mexican black bears, and other species for thousands\nof years. Separate ongoing USGS research on a different border segment (Lower Rio Grande\nValley) documents wildlife entrapment and drowning behind barrier fencing as a studied,\nrecurring impact category relevant to Rio Grande barrier construction generally.\n", "impact_cultural": "Not yet documented \u2014 awaiting a specific cited cultural/archaeological resource assessment\nfor this construction segment.\n", "impact_economic": "Total identified contract value for the Big Bend-area barrier work is approximately $4.86\nbillion ($1.7B Southwest Valley Constructors + $1.0B Barnard Segment 1 + $1.2B Fisher Segment 2\n+ $960.4M Fisher Segment 3), entirely taxpayer-funded through congressional appropriations.\nThat combined figure alone exceeds the entire National Park Service's 2025 nationwide operating\nbudget of $3.337 billion \u2014 meaning taxpayers are funding more for barrier construction around\none park than the agency receives to run every national park in the country for a year. For\ncomparison, the largest other outstanding infrastructure need in the park itself was a $17.9\nmillion water system overhaul \u2014 a figure smaller than half a mile of the contracted barrier\nwork. Nationally, per-mile wall costs have run as high as $22 million per mile in prior\nappropriations, with legal disputes from earlier construction still unresolved years later.\nThe overall national border wall program is funded through legislation allocating more than\n$35 billion in taxpayer dollars.\n", "impact_legal": "Advocacy and legal organizations filed suit in mid-April 2026 arguing DHS illegally waived\nenvironmental laws without congressional authorization for the West Texas barrier project. The\nCenter for Biological Diversity filed a further constitutional challenge in August 2026 after\nconstruction began inside the park, arguing the waivers exceeded executive authority. Both\ncases were ongoing as of this page's last verification date.\n", "impact_health": "A 2024 wildlife camera-trap study (cited above) documents ecological displacement effects, but\na dedicated human-health impact study specific to this project (e.g., construction dust,\ngenerator/light-pollution effects on nearby residents, or health effects on Rio Grande\nVillage/Study Butte area residents) was not identified in current sourcing.\n", "consultation_status": "Tribal consultation status specific to this project is not yet documented \u2014 the waived-laws\nlist includes the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and the Antiquities\nAct, both of which normally require consultation, but no record of consultation having\noccurred, been offered, or been formally declined was identified in current sourcing. A\ndocumented related incident: in May 2026, a construction contractor for wall segments in\nArizona (a different project) damaged a sacred Indigenous site, cited by opponents as a\ncautionary precedent for this project's process.\n" }, "contractors": [ { "name": "Southwest Valley Constructors (subsidiary of Kiewit Corporation)", "role": "Prime contractor", "responsibility": "17 miles of vehicle barrier plus ~205 miles of patrol roads, cameras, and sensors in and around Big Bend NP, Big Bend Ranch SP, and Black Gap WMA", "value": "$1.7 billion contract", "url": "https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/texas/2026/05/20/552458/new-1-7-billion-contract-in-big-bend-national-park-wont-be-used-for-border-wall-cbp-says/" }, { "name": "Barnard Construction Company", "role": "Prime contractor, Big Bend Segment 1 (Hudspeth County)", "responsibility": "Border barrier construction", "value": "$1.0 billion contract (part of ~$3.16 billion combined Big Bend 1/2/3 contracts)", "url": "https://bigbendsentinel.com/2026/05/20/largest-border-wall-contract-in-us-history-to-span-big-bend-national-park/" }, { "name": "Fisher Sand and Gravel", "role": "Prime contractor, Big Bend Segments 2 and 3 (Jeff Davis and Presidio Counties)", "responsibility": "Border barrier construction", "value": "$1.2 billion and $960.4 million contracts", "url": "https://bigbendsentinel.com/2026/05/20/largest-border-wall-contract-in-us-history-to-span-big-bend-national-park/" }, { "name": "U.S. Customs and Border Protection / DHS", "role": "Contracting and permitting authority", "responsibility": "Issued environmental-law waivers; awarded and administers all listed contracts", "value": "", "url": "https://www.tpr.org/border-immigration/2026-05-22/confused-about-big-bend-area-border-wall-plans-heres-where-things-stand" } ], "opposition_support": [ { "name": "Five Big Bend-area county sheriffs", "position": "Publicly opposed construction plans", "date": "2026", "url": "https://www.tpr.org/border-immigration/2026-05-22/confused-about-big-bend-area-border-wall-plans-heres-where-things-stand" }, { "name": "Coalition to Protect America's National Parks (former NPS superintendents)", "position": "Urged DHS to reject the border wall waiver", "date": "2026-05-21", "url": "https://protectnps.org/2026/05/21/former-big-bend-national-park-leaders-urge-dhs-to-reject-border-wall-waiver/" }, { "name": "Center for Biological Diversity", "position": "Litigating against the waivers and against construction begun in August 2026", "date": "2026-08-06", "url": "https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/federal-contractors-begin-border-construction-in-big-bend-national-park-2026-08-06/" }, { "name": "140+ outfitters, local businesses, and recreation groups", "position": "Urged Texas leaders to protect Rio Grande public access and halt the project", "date": "2026-08", "url": "https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/federal-contractors-begin-border-construction-in-big-bend-national-park-2026-08-06/" }, { "name": "Texas Conservation Alliance", "position": "Opposes a continuous physical wall; supports technology/personnel alternatives instead", "date": "2026-03-02", "url": "https://www.nwf.org/Home/Latest-News/Press-Releases/2026/3-2-2026-Border-Wall-in-Big-Bend-Threatens-Wildlife" }, { "name": "U.S. Customs and Border Protection", "position": "States the May 2026 contract does not include a 30-foot wall inside the park and instead uses technology and low-profile barriers", "date": "2026-05-20", "url": "https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/texas/2026/05/20/552458/new-1-7-billion-contract-in-big-bend-national-park-wont-be-used-for-border-wall-cbp-says/" } ], "timeline": [ { "date": "1944-06-12", "event": "Big Bend National Park officially established by act of Congress, signed by FDR." }, { "date": "2026-02", "event": "DHS waives nearly 30 federal environmental/cultural laws for a ~150-mile West Texas barrier project initially including the park." }, { "date": "2026-04", "event": "Advocacy groups file suit challenging the legality of the waivers; over 2,000 protest at the Texas Capitol." }, { "date": "2026-05-14", "event": "Additional waivers published." }, { "date": "2026-05-20", "event": "$1.7 billion contract awarded to Southwest Valley Constructors for vehicle barriers, roads, and technology in and around Big Bend." }, { "date": "2026-05", "event": "Big Bend 1/2/3 contracts (~175 miles, Hudspeth/Jeff Davis/Presidio counties) awarded to Barnard Construction and Fisher Sand and Gravel, totaling roughly $3.16 billion." }, { "date": "2026-06-08", "event": "DHS waives roughly 28 federal laws, including NPS Organic Act, ESA, Clean Water Act, and Clean Air Act, to allow construction inside the park itself." }, { "date": "2026-08-06", "event": "Federal contractors begin physical border construction inside Big Bend National Park; Center for Biological Diversity files constitutional challenge." } ], "sources_primary": [ { "label": "Big Bend National Park management overview", "publisher": "National Park Service", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://home.nps.gov/bibe/learn/management/index.htm", "supports": "Park mission and management context" }, { "label": "Texas' Gift to the Nation: The Establishment of Big Bend National Park", "publisher": "National Park Service", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://home.nps.gov/bibe/learn/historyculture/tgttn.htm", "supports": "1944 founding history" }, { "label": "Letter opposing border wall construction in Big Bend", "publisher": "Public Justice", "date": "2026-03", "url": "https://www.publicjustice.net/letter-oppose-border-wall-construction-big-bend-national-park-big-bend-ranch-state-park/", "supports": "Legal opposition record" }, { "label": "Leahy on border wall funding and cost per mile", "publisher": "U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee (Minority)", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/news/minority/leahy-slams-border-wall-funding-as-bumper-sticker-budgeting", "supports": "Cost-per-mile and appropriations figures" }, { "label": "Federal Contractors Begin Border Construction in Big Bend National Park", "publisher": "Center for Biological Diversity", "date": "2026-08-06", "url": "https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/federal-contractors-begin-border-construction-in-big-bend-national-park-2026-08-06/", "supports": "Construction start date, waived-laws list, litigation" }, { "label": "Trump Administration Waives Environmental Laws to Blast Border Barriers, Roads Through Big Bend National Park", "publisher": "Center for Biological Diversity", "date": "2026-06-08", "url": "https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/trump-administration-waives-environmental-laws-to-blast-border-barriers-roads-through-big-bend-national-park-2026-06-08/", "supports": "Park acreage, visitation figures, waiver details" } ], "sources_secondary": [ { "label": "Confused about Big Bend area border wall plans? Here's where things stand.", "publisher": "Texas Public Radio", "date": "2026-05-22", "url": "https://www.tpr.org/border-immigration/2026-05-22/confused-about-big-bend-area-border-wall-plans-heres-where-things-stand", "supports": "Contract details, apprehension statistics, opposition record" }, { "label": "$1.7 billion contract awarded 'for border wall in Big Bend'", "publisher": "The Texas Tribune", "date": "2026-05-15", "url": "https://www.texastribune.org/2026/05/15/texas-big-bend-border-wall-contract-awarded-billion/", "supports": "Waiver history, litigation" }, { "label": "New $1.7 billion contract in Big Bend National Park won't be used for border wall, CBP says", "publisher": "Houston Public Media / Marfa Public Radio", "date": "2026-05-20", "url": "https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/texas/2026/05/20/552458/new-1-7-billion-contract-in-big-bend-national-park-wont-be-used-for-border-wall-cbp-says/", "supports": "CBP's own characterization of the contract scope" }, { "label": "Largest border wall contract in US history to span Big Bend National Park", "publisher": "Big Bend Sentinel", "date": "2026-05-20", "url": "https://bigbendsentinel.com/2026/05/20/largest-border-wall-contract-in-us-history-to-span-big-bend-national-park/", "supports": "Cost comparison to NPS operating budget" }, { "label": "Border Wall to Start Construction", "publisher": "Big Bend Sentinel", "date": "2026-02-03", "url": "https://bigbendsentinel.com/2026/02/03/big-bend-border-wall-nears-reality/", "supports": "February 2026 waiver notices" }, { "label": "U.S.-Mexico Border Update", "publisher": "WOLA", "date": "2026-06-12", "url": "https://www.wola.org/2026/06/u-s-mexico-border-update-billions-more-for-ice-and-cbp-detention-border-wall-construction-impacts-in-the-americas/", "supports": "Sector-wide apprehension statistics, litigation status" }, { "label": "The Inspiring Story Behind Big Bend National Park's Founding 6 Days After D-Day", "publisher": "Texas Highways", "date": "2026-04-09", "url": "https://texashighways.com/outdoors/parks/the-inspiring-story-behind-big-bend-national-parks-founding-6-days-after-d-day/", "supports": "1944 founding narrative" }, { "label": "Big Bend Border Facts", "publisher": "No Big Bend Wall", "date": "2026-02-22", "url": "https://nobigbendwall.org/big-bend-border-facts/", "supports": "2024 wildlife crossing camera study, prior wall flooding incident" }, { "label": "Environmental concerns of a border wall in Big Bend", "publisher": "Spectrum Local News", "date": "2026-04-23", "url": "https://spectrumlocalnews.com/tx/south-texas-el-paso/news/2026/04/23/environmental-concerns-of-a-border-wall-in-big-bend", "supports": "Species counts, drought context, Mexican black bear status" }, { "label": "DHS Waives Dozens of Laws to Fast-Track Border Barriers Near Big Bend", "publisher": "GearJunkie", "date": "2026-05-29", "url": "https://gearjunkie.com/parks-and-public-lands/border-wall-big-bend-rio-grande", "supports": "Texas hornshell mussel and Salina mucket listing status, specific waived laws" }, { "label": "Physical Border Wall in Big Bend is Ineffective; Threatens Wildlife, Working Lands", "publisher": "National Wildlife Federation / Texas Conservation Alliance", "date": "2026-03-02", "url": "https://www.nwf.org/Home/Latest-News/Press-Releases/2026/3-2-2026-Border-Wall-in-Big-Bend-Threatens-Wildlife", "supports": "TCA position, habitat fragmentation framing" }, { "label": "Evaluating Impacts of Border Wall Construction on Wildlife Entrapment and Drowning", "publisher": "U.S. Geological Survey", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.usgs.gov/centers/wetland-and-aquatic-research-center/science/evaluating-impacts-border-wall-construction", "supports": "Wildlife entrapment/drowning research category (different border segment, general relevance)" } ], "action": { "petition_url": "https://www.change.org/p/stop-the-construction-of-the-smart-wall-in-the-big-bend-sector-big-bend-national-park", "comment_deadline": "No published federal comment deadline on record as of last verification; construction is actively underway." }, "corrections_log": "None on record as of 2026-08-12 (page last substantially expanded).\n" }, { "site_name": "Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (Superior National Forest watershed)", "slug": "boundary-waters", "location": "Superior National Forest, northeastern Minnesota, near Ely", "designation_type": "Wilderness Area (BWCAW); threat concerns adjacent Superior National Forest mineral leases", "governing_agency": "U.S. Forest Service / Bureau of Land Management", "threat_category": "Sulfide-ore copper-nickel mining \u2014 mineral withdrawal reversal", "status": "Reversed \u2014 20-year mining ban overturned; leases advancing", "coordinates": [ 47.9, -91.5 ], "last_verified": "2026-08-12", "maintainer": "Alicen M.", "one_line_summary": "Congress overturned a 20-year mining ban near the BWCAW; Twin Metals' leases are advancing toward reinstatement.", "sections": { "history": "The Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness spans roughly 1.1 million acres and is the most\nvisited federally designated wilderness area in the United States, drawing nearly 150,000\nvisitors in 2024. Twin Metals Minnesota, a subsidiary of the Chilean mining conglomerate\nAntofagasta, has sought to build a copper-nickel sulfide mine near Ely and Babbitt, upstream\nfrom the BWCAW, using mineral leases first issued in 1966 (MNES-01352 and MNES-01353). In 2016,\nthe Obama administration declined to renew those leases. In 2022, after a multi-year\nenvironmental review, the Biden administration formally canceled the leases, citing risk of\nacid mine drainage into the Boundary Waters watershed. In January 2023, a 20-year mineral\nwithdrawal (mining ban) was ordered across approximately 225,000 acres of the Superior National\nForest to protect the watershed from future hardrock mining.\n", "current_threat": "In 2018, during the first Trump administration, the leases were reinstated in a move later\nfound unlawful. In 2026, the second Trump administration moved to revive the project: DOI\nDeputy Secretary Katherine MacGregor signed a memo reversing a 2022 legal opinion that had\ninvalidated the leases, and on June 3, 2026 the House Appropriations Committee advanced FY27\nInterior appropriations language directing federal agencies to reinstate the two Twin Metals\nleases. On April 16, 2026, the Senate passed a resolution overturning the 20-year mineral\nwithdrawal across the 225,000-acre area (50-49 vote); the House had already passed it, and\nPresident Trump signed it on April 27, 2026. This legislative approach \u2014 directing agencies to\ngrant leases the company does not currently hold, rather than restoring prior rights \u2014 was\nnoted as an unusual mechanism by opponents. Twin Metals still needs its mineral leases formally\napproved and must pass federal and state permitting processes before mining could begin.\n", "impact_environmental": "**Geology & Ore Body:** Northeastern Minnesota sits atop the Duluth Complex, a major deposit of\ncopper, nickel, cobalt, and other precious metals. Unlike most historic Minnesota iron mining,\nthese metals are bound in sulfide-bearing minerals.\n\n**Water & Contamination:** The central documented risk is acid mine drainage: when sulfide\nminerals are exposed to air and water during mining, they can generate sulfuric acid and\nrelease other pollutants. The Biden administration's 2022 lease cancellation and 2023\nwithdrawal were explicitly based on a multi-year environmental review finding this risk\nunacceptable for the BWCAW watershed. The Boundary Waters is a uniquely interconnected wilderness\nof lakes, rivers, streams, and wetlands with limited natural buffering capacity against\npollutants, making it especially vulnerable to any sulfate or heavy-metal loading. Sulfate\nincreases in water are documented to damage wild rice \u2014 a culturally and ecologically\nsignificant plant in the region \u2014 and to contribute to the creation of methylmercury, the form\nof mercury that bioaccumulates in fish tissue and moves up the food chain, including into fish\nconsumed by humans.\n\n**Habitat:** A dedicated wildlife/endangered-species inventory specific to the mine footprint is\nnot yet documented in current sourcing.\n\n**Long-Term Effects:** Once initiated, acid mine drainage is a process that can continue for\ndecades to centuries after a mine closes, since exposed sulfide rock continues reacting with air\nand water indefinitely absent active, continuing remediation \u2014 a standard concern cited broadly\nin sulfide-mining risk literature and specifically invoked in the 2022/2023 federal review of\nthis project. The BWCAW's status as an interconnected watershed means contamination introduced\nat the mine site is not contained to a single location but can migrate through the connected\nlake system over time.\n", "impact_cultural": "Not yet documented \u2014 awaiting a specific cited cultural/indigenous-resource assessment for this\nsite.\n", "impact_economic": "Statewide, outdoor recreation contributes an estimated $13.9 billion annually to Minnesota's\neconomy, compared with $1.2 billion from extractive industries including mining, according to\nSave the Boundary Waters' published analysis. The only peer-reviewed, published economic study\nof the proposed Twin Metals project reportedly found the region would see more jobs and income\nwith no copper mining in the headwaters than with the mine operating. A federal agency\nannouncement previously cited concerns about impacts to a nearly $45 million regional\nrecreation economy specifically tied to the watershed. Twin Metals has stated much of its\nmining workforce would come from outside Minnesota and outside the U.S., citing an insufficient\nlocal technical talent base \u2014 a claim relevant to promised in-state job creation figures.\n", "impact_legal": "Earthjustice, representing The Wilderness Society, Izaak Walton League of America, and the\nCenter for Biological Diversity, previously sued over the first Trump administration's 2018\nlease reinstatement and successfully defended the Biden administration's 2022 cancellation.\nFollowing the April 2026 congressional resolution and the DOI legal-opinion reversal,\nEarthjustice has stated the fight is continuing; Twin Metals still requires lease approval and\nfull federal/state permitting, a process expected to take years and likely draw further\nlitigation.\n", "impact_health": "Not yet documented \u2014 no dedicated human-health impact study specific to this project (e.g.,\nfor downstream communities or mine workers) was identified in current sourcing, beyond the\ngeneral mercury-bioaccumulation-in-fish pathway noted in the environmental section, which has\ndocumented human health relevance for subsistence and recreational anglers.\n", "consultation_status": "Not yet documented \u2014 a tribal consultation record specific to this project was not identified\nin current sourcing.\n" }, "contractors": [ { "name": "Twin Metals Minnesota LLC (subsidiary of Antofagasta plc, Chile)", "role": "Mine proponent / lease applicant", "responsibility": "Proposes an underground copper-nickel-cobalt sulfide mine near Ely and Babbitt, MN, processing a projected 20,000 tons of ore per day; released its Mine Plan of Operations December 18, 2019", "value": "$2.8 billion projected project cost per 2016-era federal reporting; a separate 2026 industry estimate put a comparable Minnesota copper-nickel project's investment at $2.4 billion. A state-commissioned analysis found mine construction would cost $2.77 billion over three years, with projected revenues of $12.11 billion over the first 10 years of operation, employing about 850 people.", "url": "https://www.startribune.com/boundary-waters-twin-metals-senate-vote-pete-stauber-minnesota-antofagasta-copper-nickel-mining/601751796" }, { "name": "The Bernhardt Group (lobbying firm, led by former Interior Secretary David Bernhardt)", "role": "Lobbyist retained by Twin Metals", "responsibility": "Lobbied federal officials on Twin Metals' behalf in the year leading up to the April 2026 congressional resolution overturning the mining ban", "value": "$380,000 paid by Twin Metals to the Bernhardt Group", "url": "https://www.minnpost.com/glean/2026/04/twin-metals-minnesota-lobby-boundary-waters-policy-win/" }, { "name": "U.S. Forest Service / Bureau of Land Management", "role": "Administering agencies", "responsibility": "Manage the Superior National Forest and the mineral leasing process; would process any reinstated Twin Metals leases (MNES-01352, MNES-01353)", "value": "", "url": "https://www.savetheboundarywaters.org/house-committee-works-hand-over-leases-twin-metals" } ], "opposition_support": [ { "name": "Earthjustice, on behalf of The Wilderness Society, Izaak Walton League of America, and Center for Biological Diversity", "position": "Opposes lease reinstatement; previously sued over the unlawful 2018 reinstatement", "date": "2026-04-17", "url": "https://earthjustice.org/press/2026/senate-votes-to-strip-minnesotas-boundary-waters-of-protection-from-mining-pollution" }, { "name": "Rep. Pete Stauber (R-MN-8)", "position": "Sponsored the resolution overturning the mining ban", "date": "2026-04", "url": "https://minnesotareformer.com/2026/04/15/congress-overturns-ban-on-mining-near-the-boundary-waters/" }, { "name": "Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy", "position": "Opposes the mine and the reversal of protections", "date": "2026", "url": "https://www.mncenter.org/defending-boundary-waters-sulfide-mine-pollution" }, { "name": "Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness", "position": "Opposes the mine; disputes the project's financial and environmental viability", "date": "2026", "url": "https://www.friends-bwca.org/blog/twin-metals-plan-to-mine/" } ], "timeline": [ { "date": "1966", "event": "Original Twin Metals mineral leases (MNES-01352, MNES-01353) issued; last renewed 2004." }, { "date": "2014", "event": "Antofagasta acquires Twin Metals from Duluth Metals after a 2014 disclosure showed a weak ~10% projected rate of return." }, { "date": "2016", "event": "Obama administration declines to renew the leases." }, { "date": "2018", "event": "First Trump administration reinstates the leases, later found to have done so unlawfully." }, { "date": "2019-12-18", "event": "Twin Metals releases its Mine Plan of Operations." }, { "date": "2022-01", "event": "Biden administration formally cancels the leases, citing acid mine drainage risk." }, { "date": "2023-01", "event": "20-year mineral withdrawal ordered across ~225,000 acres of Superior National Forest." }, { "date": "2026 (date TBD)", "event": "DOI Deputy Secretary MacGregor signs memo reversing 2022 legal opinion invalidating the leases." }, { "date": "2026-06-03", "event": "House Appropriations Committee advances FY27 language to reinstate the Twin Metals leases." }, { "date": "2026-04-16", "event": "Senate passes resolution (50-49) overturning the 20-year mineral withdrawal." }, { "date": "2026-04-27", "event": "President Trump signs the resolution into law." } ], "sources_primary": [ { "label": "Senate Votes to Strip Minnesota's Boundary Waters of Protection from Mining Pollution", "publisher": "Earthjustice", "date": "2026-04-17", "url": "https://earthjustice.org/press/2026/senate-votes-to-strip-minnesotas-boundary-waters-of-protection-from-mining-pollution", "supports": "Legal history, DOI memo, litigation posture" }, { "label": "House committee works to hand over leases to Twin Metals", "publisher": "Save the Boundary Waters", "date": "2026-06-11", "url": "https://www.savetheboundarywaters.org/house-committee-works-hand-over-leases-twin-metals", "supports": "Lease numbers, FY27 appropriations language, legal mechanism" } ], "sources_secondary": [ { "label": "Congress overturns ban on mining near the Boundary Waters", "publisher": "Minnesota Reformer", "date": "2026-04-17", "url": "https://minnesotareformer.com/2026/04/15/congress-overturns-ban-on-mining-near-the-boundary-waters/", "supports": "225,000-acre figure, 2024 visitation, Antofagasta ownership, Duluth Complex geology" }, { "label": "Senate Overturns Ban On Mining Near Boundary Waters Wilderness", "publisher": "Circle of Blue", "date": "2026-04-28", "url": "https://www.circleofblue.org/2026/great-lakes/senate-overturns-ban-on-mining-near-boundary-waters-wilderness/", "supports": "Senate vote date/margin, stated rationale for the original ban" }, { "label": "What to know about Twin Metals, the company at the center of the overturned mining ban", "publisher": "Star Tribune", "date": "2026-04-16", "url": "https://www.startribune.com/boundary-waters-twin-metals-senate-vote-pete-stauber-minnesota-antofagasta-copper-nickel-mining/601751796", "supports": "Antofagasta financials, comparable project investment figures" }, { "label": "The cost last year to gain mining access near the Boundary Waters? About $380K.", "publisher": "MinnPost", "date": "2026-04-30", "url": "https://www.minnpost.com/glean/2026/04/twin-metals-minnesota-lobby-boundary-waters-policy-win/", "supports": "Bernhardt Group lobbying fee, signing date" }, { "label": "Twin Metals Paid Former Trump Officials $380K...", "publisher": "Outdoor Life", "date": "2026-05-01", "url": "https://www.outdoorlife.com/conservation/boundary-waters-mine-vote-breakdown/", "supports": "Permitting timeline context, lobbying detail" }, { "label": "Officials lay more groundwork to reinstate mineral leases near BWCAW despite opposition", "publisher": "Quetico Superior Wilderness News", "date": "2025-11-14", "url": "https://queticosuperior.org/officials-lay-more-groundwork-to-reinstate-mineral-leases-near-bwcaw-despite-opposition/", "supports": "Legislative history, prior bill text references" }, { "label": "Defending the Boundary Waters from sulfide mine pollution", "publisher": "Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.mncenter.org/defending-boundary-waters-sulfide-mine-pollution", "supports": "$45 million recreation economy figure, lease history" }, { "label": "Feds Deny Minerals Lease Renewals For Twin Metals", "publisher": "Associated Press (via CBS News)", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/feds-deny-minerals-lease-renewals-for-twin-metals", "supports": "2016 non-renewal rationale, visitation figures, $2.8B project cost" }, { "label": "Copper and Greed: Inside Twin Metals' Disastrous Plan for the Boundary Waters", "publisher": "Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness", "date": "2026-02-17", "url": "https://www.friends-bwca.org/blog/twin-metals-plan-to-mine/", "supports": "Duluth Metals/Antofagasta acquisition history, IRR figures, Mine Plan of Operations date" }, { "label": "Protecting the Boundary Waters: Debunking myths about the proposed Twin Metals mine", "publisher": "Save the Boundary Waters", "date": "2026-06-11", "url": "https://www.savetheboundarywaters.org/protecting-boundary-waters-debunking-myths-about-proposed-twin-metals-mine-headwaters-boundary", "supports": "$13.9B vs $1.2B economic comparison, sulfate/wild rice/methylmercury detail, workforce sourcing claim" }, { "label": "Twin Metals Mining Project Minnesota", "publisher": "Value The Markets", "date": "2026-03-16", "url": "https://www.valuethemarkets.com/analysis/twin-metals-mining-project-minnesota", "supports": "$1.7B stated company investment figure (company-reported)" }, { "label": "Study shows Twin Metals mine economically feasible", "publisher": "CBS News Minnesota", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/study-shows-twin-metals-mine-economically-feasible", "supports": "State-commissioned $2.77B construction cost, $12.11B revenue, 850-job figures" } ], "action": { "petition_url": "https://www.savetheboundarywaters.org/", "comment_deadline": "No published federal comment deadline on record as of last verification; legislative and regulatory actions are ongoing." }, "corrections_log": "None on record as of 2026-08-12 (page last substantially expanded).\n" }, { "site_name": "Chaco Culture National Historical Park (Greater Chaco Landscape)", "slug": "chaco-culture", "location": "San Juan County, northwestern New Mexico", "designation_type": "National Historical Park; UNESCO World Heritage Site. Threat concerns the surrounding 10-mile buffer under BLM jurisdiction", "governing_agency": "National Park Service (park); Bureau of Land Management (surrounding buffer)", "threat_category": "Oil and gas drilling \u2014 mineral withdrawal revocation", "status": "Proposed \u2014 public comment period closed, decision pending", "coordinates": [ 36.0608, -107.9556 ], "last_verified": "2026-08-12", "maintainer": "Alicen M.", "one_line_summary": "BLM proposes revoking the 10-mile, 336,404-acre drilling buffer around Chaco Canyon.", "sections": { "history": "Chaco Canyon was a major ceremonial and cultural center for the ancestral Puebloan world\nbetween roughly 850 and 1250 A.D. It holds continuing living significance for today's Pueblo\ncommunities, the Hopi Tribe, the Navajo Nation, and other Indigenous nations. Chaco Culture\nNational Historical Park is a UNESCO World Heritage Site, containing great houses, kivas, and\nother structures such as Pueblo Bonito. After nearly a decade of advocacy by tribes,\narchaeologists, and conservation groups, and a public process spanning about 1.5 years with 150\ndays of public comment, the BLM established Public Land Order 7923 in June 2023, withdrawing\napproximately 336,404 acres within a 10-mile radius of the park from new mineral leasing and\nmining claims for 20 years.\n", "current_threat": "On October 30, 2025, the Interior Department began tribal consultation on a proposal to reverse\nPublic Land Order 7923. On March 31, 2026, the BLM opened a public scoping/comment period \u2014\ninitially just seven days, later extended, closing July 29, 2026 \u2014 on a proposal to revoke the\nwithdrawal and reopen the 336,404-acre buffer to oil and gas leasing. The BLM's own environmental\nassessment reportedly found under 1% of the buffer area has meaningful oil and gas development\npotential. Navajo Nation President Buu Nygren has publicly supported ending the buffer,\nciting financial harm to Navajo allottees within the zone, while the Pueblo of Acoma and the\nAll Pueblo Council of Governors have opposed the rollback.\n", "impact_environmental": "**Geology & Land Use Context:** Chaco sits within the San Juan Basin, one of the most\nintensively developed oil and gas regions in the country. Roughly 90% of the broader Greater\nChaco landscape outside the 10-mile buffer is already leased for oil and gas development,\nmeaning the buffer represents most of what remains unleased in the immediate region.\n\n**Climate & Air Quality:** The San Juan Basin has been identified by NASA satellite methane\nmapping as the single largest regional methane anomaly (\"hot spot\") in the continental United\nStates \u2014 a roughly 2,500-square-mile methane cloud, comparable in size to the state of\nDelaware, spanning the Four Corners region including national parks like Chaco. Estimates have\nput the value of natural gas lost annually to flaring and venting in the region above $2\nbillion. Methane traps roughly 84 times more heat than CO2 over its first 20 years in the\natmosphere. Independent USGS field measurement (983 flux-chamber readings, 2022-2023) confirmed\nnatural geologic seepage exists along specific fault-associated outcrops in the basin, distinct\nfrom \u2014 and smaller than \u2014 the oil-and-gas-driven emissions documented by satellite.\n\n**Air Quality & Public Health:** Approximately 75% of San Juan County residents live within a\nhalf mile of oil and gas infrastructure, and many are documented to suffer respiratory illness\nand other poor health outcomes tied to air pollution from existing operations. Weakening the\n10-mile buffer would extend this same industrial footprint closer to the park itself.\n\n**Night Sky / Visual Resources:** Chaco is documented for exceptional dark-sky quality;\nexisting gas flares in the surrounding basin already light up the night sky, and expanding\ndrilling into the buffer would further degrade the dark-sky and viewshed experience across the\n91,793-acre area immediately visible from the park.\n\n**Cultural/Archaeological (overlapping with land disturbance):** Archaeologists estimate as\nmany as 12,000 cultural sites and traditional cultural places may lie within the 5-to-10-mile\nzone, though only 15-20% of the area has been surveyed; ground disturbance from drilling risks\ndamaging sites before they are even identified.\n\n**Long-Term Effects:** A National Parks Conservation Association program manager has\ncharacterized the proposal as risking \"a thousand years of history\" \u2014 framing the loss as\nnon-recoverable given the buffer protects both undiscovered archaeological resources and the\nvisual/atmospheric integrity of a landscape with a documented history of prior societal\ncollapse tied partly to environmental stress (a historical drought is cited as a factor in the\noriginal Chacoan community's dispersal circa 1150-1250 A.D.).\n", "impact_cultural": "See combined cultural/archaeological detail folded into the environmental section above.\n", "impact_economic": "A prior single BLM lease sale bordering the buffer area generated $3 million in bids. The BLM's\nown environmental assessment for the 2026 revocation reportedly found under 1% of the buffer\narea has meaningful oil and gas development potential, raising the question of how much\nadditional tax or royalty revenue the revocation would realistically generate relative to the\ncultural and tourism value of the UNESCO World Heritage Site it would expose to drilling.\nSeparately, New Mexico's oil and gas sector overall employs nearly 20,000 people statewide and\ncontributed $2.2 billion to state coffers in the most recent reporting year (roughly half the\nstate's general fund) \u2014 context for the industry's broader economic weight in the state, though\nnot a figure specific to the 336,404-acre buffer itself. A dedicated fiscal comparison study\nspecific to the buffer was not identified in current sourcing.\n", "impact_legal": "As of this page's last verification, the BLM had not issued a final decision on the proposed\nrevocation following the close of the public comment period on July 29, 2026.\n", "impact_health": "Approximately 75% of San Juan County residents live within a half mile of oil and gas\ninfrastructure, and this population is documented to suffer respiratory illness and other poor\nhealth outcomes linked to air pollution from existing operations (see environmental section);\nexpanding drilling into the buffer would extend this same industrial footprint closer to areas\nwith documented resident exposure.\n", "consultation_status": "The Interior Department began tribal consultation on reversing PLO 7923 on October 30, 2025.\nThe subsequent public comment period was initially set at just seven days (March 31, 2026) \u2014\na sharp contrast to the original withdrawal's 1.5-year process with 150 days of public comment\n\u2014 before being extended to close July 29, 2026. Navajo Nation leadership and Pueblo/All Pueblo\nCouncil of Governors leadership have taken opposing public positions on the underlying policy,\nboth engaging with the consultation process but reaching different conclusions.\n" }, "contractors": [ { "name": "Hilcorp San Juan LP / Hilcorp Energy I LP", "role": "Largest documented leaseholder/operator in the San Juan Basin surrounding Chaco", "responsibility": "Holds approximately 1,797 authorized leases (San Juan LP) and 728 operating-rights leases (Energy I LP) across roughly 1.16 million combined acres in San Juan County, NM, per BLM lease records; would be positioned to expand operations into the buffer if the withdrawal is revoked", "value": "Not yet documented \u2014 specific buffer-zone acreage or dollar value attributable to Hilcorp specifically not established in current sourcing", "url": "https://thedrillings.com/usa/new-mexico/san-juan-nm045" }, { "name": "Dugan Production Co.", "role": "Major operating-rights holder in San Juan County", "responsibility": "Holds approximately 754 leases, ~471 authorized, across roughly 244,895 acres in the county", "value": "Not yet documented", "url": "https://thedrillings.com/usa/new-mexico/san-juan-nm045" }, { "name": "Bureau of Land Management, Farmington Field Office", "role": "Administering agency", "responsibility": "Manages the 10-mile buffer and would administer any new leasing if the withdrawal is revoked; issued the proposed rulemaking (DOI-BLM-NM-F010-2026-0002-EA)", "value": "", "url": "https://morethanjustparks.com/public-lands-action-network/4294" } ], "opposition_support": [ { "name": "Pueblo of Acoma, supported by the All Pueblo Council of Governors", "position": "Nominated Greater Chaco for the National Trust's endangered list; opposes rollback", "date": "2026-05-20", "url": "https://tucson.com/news/state-regional/article_3c437dfa-8167-4d72-82b8-87c25f085a8e.html" }, { "name": "Navajo Nation President Buu Nygren", "position": "Supports ending the current buffer, citing financial impact on Navajo allottees; has called for a smaller or modified zone", "date": "2026-05-13", "url": "https://tucson.com/news/state-regional/article_3c437dfa-8167-4d72-82b8-87c25f085a8e.html" }, { "name": "National Trust for Historic Preservation", "position": "Opposes revocation of the buffer", "date": "2026-04-08", "url": "https://savingplaces.org/public-lands/updates/national-trust-comments-on-revocation-protective-buffer-at-chaco-culture-nhp" }, { "name": "National Parks Conservation Association", "position": "Opposes revocation of the buffer, citing air/night-sky degradation and cultural risk", "date": "2026-04", "url": "https://www.npca.org/articles/11370-revoking-chaco-canyon-protections-would-risk-a-thousand-years-of-history" }, { "name": "New Mexico Wild", "position": "Opposes revocation, citing habitat fragmentation and air/night-sky quality degradation", "date": "2026-04-02", "url": "https://ourpubliclandsandwaters.substack.com/p/blm-wants-to-allow-drilling-on-lands" }, { "name": "New Mexico Oil and Gas Association", "position": "Supports continued development, stating New Mexico has 'safely produced oil and natural gas...while protecting cultural and historic treasures'", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/feds-plan-to-issue-oil-leases-near-chaco-canyon-in/article_05e01868-ebee-5cc4-b88c-cfd55b0c3330.html" } ], "timeline": [ { "date": "850-1250 (A.D.)", "event": "Chaco Canyon serves as a major ceremonial and cultural center for the ancestral Puebloan world; a documented ~75-year drought is cited among factors in its eventual decline." }, { "date": "2023-06", "event": "BLM establishes Public Land Order 7923, withdrawing 336,404 acres around the park from mineral leasing for 20 years, after a 1.5-year, 150-day public process." }, { "date": "2025-10-30", "event": "Interior Department begins tribal consultation on reversing PLO 7923." }, { "date": "2026-03-31", "event": "BLM opens a public comment period on revoking the withdrawal, initially seven days." }, { "date": "2026-05-20", "event": "National Trust names the Greater Chaco Cultural Landscape one of America's 11 Most Endangered Historic Places for 2026." }, { "date": "2026-07-29", "event": "Extended public comment period on the proposed revocation closes." } ], "sources_primary": [ { "label": "BLM NEPA Register \u2014 Chaco 10-mile buffer zone environmental assessment (DOI-BLM-NM-F010-2026-0002-EA)", "publisher": "Bureau of Land Management", "date": "2026", "url": "https://morethanjustparks.com/public-lands-action-network/4294", "supports": "Acreage figures, development-potential finding, comment deadline" }, { "label": "Comments on the Potential Revocation of the Protective Buffer at Chaco Culture NHP", "publisher": "National Trust for Historic Preservation", "date": "2026-04-08", "url": "https://savingplaces.org/public-lands/updates/national-trust-comments-on-revocation-protective-buffer-at-chaco-culture-nhp", "supports": "2019/2023 buffer history, 91,793-acre viewshed figure" }, { "label": "Investigating methane emissions in the San Juan Basin", "publisher": "GlobalChange.gov (U.S. Global Change Research Program)", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.globalchange.gov/highlights/investigating-methane-emissions-san-juan-basin", "supports": "Satellite methane hot-spot identification" }, { "label": "Bottom-up characterization of geologic methane emissions in the San Juan Basin", "publisher": "USGS", "date": "2026-03-19", "url": "https://www.usgs.gov/publications/bottom-characterization-geologic-methane-emissions-san-juan-basin-southwestern-usa", "supports": "Natural vs. industrial methane seepage distinction, field measurement methodology" } ], "sources_secondary": [ { "label": "Feds, tribes spar over drilling at Chaco Canyon", "publisher": "Tucson.com / Cronkite News", "date": "2026-05-24", "url": "https://tucson.com/news/state-regional/article_3c437dfa-8167-4d72-82b8-87c25f085a8e.html", "supports": "Nygren position, National Trust endangered listing" }, { "label": "BLM Wants to Allow Drilling on Lands Directly Bordering Chaco Culture NHP", "publisher": "Our Public Lands and Waters (Substack)", "date": "2026-04-02", "url": "https://ourpubliclandsandwaters.substack.com/p/blm-wants-to-allow-drilling-on-lands", "supports": "Comment period details, New Mexico Wild statement, 90% regional leasing figure" }, { "label": "Stop oil and gas drilling around Chaco Culture Park", "publisher": "More Than Just Parks", "date": "2026-07", "url": "https://morethanjustparks.com/public-lands-action-network/4294", "supports": "7,552 historic properties figure, comment deadline" }, { "label": "Revoking Chaco Canyon Protections Ignores Pueblos, Tribes, and the Public", "publisher": "Archaeology Southwest", "date": "2026-04", "url": "https://www.archaeologysouthwest.org/2026/04/01/revoking-chaco-canyon-protections-ignores-pueblos-tribes-and-the-public-repost/", "supports": "12,000 cultural sites estimate, survey coverage percentage" }, { "label": "Revoking Chaco Canyon Protections Would Risk A Thousand Years of History", "publisher": "National Parks Conservation Association", "date": "2026-04", "url": "https://www.npca.org/articles/11370-revoking-chaco-canyon-protections-would-risk-a-thousand-years-of-history", "supports": "150-day original comment process, NPCA statement" }, { "label": "Why Chaco Culture's Buffer Matters", "publisher": "National Parks Conservation Association", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.npca.org/articles/10970-why-chaco-culture-s-buffer-matters", "supports": "Methane cloud size, resident proximity to infrastructure, respiratory health impacts" }, { "label": "Chaco: A World Heritage site faces fracking", "publisher": "High Country News", "date": "2024-01-22", "url": "https://www.hcn.org/articles/chaco-a-world-heritage-site-faces-fracking/", "supports": "Historical drought/decline framing, flared gas dollar-value estimate" }, { "label": "Higher natural gas prices lead to increased production in the San Juan Basin", "publisher": "New Mexico Political Report", "date": "2023-06-07", "url": "https://nmpoliticalreport.com/2023/06/07/higher-natural-gas-prices-lead-to-increased-production-in-the-san-juan-basin/", "supports": "2023 withdrawal context, basin leasing dynamics" }, { "label": "New Mexico Has a Methane Cloud Visible by Satellite. It Also Has Bold Climate Plans.", "publisher": "Stateline / NRDC reporting", "date": "2026-04-02", "url": "https://www.nrdc.org/stories/new-mexico-has-methane-cloud-visible-satellite-it-also-has-bold-climate-plans", "supports": "State oil/gas employment and revenue figures" }, { "label": "Active Oil and Gas Companies in San Juan County, NM", "publisher": "ShaleExp", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.shalexp.com/new-mexico/san-juan-county/companies", "supports": "Operator identification cross-reference" }, { "label": "Oil and Gas In San Juan County, New Mexico", "publisher": "The Drillings", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://thedrillings.com/usa/new-mexico/san-juan-nm045", "supports": "Lease counts and acreage by named operator" } ], "action": { "petition_url": "https://morethanjustparks.com/public-lands-action-network/4294", "comment_deadline": "Public comment period closed July 29, 2026; final BLM decision pending as of last verification." }, "corrections_log": "None on record as of 2026-08-12 (page last substantially expanded).\n" }, { "site_name": "Pinyon Plain Uranium Mine (Baaj Nwaavjo I'tah Kukveni National Monument, Grand Canyon region)", "slug": "grand-canyon-pinyon-plain", "location": "Kaibab National Forest, ~6-10 miles from Grand Canyon National Park's South Rim, Coconino County, AZ", "designation_type": "Active uranium mine grandfathered inside a National Monument (Baaj Nwaavjo I'tah Kukveni, designated 2023)", "governing_agency": "U.S. Forest Service (Kaibab National Forest); Arizona Department of Environmental Quality; EPA Region 9", "threat_category": "Uranium mining \u2014 active groundwater contamination risk", "status": "Active \u2014 in production, water/permit disputes ongoing", "coordinates": [ 35.9722, -112.1 ], "last_verified": "2026-08-12", "maintainer": "Alicen M.", "one_line_summary": "Active uranium mine 6 miles from the Grand Canyon has pumped 80+ million gallons of groundwater since 2016; EPA finds contamination potential.", "sections": { "history": "The mine (originally Canyon Mine, renamed Pinyon Plain Mine) was first approved in the 1980s\nunder a Plan of Operations from 1986 and closed in 1992 when uranium prices fell to $6.40/lb. In\n2012, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar established a temporary 20-year administrative mining ban\nacross roughly 1 million acres of public land near the Grand Canyon. The Forest Service\ndetermined Canyon Mine held \"valid existing rights\" under the 1872 Mining Law, exempting it from\nthat ban. In August 2023, President Biden designated the Baaj Nwaavjo I'tah Kukveni \u2014 Ancestral\nFootprints of the Grand Canyon National Monument at the request of tribes, withdrawing the area\nfrom future mineral entry; Pinyon Plain was again grandfathered in as a pre-existing right and\nis the only active mine operating inside the monument's boundary. Red Butte, a Havasupai sacred\nsite near the mine, was separately designated a traditional cultural property under the\nNational Historic Preservation Act.\n", "current_threat": "Operator Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. began active ore extraction in December 2023\n(first ore removed to the surface January 8, 2024) after decades of litigation, citing rising\nuranium prices (roughly $57/lb as of recent reporting, up from the 1992 shutdown price of\n$6.40/lb). Miners pierced an aquifer during shaft construction in 2016, and the mine has pumped\ngroundwater out of the shaft continuously since. Ore is trucked roughly 300 miles across Navajo\nNation land to the White Mesa Mill near Bears Ears National Monument for processing (see\n/sites/bears-ears/). In July 2026, the Havasupai Tribe formally objected to a proposed amendment\nto the mine's aquifer protection permit that would raise the allowable arsenic limit at a\nmonitoring well, arguing Arizona regulators are attempting to weaken pollution limits without\nproper public process.\n", "impact_environmental": "**Geology & Hydrology:** The mine sits above the deep Redwall-Muav Aquifer, which feeds seeps\nand springs throughout the Grand Canyon and is the Havasupai people's sole source of drinking\nwater via Havasu Creek and Havasu Spring near Supai Village. A shallower C-aquifer and the\ndeeper R-aquifer are separated by more than 2,000 feet of rock, but numerous studies \u2014\nincluding a 2024 published groundwater study \u2014 strongly suggest likely connectivity between them\nvia fractures and faults.\n\n**Water & Contamination:** Over the past decade the mine has pumped more than 80 million\ngallons of groundwater out of the mine shaft (6.7 million gallons in 2025 alone, per the\ncompany's own 2025 annual report), stored in an uncovered pond inside the site's fence. A 2024\npublished groundwater study found potential for contamination from the mine to reach springs on\nthe Grand Canyon's South Rim and Havasu Spring near Supai Village, though it called for further\nmonitoring-well data to confirm exact flow paths. A 2026 EPA technical study, requested by the\nHavasupai Tribe, similarly found \"potential\" for the mine to contaminate local and regional\ngroundwater resources vital to the Havasupai Reservation's water supply, while stating further\ninvestigation is needed to confirm the extent of aquifer connectivity.\n\n**Habitat & Cultural Site:** The mine sits near Red Butte, the Havasupai Tribe's sacred\nmountain, a designated National Historic Preservation Act traditional cultural property.\n\n**Long-Term Effects:** Groundwater contamination from mining, if it occurs, would affect a\naquifer system already documented as slow to characterize (2,000+ feet of separating rock,\nongoing scientific uncertainty about connectivity) \u2014 meaning any contamination could take years\nto be detected and would be extremely difficult to remediate once it reaches a deep aquifer\nsupplying a community's sole water source.\n", "impact_cultural": "See Red Butte traditional cultural property designation above. The mine sits within a monument\ndesignated specifically at tribal request to protect this landscape, yet operates under a legal\nexemption tribes have unsuccessfully litigated against for years.\n", "impact_economic": "Energy Fuels reported producing about 1.6 million pounds of finished U3O8 (yellowcake) at the\nWhite Mesa Mill in the first half of 2026, sourced partly from Pinyon Plain ore; because mining\nis currently in \"lower grade areas\" producing less ore than the mill can process, mill\noperations were scheduled to pause for Q3 2026 before resuming. A dedicated cost-benefit or\ntaxpayer-impact analysis specific to this mine (e.g., value of foregone groundwater, monitoring\ncosts borne by EPA/state regulators) was not identified in current sourcing.\n", "impact_legal": "The Havasupai Tribe's lawsuit challenging the mine's exemption from the 2012 mining ban was\ndismissed and the dismissal affirmed on appeal. The Tribe, Grand Canyon Trust, Center for\nBiological Diversity, and Sierra Club have separately and repeatedly legally challenged the\nForest Service's decisions allowing the mine to operate. As of July 2026, the Havasupai Tribe\nwas formally objecting to a proposed state permit amendment loosening the arsenic limit at a\nmine monitoring well.\n", "impact_health": "The Havasupai Tribe's core stated concern is direct: contamination reaching their sole source\nof drinking water. No separate occupational or community air-quality health study specific to\nthis mine was identified in current sourcing, distinct from the water-contamination risk\nalready detailed above.\n", "consultation_status": "The Forest Service was documented as \"not a part of\" discussions between Energy Fuels and the\nNavajo Nation over ore-transport routes across Navajo land in 2024 \u2014 meaning the relevant\nfederal land-managing agency was absent from the tribal negotiation that determined how ore\nmoves across a second tribal nation's territory. The Havasupai Tribe's July 2026 objection to\nthe arsenic permit amendment specifically states Arizona regulators are \"not required to accept\nformal comments\" on the change, meaning no mandated public/tribal consultation applies to that\nparticular permit action even as the Tribe formally requests one.\n" }, "contractors": [ { "name": "Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. (subsidiary of Energy Fuels Inc., Canada)", "role": "Mine operator; also owns the destination processing mill", "responsibility": "Operates Pinyon Plain Mine (17-acre site) and trucks ore approximately 300 miles across Navajo Nation land to its own White Mesa Mill near Bears Ears for processing \u2014 the same company profiled in the Bears Ears case file", "value": "~1.6 million lbs U3O8 produced at White Mesa Mill in H1 2026 (partly from this mine's ore); mine has been in planning/ownership since the 1980s", "url": "https://azdailysun.com/news/local/environment/havasupai-tribe-objects-to-aquifer-protection-permit-change-at-pinyon-plain-mine/article_c996bad6-32f9-42a4-9045-c59fde6df017.amp.html" }, { "name": "Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)", "role": "State permitting authority", "responsibility": "Issued the mine's Individual Aquifer Protection Program Permit (No. P-100333, July 31, 2024); currently considering an amendment to raise the permitted arsenic limit at a monitoring well", "value": "", "url": "https://azdeq.gov/WQD/PinyonPlainMine" }, { "name": "U.S. Forest Service, Kaibab National Forest", "role": "Land-managing agency", "responsibility": "Approved the mine's Plan of Operations under a 2020 Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision; determined the mine holds valid existing mining rights exempting it from the regional mining ban", "value": "", "url": "https://fs.usda.gov/r03/kaibab/forest-products/nonwood-products/pinyon-plain-mine-formerly-canyon-uranium-mine" } ], "opposition_support": [ { "name": "Havasupai Tribe", "position": "Opposes the mine; has litigated against it for decades and formally objects to a 2026 permit amendment", "date": "2026-07", "url": "https://azdailysun.com/news/local/environment/havasupai-tribe-objects-to-aquifer-protection-permit-change-at-pinyon-plain-mine/article_c996bad6-32f9-42a4-9045-c59fde6df017.amp.html" }, { "name": "Grand Canyon Trust, Center for Biological Diversity, Sierra Club", "position": "Have jointly and separately legally challenged the mine's operation", "date": "ongoing", "url": "https://www.nhonews.com/features/uranium-mining-operations-begin-at-pinyon-plain-mine/article_9c73e602-1ab3-5663-8327-870c7f793f0a.html" }, { "name": "Navajo Nation", "position": "Negotiated directly with Energy Fuels over ore-transport routes across its land; voluntarily paused transport for months in 2024 pending discussions", "date": "2024-2025", "url": "https://fs.usda.gov/r03/kaibab/forest-products/nonwood-products/pinyon-plain-mine-formerly-canyon-uranium-mine" }, { "name": "Ute Mountain Ute Tribe", "position": "Opposes operations, citing proximity of the destination mill to their community", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://azdailysun.com/news/local/environment/havasupai-tribe-objects-to-aquifer-protection-permit-change-at-pinyon-plain-mine/article_c996bad6-32f9-42a4-9045-c59fde6df017.amp.html" }, { "name": "Energy Fuels Resources", "position": "States mining, hauling, and processing pose no threat to communities or the environment", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://azdailysun.com/news/local/environment/havasupai-tribe-objects-to-aquifer-protection-permit-change-at-pinyon-plain-mine/article_c996bad6-32f9-42a4-9045-c59fde6df017.amp.html" } ], "timeline": [ { "date": "1980s", "event": "Canyon Mine (later Pinyon Plain) first approved under a Plan of Operations." }, { "date": "1992", "event": "Mine halts operations as uranium price falls to $6.40/lb." }, { "date": "2012", "event": "Interior Secretary Salazar establishes a 20-year administrative mining ban near the Grand Canyon; Forest Service exempts the mine as a valid existing right." }, { "date": "2016", "event": "Miners pierce an aquifer during shaft construction; groundwater pumping begins." }, { "date": "2018", "event": "Mine shaft sinking completed to ~1,470 feet." }, { "date": "2020", "event": "USFS completes Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision under NEPA for the mine's Plan of Operations." }, { "date": "2023-08-08", "event": "Baaj Nwaavjo I'tah Kukveni National Monument designated at tribal request; mine again grandfathered in." }, { "date": "2023-12", "event": "Energy Fuels begins active ore extraction." }, { "date": "2024-01-08", "event": "First ore removed to the surface." }, { "date": "2024-07-30", "event": "Energy Fuels voluntarily pauses ore transport after two shipments, pending Navajo Nation discussions." }, { "date": "2024-07-31", "event": "ADEQ issues the mine's Individual Aquifer Protection Program Permit." }, { "date": "2025-02-12", "event": "Ore hauling resumes following Navajo Nation discussions." }, { "date": "2026 (H1)", "event": "~1.6 million lbs U3O8 produced at White Mesa Mill; mill scheduled to pause Q3 2026." }, { "date": "2026-07", "event": "Havasupai Tribe formally objects to proposed arsenic-limit permit amendment." } ], "sources_primary": [ { "label": "Pinyon Plain Mine, Coconino County, AZ", "publisher": "U.S. EPA", "date": "2026-03-03", "url": "https://www.epa.gov/uic/pinyon-plain-mine", "supports": "EPA technical study findings, aquifer connectivity assessment, request origin" }, { "label": "WQD | Permit of Interest | Pinyon Plain Mine", "publisher": "Arizona Department of Environmental Quality", "date": "2026-05-08", "url": "https://azdeq.gov/WQD/PinyonPlainMine", "supports": "Permit number, issuance date, regulatory framework, EIS/ROD reference" }, { "label": "Pinyon Plain Mine (formerly Canyon Uranium Mine)", "publisher": "U.S. Forest Service, Kaibab National Forest", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://fs.usda.gov/r03/kaibab/forest-products/nonwood-products/pinyon-plain-mine-formerly-canyon-uranium-mine", "supports": "Site size, shaft depth, operational timeline, monument-exemption status" } ], "sources_secondary": [ { "label": "Uranium mining operations begin at Pinyon Plain Mine", "publisher": "Navajo-Hopi Observer", "date": "2024-04-17", "url": "https://www.nhonews.com/features/uranium-mining-operations-begin-at-pinyon-plain-mine/article_9c73e602-1ab3-5663-8327-870c7f793f0a.html", "supports": "Monument designation context, litigation history" }, { "label": "Pinyon Plain Uranium Mine (formerly Canyon Mine) \u2014 story map", "publisher": "Grand Canyon Trust (ArcGIS StoryMaps)", "date": "2026-01-12", "url": "https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/e5581098559f4c9884cd76185e840b22", "supports": "Full historical timeline, mining claims context, litigation history" }, { "label": "Grand Canyon Uranium Mine Water Problem Hits 80 Million Gallons", "publisher": "Grand Canyon Trust", "date": "2026-06-06", "url": "https://www.grandcanyontrust.org/blog/pinyon-plain-uranium-mine-80-million-gallons/", "supports": "Groundwater pumping volumes, arsenic permit dispute, 2024 groundwater study findings" }, { "label": "Havasupai Tribe objects to aquifer protection permit change at Pinyon Plain Mine", "publisher": "Arizona Daily Sun", "date": "2026-07-04", "url": "https://azdailysun.com/news/local/environment/havasupai-tribe-objects-to-aquifer-protection-permit-change-at-pinyon-plain-mine/article_c996bad6-32f9-42a4-9045-c59fde6df017.amp.html", "supports": "2026 permit dispute detail, ore hauling route/pause history, U3O8 production figures" }, { "label": "Arizona approves key environmental permit for uranium mine near Grand Canyon", "publisher": "Associated Press (via Yahoo News)", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://news.yahoo.com/arizona-approves-key-environmental-permit-004941170.html", "supports": "Uranium price history, company ownership/incorporation details" } ], "action": { "petition_url": "https://www.grandcanyontrust.org/blog/pinyon-plain-uranium-mine-80-million-gallons/", "comment_deadline": "ADEQ's arsenic-limit permit amendment does not require formal public comment; the Havasupai Tribe and allies are urging public pressure regardless." }, "corrections_log": "None on record as of 2026-08-12 (page initial publication).\n" }, { "site_name": "Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument", "slug": "grand-staircase-escalante", "location": "Kane and Garfield Counties, southern Utah", "designation_type": "National Monument (reduced boundary as of July 2026)", "governing_agency": "Bureau of Land Management", "threat_category": "Monument boundary rollback / mining and drilling", "status": "Boundary cut \u2014 reopening to mining claims in progress", "coordinates": [ 37.5, -111.3 ], "last_verified": "2026-08-12", "maintainer": "Alicen M.", "one_line_summary": "Monument cut from 1.86 million to 181,541 acres on the same day as the Bears Ears cut.", "sections": { "history": "President Clinton designated Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in 1996 at roughly\n1.86 million acres, protecting a geologically layered landscape of cliffs, plateaus, and\ncanyons along with significant paleontological and archaeological resources. The designation\nwas controversial from the outset, particularly with local Utah communities.\n", "current_threat": "In December 2017, the first Trump administration cut Grand Staircase-Escalante by nearly half.\nBiden restored the monument to its full size in October 2021, a decision upheld by courts in\n2023. In 2025 the BLM adopted a new resource management plan (RMP) for the monument; on\nJanuary 15, 2026, the Government Accountability Office determined that RMP counted as a rule\nunder the Congressional Review Act, opening a fast-track window for Congress to overturn it. A\nSenate resolution to do so had a 60-day fast-track window that expired without a vote on June\n11, 2026. Separately, on July 13, 2026 \u2014 the same day as the Bears Ears reduction \u2014 President\nTrump signed a proclamation cutting Grand Staircase-Escalante from approximately 1.86 million\nacres to 181,541 acres, roughly a 90% reduction. As with Bears Ears, excluded lands are slated\nto reopen to new mining claims and mineral leasing approximately 60 days after signing.\n", "impact_environmental": "**Geology:** The monument's defining feature is the Grand Staircase itself \u2014 a sequence of\nexposed geological terraces spanning roughly 260 million years of Earth history, ascending\nfrom the Grand Canyon to Bryce Canyon. The Kaiparowits Plateau, a 50-mile-long ridge within\nthe monument, holds a high-quality, extensive coal resource (the Kaiparowits coal field)\nconducive to underground mining. The monument overall holds low-to-moderate potential for oil\nand gas (one boundary-adjacent field has produced over 29 million barrels since 1964, but other\ndrilling in the vicinity has produced only dry holes) and low potential for most metals and\nindustrial minerals.\n\n**Paleontological Resources:** The monument is one of the richest dinosaur-fossil regions in\nNorth America: at least 25 unique dinosaur species have been identified since scientific\nexploration intensified after 2000, including Lythronax (\"king of gore\"), Teratophoneus\ncurriei, Utahceratops, Kosmoceratops, and the armored dinosaur Akainacephalus johnsoni. Finds\nalso include six crocodile species, 17 turtle species, fossilized dinosaur skin, and\nexceptionally preserved plant fossils with leaves intact. The Kaiparowits Formation specifically\nrepresents a scientifically significant record of a vanished, one-fifth-of-Africa-sized\nlandmass called Laramidia. Excavation is an active, ongoing BLM/museum partnership program.\nExcluding these fossil beds from monument protection exposes deposits \u2014 including sites not yet\ndiscovered or excavated \u2014 to surface disturbance from mining or drilling before they can be\nstudied.\n\n**Habitat & Water:** A dedicated habitat/species inventory and water-resource assessment\nspecific to the 2026 excluded lands is not yet documented in current sourcing.\n\n**Long-Term Effects:** Paleontologists and conservation groups have specifically noted that\nfossils not yet discovered \u2014 an unknown but potentially substantial share of the monument's\ntotal paleontological resource, given active discoveries continuing after 25+ years of\nfieldwork \u2014 are now at risk of being destroyed or lost to research before they are ever found,\na loss that is by definition unrecoverable and unquantifiable in advance.\n", "impact_cultural": "Not yet documented \u2014 awaiting a specific cited cultural/archaeological (as distinct from\npaleontological) resource assessment for the excluded lands.\n", "impact_economic": "The Kaiparowits Plateau within the monument holds an estimated coal reserve roughly twice the\nsize of the rest of Utah's known coal, per prior BLM/state geological assessment, but industry\nanalysts have noted the remote location, lack of rail/transport infrastructure, and coal's\ndeclining economic competitiveness make large-scale extraction commercially uncertain regardless\nof monument status. Historical analysis of the one pre-monument lease holder (Andalex) found\nthat even full development would have generated only about $36,000 annually in interest for\nUtah's public school trust fund, against a state education budget of $1.7 billion at the time \u2014\nundercutting claims that monument protection caused major state revenue loss. A current fiscal\nanalysis specific to the 2026 reduction is not yet documented. A 2026 Conservation in the West\npoll found 86% of Utah residents support keeping existing national monument designations for\npublic lands protected over the last decade in place.\n", "impact_legal": "The Congressional Review Act fast-track resolution targeting the monument's 2025 resource\nmanagement plan expired without a Senate vote on June 11, 2026. Litigation history includes a\n2023 court ruling upholding the Biden administration's 2021 full restoration of the monument's\nboundaries, and a Society of Vertebrate Paleontology lawsuit (filed December 2017, later\ncombined with environmental and tribal lawsuits) specifically over the earlier rollback's\nthreat to paleontological resources; that combined litigation was ongoing as of prior reporting.\nNew legal challenges to the July 2026 proclamation were anticipated but not yet filed as of this\npage's last verification.\n", "impact_health": "Not yet documented \u2014 no dedicated human-health impact study specific to the 2026 boundary\nreduction (as distinct from the pre-monument Andalex-era coal debate) was identified in current\nsourcing.\n", "consultation_status": "Not yet documented \u2014 a tribal or public consultation record specific to the July 13, 2026\nboundary reduction was not identified in current sourcing, distinct from the Society of\nVertebrate Paleontology's 2017 litigation over the earlier rollback.\n" }, "contractors": [ { "name": "Alton Coal Development, LLC", "role": "Existing/adjacent mine operator seeking expansion", "responsibility": "Operates the Coal Hollow surface mine adjacent to the monument in the Alton coalfield and has sought to expand mining operations bordering Bryce Canyon NP, Zion NP, and Grand Staircase-Escalante", "value": "Not yet documented \u2014 specific expansion-project valuation not established in current sourcing", "url": "https://www.grandcanyontrust.org/resources/alton-coal-proposed-mine-expansion-map/" }, { "name": "Andalex Resources Inc. (historical)", "role": "Prior coal lease holder, Kaiparowits Plateau (grandfathered into the original 1996 monument)", "responsibility": "Held the only viable pre-monument coal leases on the Kaiparowits Plateau; contemporary analysis found the company had planned to mine roughly $48 million worth of coal annually for 30 years", "value": "$48 million/year projected coal value (historical estimate); ~$624,000/year projected state revenue", "url": "https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/energy-environment/337422-leave-the-grand-staircase-escalante-national-monument/" }, { "name": "Bureau of Land Management", "role": "Administering agency", "responsibility": "Manages the reduced monument and reopened lands; adopted the 2025 resource management plan", "value": "", "url": "https://gearjunkie.com/conservation/the-10-public-lands-most-at-risk-mining-drilling" } ], "opposition_support": [ { "name": "Earthjustice", "position": "Successfully challenged the first Trump administration's 2017 cuts to Grand Staircase and Bears Ears", "date": "2026", "url": "https://earthjustice.org/brief/2026/trump-administration-moves-to-slash-national-monuments-by-nearly-3-million-acres" }, { "name": "Society of Vertebrate Paleontology", "position": "Sued over the 2017 rollback's threat to paleontological resources; case combined with other litigation", "date": "2017-12 (ongoing per prior reporting)", "url": "https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/news-akainacephalus-fossils-paleontology-grand-staircase-escalante" }, { "name": "The Wilderness Society", "position": "Opposes the reduction; cites Utah polling showing majority support for existing monument protections", "date": "2026", "url": "https://www.wilderness.org/wild-places/utah/national-monuments-grand-staircase-escalante" } ], "timeline": [ { "date": "1996-09", "event": "President Clinton designates Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument at approximately 1.86 million acres." }, { "date": "1999", "event": "Systematic dinosaur fossil discoveries begin picking up significantly in the monument." }, { "date": "2017-12", "event": "First Trump administration cuts the monument by nearly half; Society of Vertebrate Paleontology sues." }, { "date": "2021-10", "event": "President Biden fully restores the monument's original boundaries." }, { "date": "2023", "event": "Courts uphold the Biden restoration." }, { "date": "2025", "event": "BLM adopts a new resource management plan for the monument." }, { "date": "2026-01-15", "event": "GAO rules the 2025 RMP counts as a rule under the Congressional Review Act, opening a fast-track repeal window." }, { "date": "2026-06-11", "event": "The Senate's 60-day fast-track window on the CRA resolution expires without a vote." }, { "date": "2026-07-13", "event": "Trump signs proclamation cutting the monument to 181,541 acres, the same day as the Bears Ears reduction." } ], "sources_primary": [ { "label": "Trump Administration Moves to Slash National Monuments by Nearly 3 Million Acres", "publisher": "Earthjustice", "date": "2026", "url": "https://earthjustice.org/brief/2026/trump-administration-moves-to-slash-national-monuments-by-nearly-3-million-acres", "supports": "2017 cut history, litigation, acreage figures" }, { "label": "Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument nets important dinosaur discovery", "publisher": "Bureau of Land Management", "date": "2022-02-11", "url": "https://www.blm.gov/blog/2022-02-11/grand-staircase-escalante-national-monument-nets-important-dinosaur-discovery", "supports": "BLM paleontology program details, ongoing fossil discovery process" }, { "label": "Resource Overview for the Original 1996 Grand Staircase\u2013Escalante National Monument", "publisher": "Utah Geological Survey", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://ugspub.nr.utah.gov/publications/public_information/pi-103.pdf", "supports": "Coal, oil/gas, and mineral development-potential assessment" } ], "sources_secondary": [ { "label": "The 10 Public Lands Most at Risk for Mining and Drilling", "publisher": "GearJunkie", "date": "2026-04-01", "url": "https://gearjunkie.com/conservation/the-10-public-lands-most-at-risk-mining-drilling", "supports": "RMP/CRA process, designation and restoration history" }, { "label": "Complete National Monuments List 2026", "publisher": "More Than Just Parks", "date": "2026-06", "url": "https://morethanjustparks.com/list-of-us-national-monuments/", "supports": "CRA fast-track window expiration date" }, { "label": "Bears Ears & Grand Staircase Monument Watch", "publisher": "More Than Just Parks", "date": "2026", "url": "https://morethanjustparks.com/monument-watch", "supports": "July 13, 2026 acreage reduction figures, 60-day reopening provision" }, { "label": "National Monuments: Grand Staircase-Escalante", "publisher": "The Wilderness Society", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.wilderness.org/wild-places/utah/national-monuments-grand-staircase-escalante", "supports": "2026 Utah polling figure, coal-deposit boundary framing" }, { "label": "Dinosaur Finds in Grand Staircase-Escalante", "publisher": "Grand Canyon Trust", "date": "2025-01-26", "url": "https://www.grandcanyontrust.org/blog/dinosaur-finds-grand-staircase-escalante/", "supports": "Species diversity, fossil preservation quality" }, { "label": "Dinosaur Fossils in Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument", "publisher": "Bryce Canyon Country", "date": "2025-08-12", "url": "https://www.brycecanyoncountry.com/dinosaur-fossils-in-grand-staircase-escalante-national-monument/", "supports": "25-species count, Kaiparowits Plateau fossil record detail" }, { "label": "Spectacular Armored Dinosaur Found in Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument", "publisher": "National Geographic", "date": "2022-01-26", "url": "https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/news-akainacephalus-fossils-paleontology-grand-staircase-escalante", "supports": "Society of Vertebrate Paleontology litigation" }, { "label": "Yet-to-be-discovered dinosaur fossils may be at risk after Trump slashed the size of Grand Staircase", "publisher": "Salt Lake Tribune (AP)", "date": "2018-11-01", "url": "https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2018/11/01/yet-to-be-discovered/", "supports": "Undiscovered-fossil risk framing (applies structurally to the 2026 reduction)" }, { "label": "Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument \u2014 Trails, Wildlife & Visitor Guide", "publisher": "Visit US National Parks", "date": "2026", "url": "https://visitusnationalparks.com/parks/grand-staircase-escalante", "supports": "Geological staircase description, 260-million-year span figure" } ], "action": { "petition_url": "https://www.wilderness.org/wild-places/utah", "comment_deadline": "No published federal comment deadline on record as of last verification; lands reopen to claims approximately September 2026." }, "corrections_log": "None on record as of 2026-08-12 (page last substantially expanded).\n" }, { "site_name": "National Park Service \u2014 Nationwide Budget & Staffing Cuts", "slug": "nps-budget-staffing-cuts", "location": "Nationwide \u2014 affects all 430+ National Park Service units, including every other site tracked in this registry that NPS co-manages or that depends on NPS capacity", "designation_type": "Cross-cutting policy threat (not a single site) \u2014 federal agency funding and staffing levels", "governing_agency": "National Park Service / Department of the Interior / Congress (appropriations)", "threat_category": "Agency capacity \u2014 budget cuts and staff reductions", "status": "Active \u2014 proposed cuts partly rejected by Congress for FY26; FY27 proposal pending", "coordinates": [ 38.9, -77.0 ], "last_verified": "2026-08-12", "maintainer": "Alicen M.", "one_line_summary": "NPS has lost 24% of its permanent staff since January 2025; a further $736M operations cut is proposed for FY27.", "sections": { "history": "The National Park Service's regular discretionary budget grew 11% in nominal dollars between\nFY2017 and FY2026, but fell 16% once adjusted for inflation, according to a Congressional\nResearch Service report. Staffing declined an estimated 18% over the same decade, while the\nagency's deferred-maintenance backlog nearly doubled. A funding mechanism that had been\npartially offsetting these gaps expired at the end of FY2025.\n", "current_threat": "Executive Order 14210 (the DOGE workforce-optimization order, signed February 2025) drove a 16%\ndrop in NPS employee counts during FY2025 alone per Office of Personnel Management data cited\nin the CRS report; NPS has lost roughly 4,000 permanent employees (24% of its permanent\nworkforce) since January 2025, per National Parks Conservation Association reporting, including\napproximately 1,000 probationary employees terminated in a single day in February 2025, weeks\nbefore spring visitor season. The administration's \"Big Beautiful Bill\" rescinded $267 million\nin previously committed NPS staffing funds that had been approved under the Inflation Reduction\nAct. The administration's May 2025 budget proposal sought more than $1 billion in FY2026 cuts\n(a 30%+ drop), which NPCA calculated could have required eliminating funding and staffing for\nroughly 350 park sites \u2014 over 75% of the National Park System \u2014 and also proposed transferring\nsome park sites to state ownership; Congress rejected the most severe cuts and passed flat FY2026\nfunding of $2.88 billion. On April 3, 2026, the administration's FY2027 budget proposal sought a\nfurther $736 million cut (over 25%) to park operations specifically, which NPCA states would\neliminate thousands more staff; the FY2027 proposal also includes a 95% cut to the Historic\nPreservation Fund. An April 2026 DOI memo separately announced restructuring NPS staff into\n\"visitor-facing\" roles alongside new voluntary-departure incentive windows.\n", "impact_environmental": "**Direct Environmental Effect:** Reduced staffing directly affects the agency's capacity to\nmonitor and protect the natural and cultural resources documented throughout every other case\nfile in this registry \u2014 biologists who track endangered species, resource specialists who\nmonitor water quality and invasive species, and historic-preservation staff who document\narchaeological and cultural sites are among the roles affected by the described cuts.\n\n**Compounding Effect on Other Sites:** This threat is structurally different from the others\ntracked here: it does not target a specific landscape's protections directly, but reduces the\nfederal government's operational capacity to enforce, monitor, and respond to the site-specific\nthreats documented at Big Bend, Chaco, and every NPS-co-managed unit in this registry \u2014 for\nexample, fewer resource specialists available to assess archaeological sites ahead of Big Bend's\nborder-wall construction, or to monitor cultural sites at Chaco.\n", "impact_cultural": "The FY2027 budget proposal specifically includes a 95% cut to the Historic Preservation Fund,\nwhich NPCA states would gut support for communities and tribes seeking to protect historic and\ncultural resources nationwide \u2014 a direct, quantified cut to the exact funding mechanism most\nrelevant to the cultural-preservation concerns raised across every monument and historic-site\ncase file in this registry.\n", "impact_economic": "NPS's FY2026 budget was held flat at $2.88 billion after Congress rejected proposed cuts. The\nFY2027 proposal seeks a further $736 million operations cut. A broader Center for American\nProgress analysis found the administration's earlier 2026 budget proposal included a nearly $4\nbillion cut across national parks, forests, wildlife refuges, and other public lands agencies\ncombined \u2014 a 35% decrease from 2024 funding \u2014 paired with a proposed 30% staffing reduction\nacross NPS, USFS, FWS, and BLM combined relative to 2024 levels. If fully enacted, the same\nanalysis found visitors-per-employee ratios would rise nearly 75% since 2011, meaning\nsubstantially reduced staff capacity per visitor even before accounting for specific\nresource-protection duties.\n", "impact_legal": "Congress rejected the administration's most severe FY2026 cut proposal in the final\nappropriations bill, funding NPS at flat FY2025-equivalent levels ($2.88 billion) rather than\nthe proposed ~$900 million (31%) operations cut. The FY2027 proposal remained pending as of this\npage's last verification, meaning the FY2026 outcome \u2014 public and congressional pushback\npartially reversing a severe proposed cut \u2014 is the most direct precedent for whether the FY2027\nproposal will also be scaled back.\n", "impact_health": "NPCA and other groups document reduced staffing has led to slower emergency response times at\nparks nationwide \u2014 a direct visitor and worker safety concern distinct from environmental or\ncultural impacts, though a dedicated quantified health-outcomes study was not identified in\ncurrent sourcing.\n", "consultation_status": "Not applicable in the traditional tribal-consultation sense (this is an agency budget/staffing\naction, not a land-designation or leasing action); however, NPCA specifically credits public\nengagement \u2014 \"thousands of calls, sent emails and raised their voices\" \u2014 with the FY2026 outcome\nin which Congress rejected the most severe proposed cuts, indicating public comment functioned\nas an effective check in this specific case, unlike the compressed consultation windows\ndocumented at several site-specific case files in this registry.\n" }, "contractors": [ { "name": "Congress (House and Senate Appropriations Committees)", "role": "Funding decision-maker", "responsibility": "Ultimately sets NPS's actual appropriated budget; rejected the administration's most severe FY2026 cut proposal", "value": "FY2026: $2.88 billion (flat funding, rejecting a proposed ~$900M/31% cut); FY2027 proposal pending at $736M/25%+ operations cut", "url": "https://www.npca.org/articles/11293-inside-the-fy26-national-park-service-budget" }, { "name": "Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) / Executive Order 14210", "role": "Workforce-reduction driver", "responsibility": "Directed the workforce-optimization initiative that drove a 16% NPS staffing drop in FY2025 alone", "value": "", "url": "https://legis1.com/news/national-park-service-budget-squeezed-despite" }, { "name": "Department of the Interior", "role": "Administering department", "responsibility": "Issued the April 2026 memo restructuring NPS staff into 'visitor-facing' roles; offering deferred-resignation and early-retirement programs", "value": "", "url": "https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/environment/nps-layoffs-visitor-facing-realignment-2027-budget/" } ], "opposition_support": [ { "name": "National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA)", "position": "Opposes the cuts; organized public pressure campaigns and public advocacy events", "date": "2026-04-03", "url": "https://www.npca.org/articles/11371-president-s-budget-proposal-slashes-national-park-service-funding-amid" }, { "name": "Coalition to Protect America's National Parks", "position": "Opposes the cuts, documenting operational strain on remaining staff", "date": "2025-08-11", "url": "https://protectnps.org/2025/08/11/americas-national-parks-at-breaking-point-as-staff-cuts-budget-slashes-threaten-safety-and-preservation/" }, { "name": "Sierra Club (Outdoors For All campaign)", "position": "Opposes the staff 'realignment,' characterizing it as layoffs presented as reform", "date": "2026-04-09", "url": "https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/environment/nps-layoffs-visitor-facing-realignment-2027-budget/" }, { "name": "Congress (in the final FY2026 appropriations bill)", "position": "Rejected the administration's most severe proposed cuts, funding NPS at flat levels", "date": "2026 (FY2026 enacted)", "url": "https://www.npca.org/articles/11293-inside-the-fy26-national-park-service-budget" } ], "timeline": [ { "date": "2017-2026", "event": "NPS budget grows 11% nominally but falls 16% inflation-adjusted over the decade; staffing declines an estimated 18%; deferred maintenance backlog nearly doubles." }, { "date": "2025-02", "event": "Executive Order 14210 (DOGE workforce optimization) signed; approximately 1,000 probationary NPS employees terminated in a single day shortly after." }, { "date": "2025 (FY2025)", "event": "NPS employee count drops 16% for the fiscal year per OPM data; 'Big Beautiful Bill' rescinds $267 million in committed NPS staffing funds." }, { "date": "2025-05", "event": "Administration proposes over $1 billion (30%+) in FY2026 NPS cuts and state-transfer of some park sites." }, { "date": "2026 (FY2026 enacted)", "event": "Congress rejects the most severe cuts; NPS funded at flat $2.88 billion." }, { "date": "2026-04-03", "event": "Administration's FY2027 budget proposal seeks a further $736 million (25%+) operations cut and a 95% Historic Preservation Fund cut." }, { "date": "2026-04 (early April)", "event": "DOI memo announces NPS workforce realignment into 'visitor-facing' roles plus new voluntary-departure incentive windows." } ], "sources_primary": [ { "label": "President's Budget Proposal Slashes National Park Service Funding Amid Ongoing Attacks on National Parks", "publisher": "National Parks Conservation Association", "date": "2026-04-03", "url": "https://www.npca.org/articles/11371-president-s-budget-proposal-slashes-national-park-service-funding-amid", "supports": "FY2027 $736M/25%+ cut figure, staffing impact statement" }, { "label": "Inside the FY26 National Park Service Budget", "publisher": "National Parks Conservation Association", "date": "2026-02-02", "url": "https://www.npca.org/articles/11293-inside-the-fy26-national-park-service-budget", "supports": "FY2026 $2.88B flat-funding outcome, rejected $900M/31% proposal, 350-site elimination calculation" }, { "label": "NPS Budget Crisis: Parks Squeezed Despite Growing Needs", "publisher": "Legis1 (citing Congressional Research Service report)", "date": "2026-06-05", "url": "https://legis1.com/news/national-park-service-budget-squeezed-despite", "supports": "Decade-long budget/staffing trend figures, FY2025 16% staffing drop, FTE counts" } ], "sources_secondary": [ { "label": "The Trump Administration Is Recklessly Axing Funding and Staff for America's National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands", "publisher": "Center for American Progress", "date": "2025-07-01", "url": "https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-trump-administration-is-recklessly-axing-funding-and-staff-for-americas-national-parks-forests-and-public-lands/", "supports": "Cross-agency $4B/35% cut figure, 30% cross-agency staffing reduction, visitors-per-employee ratio finding" }, { "label": "$736M Budget Cut Could Gut National Park Service Workforce", "publisher": "Outside", "date": "2026-04-09", "url": "https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/environment/nps-layoffs-visitor-facing-realignment-2027-budget/", "supports": "Visitor-facing realignment memo detail, Historic Preservation Fund cut, Sierra Club opposition" }, { "label": "America's National Parks at Breaking Point as Staff Cuts, Budget Slashes Threaten Safety and Preservation", "publisher": "Coalition to Protect America's National Parks", "date": "2025-08-11", "url": "https://protectnps.org/2025/08/11/americas-national-parks-at-breaking-point-as-staff-cuts-budget-slashes-threaten-safety-and-preservation/", "supports": "24%/4,000-employee loss figure, $267M/$176M funding-cut figures, emergency-response slowdown" }, { "label": "National Park Service - Budget and Staff Cuts - Issue Tracker & Action Guide", "publisher": "Works For Nature", "date": "2025-08-27", "url": "https://worksfornature.org/nature-in-need/national-park-service-budget-and-staff-cuts", "supports": "Seasonal hiring shortfall figures, IRA-funding rescission detail" }, { "label": "NPS Cuts 2026: What Park Service Employees Face", "publisher": "FedTools", "date": "2026-04 (updated)", "url": "https://www.fedtools.com/blog/national-park-service-cuts-2026", "supports": "Probationary-employee termination date and scale, VERA/VSIP window details, workforce numbers" } ], "action": { "petition_url": "https://www.npca.org/articles/11371-president-s-budget-proposal-slashes-national-park-service-funding-amid", "comment_deadline": "FY2027 budget and appropriations process was ongoing in Congress as of this page's last verification; no single public comment deadline applies to a budget bill." }, "corrections_log": "None on record as of 2026-08-12 (page initial publication).\n" }, { "site_name": "Pacific Marine National Monuments (Papah\u0101naumoku\u0101kea, Pacific Islands Heritage, Mariana Trench, Rose Atoll)", "slug": "pacific-marine-monuments", "location": "Central and Western Pacific Ocean (Hawaii, Mariana Islands, American Samoa region)", "designation_type": "Marine National Monuments", "governing_agency": "NOAA / National Marine Fisheries Service; Department of the Interior", "threat_category": "Commercial fishing access opened within protected monument waters", "status": "Active \u2014 proclamations signed, regulatory rulemaking and litigation ongoing", "coordinates": [ 25.0, -171.0 ], "last_verified": "2026-08-12", "maintainer": "Alicen M.", "one_line_summary": "Two 2026 proclamations opened portions of four Pacific marine monuments to commercial fishing; litigation ongoing.", "sections": { "history": "The Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument (formerly the Pacific Remote Islands\nMarine National Monument) was first established by President George W. Bush in 2009 and covers\nnearly 500,000 square miles of ocean. Papah\u0101naumoku\u0101kea Marine National Monument, in the\nNorthwestern Hawaiian Islands, is the largest contiguous fully protected conservation area\nunder the U.S. flag; its marine portions were designated the nation's 18th marine sanctuary in\nBiden's final days in office. The Mariana Trench and Rose Atoll Marine National Monuments were\nalso established under the Antiquities Act. Together, these four monuments were designed to\nprotect coral atolls, deep-sea trenches, and remote islands, and habitat for numerous\nthreatened and endangered species.\n", "current_threat": "On April 17, 2025, President Trump signed Proclamation 10918, opening the Pacific Islands\nHeritage Marine National Monument to commercial fishing and directing the Secretaries of\nCommerce and the Interior to review other marine monuments for the same purpose. On June 11,\n2026, he signed a second proclamation (PP 11035), \"Restoring American Commercial Fishing in the\nPacific,\" opening additional areas: the Islands Unit of the Mariana Trench Marine National\nMonument, the Mau Zone and Ho'omalu Zone plus waters seaward of 50 nautical miles within\nPapah\u0101naumoku\u0101kea, and waters between 12 and 50 nautical miles around Rose Atoll \u2014 together\ncovering roughly 690,000 square miles. Separately, in February 2026, Proclamation 11009 opened\nthe Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument in the Atlantic to commercial\nfishing. As of late June 2026, commercial fishing remained formally prohibited within the\nPacific Islands Heritage monument under existing NOAA/NMFS regulations pending agency\nrulemaking, per the Congressional Research Service.\n", "impact_environmental": "**Geology/Ocean Features:** These monuments protect coral atolls, seamounts, and \u2014 in the case\nof the Mariana Trench monument \u2014 the deepest points in the world's ocean, along with associated\ndeep-sea ecosystems that are poorly studied relative to shallower waters.\n\n**Habitat & Endangered Species:** Papah\u0101naumoku\u0101kea and the Pacific Islands Heritage monument\nsustain species including corals, reef sharks, sea turtles (green and hawksbill), giant clams,\ngroupers, humphead and Napoleon wrasses, bumphead parrotfish, dolphins, and whales, along with\nnumerous threatened, endangered, and depleted species.\n\n**Fisheries/Ecological Function:** Conservation groups argue these protected \"safe haven\" areas\nfunction as fish population reservoirs that help replenish and sustain surrounding commercial\nfisheries \u2014 specifically citing that U.S.-based tuna fleets otherwise hit their annual catch\nlimits without the reproductive buffer these no-fishing zones provide. Opening these areas to\ncommercial harvest risks undermining that buffering function over time, a systemic\n(basin-wide, multi-year) effect rather than a localized one.\n", "impact_cultural": "Not yet documented \u2014 awaiting a specific cited assessment of impacts on Native Hawaiian or\nPacific Islander cultural or subsistence practices tied to these waters.\n", "impact_economic": "President Trump stated the June 2026 proclamation would \"support millions of dollars in annual\nharvest\" without citing a specific total figure in available primary sourcing. No independent,\ncited third-party economic analysis quantifying total projected harvest value, job creation, or\noffsetting cost to protected-species recovery programs was identified for this specific\nproclamation as of this page's last verification. Conservation groups argue the unquantified\neconomic case must be weighed against the documented ecological \"safe haven\" effects described\nabove.\n", "impact_legal": "A federal district court in Hawaii vacated an April 2025 NMFS letter that had declared the\nPacific Islands Heritage monument open to fishing, ruling it violated the Administrative\nProcedure Act's notice-and-comment requirements (K\u0101pa\u02bba v. Trump). Earthjustice, representing\nK\u0101pa\u02bba, the Conservation Council for Hawaii, and the Center for Biological Diversity, filed\nthat suit in May 2025 challenging Proclamation 10918's legal authority under the Antiquities\nAct, and has stated it will pursue further litigation over the June 2026 proclamation.\n", "impact_health": "Not applicable in the direct sense (this is a fishing-access policy change, not a construction\nor extraction project); no dedicated human-health impact study was identified as relevant to\nthis specific action.\n", "consultation_status": "Not yet documented \u2014 a Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander community consultation record\nspecific to the June 2026 proclamation was not identified in current sourcing. The since-vacated\nApril 2025 NMFS letter was specifically found by a federal court to have violated\nAdministrative Procedure Act notice-and-comment requirements, indicating a documented process\nfailure for the earlier, related action.\n" }, "contractors": [ { "name": "Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council (WPRFMC)", "role": "Federal fishery management body advocating for and administering the fishing reopening", "responsibility": "Directed staff to analyze regulations and submit recommendations for restoring commercial fishing access; represents Hawaii-based and American Samoa-based commercial fishing fleet interests", "value": "Not yet documented \u2014 no specific company or vessel-fleet dollar figures identified in current sourcing", "url": "https://www.seafoodsource.com/news/environment-sustainability/wprfmc-continues-push-to-restore-commercial-fishing-access-in-marine-monuments" }, { "name": "NOAA / National Marine Fisheries Service", "role": "Administering and rulemaking agency", "responsibility": "Implements the proclamations through agency rulemaking; issued the since-vacated April 2025 letter declaring the monument open to fishing", "value": "", "url": "https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF13090" } ], "opposition_support": [ { "name": "Earthjustice, representing K\u0101pa\u02bba, Conservation Council for Hawaii, Center for Biological Diversity", "position": "Litigating against the fishing-access proclamations under the Antiquities Act and APA", "date": "2026-06-15", "url": "https://earthjustice.org/press/2026/trump-administration-continues-attacks-on-pristine-pacific-marine-monuments" }, { "name": "Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council", "position": "Supports reopening the monuments to commercial fishing", "date": "2026-03-30", "url": "https://www.seafoodsource.com/news/environment-sustainability/wprfmc-continues-push-to-restore-commercial-fishing-access-in-marine-monuments" }, { "name": "NOAA / Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick", "position": "Supports the proclamation, citing economic opportunity for commercial fishermen", "date": "2026-06-11", "url": "https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/executive-proclamation-restores-commercial-fishing-in-pacific-marine-monuments-unlocks-economic" } ], "timeline": [ { "date": "2009", "event": "Pacific Islands Heritage (then Pacific Remote Islands) Marine National Monument established by President George W. Bush." }, { "date": "2025-01", "event": "Papah\u0101naumoku\u0101kea marine portions designated the nation's 18th marine sanctuary under Biden." }, { "date": "2025-04-17", "event": "Trump signs Proclamation 10918 opening Pacific Islands Heritage monument to commercial fishing." }, { "date": "2025-05-22", "event": "Earthjustice files K\u0101pa\u02bba v. Trump challenging Proclamation 10918." }, { "date": "2025-08", "event": "Hawaii federal court vacates NMFS letter implementing the fishing opening." }, { "date": "2026-02-06", "event": "Trump signs Proclamation 11009 opening the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts monument (Atlantic) to fishing." }, { "date": "2026-06-11", "event": "Trump signs Proclamation 11035 opening portions of Papah\u0101naumoku\u0101kea, Mariana Trench, and Rose Atoll monuments to commercial fishing." } ], "sources_primary": [ { "label": "The Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument: Commercial Fishing Interests and Considerations for Congress", "publisher": "Congressional Research Service (Congress.gov)", "date": "2026", "url": "https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF13090", "supports": "Proclamation numbers, litigation status, current regulatory status" }, { "label": "Executive Proclamation restores commercial fishing in Pacific marine monuments", "publisher": "NOAA", "date": "2026-06-11", "url": "https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/executive-proclamation-restores-commercial-fishing-in-pacific-marine-monuments-unlocks-economic", "supports": "Proclamation scope, official rationale" }, { "label": "Marine National Monuments & Marine Sanctuaries tracker", "publisher": "Harvard Environmental & Energy Law Program", "date": "2026-05", "url": "https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/tracker/marine-national-monuments-and-marine-sanctuaries/", "supports": "Full litigation and proclamation timeline" } ], "sources_secondary": [ { "label": "Trump signs proclamation to open marine monuments to commercial fishing", "publisher": "Hawaii News Now", "date": "2026-06-11", "url": "https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2026/06/12/trump-signs-proclamation-open-marine-monuments-commercial-fishing/?outputType=amp", "supports": "Specific zones opened, official statements" }, { "label": "Pacific Marine Monuments Open to Commercial Fishing", "publisher": "Environment Coastal & Offshore", "date": "2026-06-12", "url": "https://ecomagazine.com/news/policy/pacific-marine-monuments-open-to-commercial-fishing", "supports": "Zone list, stated legal basis (Magnuson-Stevens Act)" }, { "label": "US moves to allow commercial fishing in Pacific marine protected areas", "publisher": "Mongabay", "date": "2026-06-22", "url": "https://news.mongabay.com/short-article/2026/06/us-moves-to-allow-commercial-fishing-in-pacific-marine-protected-areas/", "supports": "Total area figures, monument history" }, { "label": "Trump Administration Continues Attacks on Pristine Pacific Marine Monuments", "publisher": "Earthjustice", "date": "2026-06-15", "url": "https://earthjustice.org/press/2026/trump-administration-continues-attacks-on-pristine-pacific-marine-monuments", "supports": "Litigation history, ecological rationale for protection" }, { "label": "WPRFMC continues push to restore commercial fishing access in marine monuments", "publisher": "SeafoodSource", "date": "2026", "url": "https://www.seafoodsource.com/news/environment-sustainability/wprfmc-continues-push-to-restore-commercial-fishing-access-in-marine-monuments", "supports": "Council position and quoted rationale" }, { "label": "Defend Pacific Marine National Monuments From Commercial Fishing", "publisher": "Shark Stewards", "date": "2026-04-03", "url": "https://sharkstewards.org/defending-the-pacific-islands-heritage-marine-national-monument/", "supports": "Species list, Papah\u0101naumoku\u0101kea designation details" } ], "action": { "petition_url": "https://earthjustice.org/press/2026/trump-administration-continues-attacks-on-pristine-pacific-marine-monuments", "comment_deadline": "NOAA/NMFS rulemaking to implement the June 2026 proclamation was ongoing as of last verification; no published public comment deadline on record." }, "corrections_log": "None on record as of 2026-08-12 (page last substantially expanded).\n" }, { "site_name": "Red Desert / Rock Springs Resource Management Plan", "slug": "red-desert-rock-springs", "location": "Southwest Wyoming (BLM Rock Springs Field Office), including the Red Desert, Golden Triangle, and Greater Little Mountain", "designation_type": "BLM-managed public land under Resource Management Plan revision (not a formally designated monument/park)", "governing_agency": "Bureau of Land Management, Rock Springs Field Office", "threat_category": "Resource Management Plan rollback \u2014 oil, gas, and mineral access expansion", "status": "Active \u2014 plan amendment in progress, comment period closed", "coordinates": [ 41.7, -108.5 ], "last_verified": "2026-08-12", "maintainer": "Alicen M.", "one_line_summary": "A finalized 2024 conservation-oriented land plan for 3.6 million acres is being unwound just 9 months after completion.", "sections": { "history": "The Red Desert, part of Wyoming's Great Divide Basin, is often described as the largest\nunfenced area in the Lower 48 and contains the largest living dune field in North America. The\nRock Springs Field Office's management plan governs 3.6 million acres of BLM land in\nsouthwestern Wyoming; the prior plan dated to 1997. A rewrite process began in 2011, spanning\nover a decade of inventories, public outreach, and stakeholder meetings \u2014 including litigation\nover wild horse management and a separate sage-grouse habitat planning process that further\nslowed completion. A draft plan and EIS were released in August 2024, opening a 90-day comment\nperiod later extended by an additional 90 days at the request of Wyoming's governor. The plan\nwas finalized in December 2024, incorporating input from a governor's task force that included\nlocal government, oil and gas, mining, and grazing representatives, and reflected nearly all of\nthat task force's recommendations. The final plan protected areas including Greater Little\nMountain, the Northern Red Desert, and the Golden Triangle via \"areas of critical environmental\nconcern\" designations and blocked roughly 1.1 million acres from new industrial-scale\ndevelopment through rights-of-way exclusion areas, while still allowing continued mineral\ndevelopment across more than two-thirds of the total planning area.\n", "current_threat": "Despite the plan's recency, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, under a Trump administration\ndirective, granted authority in February 2025 to review and revise resource management plans\nnationwide, specifically naming the Rock Springs plan and Greater Sage-Grouse Range-Wide\nPlanning. In October 2025, the BLM formally announced intent to amend the finalized Rock\nSprings plan to expand access for fossil fuel extraction \u2014 an unusually fast reversal, described\nby a Wyoming Outdoor Council program director as rare for an agency to revise an approved\nRecord of Decision meant to last 15-20 years within just nine months. A 30-day scoping comment\nperiod was announced via Federal Register notice, later extended 45 days to December 18, 2025,\ncontinuing despite a concurrent federal government shutdown. The process is still in its early\n\"scoping\" stage; the next step is a formal environmental assessment.\n", "impact_environmental": "**Geology & Land:** The Red Desert/Great Divide Basin includes extensive sagebrush-steppe,\nvolcanic buttes with springs, badlands, and the continent's largest living dune field \u2014\nlandscape features the finalized 2024 plan specifically protected via \"areas of critical\nenvironmental concern.\"\n\n**Climate:** The region's sagebrush-steppe habitat is documented as already climate-stressed,\nmeaning additional development pressure compounds an existing vulnerability rather than acting\nindependently of it.\n\n**Habitat & Endangered/Sensitive Species:** The area supports the greater sage-grouse (a\nspecies of conservation concern and a keystone species for the sagebrush ecosystem), along with\npronghorn (including the world's largest pronghorn herd, per one conservation group's\ndescription), mule deer, and elk, whose winter range and migration corridors the 2024 plan\nspecifically protected through development closures.\n\n**Long-Term Effects:** A Wyoming Outdoor Council representative specifically noted that\nrevising a 15-20-year land-use plan within 9 months undermines the durability that such plans\nare designed to provide, creating a pattern where conservation gains achieved through\nmulti-year, multi-stakeholder processes can be reversed administratively far faster than they\nwere built \u2014 a structural risk to any future durable land-management compromise, not just this\nspecific plan.\n", "impact_cultural": "The Red Desert is documented as culturally significant and vital for sustaining Indigenous\ntraditional ecological knowledge, per the Wyoming Outdoor Council's public materials; a more\nspecific, named-tribe consultation record was not identified in current sourcing.\n", "impact_economic": "Wyoming's outdoor recreation economy is valued at $1.5 billion statewide, which the finalized\n2024 plan was credited with supporting alongside continued mineral development and grazing\naccess. Even under the 2024 plan's protections, approximately 75% of the 3.6-million-acre\nplanning area remains already leased or technically available for energy development, according\nto a Wilderness Society report \u2014 meaning the amendment targets a relatively small remaining\nprotected share (roughly 25%) rather than the whole planning area. Separately, 92% of all BLM\nland in Wyoming statewide is already open to oil and gas leasing, a figure cited by plan\nsupporters (WyoFile op-ed) to argue the finalized plan was not, in fact, unusually restrictive.\nThe Petroleum Association of Wyoming has stated it welcomes the amendment process, citing the\n2024 plan as having \"locked away\" acreage from \"productive uses.\"\n", "impact_legal": "No litigation specific to the 2025-2026 plan amendment was identified as filed in current\nsourcing; the process remains in early administrative scoping/comment stages rather than formal\nagency decision stages that would typically trigger legal challenge.\n", "impact_health": "Not yet documented \u2014 no dedicated human-health impact study specific to this plan amendment\nwas identified in current sourcing.\n", "consultation_status": "The finalized 2024 plan followed an unusually extensive public process: begun in 2011, spanning\n13 years, including a governor's task force with local government, industry, and grazing\nrepresentation, and a comment period extended at the governor's own request. By contrast, the\n2025-2026 amendment process began with just a 30-day scoping comment window (later extended 45\ndays to December 18, 2025) and proceeded through a federal government shutdown, which a Wyoming\nOutdoor Council program director specifically flagged as creating uncertainty about whether\nBLM would have adequate staff to fully review submitted public comments.\n" }, "contractors": [ { "name": "Petroleum Association of Wyoming", "role": "Industry trade association supporting the plan amendment", "responsibility": "Publicly welcomed the BLM's decision to amend the 2024 plan; specific member companies not yet named in current sourcing", "value": "Not yet documented \u2014 specific company-level lease values or bid amounts not identified in current sourcing", "url": "https://www.wyomingnews.com/news/local_news/feds-to-redo-management-plan-for-3-6m-acres-in-southwest-wyoming/article_e6cba8d3-6b7c-4598-bad9-8ede9e1864dc.html" }, { "name": "Bureau of Land Management, Rock Springs Field Office", "role": "Administering agency", "responsibility": "Manages the 3.6-million-acre planning area; conducting the current plan-amendment process", "value": "", "url": "https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/natural-resources-energy/2025-10-06/government-shutdown-muddies-the-rock-springs-land-use-plan-amendment-process" } ], "opposition_support": [ { "name": "Wyoming Outdoor Council", "position": "Opposes rushed revision of the finalized plan; helped shape the original protective measures", "date": "2025-10-06", "url": "https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/natural-resources-energy/2025-10-06/government-shutdown-muddies-the-rock-springs-land-use-plan-amendment-process" }, { "name": "The Wilderness Society", "position": "Opposes the amendment; published the 75%-already-leased statistic", "date": "2025-10", "url": "https://www.wyomingnews.com/news/local_news/feds-to-redo-management-plan-for-3-6m-acres-in-southwest-wyoming/article_e6cba8d3-6b7c-4598-bad9-8ede9e1864dc.html" }, { "name": "WyoFile editorial board / conservation coalition", "position": "Opposes reopening the plan, citing the 12-year public process and 92%-statewide-leased context", "date": "2025-12-16", "url": "https://wyofile.com/wyoming-already-put-in-the-work-on-rock-springs-plan-we-should-respect-it/" }, { "name": "Petroleum Association of Wyoming", "position": "Supports the amendment, citing the 2024 plan as overly restrictive", "date": "2025-10", "url": "https://www.wyomingnews.com/news/local_news/feds-to-redo-management-plan-for-3-6m-acres-in-southwest-wyoming/article_e6cba8d3-6b7c-4598-bad9-8ede9e1864dc.html" }, { "name": "Sweetwater County legislators", "position": "Support the amendment", "date": "2025-02", "url": "https://www.gillettenewsrecord.com/news/wyoming/article_a005c1a4-e7cf-11ef-a416-479977d870c2.html" } ], "timeline": [ { "date": "1997", "event": "Prior Rock Springs Field Office resource management plan signed." }, { "date": "2011", "event": "Rewrite process for a new plan begins." }, { "date": "2024-08", "event": "Draft plan and EIS released; 90-day comment period opens, later extended 90 more days at governor's request." }, { "date": "2024-12", "event": "Rock Springs Resource Management Plan finalized after 13 years of process." }, { "date": "2025-02", "event": "Interior Secretary Burgum granted authority to review/revise the plan under Trump directive." }, { "date": "2025-10", "event": "BLM formally announces intent to amend the plan; Federal Register notice opens a 30-day scoping comment period." }, { "date": "2025-11-06", "event": "Comment period extended 45 days." }, { "date": "2025-12-18", "event": "Extended scoping comment period closes." } ], "sources_primary": [ { "label": "Feds to redo management plan for 3.6M acres in southwest Wyoming", "publisher": "Wyoming Tribune Eagle / WyoFile (wyomingnews.com)", "date": "2025-10-03", "url": "https://www.wyomingnews.com/news/local_news/feds-to-redo-management-plan-for-3-6m-acres-in-southwest-wyoming/article_e6cba8d3-6b7c-4598-bad9-8ede9e1864dc.html", "supports": "75%-already-leased figure, 1.1M-acre exclusion detail, industry reaction" }, { "label": "Feds extend comment for vast Rock Springs public land management area", "publisher": "Wyoming Tribune Eagle (wyomingnews.com)", "date": "2025-11-06", "url": "https://www.wyomingnews.com/laramieboomerang/laramieboomerang/news/feds-extend-comment-for-vast-rock-springs-public-land-management-area/article_6d4b6c17-be97-4712-9743-c07af090df73.html", "supports": "45-day comment extension, December 18 deadline" }, { "label": "President Trump pulls back Biden administration's Rock Springs Resource Management Plan", "publisher": "Gillette News Record", "date": "2025-02-10", "url": "https://www.gillettenewsrecord.com/news/wyoming/article_a005c1a4-e7cf-11ef-a416-479977d870c2.html", "supports": "February 2025 Burgum authorization, Sweetwater County legislator support" } ], "sources_secondary": [ { "label": "PROTECT THE RED DESERT: ROCK SPRINGS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN", "publisher": "Wyoming Outdoor Council", "date": "2023-12-27", "url": "https://wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org/rocksprings-rmp/", "supports": "Sage-grouse/wildlife habitat description, cultural/indigenous significance framing" }, { "label": "Government shutdown muddies Rock Springs land use amendment process", "publisher": "Wyoming Public Media", "date": "2025-10-06", "url": "https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/natural-resources-energy/2025-10-06/government-shutdown-muddies-the-rock-springs-land-use-plan-amendment-process", "supports": "9-month reversal characterization, shutdown-related consultation concerns" }, { "label": "BLM releases long-awaited management plan for Red Desert region", "publisher": "Wyoming Tribune Eagle (wyomingnews.com)", "date": "2024-09-22", "url": "https://www.wyomingnews.com/news/local_news/blm-releases-long-awaited-management-plan-for-red-desert-region/article_4bf0be7a-3df8-11ee-9ab0-6f17aa1d657c.html", "supports": "2011 process start date, 1997 prior plan date, planning history" }, { "label": "Wyoming already put in the work on Rock Springs plan. We should respect it.", "publisher": "WyoFile", "date": "2025-12-16", "url": "https://wyofile.com/wyoming-already-put-in-the-work-on-rock-springs-plan-we-should-respect-it/", "supports": "$1.5B recreation economy figure, 92% statewide leasing figure, task-force recommendation detail" }, { "label": "Feds to redo management plan for 3.6M acres in southwest Wyoming (Rawlins Times)", "publisher": "Rawlins Times (wyomingnews.com)", "date": "2025-10-06", "url": "https://www.wyomingnews.com/rawlinstimes/rawlinstimes/feds-to-redo-management-plan-for-3-6m-acres-in-southwest-wyoming/article_2e964202-7ff1-4ebb-9cf8-995ef8849064.html", "supports": "Federal Register notice detail, comment submission channels" }, { "label": "Rock Springs Resource Management Plan", "publisher": "Wyoming Wilderness Association (WWA)", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.wildwyo.org/general-7-1", "supports": "Red Desert/Great Divide Basin geological description, dune field detail" }, { "label": "Rock Springs Resource Management Plan", "publisher": "Wyoming Wildlife Federation", "date": "2025-10-08", "url": "https://wyomingwildlife.org/rsrmp-update/", "supports": "Amendment announcement corroboration" } ], "action": { "petition_url": "https://wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org/rocksprings-rmp/", "comment_deadline": "Scoping comment period closed December 18, 2025; a formal environmental assessment is the next expected step." }, "corrections_log": "None on record as of 2026-08-12 (page initial publication).\n" }, { "site_name": "Tongass National Forest (2001 Roadless Rule Rescission)", "slug": "tongass-roadless-rule", "location": "Southeast Alaska (Tongass National Forest, plus nationwide National Forest System roadless areas)", "designation_type": "National Forest; threat concerns the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule", "governing_agency": "U.S. Forest Service / USDA", "threat_category": "Logging / road construction \u2014 roadless rule rescission", "status": "Proposed rescission \u2014 draft EIS expected 2026, litigation history ongoing", "coordinates": [ 57.5, -134.0 ], "last_verified": "2026-08-12", "maintainer": "Alicen M.", "one_line_summary": "USDA proposes rescinding roadless protections on ~44.7 million acres nationwide, including 9.2 million roadless acres of the Tongass.", "sections": { "history": "The Tongass National Forest is the largest national forest in the U.S. at 16.7 million acres\nand the world's largest intact temperate rainforest, containing old-growth trees up to 800\nyears old. The 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule has protected roughly 58.5 million acres of\nNational Forest System land nationwide from new road construction and most commercial logging,\nincluding more than 9 million roadless acres within the Tongass. In 2020, the first Trump\nadministration exempted the Tongass specifically from roadless protections via the \"Alaska\nRoadless Rule\"; the Biden administration repealed that exemption on January 27, 2023, restoring\nthe Tongass to standard 2001 Roadless Rule protection.\n", "current_threat": "On June 23, 2025, USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins announced intent to rescind the 2001 Roadless\nRule nationwide, affecting nearly 45 million acres of national forest, explicitly including the\nTongass. A public scoping comment period ran August 2025 through September 19, 2025; a Center\nfor Western Priorities review found public comments overwhelmingly opposed the rescission. A\ndraft Environmental Impact Statement and proposed rule were expected in 2026. Separately,\nPresident Trump's March 2026 executive orders directed a 25% increase in national forest timber\nvolume (targeting 4 billion board feet by 2028) under a \"Timber Extraction Directive,\" creating\noverlapping pressure with the roadless rescission specifically in parts of the Tongass. As of\nMay 2026, the Forest Service had not held public meetings specifically on the Tongass roadless\nrescission, prompting Southeast Alaska Conservation Council to organize independent public\nhearings.\n", "impact_environmental": "**Geology & Forest Type:** The Tongass is an old-growth coastal temperate rainforest along the\nInside Passage; it is documented as one of the world's most significant carbon sinks, absorbing\nmore carbon dioxide than it emits.\n\n**Water:** Roadless areas nationally protect watersheds supplying drinking water to an\nestimated 47 million Americans; the Forest Service's own Watershed Condition Framework uses\nroad density as a key indicator of degraded water quantity/quality, since new roads block\nstream flow and increase sediment loading, which can raise water-purification costs downstream.\n\n**Habitat & Endangered/Keystone Species:** The Tongass supports eagles, bears (including black\nbears), and salmon populations tied to old-growth-shaded streams; salmon runs specifically\ndepend on intact forest cover, since the Tongass provides two-thirds of the pink salmon and 75%\nof the coho caught by commercial fishermen in Southeast Alaska waters.\n\n**Climate:** As one of the world's largest carbon sinks, large-scale logging in the Tongass\nwould release stored carbon and reduce future carbon sequestration capacity, a documented\nconcern distinct from and additive to habitat-fragmentation effects.\n\n**Long-Term Effects:** Habitat fragmentation from new permanent road construction is\ncharacterized by conservation groups as unable to be restored once built. A cited historical\nprecedent: unregulated 1980s clearcut logging in the Tongass (e.g., at K\u00edis Gwaay) caused damage\nthat the Organized Village of Kasaan and other tribes describe as still being actively repaired\ndecades later, illustrating multi-decade recovery timelines even after logging stops.\n", "impact_cultural": "For Southeast Alaska Native tribes, including the Organized Village of Kasaan (Haida) and\nTlingit & Haida Nations, the Tongass is documented as indistinguishable from cultural identity,\nsubsistence practice, and traditional ways of life; tribal leaders have specifically framed the\nproposed rescission as a violation of tribal treaty rights, trust responsibilities, and federal\nlaw, not solely an environmental issue.\n", "impact_economic": "A published estimate found industrial logging in the Tongass has cost taxpayers $1.7 billion\nover 40 years, while creating comparatively few jobs, according to the Alaska Sustainable\nFisheries Trust's compiled analysis; the same analysis estimated the Roadless Rule has saved\napproximately $5 billion in avoided road-building costs over 20 years nationally. The Tongass\nalso underpins a documented tourism and commercial/subsistence fishing economy tied to intact\nsalmon habitat (see environmental section for salmon-catch percentages). A dedicated modern\ncost-benefit analysis specific to the 2025-2026 rescission proposal was not identified in\ncurrent sourcing.\n", "impact_legal": "NRDC and other groups have a documented multi-decade litigation and advocacy history defending\nroadless protections for the Tongass specifically, including prior battles over the 2020\nAlaska-specific exemption. New litigation specific to the 2025-2026 nationwide rescission\nproposal was not identified as filed yet in current sourcing, likely because the rule remains\nin the draft EIS/proposed-rule stage as of this page's last verification.\n", "impact_health": "Not yet documented \u2014 no dedicated human-health impact study specific to the roadless rescission\nwas identified in current sourcing.\n", "consultation_status": "When the Trump administration previously proposed removing Tongass roadless protections (a\ndistinct, earlier 2020 action), 96% of public comments submitted opposed the proposal. For the\ncurrent 2025-2026 rescission, a public scoping comment period ran through September 19, 2025.\nHowever, as of May 2026, the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council stated the Forest Service was\n\"refusing to hold any public meetings\" specifically on the roadless rule question, instead\ndirecting input through its ongoing review process for individual active timber proposals \u2014 a\nnarrower channel than a dedicated roadless-rule public meeting. Tribal leaders (Organized\nVillage of Kasaan and others) have separately and explicitly called for tribal governments to be\ntreated as cooperating agencies in the environmental review, indicating that status had not yet\nbeen granted as of their public statements.\n" }, "contractors": [ { "name": "U.S. Forest Service / USDA", "role": "Rulemaking agency", "responsibility": "Announced intent to rescind the 2001 Roadless Rule; conducting the draft EIS and proposed-rule process", "value": "", "url": "https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/planning/roadless" }, { "name": "Timber industry stakeholders (unnamed specific companies not yet identified in current sourcing)", "role": "Beneficiary industry", "responsibility": "Would gain access to previously roadless timber volume under the Timber Extraction Directive's 25% volume-increase target", "value": "Not yet documented \u2014 specific company names, contract values, or timber-sale bidders not identified in current sourcing", "url": "https://www.hcn.org/articles/a-new-era-of-industrial-logging-looms/" } ], "opposition_support": [ { "name": "Southeast Alaska Conservation Council", "position": "Opposes the rescission; organized independent public hearings after stating the Forest Service refused to hold its own", "date": "2026-05-06", "url": "https://www.alaskasnewssource.com/2026/05/06/virtual-tongass-roadless-rule-town-hall-planned-forest-service-advances-logging-proposals/" }, { "name": "Organized Village of Kasaan (Haida)", "position": "Opposes the rescission; frames it as violating tribal treaty rights", "date": "2026-04-23", "url": "https://www.adn.com/opinions/2026/04/22/opinion-the-roadless-rule-safeguards-the-tongass-and-helps-us-heal/" }, { "name": "Tlingit & Haida Nations", "position": "Oppose the rescission and the overlapping Timber Extraction Directive's old-growth harvest implications", "date": "2026", "url": "https://www.hcn.org/articles/a-new-era-of-industrial-logging-looms/" }, { "name": "NRDC", "position": "Continuing decades-long advocacy and litigation history to protect Tongass roadless status", "date": "2025-06-25", "url": "https://www.nrdc.org/stories/alaskas-tongass-national-forest-risk-once-again" }, { "name": "Rep. Ra\u00fal Grijalva (D-Ariz.), House Natural Resources Committee", "position": "Has previously praised roadless restoration for the Tongass; opposes rescission", "date": "2023-01-25", "url": "https://democrats-naturalresources.house.gov/media/press-releases/ranking-democrat-grijalva-cheers-repeal-of-reckless-trump-era-rule-for-tongass-national-forest" } ], "timeline": [ { "date": "2001", "event": "2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule adopted, protecting ~58.5 million acres nationwide." }, { "date": "2020", "event": "First Trump administration exempts the Tongass specifically via the Alaska Roadless Rule." }, { "date": "2023-01-27", "event": "Biden administration repeals the Alaska-specific exemption, restoring standard roadless protection to the Tongass." }, { "date": "2025-06-23", "event": "USDA Secretary Rollins announces intent to rescind the 2001 Roadless Rule nationwide, including the Tongass." }, { "date": "2025-08 to 2025-09-19", "event": "Public scoping comment period held; comments overwhelmingly opposed the rescission per Center for Western Priorities review." }, { "date": "2026-03", "event": "Trump executive orders direct a 25% national forest timber-volume increase (Timber Extraction Directive)." }, { "date": "2026-05-06", "event": "Southeast Alaska Conservation Council holds independent public hearings after stating USFS declined to hold its own." }, { "date": "2026 (expected)", "event": "Draft Environmental Impact Statement and proposed rule expected to be released." } ], "sources_primary": [ { "label": "Roadless Areas", "publisher": "U.S. Forest Service", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/planning/roadless", "supports": "Official rescission announcement date, acreage figures, EIS timeline" }, { "label": "Roadless Area - Alaska Rule", "publisher": "U.S. Forest Service", "date": "n.d.", "url": "https://fs.usda.gov/managing-land/planning/roadless/alaska-rule", "supports": "2020/2023 Alaska-specific rule history, executive order reference" } ], "sources_secondary": [ { "label": "Paving paradise: Dismantling the US Roadless Rule threatens to disrupt wildlife, water and peace", "publisher": "The Conversation", "date": "2026-06-15", "url": "https://theconversation.com/paving-paradise-dismantling-the-us-roadless-rule-threatens-to-disrupt-wildlife-water-and-peace-in-the-last-quiet-places-in-america-275435", "supports": "47 million Americans' drinking water figure, Watershed Condition Framework detail, public comment opposition finding" }, { "label": "A new era of industrial logging looms", "publisher": "High Country News", "date": "2026 (recent)", "url": "https://www.hcn.org/articles/a-new-era-of-industrial-logging-looms/", "supports": "Timber Extraction Directive volume targets, Tongass 9.2M roadless acres figure, tribal concern" }, { "label": "Opinion: The Roadless Rule safeguards the Tongass \u2014 and helps us heal", "publisher": "Anchorage Daily News", "date": "2026-04-23", "url": "https://www.adn.com/opinions/2026/04/22/opinion-the-roadless-rule-safeguards-the-tongass-and-helps-us-heal/", "supports": "K\u00edis Gwaay historical clearcutting recovery example, tribal cultural framing" }, { "label": "Opinion: Safeguarding the Roadless Rule saves the Tongass Forest", "publisher": "Anchorage Daily News", "date": "2026-04-04", "url": "https://www.adn.com/opinions/2026/04/03/opinion-safeguarding-the-roadless-rule-saves-the-tongass-forest/", "supports": "44.7 million acre figure, tribal treaty-rights framing, carbon-sink description" }, { "label": "Alaska's Tongass National Forest at Risk Once Again", "publisher": "NRDC", "date": "2025-06-25", "url": "https://www.nrdc.org/stories/alaskas-tongass-national-forest-risk-once-again", "supports": "58.5 million acre national figure, old-growth tree age, litigation history" }, { "label": "The Roadless Rule", "publisher": "Alaska Sustainable Fisheries Trust", "date": "2025-09-19", "url": "https://thealaskatrust.org/alaska-roadless-rule-2", "supports": "Salmon catch percentages, $1.7B logging cost / $5B savings figures, comment period dates" }, { "label": "Virtual Tongass Roadless Rule town hall planned", "publisher": "Alaska's News Source", "date": "2026-05-06", "url": "https://www.alaskasnewssource.com/2026/05/06/virtual-tongass-roadless-rule-town-hall-planned-forest-service-advances-logging-proposals/", "supports": "Public meeting/consultation process gap, tourism economy framing" }, { "label": "Ranking Democrat Grijalva Cheers Repeal of Reckless Trump-Era Rule for Tongass National Forest", "publisher": "House Natural Resources Committee (Democrats)", "date": "2023-01-25", "url": "https://democrats-naturalresources.house.gov/media/press-releases/ranking-democrat-grijalva-cheers-repeal-of-reckless-trump-era-rule-for-tongass-national-forest", "supports": "2023 repeal-of-exemption context, 96% opposition figure from the earlier 2020 action" } ], "action": { "petition_url": "https://thealaskatrust.org/alaska-roadless-rule-2", "comment_deadline": "Formal scoping comment period closed September 19, 2025; a draft EIS and new comment period were expected in 2026." }, "corrections_log": "None on record as of 2026-08-12 (page initial publication).\n" } ]