From above a treeline of quaky pines at a 3,000-foot elevation, a group of bicyclists make their way down through a network of unexpected canyons in the Abajo Mountains of Bears Ears National Monument in southern Utah. They snake through the vast ravines and drop into red rock and some wind-polished slickrock.
Throughout the multiday bikepacking excursion, University of Utah students, led by Natalie Randall and her husband, collect lessons on nature conservation and reflect on the ancient ruins of the Anasazi Indians found around them.
“There is a solemn reverence for that area,” says Randall, who was recently named director of economic development in Bears Ears’s home, San Juan County. “The mountains to me are spiritual in general, full of ancient sites. And being in nature is spiritual for most people, with the quietness and remoteness.”
Nature may be nonpartisan, but governing it is not.
On Aug. 24, Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke delivered to President Donald Trump his recommended changes after a four-month review of the status of 27 national monuments. In ordering the review, Trump claimed that his predecessors overreached their authority to designate federally protected land under the Antiquities Act, and Zinke would review whether any designations led to ” loss of jobs, reduced wages and reduced public access.”
According to a 2016 report from the Congressional Research Service, the Antiquities Act of 1906 was “designed to protect federal lands and resources quickly” in the interest of preserving historic landmarks, structures and ‘other objects of historical or scientific interest.” A total of 151 national monuments have been created under the act, and presidents are advised to reserve the smallest area necessary to protect the objects of interest.
But the presence of national monuments — and their size — can help bolster local economies, experts say.
In a letter to then-President Barack Obama, just weeks before he declared Bears Ears a national monument at the end of 2016, a group of more than 100 economists — including three Nobel laureates — urged federal efforts to protect federal lands in the interest of the West’s economic future.
“The rivers, lakes, canyons, and mountains found on public lands serve as a unique and compelling backdrop that has helped to transform the western economy from a dependence on resource extractive industries to growth from in-migration, tourism, and modern economy sectors such as finance, engineering, software development, insurance, and health care,” they wrote. “In the West especially, public lands play a pivotal role in attracting and retaining people and businesses.”
Bears Ears — named for two mountain crests that rise above the ridgeline in lands that house ancient cliff dwellings and tribal artifacts — likely stands to lose some of the most, in terms of both protected land and economic potential, if Zinke’s recommendations move forward.
The monument currently covers much of a sleepy, rural county where the 28 percent poverty rate among its 15,000 residents is double the national average.
The details of the report are not yet public, but Zinke has hinted at reducing the protected area of Bears Ears to a tenth of its 1.35 million acres. He has also proposed to shrink three others, according to The New York Times.
According to a report published this spring by Headwaters Economics, an analysis of rural counties in 11 western states found that per capita income was $436 higher for every 10,000 acres of protected public land within their boundaries.
“I can’t say the benefits are guaranteed, but the way I would read this is that national monuments help these communities diversify while holding onto traditional economies,” says Chris Mehl, policy director or the nonprofit research group.
“It’s the story of the West: 90 percent, if not all, job creation is in services. Non-service jobs — manufacturing, construction and extraction like timber and mining — have remained flat, and service jobs — like accounting, law and hospitality — have grown.”
Tourism to San Juan County has increased in recent years, evidenced by the consistent presence of tour buses and rising transient-use taxes from hotels, says Randall, and the free publicity from Zinke’s review has definitely helped.
But, according to local news outlets, Randall’s predecessor was terminated, in part, due to concerns that he prioritized tourism too heavily over other forms of development. County leaders had considered creating a tourism promotion role separate from economic development, according to one report.
In line with the economists’s suggestions to Obama, one of Randall’s main goals is to build 1-, 5- and 10-year plans that will help retain local businesses and talent.
Some supporters of downsizing Bears Ears and other national monuments believe the strict federal restrictions that come with the designation cause local communities to foreclose on economic opportunities that the protected land may present.
“When land is declared a national monument, travel is restricted, roads are closed, grazing is curtailed, protection of the watershed is severely impacted, as is the ability to bring in communications infrastructure we need if there is going to be an increase in tourism,” says state Rep. Michael Noel, a Republican whose district covers Bears Ears and the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument.
Understanding the motives behind national monument designation — and potential shrinking — is of interest to national lawmakers, as well.
A report by the Democratic staff of the House Natural Resources Committee also raises concerns about the influence the fossil fuel industry may have had on the review and resulting recommendations.
“While the administration has claimed a deep desire to know what the American public thinks about our national monuments as the motivation for its review, there is ample evidence that the real purpose is to satisfy the apparently boundless demand for access to drill and mine on all public lands,” write members of the committee. “The true aim of this process is to grant access for some of the most profitable energy companies in the world to the last remaining protected corners of some of our most special places.”
Shrinking national monuments based on industry demand does not make economic sense, according to the report, noting that 61 percent of public land that has been leased to oil and gas companies in Utah is not in production as of fiscal year 2016.
Noel agrees that the impacts from drilling would be minor and says that, even if the monument designation is lifted, much of the land will still be protected by other statutes, such as the National Historical Preservation Act and the Agriculture Reconstruction Act.
“The public needn’t be concerned about destroying the beauty of Utah that has been preserved for generations,” he says. “What they need to be concerned about is Washington, D.C., and overreach by a federal government that’s 2,000 miles away from the land that is managed within the state.”
For now, the future of Bears Ears and the economy surrounding it are shrouded in uncertainty.
Specific regulations for use of national monument land are outlined for each site individually, but those managing Bears Ears have not yet received these guidelines since its designation on Dec. 28, 2016.
With Zinke yet to publicly quantify his proposed reductions, it is unclear what the scale of those regulations and their effects will be. His office did not return requests for comment.
More from U.S. News
10 National Monuments at Risk Under Trump’s Executive Order
States With the Most Economic Opportunity
Best Countries for Green Living
National Monuments Could Benefit Rural Economies in the West originally appeared on usnews.com
