a policy focus of theodore roosevelt was on protecting and embracing the natural beauty of the united states. during his tenure as president, he preserved more than 230 million acres of public land, with the majority of the land becoming public forests. his legacy is seen today with the 150 national forests, 51 federal bird reserves, 4 national game preserves, 5 national parks, and 18 national monuments that he created.

roosevelt’s most important legacy is the 1906 american antiquities act. the main focus of the act gives the president the ability to protect special areas as national monuments and expand monument boundaries. sixteen presidents have used the antiquities act, from black canyon of the gunnison, established by president hoover, to the mariana trench marine national monument, established by president bush.

the part of the antiquities act that the trump administration is focusing on is the “smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected”, which gives the president the ability the reduce the size and scale of the monuments. with help from the secretary of the interior ryan zinke, president trump plans to “give the land back to the people.”

obama’s legacy in bear ears

president obama used the antiquities act to establish 12 national monuments, over 2.9 million acres of land, in the final two years of his presidency. this has created some controversy, due to how late in his presidency they were established. one prime example is the bear ears national monument in utah, established dec. 28, 2016.

president obama said in a statement: “for hundreds of generations, native peoples lived in the surrounding deep sandstone canyons, desert mesas, and meadow mountaintops, which constitute one of the densest and most significant cultural landscapes in the united states,” during his proclamation of bear ears national monument.

the cultures president obama references are the native american tribes that have lived in the area, such as the navajo nation, ute tribe, and hopi nation.

the 26th president at odds with the 45th

critics say that president obama did a last-minute grab at a wide variety of land, which negatively affects the lives of americans. one of those critics is president trump. the current president wants to shrink many of the national parks and monuments, and create a greater privatization of these public lands.

according to the national park service, presidents have diminished the land of national monuments 16 times, affecting more than 430,000 acres. the president has the power to do so due to the language in the antiquities act that states, “national monuments… shall be confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected.”

“giving the land back to the people”

it seems as though president trump is going to use this power to shrink many of the obama-era national monuments to their “smallest area compatible.” secretary of the interior, ryan zinke, is reviewing 26 national monuments to see if they are in compliance with the antiquities act. this review most likely means that monuments that can be reduced within the boundaries of the antiquities act, will be. president trump has signed executive orders in the past that focus on cutting government waste across the board, so this is no exception.

if the size of the monuments are reduced, the land lost to the monuments would most likely become privatized. secretary zinke has stated “some of these areas were put off limits for traditional uses such as farming, ranching, timber harvest, mining, and the land has a chance to be used for these purposes.” secretary zinke and president trump want to reduce the size of the national monuments to save federal dollars and to give control of the land “back to the people.”

giving “control” back to the people, how president trump wants, means that the land will be used for mining, farming and ranching. this may help a few, but will ultimately ruin the land for everyone. creating this “tragedy of the commons” situation will tarnish the legacy that roosevelt set out to create.

native american legacies under threat

for the hopi and the navajo tribes the bear ears national monument is more than a piece of land; it is crucial for their lives and culture. they are connected to that land through their ancestors, their culture, their food, and their medicine. losing that land under the protection of the antiquities act means that a legacy will be thrown to the wolves and potentially ruined for everyone.

president roosevelt wanted americans to conserve and preserve the wilderness as well. he said, “there is none which compares in importance with the great central task of leaving this land even a better land for our descendants than it is for us.”

the concept of conservation and preservation of land, resources, and culture is held by millions of americans who have protested to secretary zinke over his possible recommendations. the 45th president needs to hold and embrace these same ideas of the 26th president, since he has power over millions of acres of land.

on december 23, 2016, president obama angered many americans with the creation of the bear ears national monument, but was within his full legal authority to create it. ultimately, president trump has the same legal right to diminish the size of bear ears and any other national monument, but that doesn’t mean that he should.

representative jay inslee (d-wa) introduced a bill in congress in 2009, called the cascadia marine trail study bill, to designate the cascadia marine trail as a national scenic trail. in washington, 83% of the shoreline property is privately owned, and this designation would not only protect the fragile ecology of this area, but would also protect public access to the cascadia marine trail. this is the first bill to be introduced in congress that would provide a designation for a fully waterborne trail.

supporters of the bill would like to see campsites added for non-motorized boaters every five to ten miles along the trail. “if you’re not kayaking a lot, you don’t really realize how few spots there are that you can camp, and that you can go with a kayak,” says connor inslee of the outdoors for all foundation.

the cascadia marine trail currently relies on the generosity of donors and the efforts of volunteers for support and maintenance, but the economic downturn has resulted in fewer donations, which means losing campsites. the success of the current bill would provide support from federal funding as well as management of the trail and campsites by federal authorities from the national parks service or the bureau of land management.

congressman inslee says americans should support this bill regardless of where they live. “it’s just like asking why you would care about yellowstone or yosemite,” he says, “just because you’re not living [near] there, it doesn’t mean it’s not a huge part of everybody’s lives.” supporters say the designation is about more than funding. they want to ensure that future generations can enjoy this as much as those who travel these waters today.

the house of representatives approved the cascadia marine trail study bill, but a senate vote never occurred, so it was not passed. as is customary, this bill was cleared from the books at the end of the session, but will be re-introduced in the current session.

david eddleston leads a volunteer force called the friends of the oregon badlands or fobits. he said the fun name rhyming with hobits brings attention to the group’s mission to help restore this high desert jewel.
“that means reversing decades of dumping,” eddleston said. “we want to take out all this trash that we’ve got here and gradually restore it and heal it and bring it back to being a wilderness again.”

the fobits have more than a 130 volunteers who work closely with other nonprofits.
the u.s. bureau of land management says that it benefits from tens of thousands of dollars in volunteer labor. facing tight budgets and limited resources, land managers here are increasingly turning to volunteers to help protect these uniquely american assets.

“what we’re pushing for and suggesting is kind of a leave-it-as-it-policy,” said paul joyce of the alpine triangle coalition. “we don’t want to change a lot about the alpine triangle. we just don’t want a lot to change about it in the future.”

but some local residents are apprehensive about closing public land to future mining. while others worry that a conservation land designation might negatively impact tourism.