Congress is attempting to use the Congressional Review Act to remove a national monument management plan, a targeted attack on protected public lands in Utah and across the country.

The proposed Northern Corridor Highway would carve a four-lane, high-speed road through designated critical habitat for the threatened Mojave desert tortoise within Red Cliffs National Conservation Area.

The Conservation Lands Foundation calls on Congress to reject the nomination of Stevan Pearce for Bureau of Land Management Director

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE JANUARY 6, 2025 Contact: Kris Deutschman, kris@ conservationlands.org Washington, DC - The bipartisan Fiscal Year 2026 Interior appropriations bill Congress will be considering in the coming days rejects the steep cuts the White House requested for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and management of National Conservation Lands, which include nearly 40 million acres of the country’s iconic national monuments, wild and scenic rivers, and other special public lands.  The bill provides marginal reductions in funding for the BLM Lands and Resources account, while ensuring funding for the National Conservation Lands system is maintained at $59.135 million, equal to what was enacted in Fiscal Year 2025. Below is a statement from David Feinman, Vice President of Government Affairs of the Conservation Lands Foundation, which represents a national network of community advocates who are solely focused on the public lands overseen by the Bureau of Land Management including National Conservation Lands. "The Conservation Lands Foundation applauds Congress for delivering clear bipartisan, bicameral support for National Conservation Lands and rejecting the White House's proposed 75% cut to the management of these critical public lands. While the current funding is not enough to make up for decades of underinvestment, maintaining the current funding level for the National Conservation Lands system helps the BLM protect these iconic and irreplaceable natural landscapes and the public’s access to them. “We also applaud the inclusion of language in the bill that requires the BLM maintain staffing levels necessary to fulfill its multiple-use mission, including protecting natural and cultural resources, maintaining safe and appropriate access and recreation, conducting Tribal consultation, and managing the National Conservation Lands. “The truth is, BLM and the National Conservation Lands system have been chronically underfunded by Congress and understaffed for decades, and we remain concerned about the historical underinvestment to the nation’s largest public land manager and the conservation lands it stewards. “The agency needs meaningful funding increases to address decades of deferred maintenance, visitor services and resource protection, as well as to properly staff the agency to do this work. Nevertheless, we urge swift passage of the FY26 Interior funding bill, which at minimum provides stability for the agency to fulfill its mission.” ###

Washington, D.C. — The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee heard five conservation bills, which will enact much-needed new protections for public lands in Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico. Below is a statement from Chris Hill, CEO of the Conservation Lands Foundation, which represents a national network of community advocates who are solely focused on the public lands overseen by the Bureau of Land Management, including the National Conservation Lands: “We thank the champions in the Senate who introduced and continue to move forward these important bills that protect the public’s access to nature and essential wildlife habitats, while supporting Tribal culture and economies. It’s heartening to see the Senate advance meaningful public lands policy with the bipartisan support we know exists with their constituents. These bills include: S. 1005 Southern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act, sponsored by Senators Cortez Masto and Rosen of Nevada. S.764 Colorado Outdoor Recreation and Economy (CORE) Act, sponsored by Senators Bennet and Hickenlooper of Colorado. S. 1195 Pershing County Economic Development and Conservation Act, sponsored by Senator Rosen of Nevada. S. 1319 Pecos Watershed Withdrawal and S. 1476 M.H. Dutch Salmon Greater Gila Wild and Scenic River Act, both sponsored by Senators Heinrich and Luján of New Mexico. “These bills honor our collective commitments to strengthen our bonds with the lands we know and love and we urge the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee to ensure they are passed by the full Senate quickly.” ###

Patagonia, Adyen ask customers to protect public lands this holiday season

Washington — Six organizations sent a letter to the Acting Director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), warning that at least 5,033 oil and gas leases — covering nearly 4 million acres — may now be legally invalid. The letter asks the agency to halt all new leasing and permitting until it “ensure[s] compliance with the law and remed[ies] this grave legal uncertainty.” Ultimately, Congress must fix the legal crisis it created. The letter details how Congress' unprecedented use of the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to overturn BLM Resource Management Plans (RMPs) has called into question the legal efficacy of every land management plan finalized since 1996. These plans don't just guide management decisions; they enable everything that happens on public lands, from oil and gas drilling to recreation, grazing, and wildlife protection. If land use plans may now be invalid, then thousands of oil and gas leases and drilling permits issued under them may also be invalid Congress Was Warned About CRA Consequences When Republican members of Congress voted in October to use the CRA to overturn three RMPs in Alaska, Montana, and North Dakota, they ignored urgent warnings from conservationists, legal scholars, former BLM officials, and even some energy industry voices about the chaos this would unleash. The agency's own Solicitor’s Office cautioned that treating RMPs as “rules” could call into question the validity of every BLM plan since 1996 — along with the leases, grazing permits, rights-of-way, and other decisions based on those plans. Thirty leading law professors warned that this move could jeopardize “thousands of leases and management decisions across hundreds of millions of acres.” Former BLM leaders said overturning land-use plans under the CRA would “undermine the basis for authorizations” and create widespread legal uncertainty for energy developers, ranchers, and recreation permittees, threatening the integrity of the entire planning system. But Congress ignored these warnings — and is now moving ahead with even more CRA resolutions that will escalate the crisis. "By incorrectly treating land use plans as rules under the Congressional Review Act, Congress hasn't just overturned three plans — they've thrown every plan finalized since 1996, representing 166 million acres, into doubt. That mistake replaces a stable, science-based, community-driven system with needless chaos and uncertainty. It was lazy and irresponsible and is harmful to all land users," said Jocelyn Torres, chief conservation officer at the Conservation Lands Foundation. Along with the at least 5,033 existing leases, the legal uncertainty extends to future leasing. According to the letter, 69.8% of all BLM lands available for oil and gas leasing are managed under RMPs finalized after 1996 that were never submitted to Congress. BLM is currently evaluating 850 parcels totaling 787,927 acres across 14 upcoming lease sales on lands that may lack a valid RMP. This legal chaos affects far more than oil and gas. Land management plans for national forests, national parks, and national wildlife refuges finalized since 1996 may also be invalid, potentially calling into question grazing permits, timber sales, recreation authorizations, and wildfire management projects across hundreds of millions of acres nationwide. "Congress was warned repeatedly that weaponizing the CRA against land management plans would create exactly this kind of chaos. They charged ahead anyway, putting short-term political gain ahead of stable land management. Now they've jeopardized the very oil and gas development they claimed to be protecting. Congress must immediately fix the mess it made." said Alison Flint, senior legal director for The Wilderness Society . “Let’s be crystal clear: The Congressional Review Act is bad public policy. And it’s absolutely terrible public policy when used to overturn comprehensive public land planning decisions that radically reduces predictability for all public land users — in particular, as we have highlighted to the Bureau of Land Management, the oil and gas industry itself,” said Melissa Hornbein, senior attorney at the Western Environmental Law Center. “Congress lit the fuse on a legal time bomb that now calls into question the validity of thousands of oil and gas leases covering millions of acres as well as grazing permits and numerous other authorizations. But equally concerning, use of the CRA unravels decades of community-led land-use planning and throws into disarray the legal foundation for how our public lands are managed,” said Laird Lucas, executive director at Advocates for the West. “Congress’s use of the CRA to disapprove several Bureau of Land Management land use plans that were put in place following years of stakeholder and Tribal Nation input has sown confusion throughout the American West. This is not what Congress intended when it passed the CRA,” said Steve Bloch, legal director for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. “As one of the principal architects of this newest line of attack on public lands, Sen. Daines opened Pandora’s Box. Using the Congressional Review Act to wipe out years of local work on Resource Management Plans is unprecedented, and it puts rural economies at risk, including the oil and gas industry. Inserting Congress into these processes threatens to unravel the foundations of public resource management and dismantle the systems that communities, businesses, and Montanans rely on. Congress is heading down a reckless path, yet another example of the pattern of attacks we’re seeing out of Washington D.C. on one of the most foundational aspects of Montana’s way of life: our public lands and resources,” said Aubrey Bertram, Staff Attorney & Federal Policy Director at Wild Montana.

Washington, D.C. — The U.S. House last night used the Congressional Review Act to consider and pass three resolutions undermining public lands protections in three areas in Alaska and Wyoming. The three resolutions are: S.J. Res. 80 – disapproving of the ‘‘National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska Integrated Activity Plan Record of Decision’’. H.J. Res. 130 – disapproving of the ‘‘Buffalo Field Office Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment’’. H.J. Res. 131 – disapproving of the ‘‘Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program Record of Decision’’. Below is a statement from Jocelyn Torres, Chief Conservation Officer of the Conservation Lands Foundation, which represents a national network of community advocates who are solely focused on the public lands overseen by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), including the National Conservation Lands: “Today’s action by the U.S. House is part of a series of coordinated attempts to roll back common sense management of public lands. It’s simple - America’s public lands should be managed for the public good. These resolutions undermine the U.S. Bureau of Land Management’s authority to manage public lands for the benefit of all Americans, not just those who seek to buy up and close public lands to public access and benefit. “It is clear from the recent actions of this Congress to remove protections from key areas across the West that supporters of these actions are opponents of public lands. By removing the BLM’s authority to manage lands, these resolutions ensure that privatizing or industrializing them are the only viable remaining options. It’s a classic example of trying to solve a problem that was self-inflicted for the express purpose of achieving an outcome that benefits you. “We remain opposed to these one-sided, destructive attempts to roll back the clock on public lands protection and we’ll continue to work with members of the Friends Grassroots Network to oppose these obvious attempts to use public resources for private gain. We’ll continue to remind members of Congress that the overwhelming majority of Americans support responsible, effective, balanced management of the public lands.” ###

Rule repeal leaves irreplaceable wildlife habitat vulnerable to unchecked oil drilling, despite 300,000+ public comments in support of conservation

Members of Congress, local elected officials, Tribal leaders, outdoor industry executives, legal scholars and former BLM officials join calls for protecting public lands and preserving the Public Lands Rule.

Oil Ties and Land-Sale Stance of Nominee for the Country’s Largest Public Lands Manager Threatens Local Communities and Agency’s 'Multiple-Use' Mandate

Washington, D.C. – The U.S. Senate voted today to approve a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to dismantle the Bureau of Land Management’s Integrated Activity Plan that protects 13.3 million acres of irreplaceable public lands and waters in the Western Arctic (called the National Petroleum Reserve Alaska (NPRA).  This legally-questionable use of the CRA will erase years of public engagement and scientific collaboration, overturning balanced management that supports Indigenous communities, wildlife, and the global climate. Once the U.S. House of Representatives passes it and the president signs it, as is expected, vast swaths of the Reserve will be open to expanded industrial oil and gas development, an action that directly undermines commitments to Tribal sovereignty, biodiversity, and climate resilience in one of the fastest-warming regions on Earth. Below is a statement from Jocelyn Torres, Chief Conservation Officer for the Conservation Lands Foundation: “Using the Congressional Review Act to undo protections in the Western Arctic is reckless and a deliberate attack on the Alaska Native communities that have cared for these lands for generations and were involved in establishing the framework that protects these lands. The Integrated Activity Plan represents years of collaboration between Tribes, local communities, scientists, and the American public to ensure the survival of vital and sensitive landscapes including Teshekpuk Lake and the Utukok Uplands. “Repealing this plan will further expose the region’s wildlife and people to devastating and irrevocable industrial impacts, all to serve short-term fossil fuel interests in a place already warming at four times the global average. It will also continue a dangerous new precedent that began earlier this month empowering Congress through the CRA to wreak havoc on how the public’s lands are managed across the country, jeopardizing the stability and predictability that communities and industries alike depend on. “The American people have made their priorities clear: they want clean air, safe water, and healthy public lands that future generations can enjoy. We will continue to stand with local communities and fight these extreme measures that decimate the natural environment that the people and wildlife of the Western Arctic depend on.” Background The National Petroleum Reserve Alaska (NPRA) is the largest unit of public land in the United States, encompassing nearly 23 million acres of critical habitat for caribou, polar bears, muskox, migratory birds, and fish. More than 40 Indigenous communities depend on the Reserve for subsistence and cultural practices that have persisted for millennia. In 2024, following extensive consultation with Alaska Native Tribes and corporations, the Biden administration finalized a rule restoring and strengthening protections for 13.3 million acres of Special Areas within the Reserve—Teshekpuk Lake, Utukok Uplands, Colville River, Kasegaluk Lagoon, and Peard Bay. This plan balanced subsistence needs with responsible land management and was widely supported by the public, with more than 250,000 comments favoring conservation. ###

Washington, D.C. — In an unprecedented and alarming move for the country’s public lands, the U.S. Senate voted over the past two days to pass three Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions that overturn finalized, science-based Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land use plans that were developed over years of public engagement and stakeholder input. These plans—crafted with the involvement of local communities, Tribes, landowners, and land management professionals—were designed to ensure responsible, balanced use of public lands. This marks the first time the Congressional Review Act has been used to nullify land management plans, setting a dangerous precedent that threatens to destabilize how millions of acres of public lands are governed across the West. Specifically, the Senate passed resolutions of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act (or CRA) to strike down Resource Management Plans covering Central Yukon (AK) , Miles City (MT) , and North Dakota. All three passed in the House of Representatives in September. Below is a statement from David Feinman, Vice President of Government Affairs at the Conservation Lands Foundation, which represents a national network of community advocates who are solely focused on the public lands overseen by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), including the National Conservation Lands: “This move is legally dubious and deeply irresponsible. Land use plans have never been considered ‘rules’ under the Congressional Review Act. To suddenly apply the CRA here—after these plans were developed through extensive public engagement—is a slap in the face to every community member, Tribal government, industry expert, and stakeholder who participated in good faith. “Let’s be clear: these plans weren’t drafted in a back room—they were shaped over years of broad stakeholder collaboration, public comment, and scientific review, and they balance many uses on the land. Overturning them by congressional decree thousands of miles from these landscapes not only disregards the substance of those plans, it also throws the entire land management system into chaos. Virtually every single BLM land use plan is now potentially at risk—and with them, every use authorized by those plans, from grazing and energy development to mining, outdoor recreation, and wildlife conservation. “This action doesn’t just hurt conservation—it hurts local economies and the ability of land users and communities across the West to know how public lands are being managed acre by acre. Everyone who cares about public land access, stewardship, and the multiple uses they provide the American people should be outraged by what’s happening here.” ###

Durango, Colorado — Today, the Trump administration announced it will reopen the recently finalized Rock Springs, Wyoming Resource Management Plan (RMP), a blueprint that guides the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) management of nearly 3.6 million acres of public lands in southwestern Wyoming for the next two decades. Conservation leaders criticized the move, calling it a step backward that undermines years of public engagement, Tribal consultation, and science-backed planning.  The Rock Springs RMP, finalized just months ago, reflects over a decade of collaboration between local communities, Tribal nations, state officials, and federal land managers. Over 92 percent of public comments submitted during the draft stage supported conservation efforts within the plan, and the final plan reflected 85 percent of recommendations from the Wyoming Governor’s own task force. The plan strikes a meaningful balance—protecting the wild landscapes and migration corridors of Wyoming’s Northern Red Desert while leaving two-thirds of the acreage open to oil and gas development. Below is a statement from Charlotte Overby, Vice President of Conservation Field Programs of the Conservation Lands Foundation, which represents a national network of community advocates who are solely focused on the public lands overseen by the Bureau of Land Management, including the National Conservation Lands: “Reopening a carefully balanced plan that took more than a decade to develop is a glaring disservice to the people who shaped it. The Rock Springs Resource Management Plan incorporated extensive public input, respected the work of the Governor’s task force, and reflected what science, Tribal nations, and communities have been calling for: smart, modern, and carefully balanced land stewardship. People across Wyoming and the nation care deeply about how their public lands are managed. They showed up in this process, and their voices deserve to be respected—not sidelined. “The final plan protected irreplaceable values while still allowing oil and gas leasing in areas with production potential. For example, the plan protects the Northern Red Desert region, which is a critical cultural and ecological landscape and includes vast unfenced land home to iconic wildlife migrations, some of the most intact sagebrush steppe left in the West, and cultural resources sacred to Indigenous communities. Areas of critical environmental concern were appropriately designated to protect important resources and allow public access to these beloved landscapes. Reopening this process creates uncertainty, wastes taxpayer resources, and ignores the clear consensus of the people who live, work and recreate on these lands. “It’s deeply concerning that the notice to reopen the Rock Springs Resource Management Plan was published the same morning the federal government shut down. As a result, the agency has failed to take the required next step in the planning process–an immediate example of how the shutdown is already causing confusion in land management. This timing undermines transparency and meaningful public participation.” ### Contact: Kris Deutschman, kris@conservationlands.org

Washington, DC – Following the mass layoffs of federal employees within the Department of the Interior and the Bureau of Land Management earlier this year and ongoing moves to sell off America’s public lands, today’s federal government shutdown is another blow to the country’s remaining unprotected areas of nature.  Below is a statement from Chris Hill, Chief Executive Officer of the Conservation Lands Foundation, which represents a national network of community advocates who are solely focused on the public lands overseen by the Bureau of Land Management, including the National Conservation Lands: “We call upon Congress to uphold its responsibilities under the Constitution and pass a budget that keeps our public land management agencies intact and ensures that the administration executes the funding appropriated by Congress for public land management agencies accordingly. Anything less is a betrayal of our Constitution and the nation’s commitment to public lands, public service, and future generations. “What we have seen over the past nine months is a blatant effort to undermine and weaken the very institutions that safeguard our country’s remaining natural and wild places–our precious public lands and water sources that tell the story of America’s culture, help mitigate the climate crisis, prevent wildfires, protect wildlife corridors, and provide for outdoor recreation experiences that are supporting local economies. “Elected leaders behind this effort don’t care about the businesses and local communities that depend on access to these places to pay their bills. They don’t care about the wildlife that will be harmed after oil and gas companies desecrate this land. They don’t care about the families who hunt, fish, camp and recreate on this land, or the Indigenous communities for whom access to their ancestral lands is vital. In short, they’re showing us very clearly that they only care about the corporations who will benefit from privatizing public lands. “Roughly 200 million of the 245 million acres of nature and wildlife beyond and between the national parks and overseen by the Bureau of Land Management are not protected from mining, drilling, or other development, and both the government shutdown, Sec. Burgum’s plan to designate oil permitting as “essential”, and reported reductions in workforce set the stage for the administration to make good on its promise to sell off America’s remaining natural resources. “Congress must ensure that the integrity of the federal budget process is maintained, and that the Executive Branch spends what the Congress appropriates. Any other outcome is a threat to the integrity of our public lands and the agencies that manage them, and a clear effort by elected leaders who are hell bent on privatizing the country’s remaining public lands. ####

PIMA COUNTY, Ariz. — Tuesday’s introduction of H.R.5393 — legislation that aims to undo Presidential Proclamation 7320, which established Ironwood Forest National Monument in 2000 — is the latest in a series of attacks on public land in Arizona. The bill was introduced by Representative Paul Gosar , with Representatives Eli Crane and Andy Biggs as co-sponsors. The districts of the three representatives do not overlap with the monument. In 2017, communities and organizations across southern Arizona rallied in response to a similar and unsuccessful attempt by Rep. Gosar to undermine the monument. The introduction of mining on currently protected public lands, which the bill intends to enable, would devastate Ironwood Forest National Monument’s native ecosystems and sever wildlife connectivity. Many expect the bill’s success or failure to sit with Representative Juan Ciscomani , whose district includes part of Ironwood Forest National Monument. On Monday, Ciscomani became the latest co-sponsor, and the only co-sponsor from Arizona, on the Public Lands in Public Hands Act, which aims to preserve public lands by blocking unauthorized sell offs or transfers. Ciscomani has also voiced support for Chiricahua National Monument’s potential conversion to a national park. The Ironwood Forest National Monument has become increasingly popular with well over 100,000 visitors a year, and local governments are paying attention. Mayor Jon Post , at the Town of Marana ’s recent vote on a resolution in support of the monument, said, “We want to do everything we can to protect that.” Two other local governments—the City of Tucson and Pima County — have also issued resolutions that opposed any reduction in boundaries or any increase in resource extraction in Ironwood Forest National Monument. _______ Below are statements from Ironwood Forest National Monument defense coalition members responding to Tuesday’s legislation: “Rep. Paul Gosar’s push to rescind Ironwood Forest’s protections is a misguided bid for attention,” said Christine Flanagan, president of the Friends of Ironwood Forest . “The monument isn’t even in his district — if it were, he would know it’s both highly visited and deeply valued by the local community.” “Ironwood Forest National Monument is home to a dense population of ironwood trees, bighorn sheep, and important habitat for several endangered species,” said Sandy Bahr, director of Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon (Arizona) Chapter . “It is significant for its natural and cultural resources and is broadly supported by local governments, Tribal Nations, businesses, and more. Rep Gosar is out of touch with Arizonans when he goes after land protections. He should abandon this short-sighted legislation.” "This short-sighted attack on the monument would cause irrevocable harm to Southern Arizona’s landscapes and communities," said Sanober Mirza, Arizona Program Manager for the National Parks Conservation Association . Saguaro National Park is a neighbor to the monument. The Wilderness Society’s Southwest Regional Director, Scott Miller , said “This is an affront to the freedom of all Americans who rely on these landscapes for cultural, recreational, economic and health benefits. It will threaten critical habitat for wildlife and desecrate our treasured natural places, and flies in the face of the massive broad Tribal and local support for these places.” “Congressman Gosar’s wrongheaded legislation is not just an attack on iconic monuments in Arizona, it tees up potential attacks on cherished monuments in other states as well,” said Chris Hill, CEO of the Conservation Lands Foundation . “These monuments were designated to protect irreplaceable cultural sites, fragile ecosystems, and landscapes that generations of people — including Tribes, local communities, and outdoor enthusiasts — have fought to preserve. This move ignores science, public opinion, and our shared responsibility to protect the places that make America unique.” Kate Hotten, co-executive director with the Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection , said “Attempts to strip protections from public lands are deeply unpopular. Ciscomani knows that we’ve seen this play out before, and that the community will stand up in strong support of Ironwood Forest National Monument.” “Ironwood Forest is a refuge of critical habitat for the wildlife and plants that give our region its character and are cherished by local communities” said Nico Lorenzen, conservation and wildlife associate at Wild Arizona . “The monument is an irreplaceable treasure worth far more than its weight in the metals extractive industries want to rip from its soil.” The Arizona Program Manager for Mountain Mamas, Selina Barajas , said "Ironwood Forest National Monument is a vital part of Southern Arizona’s natural and cultural heritage. Representative Gosar's efforts to dismantle its protections threaten the health of our families, communities, and future generations. Moms across Arizona know that protecting clean air, safe and clean water, wildlife, and public lands isn’t optional — it’s essential! We stand with the many local governments, organizations, and residents who have made it clear: Ironwood Forest belongs to the people, not to mining interests." “Ironwood Forest National Monument is a stronghold for Sonoran Desert wildlife that’s cherished by all Arizonans, so this bill is utterly appalling," said Laiken Jordahl, Southwest conservation advocate with the Center for Biological Diversity . “Gosar’s attempt to hand this vital habitat and beloved outdoor recreation destination over to mining companies against the will of local people isn’t policy. It’s a disgraceful sell-off of our natural heritage.” “As the weather cools in Arizona, locals and visitors will flock to our public lands, including our national monuments. Arizonans and Americans spoke clearly this summer — we have the right to access our public lands. Removing protections for the Ironwood Forest National Monument and turning it over to the mining industry would prevent us from accessing and using the land” said Environment Arizona’s Great Outdoors Campaign Director, Ellen Montgomery . “Our wildlife needs large undisturbed habitats to flourish. Ironwood Forest provides room to roam for animals and undeveloped areas for plants to grow. We need more nature in Arizona and we must protect what we have. We urge members of Congress to oppose this bill.” ### Kris Deutschman, Conservation Lands Foundation, kris@conservationlands.org

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Conservation Lands Foundation today denounced the introduction of two bills by U.S. Representative Paul Gosar that seek to abolish Ironwood Forest and Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni - Ancestral Footprints of the Grand Canyon National Monuments in Arizona. These proposed rollbacks represent a direct assault on America’s public lands, Indigenous heritage, and the will of the American people.  Below is a statement from Chris Hill, CEO of the Conservation Lands Foundation: “Congressman Gosar’s wrongheaded legislation is not just an attack on iconic monuments in Arizona, it tees up potential attacks on cherished monuments in other states as well. These monuments were designated to protect irreplaceable cultural sites, fragile ecosystems, and landscapes that generations of people — including Tribes, local communities, and outdoor enthusiasts — have fought to preserve. This move ignores science, public opinion, and our shared responsibility to protect the places that make America unique. “Ironwood Forest National Monument, designated 25 years ago with overwhelming local support, spans 129,000 acres of the biologically rich Sonoran Desert. It is home to centuries-old ironwood trees and some of the region’s most significant archaeological and cultural sites. Just last week, the Tucson City Council reaffirmed its support for the monument. “Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni - Ancestral Footprints of the Grand Canyon National Monument, designated in 2023 after decades of advocacy by the Grand Canyon Tribal Coalition, protects ancestral lands and the Colorado River watershed from uranium mining and other threats. It honors Indigenous leadership and preserves the region's clean air, water, and sacred sites while allowing for traditional uses like hunting and grazing. “We have to ask, does Congressman Gosar actually talk to his constituents? The public overwhelmingly supports these monuments. According to the 2025 State of the Rockies poll, 89% of Western voters — across political affiliations — support keeping national monument designations in place. In Arizona, 80% of voters support Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni, including large majorities of Republicans, Independents, and Democrats. “The Conservation Lands Foundation calls on Congress to reject these extreme, anti-public lands proposals and stand with the American people, the Tribes and communities who have worked tirelessly to protect these lands for future generations.” About Conservation Lands Foundation The Conservation Lands Foundation represents a national network of community advocates who are solely focused on the public lands overseen by the Bureau of Land Management including National Conservation Lands and similar protected public lands in the Western Arctic. ###

Washington, D.C. — The Trump administration today published a notice of proposed rulemaking to rescind the common-sense and widely-supported Conservation and Landscape Health Rule (“Public Lands Rule”) that ensures balanced management and public access to national public lands throughout the western U.S. The announcement indicated a 60-day public comment period, which is legally required of such changes. Below is a statement from Jocelyn Torres, Chief Conservation Officer of the Conservation Lands Foundation, which represents a national network of community advocates who are solely focused on the public lands overseen by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), including the National Conservation Lands: “The repeal of the Public Lands Rule is a betrayal of the public trust and a reckless step backwards for land stewardship in America. Americans have already raised their voices—loudly and clearly—in support of this rule. During the original rulemaking, which was finalized last year, 92% of public comments supported it. This action is a slap in the face to every American who is proud of the natural beauty we have on offer, free of charge, to everyone. “The Public Lands Rule provides land managers with clear, commonsense tools to protect what Americans cherish most about public lands—clean water, abundant wildlife, cultural resources, recreation, and natural beauty. Its repeal dismisses science-based management and undermines the values of millions who depend on these lands for more than just extraction. “Perhaps most troubling is the claim that conservation is not a valid multiple use under BLM’s guiding laws. That is blatantly false. The law explicitly requires that public lands be managed for a range of uses, including watersheds, wildlife habitat, fisheries, and scenic and recreational values—not just for development. Conservation is not a fringe idea; it’s a legal obligation. “America has no shortage of energy resources. What we need is leadership committed to balanced, future-focused land management that serves public access and wildlife—not policy reversals that favor short-term exploitation over long-term stewardship. The Public Lands Rule should remain on the books as a fair, lawful and widely supported guide for managing public lands for generations to come. ### Background on the Public Lands Rule: The Public Lands Rule, which took effect on June 10, 2024, establishes a “framework to ensure healthy landscapes, abundant wildlife habitat, clean water, and balanced decision-making on our nation’s public lands.” BLM’s webpage on the Public Lands Rule. The BLM’s 90-day public process that shaped the final rule was transparent, inclusive, and accessible. Contact: Kris Deutschman, kris@conservationlands.org

Washington, DC (January 13, 2025) – Today, the United States Supreme Court agreed to not hear a case that could decide whether America’s federal, public lands can be sold to private companies for profit. Earlier this year, with the backing of Republican officials from 12 other states, the state of Utah filed an unprecedented lawsuit at the United States Supreme Court seeking an order requiring that the federal government begin selling off or otherwise “disposing” of more than 18.5 million acres of public lands in Utah. If successful, this effort would have implicated more than 200 million acres of public lands across the West. These lands, currently held in trust for the American people, are targets for privatization, degradation, and oil and gas drilling. The sell-off and privatization of public lands has sparked intense opposition, with a broad coalition of western residents, elected officials, sportsmen, and advocacy groups vocally resisting these efforts. While the Supreme Court rejected Utah’s current efforts, attacks to America’s public lands are anticipated to continue in the upcoming administration. Today’s decision comes on the heels of the 119th Congress voting on a rules package to accelerate the sale of public lands . Quotes in Reaction to the Supreme Court Case and Public Land Seizer “We must stand united against this un-American land grab to ensure that our public lands remain accessible and protected for future generations. Our public lands are not for sale. Full stop.” – Senator Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee “This lawsuit is an assault on the country’s long-standing and successful history of safeguarding valuable and vulnerable landscapes in trust for all Americans, and while the Supreme Court’s decision to not hear the case is a reprieve, we fully expect this small group of anti-public lands politicians continue to waste taxpayer dollars and shop their bad ideas, said Chris Hill, Chief Executive Officer for the Conservation Lands Foundation. “Public lands are incredibly popular with Utahans and all Americans and this aggressive attack and blatant power-grab by a handful of Utah politicians could open the country’s remaining natural landscapes to largely unregulated exploitation of its resources–thereby closing them from the public. We will continue to defend and preserve the public’s access to public lands.” “Utah’s case is massively flawed, and we’re pleased to see the Court recognize that and leave 150 years’ worth of established public lands law firmly in place. The nation’s public lands are as popular as ever. People want these places conserved and managed responsibly--not sold off, privatized or despoiled. Today’s news is good for the stability, safety and sustainability for America’s public lands and the people who depend on them”, said Alison Flint, Senior Legal Director at The Wilderness Society . “While the Court's decision denying original review of Utah's claims is welcome news for our shared public lands, we fully expect Utah’s misguided attacks to continue and stand ready to mount a robust defense to ensure our public lands are protected.” “We’re grateful the Supreme Court swiftly rejected the State of Utah’s misguided land grab lawsuit. For more than 100 years, the Supreme Court has affirmed the power of the federal government to hold and manage public lands on behalf of all Americans,” said Steve Bloch, Legal Director for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance . “If successful, Utah’s lawsuit would result in the sale of millions of acres of public lands in redrock country to the highest bidder, an end to America’s system of federal public lands, and the dismantling of the American West as we know it. The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance will continue our unwavering efforts to ensure every attempted land grab by Utah politicians fails.” “The Supreme Court was correct to reject this unfounded lawsuit. More than a century of legal precedent is clear – it is the role of the federal government to manage public lands for the benefit of all Americans. This lawsuit and its backers sought to overturn that precedent, giving away public resources for the private profit of big corporations. For more than a century, our parks and public lands have been part of what makes us special as a country, and we will continue to defend the right of all Americans to enjoy and explore those landscapes,” said Sanjay Narayan, Chief Appellate Counsel of Sierra Club’s Environmental Law Program "The Supreme Court's decision to decline hearing Utah's lawsuit is a win for Colorado's public lands and the many people who value them. It reinforces how public lands are more than just iconic landscapes across the West, but also a core part of our national identity,” said Scott Braden, Director of Colorado Wildlands Project . “Unfortunately, it also underscores the importance of designations to protect our wildlands. For Colorado, this means we must continue working to preserve places like the Dolores Canyons, ensuring they remain intact and accessible to the public for future generations to enjoy and explore." “Public lands are one of America’s best ideas and an intrinsic part of our identity,” said John Robison, Public Lands and Wildlife Director for the Idaho Conservation League. “This takeover effort was never about “local control” but ultimately about selling off our natural heritage to the highest bidder. We are glad that the Supreme Court rejected this takeover attempt/We are dismayed that the Supreme Court is entertaining this takeover attempt/ and will do everything in our power to make sure that public lands stay in public hands.” America's opinion leaders are also deeply opposed to selling off public lands: Denver Post , Utah’s twisted lawsuit is corrupting the West’s (and Colorado’s commitment to public lands ,(December 30th, 2024) “The greatest assault on public lands in American history is being led by Utah’s Gov. Spencer Cox, who is suing the federal government to take over 18.5 million acres of public lands managed and protected by the Bureau of Land Management. The lawsuit makes us question for how many more generations the promise of Yellowstone National Park – “For the benefit and enjoyment of the people” – will stand in America. And the mentality of public lands being disposable to the highest bidder may be seeping into states across the West. Cox claims he wants the land to “actively manage and protect our natural resources.” But it’s hard not to suspect that the real reason he wants to remove the Bureau of Land Management’s oversight of these public lands is to open them up for private profit – development, mining, logging and disposal — at the expense of the American people” Idaho Statesman , Utah revives public land grab scheme, (September 22, 2024) “The courts have made a more conservative turn, but I don’t think even this Supreme Court is likely to overcome the quite clear law and Constitutional provisions that would bar Utah from taking over public lands,” University of Colorado environmental law professor Mark Squillace told the AP. But we shouldn’t count on that. We should apply continuous pressure against this and similar land-grabbing efforts (like the hundreds of thousands of dollars Idaho has spent on dubious efforts to have its federal lands valued). If you’re against the land-grabbing movement, make sure your elected officials know it — particularly Attorney General Raul Labrador, who can decide whether Idaho files an amicus brief in support of Utah’s lawsuit.” Salt Lake Tribune , Utah’s Latest Land Grab Lawsuit has No Legal Leg to Stand on, (September 8, 2024). “In the 2004 adventure movie “ National Treasure, ” the Nicolas Cage character tries to convince people at the National Archives that there is a secret message on the back of the original Declaration of Independence. Written in invisible ink. In the story, it turns out that such a message really exists, and leads to the discovery of a large treasure that has been lost for more than 200 years. In real life, the claim that a key government document contains invisible, century-old messages that only a few clever people know about is the core of Utah’s latest lawsuit seeking to seize millions of acres of federal land.In other words, a total fantasy. An expensive and embarrassing one.” Las Vegas Sun , Utah has no case for clawing back public land, but court unpredictable , (November 24, 2024) “The Supreme Court must reject Utah’s misguided attempt to seize public lands. The stakes are too high. If the court allows this lawsuit to succeed, it will not only privatize millions of acres of public land but also jeopardize the West’s way of life and undermine the very principle of shared stewardship that defines our nation’s public lands. America’s public lands are a trust — not just for this generation but for all those to come. We must protect them, not for profit or political gain, but for the enduring benefit of all.” The New York Times - John Leshy , Utah Wants the Supreme Court to Give It Land Owned by All Americans, (January 8th, 2025) “Utah seeks to give a small group of unelected justices, and not Congress, ultimate authority over America’s public lands, owned by all Americans and entrusted to the federal government for their wise use and protection. The result would most likely spell disaster for the stewardship of some of the nation’s most significant landscapes, while accelerating the decline in the court’s stature with the American people.” Outside Magazine , 18.5 Million Acres of Public Land Are on the Line in Utah in a New Lawsuit, (September 16, 2024). “Politicians in Utah have a long history of trying to sell off your public land to benefit the oil, gas, and other extractive industries that fund their campaigns. This time they’re trying to do it with a lawsuit designed to go straight to the Supreme Court. That lawsuit argues that all Bureau of Land Management acres within the state’s borders should be transferred to Utah’s control. If they succeed, the public could lose access to millions of acres that we use to pursue our favorite outdoor activities, wildlife could lose its habitat, and the environment could suffer. Worse, if the Supreme Court accepts the theory that states should have control over federal land, the upshot could be devastating. It could create precedent that might allow politicians in other western states to do the same.”