SAN JUAN COUNTY, UTAH – A historic achievement in Indigenous-informed conservation and collaborative management of nature was marked today with the finalization of the Bears Ears Resource Management Plan–a roadmap that outlines the goals, policies, and objectives for managing natural resources on publicly-owned land.  “The significance of this Resource Management Plan can’t be overstated,” said Jocelyn Torres, Chief Conservation Officer for the Conservation Lands Foundation. “The Plan sets a powerful precedent for Tribal leadership and is the result of unprecedented collaboration between the five Tribes of the Bears Ears Commission–Navajo, Hopi, Ute Mountain Tribe, Ute Tribe and Zuni, federal agencies, and community partners to create a framework of shared stewardship. “It culminates decades of effort to protect Bears Ears’ sacred places, cultural heritage, and ecological systems for future generations, which accelerated when President Obama established it as a National Monument in 2016–and then stalled when President Trump reduced the size of the monument by 85 percent and attempted to open the lands for development. Tribal Nations, CLF, and many other partners successfully fought against that reduction and secured President Biden’s reinstatement of the original boundaries in 2021. “Utah voters overwhelmingly support their national monuments and a strong role for Native American Tribes in helping to manage their ancestral lands. We wholeheartedly support the Tribes’ preferred version of the Bears Ears management plan, which ensures the protection of sacred places, cultural heritage, and ecological systems. “As a partner in the creation of the Bears Ears National Monument, we will continue to vigorously defend its protection and that of other beloved and sacred national monuments that are part of the country’s National Conservation Lands system, including its first unit–Grand Staircase-Escalante,” said Torres. ####

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.”

St. George, UT – Yesterday, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) signed a Record of Decision to deny a right-of-way for the four-lane Northern Corridor Highway through Red Cliffs National Conservation Area (NCA) in southwestern Utah near Zion National Park. “For the seventh time, the agencies have once again concluded that punching a high-speed four-lane highway through a National Conservation Area and critical habitat for the threatened Mojave desert tortoise undermines both the habitat needed for the tortoise to survive and the purposes of the congressional designation as an NCA,” said Todd C. Tucci, senior attorney with Advocates for the West and counsel for conservation groups. “We congratulate the agencies in acknowledging both the broad public opposition to the highway, and the underlying requirement to manage this NCA for conservation and recreation.” Yesterday’s decision confirms the federal agencies’ rejection of the Northern Corridor Highway project, which would have torn through critical habitat for the imperiled Mojave desert tortoise, violated five bedrock environmental laws, damaged iconic scenic vistas, disrupted treasured outdoor recreation opportunities and set a dangerous precedent for developing federally protected conservation areas across the U.S. According to the final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) , the Northern Corridor Highway is a poor option for the St. George community, as it would increase fire probability and frequency, result in permanent loss to designated critical tortoise habitat, spread noxious weeds and invasive plants and adversely impact the highest number of cultural and historical resources of all considered alternatives. This long-anticipated Record of Decision marks the conclusion of the agencies’ final SEIS , released on November 7, 2024, and is the result of a decades-long fight from local residents, conservation organizations and outdoor recreationists to keep the highway out of the NCA. While this decision is a significant victory for public lands protection nationwide, it does not change the fact that world-class recreation and critical species habitat within the Greater Moe’s Valley Area—a treasured area south of the NCA—remains at risk of development. Roughly half of the lands within the Greater Moe’s Valley Area are managed by the Utah Trust Lands Administration and lack long-term conservation protections.

Utah - Today, the Conservation Lands Foundation welcomes the release of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service’s final environmental impact statement and proposed resource management plan for Bears Ears National Monument in Utah, a crucial step in ensuring the protection of one of the nation’s most culturally and ecologically significant landscapes. The 1.36-million-acre monument is a living testament to the ancestral homelands of Tribal Nations and holds an unparalleled richness of cultural sites, historic landmarks, and natural wonders.  This proposed plan represents the culmination of years of collaboration between the five Tribes of the Bears Ears Commission and local stakeholders. Importantly, the plan honors Tribal co-stewardship, recognizing the Bears Ears Commission and formally incorporating Traditional Indigenous Knowledge into the monument’s management framework. This approach marks a pivotal shift in how public lands are protected and managed, setting a new standard for federal-Tribal partnerships. Statement from Ben Katz, Southwest associate program director for Conservation Lands Foundation: “As the only nonprofit solely dedicated to protecting, restoring, and expanding the BLM’s National Conservation Lands system, the Conservation Lands Foundation remains deeply engaged in BLM land-use planning across the West to ensure that these plans guide future management decisions in the right way. “While we are still reviewing the proposed plan, we are encouraged by the emphasis on Tribal co-stewardship, which ensures that the voices of the Hopi Tribe, Navajo Nation, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation and Pueblo of Zuni will continue to shape the future of Bears Ears. "This plan is a significant step toward righting historic wrongs and fostering a collective healing process, going further than simply conserving land and toward safeguarding the cultural heritage, traditions, and identity of Indigenous communities who have been stewarding this landscape since time immemorial.” ####

SALT LAKE CITY, UT - Today, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, Conservation Lands Foundation, and The Wilderness Society (together, the “Conservation Groups”) filed a motion to intervene to defend the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) Public Lands Rule against a lawsuit brought this past summer by the American Farm Bureau and other industry trade associations representing the oil and gas and mining industries. The Conservation Groups argue that the Public Lands Rule will help modernize the management practices of the BLM and ensure that the agency has the tools to meet future challenges, like growing pressure from climate change, and to restore public lands from the impacts of development. These groups celebrated the finalization of the rule, which was overwhelmingly supported by the public during the comment period , and are now engaging to defend it from attacks. Conservation Lands Foundation (CLF), Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA), and The Wilderness Society (TWS) are represented by Advocates for the West , SUWA, and Kaplan Kirsch LLP. “This lawsuit - like the state of Utah’s challenge to the Rule - is out of touch with the majority of Utahns who support conservation and know climate change is a serious problem,” said Stephen Bloch, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance Legal Director . “Utah is predicted to be hit particularly hard by the impacts of a hotter, drier, and more unpredictable climate. The Public Lands Rule gives BLM and the public a framework and important tools to begin work to stem the tide.” “This lawsuit is a clear attempt by extractive industries to maintain their stranglehold on our public lands for private benefit,” said Todd Tucci, Senior Attorney with Advocates for the West . “It’s long past time for BLM to address the pervasive degradation caused by extraction and fully implement the common-sense Public Lands Rule to ensure the ecological health and resilience of our public lands. This industry attempt to block BLM from fulfilling that statutory obligation - critical to meeting the challenges of a rapidly changing climate - should be rejected.” “Multinational oil and gas, mining, and other extractive industries have joined the torrent of litigation launched by anti-public lands states to keep the rules governing management of public lands permanently tipped in their favor,” said Alison Flint, Senior Legal Director at The Wilderness Society. “The BLM Public Lands Rule seeks to balance management of public lands as Congress intended almost a half-century ago. Unfortunately it's no surprise that industry groups are piling on with more meritless claims opposing balanced management. These cases should be dismissed to ensure that the agency adheres to the law that was put in place by Congress fifty years ago.” “This lawsuit against the Rule appears to be motivated by a puzzling fear of implementing existing law - the Federal Land Policy and Management Act - and an unwillingness to recognize today’s realities,” said Charlotte Overby, Vice President of Conservation Field Programs at the Conservation Lands Foundation . “This new guidance will improve ecological and climate resilience, and provide the tools managers need to restore habitat from wildfires, drought, and other negative impacts. It also keeps important recreation areas – that are local economic engines – open and accessible to the public. Supporters of the Public Lands Rule include legal experts, western lawmakers, local elected officials, and governors who participated in a robust public process, and more than 90% of public comments were in support of this sensible Rule.” Today’s legal action follows other motions to intervene ( July 26 , September 19 , and September 30 ) by conservation groups in three other lawsuits filed by the states of Alaska, Utah, Wyoming, North Dakota, Idaho, and Montana, which challenge the Public Lands Rule. The Public Lands Rule went into effect in June after a year-long process to engage the public in its development. ###

Washington, D.C. - Today, the state of Utah filed a lawsuit before the Supreme Court demanding ownership of 18.5 million acres of federal public land in the state. The case could significantly affect access to public lands not only in Utah but also throughout the Western United States and Alaska. As the only non-profit organization solely focused on protecting the public’s access to lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management, the Conservation Lands Foundation issued the following statement in response to the lawsuit: Statement from Jocelyn Torres, Co-Interim Executive Director and Chief Conservation Officer:  “This lawsuit is as frivolous as they come and a blatant power-grab by a handful of Utah politicians whose escalating aggression has become an attack on all public lands as we know them. Their previous attempt to decimate America’s cherished Grand Staircase Escalante and Bears Ears National Monuments and their attack on the Public Lands Rule clearly shows their intention to take away opportunities for enjoying, recreating on, and accessing public lands. “Public lands are increasingly among the last places that bring people together, making this lawsuit a cynical, divisive move that blatantly ignores the fact that only Congress can transfer or dispose of federal lands, serving as a safeguard against such attacks. The lawsuit is an enormous waste of taxpayer dollars at a time when Utah’s public lands continue to be an economic engine and lifeline for communities throughout the state and when Utahns and all Americans overwhelmingly support their access to them.” ####