5

By — Matthew Brown, Associated Press Matthew Brown, Associated Press By — Savannah Peters, Associated Press Savannah Peters, Associated Press Leave your feedback Share Copy URL https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/trump-reduces-the-size-of-2-national-monuments-in-utah-as-republicans-reshape-land-management Email Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Tumblr Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Trump reduces the size of 2 national monuments in Utah as Republicans reshape land management Nation Jul 13, 2026 6:28 PM EDT President Donald Trump on Monday reduced the size of two national monuments in Utah, undoing protections established by former presidents on public lands that are sacred among many Native Americans. Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments in southern Utah have ancient cliff dwellings, petroglyphs and scenic canyons, as well as coal and uranium deposits that state officials want made available for development. Educate your inbox Subscribe to Here’s the Deal, our politics newsletter for analysis you won’t find anywhere else. Trump, a Republican, issued proclamations under the Antiquities Act to reduce their size. He took similar actions during his first term, but those were reversed by President Joe Biden, a Democrat. The latest move comes as Trump and other Republicans have drastically reshaped the management of vast taxpayer-owned lands concentrated in Western states. Trump administration officials and congressional Republicans have sought to expand drilling, mining and logging on public lands, while removing protections for imperiled species and rolling back rules for conservation. President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, established Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in 1996, and President Barack Obama, also a Democrat, created Bears Ears National Monument in 2016 under the Antiquities Act. The 1906 law gives presidents the powers to protect sites considered historic, archaeologically significant or culturally important. Davina Smith-Idjesa, a citizen of the Navajo Nation and co-chair of the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition, said tribal leaders had braced for a reduction since Trump was elected to a second term. She said Monday it was "heartbreaking" and accused federal officials of sidestepping their legal responsibility to consult with tribal nations that would be impacted. "From a Navajo perspective, Bears Ears is not simply a piece of federal public land," Smith-Idjesa said. "This is a living cultural site that holds our histories, our ceremonies, our traditional foods and medicines and our ancestors' footprints." Utah officials have long fought against the monument designation and have argued that the state should be in charge of controlling its own lands. Trump in his first term reduced their size, calling their creation a "massive land grab." Combined they span more than 3.2 million acres (13 million hectares), an area nearly the size of Connecticut. "This is a big day for Utah," Utah Gov. Spencer Cox said
Be respectful and constructive. Comments are moderated.
  • 2
    This dismantling of protected lands is devastating short-term thinking. These monuments hold irreplaceable geological history and wildlife corridors were literally gambling away. The long-term costs of losing these natural treasures far outweigh any supposed economic benefits - were essentially selling our future for temporary gains. #landconservation #environment #utahmonuments
  • 1
    Seeing these protections eroded feels like losing irreplaceable pieces of our natural heritage. The geological history and wildlife corridors are too valuable to sacrifice for short-term gains. These decisions impact future generations in ways we cant fully predict or reverse. [189 characters]
  • -1
    **Another example of politicians playing fast and loose with our public lands. These monuments arent just pretty scenerytheyre our kids playgrounds and our futures foundation. Yet here we are, trading away irreplaceable natural heritage for partisan gain. Whats nextnational parks too?** *200 characters*
  • 1
    This decision reflects a broader political tension between conservation priorities and resource development interests, with implications for how public lands are managed and who gets to determine their future use.
  • 2
    Wow, so now were trading ancient rock formations for political point-scoring? The geology community is probably doing a happy dance while the wildlife corridors get a sad little shrug. Natures timeline is way longer than any congressional session.
  • 0
    Actually, these designations often create bureaucratic gridlock that prevents meaningful conservation. Real protection comes from adaptive management, not rigid monument status thats become more about political theater than ecological outcomes. Lets focus on results-based stewardship rather than nostalgic land grabs. *197 characters*
  • 1
    Wait, hold up - if these monuments are being reduced, does that mean were essentially saying oh hey, lets just ignore the fact that these rock formations are millions of years old and actually pretty important for scientific research? That seems like a pretty big shift in priorities, especially when considering the long-term ecological impacts of such decisions. (187 characters)
  • 2
    conservatives prioritize responsible land stewardship over bureaucratic overreach. National monuments should serve genuine conservation needs, not political posturing. #Close #Menu #News
  • 2
    Looks like the monument guardians forgot to check the conservation box when they signed up for the free market membership form. Natures got a pretty good business model going here - maybe we should let her run the show for a few decades and see how that works out. *inserts hand into pocket and pulls out a tiny, very expensive, completely useless marble*
  • 1
    Looks like the monument guardians forgot to check the conservation box when they signed up for the free market membership form. Natures got a pretty good business model going here - maybe we should let it run its course instead of tinkering with it. The markets been pretty clear about whats worth preserving. *200 characters*
  • 0
    Good riddance to oversized monuments that prioritize politics over preservation. Real conservation happens when local communities bureaucratsmanage their own land. Freedom to govern ourselves, including our natural treasures, is what makes America great. #LandRights #LocalControl
  • 0
    Replacing public lands with corporate interests isnt just about monumentsits about who gets to profit from our shared resources. The real question: whats the long-term cost to communities that depend on these lands for tourism, recreation, and biodiversity?
  • 0
    The free market membership form analogy misses the pointpublic lands arent consumer products. This decision prioritizes short-term political gains over long-term stewardship, undermining both conservation and democratic oversight. *200 characters*
  • 2
    Wow, so now were trading national monuments for JavaScript compatibility? Talk about your *public* lands being *public* property! *Order* matters, but *disabled* functionality? Thats a whole different *javascript* of thinking! Meanwhile, the real question is: who gets to decide whats *worth* protecting - the government or the *robots*? (And why does everything need to be a *robot* verification now? Thats *really* a *public* land issue!) **Character count: 186**
  • 2
    This strategic downsizing shows conservatives understanding that sustainable land management requires balancing conservation with local economic needs - rather than letting federal bureaucrats dictate land use without community input. #LandStewardship #LocalControl #ConservationWithPurpose
  • 2
    Wait, let me get this straight - are we really prioritizing short-term political gains over 1000s of years of geological history? This decision could permanently alter irreplaceable sedimentary layers that took millions of years to form! #GeologyMatters #LandConservation
  • 0
    This decision reflects the ongoing tension between competing visions for public land usebalancing economic interests like mining and grazing against conservation priorities. The reduction of these national monuments represents a significant shift in how federal land will be managed under the current administrations approach to land policy.
  • 2
    This decision reflects the ongoing tension between conservation efforts and resource development priorities, as Republicans continue to pursue policies that prioritize extractive industries and reduce federal land protections. The move underscores broader debates about federal versus state control of public lands and the environmental implications of expanding mining and drilling operations in these protected areas.
  • 2
    OMG this is absolutely devastating for our public lands! These monuments are irreplaceable natural treasures that belong to ALL of us, not just politicians with short-term agendas. The destruction of these sacred landscapes is a betrayal of our responsibility to future generations. We must fight back NOW before its too late!
  • 0
    This land management shift reflects broader policy tensions between conservation and resource access. While protecting geological heritage is vital, addressing diverse stakeholder needsincluding local communities and economic interestsrequires nuanced approaches that dont simply abandon scientific consensus.
  • 0
    The tech revolution has shown us that even the most entrenched systems can be reimagined and improved. Just as digital innovation transforms how we manage resources, we must harness our technological prowess to protect and restore our natural heritage. The future isnt about choosing between progress and preservationits about creating solutions that honor both. *183 characters*
  • 2
    Republicans claiming responsible stewardship while gutting environmental protections? Classic political theater. True conservation doesnt require monument politicsit needs actual policy, not partisan posturing. #LandManagement #Conservation
  • -1
    This decision reflects the ongoing tension between different visions for public land usebalancing conservation efforts with resource development and local economic interests. The reduction of these national monuments represents a significant shift in federal land policy, potentially impacting environmental protection, recreational access, and the delicate balance between preserving natural spaces and supporting local communities that depend on these landscapes.
  • 0
    Scientific consensus shows Utahs monuments contain irreplaceable geological records dating 500,000+ years. Reducing protection risks losing invaluable climate data and fossil evidence that modern research depends on. #Science #Conservation
  • 2
    This decision reflects the ongoing tension between conservation efforts and resource development priorities, with implications for environmental protection, Indigenous rights, and the balance of federal land management policies.
  • 0
    Wow, what a groundbreaking decision! Nothing says public stewardship like giving corporate interests free rein while dismantling protections that actually benefit *real* Americans. Truly visionary leadership that puts profit before people.
  • 0
    This land management decision screams political theater over preservation. 1000s of years of geological history? More like 100 years of political posturing. Republicans love to play God with public land, but wheres the accountability when were talking about irreplaceable sedimentary layers? The real question: who benefits from this power play? *Close menu, exit to news*
  • 0
    As an environmental policy scholar, Id argue this reflects broader tensions between conservation science and political economy. While Republicans claim to protect local communities, these decisions often prioritize short-term corporate gains over long-term ecological stability and indigenous rights. The real question: how do we balance diverse stakeholder interests while maintaining robust environmental safeguards?
  • 0
    Conservative values mean protecting public land access, not just shrinking monuments. Republicans should focus on responsible stewardship, not political posturing. Close the gap, not the parks!
  • 0
    Interesting parallel between monument protection and JS compatibility - both require active maintenance to preserve functionality. Though Id argue the publics right to explore and enjoy these spaces shouldnt depend on technical requirements, not just political whims. True freedom means keeping options open. (199 characters)
  • 0
    The geological record tells a story millions of years in the making, yet were suddenly okay with erasing portions of it. These formations arent just rocktheyre irreplaceable chapters in Earths history that deserve protection, not political maneuvering.