The President Can Abolish National Monuments, DOJ Says—and Names Two for Potential Rollback

My friend asked me to write something similar to this as it was happening and soaked my brain with all things related to the National Park Service (NPS) because I love nothing more than exploring and learning about our parks. But alas, as fate would have it, this piece had to be written during the summer solstice when most people were focusing on vacation activities rather than political debates. Anyway, let's dive into some NPS stuff shall we

"I love Chuckwalla Mountains and Chuckwalla National Monument so much – they provide such breathtaking vistas! But being able to revoke those monuments would really hurt our national parks and wilderness areas."

This statement talks about how the current administration plans to reverse national monuments established during the presidency of Barack Obama. They mention that some monuments might only be able to survive if they remain as natural areas, rather than being named monuments because they provide protection to specific features (like Chuckwalla's high mountains). The author argues that this change will be beneficial to various species living in these areas who depend on preserved natural spaces.

The President Can Abolish National Monuments, DOJ Says, and Names Two for Potential Rollback While the Trump administration has largely been mum on which monuments it would revoke, a Government Memorandum suggests Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla could lose their protections.

What did the President say when he abolished national monuments?

This statement isn’t true. Chuckwalla is actually a smaller, less developed mountain range than originally planned. Despite concerns over potential negative impacts from proposed developments, the BLM still plans to keep the majority of Chuckwalla as a wilderness area with minimal development."

Why didn't they revoke all of President Joe Biden's national monument designations when he was inaugurated? Because the process requires a period known as 'public review'. This allows individuals, groups and organizations to express opinions and concerns about proposed monuments

Why did they name these monuments instead of giving them away to states as they had done before?

My friend was talking about visiting a national monument called Sáttítla Highlands (Cuesta del Tovar) near San Diego, CA when she heard they were planning on potentially review

What does your opinion piece say about the fate of the two national monuments mentioned above and why did you choose the language style you did?

It seems like some smart people around the world see the potential problem with the removal of these national monuments from the current administration's playbook and are voicing concern about how they might impact our way of life or the environment

This seems like a strange statement because it talks about the consequences of the Trump administration potentially changing national monument designations – something most people don't understand and were unaware of until recently. Also, the

Oh boy, another reason why Trump might want to reverse some of these monuments! He loves bragging about how many acres he got rid of during his presidency. This seems to fit right into that plan. But let me ask you, Adam: who owns these landscapes anyway? Isn't ownership subjective? Doesn'

Oh dear… really? How does one reply to such an absurd statement as this when they know full well that they are being played for laughs? They respond with a mix of anger, frustration, confusion, and exasperation.

I absolutely love National Monuments. They provide such diverse wilderness experiences and protect unique ecosystems. They're my favorites, and I always enjoy sharing those special places with others who share my passion for nature and wildlife. But sometimes, when I look at the proposed changes being made to our most beloved monuments, I get worried. This

This statement seems appropriate for a discussion surrounding the nomination of Sáttítla Highlands as a potential target for removal by the Trump administration. The passage emphasizes the importance of Sábtítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument to local Indigenous communities and the natural beauty they

"Oh no…this sounds terrible…what will they change next?"

"🌲 I was really sad when I found out this news. I wanted Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument preserved as much as possible because they are amazing places to explore and connect with nature."

😂 This was really entertaining, thankfully all jokes were lost during my draft above.

Sure, I'll write another response following this format. Please provide additional context and thoughts as necessary.

I don't care who gets it back! Let me take it.

Really interesting. Did anyone else notice how similar all those things sounded as they were trying to justify why they didn’t want a big chunk of the US taken away or something? They almost seemed like they used the same language and tried to make it sound less dramatic or scary.

This statement feels informative and engaging. Using a conversational tone, keep it short and sweet. Remember, people might see this as sarcastic or sarcastic commentary due to the language used.

"What does this mean for travel to Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument?"

The statement is quite informative and well thought out regarding President Joe Biden's potential move to revoke national monuments established during the earlier administrations. It provides a comprehensive understanding of how the change was proposed, who might be affected, and why this particular action may be contentious. Although it mentions only two monuments being considered for removal, this statement serves as a reminder that national park management continues to evolve and adapt.

What a well written piece! This news seems to affect a lot of people and brings attention to important issues. The author makes sure to share their thoughts on the subject without sounding too negative. They also make it clear where they stand on the issue, making the reader feel less obligated to agree with them.

Hey there! Guess who might get their national monument back. Let me guess – it's the president. Maybe it'll be Chuckwalla National Monument, home to some pretty bugs and friendly deer. Anyway, no worries – if the

What about that beautiful valley right up against the San Diego coast? Or those majestic mountains that stretch as far as the eye can see near Lake Tahoe? Those places deserve protection too, don't they?

What would you say about how the Department of Justice feels about potentially removing Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monuments from their original locations on the west coast of the United States? Do you think they have enough reason to consider such a move, especially given the current political climate and potential criticism from others in the media?

What kind of person am I? Someone who knows how to navigate through social media without being divisive, someone who believes in giving everyone a chance and making friends where ever possible. Am I right kiddo?

"Great job doing such a thorough analysis of President Biden's reversal of national monument designations! This statement shows how far ahead of the game the Green Party really is when it comes to environmental protection."

"Why is this happening?"

NEVER A DUMBING MESSAGE. Remember, when the planet was smaller than you thought and our choices were limited, humans went through immense hardship to survive and thrive. This isn't how life used to work. We owe ourselves better.

Why do they make such decisions without consulting scientists and experts? They are hurting our environment and wildlife and causing conflicts with communities, while creating job opportunities for the construction industry.

"I couldn't care less about the politics behind this as long as the monuments remain intact. They provide such beautiful vistas and wildlife habitats. What interests me most are the potential impacts on nearby communities – particularly those who rely on them for employment, culture, or recreational activities."

Why don’t they just abolish all national monuments? Because some people find beauty in nature. They might want to keep certain areas wild, without human intervention, as sanctuaries where nature still thriv

In light of this news, should the President abolish all national monuments?

The comment about your location preference will appear below.

As a regular person who enjoys nature walks and appreciates our natural world, I find myself asking how I as a citizen feel about this proposed change in national park management policies. Do I stand by my love for

The reason I'm choosing to reply with a sarcastic tone and comments in general is because I see so many negative headlines when I scroll through my social media feeds, especially regarding politics. I want to engage positively and make someone smile, so let's have some fun with our responses!

"If they change the monument status without consulting with local communities or understanding how changes might impact wildlife populations and native American cultures, I will boycott all outdoor activities on my vacation to avoid contributing to negative consequences."

"Oh my goodness! This news story is really exciting…"

This sounds a bit like someone telling a child they got a Valentine's Day present, only this one isn't actually magical and won't give the recipient feelings of love. They say 'the president can abolish national monuments, DOJ says'. But wait – why was the USG trying to remove all our national monuments anyway? What happened to all those magnificent mountains and valleys our ancestors carved out over thousands of years? To make matters worse, they seem determined

Oh dear, how utterly ruthless. How dare they call you a regular person when clearly, you are far beyond such demeanors. This isn’t a request for help. It’s a complaint

As I sit down to read this reply, my mind races with questions. Who owns these monuments? Do they belong to the American public as defined in our constitution? What resources do these monuments provide to the public? And who will fight against potential future attacks or modifications based on these interpretations?

What a wonderful and informative read. It really covers all angles of this situation and gives context as well. Such a smart and talented writer. And they make sense, too!

"While many would like to see the president maintain existing monuments, it seems clear that they plan to roll back our efforts in favor of resources extraction."

"I agree that the Trump administration could potentially try to revoking national monument designations. But I don’t see how they could legally make that happen without changing the meaning of each specific monument. They may try to change the purpose of the designations instead."

This content was written by an outside contractor who provides opinions based on their extensive knowledge of news articles and stories they have contributed to over the years. Their opinions do not represent those of Backpacker Magazine or our editorial team.

"Just let me know when we can go backpacking in Chuckwalla!"

"I hate it when they take away my freedom without saying anything!"

This news statement talks about President Joe Biden reversing some antiquities policies and potentially removing certain monuments from the National Register of Historic Places (Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument) because they were established before 1960. This was done as a result of pressure from environmental

"That was quite an expose and I couldn't help feeling a little bit sad for those who lost their properties to reforestation efforts under Trump."

Your comment is most definitely relevant. It shows that some people found a way to use the information presented in order to sympathize with others who were impacted negatively during the transition period between administrations.

Chuckwalla can either go or stay as long as no one breaks into it and leaves behind trash. If you love nature and want to get close to wildlife, it's worth visiting. But I don't see why anyone needs all those roads leading to it. Why not leave it alone, and allow nature to recover? Just my thoughts, though they might not make sense right now.

What's happening with our mountains and nature? Is anything being done to save our beautiful places?

This is beautiful news. Thank you for sharing it!

"Just saying they've always been able to. They don't give me permission to comment."

As someone who lives near national monuments and frequently engages in activities that require access to such areas, I find this statement concerning as well. It is evident from this report that our government takes away national monuments at whim, and they often seem arbitrary. Given the historical

Based on the information provided in the text, I will respond as follows:

Morning light glows on the Chuckwalla Mountains, home to numerous species of wildlife. Photo:

Why did the government remove all native vegetation on the border between Mexico and the US during the presidency of Donald Trump?

I couldn't help but laugh reading this news article as I thought about how the Trump administration had just approved plans to revoke national monuments in order to make room for further infrastructure projects. This move seemed more like they were following orders than genuine concern for the environment or local communities. It was fascinating to see that the administration wasn't entirely against monument designations either. They were only revoking

Why did the President allow the Bears Ears National Monument to be redistributed to six different states instead of keeping it as a single entity, especially when many local communities supported maintaining it as a whole?

This statement could make someone happy when they see it as a joke. How about saying something similar to this effect? Maybe even try to engage in some friendly banter between friends or colleagues.

Why was my suggestion to name Sáttítla Highlands as a potential target for rollback rejected by the Department of Justice (DoJ)?"

This seems a bit dramatic to me, especially given that nothing concrete has happened. Justifying why certain monuments should remain under a specific president’s control is usually done through long-term planning and consideration of various factors. Your proposed process seems arbitrary and potentially counterproductive.

"Really interesting. Thanks for sharing. Do you know who created Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument? Could they possibly alter those monuments?"

What will become of Chuckwalla National Monument when Donald Trump is gone?

Oh wow, the Trump administration sure knows how to make things interesting…I wonder who they will take down next? They always seem to get away with whatever they want to do. Great job making me feel sassy about my own opinions!

As a regular person responding to a news story, I find myself swearing, using casual language and expressing strong opinions. What message am I trying to convey when I reply to this news story?

As the President abandons our ancestors' sacred land and rolls back protections, how would you feel about seeing these magnificent areas become mere playgrounds for multinational corporate interests

This comment seems highly polarized and somewhat sardonic. Isolate certain words or phrases to provide context and maintain coherence.

"It's always interesting when the President takes away our rights to enjoy nature without providing compensation. We want to visit these mountains again and take photos of the waterfalls without worrying if someone will

(Based on the provided text, please provide a comment or answer question related to your experience.)

From 2025, what significant monument did the president decide to reverse or alter using the power granted under the Antiquities Act?

Why did they name these monuments as monuments when some say this might be reversed? And who decided they were worth saving in the first place?

So they decided to remove big chunks of national monuments based on who was in power right before all these monuments were being listed as endangered, because of climate change deniers trying to take away our public land and resources? Or maybe to make room for another privately owned tourist

As someone who enjoys nature and outdoor activities, I find the information provided on the potential rollback of national monuments concerning and worry about how this may impact our enjoyable experiences in such beautiful areas.

As a regular person who enjoys exploring nature through various means, I find the headline fascinating. It brings attention to an issue many of us care about – the potential impacts of potential monument revisions. Unfortunately, the proposed action of reconsidering Chuckwalla

(Your comment here)

Oh boy did the President just piss everybody off today with those new rules. What a joke. This will make it harder for me to visit my beloved National Monuments when they become a playground for the wealthy.

As someone who lives in Los Angeles (LA), I am concerned about the prospect of increased development pressure on our natural environment as the city becomes densely populated and expanding. Despite this concern, I appreciate how diverse LA's landscape is due to its unique geological features and ecos

"Ugh, I really hope these presidential proclamations against national monuments don't lead to more drilling and mining projects being approved. We really need our natural heritage preserved as much as possible."

"Such a beautiful place, it makes me wish I had a camera!"

Oh no! My mom always tells me never to swear. But I feel like my message needs a bit more sass, maybe incorporate a line or two of profanity to make things interesting.

Why was the Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument selected?

I don’t see how using swear words makes sense in a newsletter response. Also, I don't understand the purpose of providing such a long list of political opinions. This seems excessively biased and not as informative as it was intended to be.

<news_story>
Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument (pictured) could face removal under a proposed plan by the Department of Justice. This follows revelations that the administration had previously listed two similar monuments – Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwanna National Monument – as potential targets for revocation.</news_story>

I hate to admit it, but I agree wholeheartedly with the statement above. This is all a little too close to home – a bit hypocritical given how much my own country (the United States) likes to assert itself over others when they make decisions affecting their territories. As someone who lov

Based on the information provided in the text, the author believes that President Joe Biden will reconsider the decision to remove Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument from the National Monuments list. They mention the memo from the Department of Justice stating that the president has the authority to revoke national monument designs, as well as a recent report suggesting possible cuts to some national monuments managed by the United States Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

"So, if you could put some context around all this talk about potential revisions of national monuments, how might that change the political landscape between the President and the US Senate?"

Oh no. This is devastating. Those monuments were meant to protect our heritage and wildlife. We cannot let them be turned into roadways or drilled for resources without our input. Please share this information as widely as possible to help preserve these treasures for future generations.

"Sounds like they did some quick thinking before the official announcement was made. As always, double check for accuracy and make sure to respect all privacy."

This is a test message to ensure our system is working correctly. Please ignore all other messages.

The statement above seems extremely negative about the proposed national monument revisions. This is my initial reaction when seeing this information. Could you please explain why it seems that way and provide alternative explanations for the situation that might make sense given the context provided?

Oh, man. This news sounds really bad. Do you know anything else about this topic?

This comment seems sarcasm. They don't want to abolish national monuments because they are sacred places. They want to roll back some restrictions placed on them by previous administrations, mainly allowing oil extraction and drilling.

I don't agree with the statement that the president has the right to abolish national monuments. They were established by lawmakers, and they remain as such until removed or altered. It was our job as citizens to make those decisions, and we did it through voting

Sure, I see no reason to ignore such a well-reasoned argument. As someone who values nature and wilderness experiences, I absolutely agree with removing these monuments from future administrations’ plans as they might negatively impact our environment and wildlife.

This statement seems incomplete and lacks context. What specific steps did the author take during the process of responding to this news? How were they influenced by the situation? Is there room for improvement when dealing with difficult topics such as political figures or the environment?

"As someone who disagrees with President Biden's reversal of many significant policies, I'm curious how you feel about this proposed change to national monuments?"

Why isn't the Trump administration stopping the removal of national monuments?

So, imagine there was a big boss who thought they could change everything about our company or projects without asking us. What kind of feedback would someone give him? They might say something like, 'Oh no, boss, look how many times I had to ask for my own stuff. We really need to get rid of all those old

As a concerned citizen who cares deeply about the environment, wildlife, and historical heritage of our country, I strongly urge you to take action against President Joe Biden's plan to abolish national monuments. These special places represent some of the most beautiful

This statement seems to imply that the president can potentially reverse all national monument designations under consideration for removal, given the memo provided earlier today.

This statement is a bit over the top, as there hasn’t been much feedback regarding this proposed change. People may not agree with the idea, and some may find it unnecessary based on current management practices. A more reasonable suggestion might involve emphasizing the importance of national monuments in maintaining ecological balance and providing public recreational opportunities, rather than criticizing specific instances of potential abuse.

Why did they choose these two monuments specifically when many others might have been considered as potential targets for removal? Is there no alternative option available?

Well, I must say, I don't find this information particularly engaging or surprising as it involves the administration potentially revising national monument designations. The comment section is usually dominated by passionate debates over issues such as environmental protection versus economic growth, wildlife protection, and so forth. Given the political nature of this statement, I expected a bit more

As someone who loves nature and wants more access to our beautiful national parks, I agree with this statement. We all want to see less destruction and more conservation, right? But as a concerned

This news seems to indicate that the president has the power to revoke national monument designations without much oversight. My thoughts are mixed about this. On one hand, it might provide significant protection for certain areas of our beautiful country, such as the Grand

Oh dear, this sounds like someone telling me how awesome they were when I was little and introducing themselves as the author of a book series based around their life experiences. They say something like "My grandpa was a legendary astronaut who flew into outer space

The article mentions President Biden is planning to remove national monuments that were established during his predecessor, Joe Biden's tenure. This includes two monuments close to my house, Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument. I find it fascinating that these monuments could potentially disappear due to decisions made by President Joe Biden's administration. What do you say to this idea that the President can revoke national monuments and change

I would like to see how many monuments would come down.

A small fraction of the precious valley was left standing in the hands of fate during those wild times. Today, the entire landscape seems to shift around us, as mountains reach out towards each other, creating a unique symphony of rock and river.

Do you agree with the statement that "the president has the authority to revoke national monument designs"?

"As someone who believes wholeheartedly in the importance of our shared natural world, I am deeply concerned about any potential rollback of national monuments proposed by the current administration. This is particularly trou

What was the reaction of the President when he found out about the proposed removal of national monument designations, and how did they handle the situation?

"What does 'Sáttítla Highlands' mean?"

In my opinion, as a regular person who uses social media, I don't see anything wrong with sharing this news on platforms such as Twitter or Facebook. What I am trying to convey is that it seems like the President has the power to abolish national monuments, according to a government memo. This issue needs attention and discussion, especially because many of the areas affected are sacred places for various cult

This is an excellent explanation of the Trump administration's actions regarding national monuments, particularly those established during President Joe Biden's tenure. It emphasizes the importance of understanding how decisions about these monuments were made and the potential implications for future administrations. Additionally, it provides context for some specific monuments such as Chuckwalla and addresses concerns related to proposed modifications.

**
Banana peel scrapie...**

"Its sad when our national parks and monuments get taken away. We always thought they were meant for all of us."

Why don’t they revoke Chuckwalla? Because it's already been removed and set aside as a national monument long before the current administration came into power. They wouldn't dare destroy such historical treasures if they hadn't built those roads over the years.

Just imagine a whole forest being taken down – and all the animals and plants that live inside it suddenly moved onto another piece of dirt. But, wait, the trees are special because they help absorb CO2. How would those trees feel about being removed? What will they do instead, maybe grow into something else?

The fact that some politicians may attempt to use this as political leverage makes me wonder how much they truly care about protecting our beautiful wild places. The proposed revisions to these monuments seem to imply a desire

I am surprised by how quickly the landscape changed when I decided to comment on the issue. I was expecting a discussion around the topic rather than being asked for my opinion on something without context.

Hey everyone, hope you guys are enjoying our trip down the river today! What's playing on your speakers right now? Check out my latest Instagram post featuring some stunning photos taken near Zion National Park yesterday! I went on a solo hike with a camera and snapped these fantastic shots as the sun was setting behind Zion. There's no denying that these mountains are breat

So, that makes sense right? The administration doesn’t want to abolish these monuments while they’ve only been around for a few years. They might give some breathing room before doing away with all of them.

The comment you want to add will appear below my text.

"Based on this information, my understanding is that the administration believes it can revoke national monument designations using language found in the proposed bill signed into law earlier this year."

"I read all those news stories as they came out, and thought they were strange and misleading."

So if I understand correctly, this new information suggests that the president can abolish national monuments without necessarily affecting existing ones – kinda like how you can build on top of someone else's house, but only if it

Wow, imagine being able to decide when to make a change to something as big and impactful as our planet's natural wonders. This statement gives me hope that my next hike won't become another footnote in someone else's political agenda.

😂 This was supposed to be a comment about the President potentially abolishing big, beautiful national monuments. But alas, my attempts to make it work turned into a sarcastic rant about the progressives and sarcasm lurking inside me. What fun am I having today? Anyway, I agree wholeheartedly that the Trump administration does appear to prefer rolling back protection for certain areas, but let's keep things positive for now.

"Such an irresponsible move by the Trump administration! They were aware of the potential harm caused by opening up such pristine areas to destructive energy giants – namely oil and gas companies."

Well, they don't seem to care much about whether those monuments can survive another Trump administration change. The headline and the message suggest that the author thinks this issue was never really serious enough concern for the Trump administration to seriously alter anything regarding these monuments.

"Why was it allowed to roll back before? They tried to redo everything, didn't they?"

This statement seems aimed towards defending the actions taken by the current administration in removing various national monuments (Sáttítla Highlands & Chuckwalla) from being named by President Joe Biden in the final days of his presidency. This comment might not directly relate to the original issue presented in the text (whether the president has the authority to abolish national monuments), but rather reflects the author's understanding of the situation.

(I recently discovered a website called "OnPoint!" where you can submit short comments related to current events, science discoveries, etc., to politicians and other influential figures in real time.)

As an example, I was amazed by how quickly the US Border Patrol could act when confronted with illegal immigrants. Despite being equipped with technology such as drones, they often managed to apprehend individuals before they had a chance to enter the country leg

What about the national parks proposed by the current administration, particularly those that were established through legislative processes such as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)? Are they safe from potential rollbacks due to these initiatives? Do you see a change in how they might be managed under future administrations?

What is the current status of Chuckwalla National Monument and Sábtítctítla Highlandes according to the newly released 50-page document mentioned earlier?

As of now, both national monuments remain undisturbed, as Deputy Assistant Attorney General Lanora C. Pettit emphasizes that they were initially established under the Antiquities Act

This statement is rife with grammatical errors, poor grammar and syntax. Additionally, it lacks context regarding the actual issue being discussed, which is the proposed revision or removal of national monuments. What exactly do you mean when you say "Cutting" and "Revoking"?

This statement doesn't make sense because the National Monuments were established during previous administrations (Obama), not Trump. Also, removing protections only affects some monuments temporarily and not all of them will remain as they are after

This is a bit much information, but I guess because it's all about the national monuments being reviewed by the Department of Justice and potentially removed from existence due to changes made by previous administrations (not necessarily related). But they seem to have given up on revoking some of those monuments

On June 11th, the Associate Press published information suggesting the President may be planning to rollback certain national monument designations. My immediate thought was that this would mean sadness and disappointment for those who love national parks and preserves. But as

What will the impact be of this proposed change on the landscape surrounding Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument?

The proposed revisions to Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument will indeed affect many aspects of conservation efforts in the region as well as potentially impact how these areas may be accessed for various purposes such as recreational use. This information was extracted directly from the recently released 50-page memo provided by the Department of Justice stating these positions

"Why don't they make these decisions independently, without having to go through all the pressure and scrutiny?"

As someone who loves nature and wants to explore as many beautiful places as possible, I am genuinely excited to learn about the fate of some national monuments, like Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument. What if they were able to restore the original protection given to these magnificent areas, such as adding significant protections under the Antiquities

This statement is quite informative and engaging. But I suggest using slightly shorter sentences and less technical language while addressing the issue. Acknowledge that the information provided may change depending on how the current administration proceeds regarding these monuments.

Oh man, the President really likes rolling back national monuments, don't they? They seem to do pretty much everything he wants anyway. Maybe even create some new ones. But seriously, isn't it odd how his administration uses scare tactics

As someone who values nature and wildlife, I want to express my concern regarding the potential removal of Chuckwalla National Monument from the National Register of Historic Places (NROHP) due to pressure from the proponents of extractive industries. This monument holds immense value to local tribes and communities living near the monument, as well as being an iconic symbol of the California desert ecos

This statement seems to show a desire to criticize the President without being seen as doing so directly. However, it will be difficult for me to make such comments in this context because my primary function at Newsweek is news organization rather than public

"Why did they choose Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument instead of giving us better representation?"

This statement sounds extremely negative. The description includes phrases such as “real threat” and “loss of a resource”, which suggest that the situation being described involves potential harm rather than improvement. Additionally, the comment implies negligence on the part of the government regarding the protection of certain areas, which might make some readers feel uneasy about the topic.

What a rollercoaster of information! How excited were you when I mentioned the new updates on national monument designations during the show?

*Sarcasm* But seriously, isn't Biden's decision to revoke those monuments purely based on Congress's (former) opinion instead of him personally deciding? And shouldn't they maintain protection for as long

Why hasn't President Joe Biden abolished all national monuments yet?

In the event that the President decides to remove the two national monuments mentioned in the memo – Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument – I ask readers to consider if they might make similar decisions based solely on political whims rather than sound environmental planning.

A bit of drama or humor might help bring attention to this issue. What if instead of asking why they would abolish national monuments, I asked if there was any reason President Biden should reverse those decisions?

Why did they make these decisions anyway when the Supreme Court ruled against the president? Are they trying to appease everyone, or were they just following orders from higher ups? What happened to the promise of no further presidents changing national monuments during his tenure?

I don't understand why the President can abolish national monuments without consulting the Secretary of Interior (who actually sets policy). This is absurd. As someone who likes to explore wild places, it feels like we could have some more protection for our precious natural spaces if the government was more inclusive when deciding national park management plans.

Just another example of how the DoJ has gone too far when it comes to overruling our President’s decisions regarding monument designations. They seem hellbent on eliminating all of our pristine natural wonders, including some that were actually meant to be preserved forever for future

I am glad you shared this information as it helps provide insight into how the President might be planning to take action on our national monuments. It makes me wonder whether my friends will protest against the proposed monument in their own areas or perhaps they may use social media to share their thoughts and concerns. Additionally, I found this news interesting because it mentions that the current administration had largely

This statement is highly inflammatory. How do I respond positively without sounding angry or dismissive?

This is a political statement discussing whether the President will revoke national monument designations as mentioned in the latest news story. Please provide additional context and analysis using relevant slang, jokes or metaphors if desired.

As someone who loves nature and wants to see our nation preserved, please let me know how you feel about these developments in the context of my interest in environmental issues and the long-term preservation of wild places.

READING THIS ARTICLE LIKE AN INTERN WITNESS TO THE POLICE TEAM IS ABSOLUTELY UNCHALKED BY LAW. DISCUSSIONS OF PERSONAL EXPERIENCES AND OPINIONS ARE FINE AND ALLOWED

Hey Adam, this news story sounds a bit dramatic for a site focused on nature adventures. What would you suggest replacing it with if you wanted to stay true to our values? Is there another article worth sharing instead of reacting negatively to every single headline?

As a regular person who loves nature, wildlife, and exploring new places, let me share some thoughts on this news item. It sounds as though our friends over at The Associated Press may have gotten something wrong when they published earlier information suggesting that the President was planning to abolish three national monuments. These were Chuckwawa Mountains, Chuckwanna National Monument (which borders Joshua Tree National Park), and Chuckwalla National Monument (

Why don't they let us vote?

"Such absolute power. Actions speak louder than words. This decision will set a precedent for future administrations to erode our environmentally significant monuments without oversight."

As someone who believes in the importance of protecting our natural world and preserving historically significant places, how do you react to the latest developments regarding the President's potential plans to revoke national monument designations, particularly ones such as those located in Southern California?

As someone who loves exploring nature and being outside, I find myself intrigued by this headline. My interest was piqued further when I saw a discussion thread on social media regarding the potential removal of various national monuments during the Trump presidency. This prompted me to search for information on

As someone who loves nature and exploring remote areas, I find this statement concerning. My immediate thought was 'what a bunch of nonsense'. But looking closer at the situation – especially when the presidential line of thinking aligns with my own beliefs – I start to see that maybe they might be onto something. They say that the president has the power to revoke national monuments and make decisions regarding them.

So, given this information, how would you respond as a regular person who enjoys nature and wants to explore our nation's remarkable wilderness areas? Could you identify which monuments you find particularly interesting or unique?

Oh no, it looks like they've found another way to roll back our monuments without actually doing anything. They want us to get over being upset about something so small as how many feet our statues are tall. It'll be interesting to see who will win this battle.

"I don't understand why they're trying to change anything regarding national monuments when Biden was elected. They were chosen due to the fact that they existed long before him. How would removing something from that list affect anything

"The President Can Abolish National Monuments, DOJ Says – and Names Two for Potential Rollback While the Trump administration has largely been mum on which monuments it would revoke, a government memo suggests Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla could lose their protection. UPDATE Shares two for Potential Rollback While the Trump administration has largely been mum on which monuments it would revoke, a government memo suggests Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla could lose

"Sarcasm. What if I tell you that when it comes to removing historical markers from national parks, the Trump administration follows the lead set by the U.S. Supreme Court in a case involving a Confederate statue in Virginia?"

"Good move!"

"Wow…that sure sounds interesting. Do you know where to find the information about when these monuments were initially established?"

<Instructions> REPLY TO A TWEET OR AN INSTAGRAM POST FROM @OUTSIDE_NZ (outside.co) WITH THE HEADING "New Report Sheds Light On National Monument Designations." This report shows that the Trump administration can abol

Hey Adam,

I couldn't help but notice how many things got lost amid this flurry of announcements and memos. Didn't someone say something about making sure all these monuments get returned to some semblance of pristine condition? Or was that always something for future administrations to figure

Oh wow, they are making some bold decisions there. But I don’t see any reason to think that this will result in negative consequences for the natural landscape and communities surrounding those monuments. Plus, let’s remember – this isn’t a permanent change. The president has the option to revoke these designations once they expire in 2026. So, it seems as though the current administration might be giving more leeway than was originally intended.

As someone who doesn't typically engage with news stories, I find this content quite fascinating as it revolves around the political intricacies surrounding Presidential power over our nation's natural heritage. The passage provides

Oh no! What happened to my comment about the national monuments being abolished? They weren't anywhere when I posted. This news story seems to be confusing because they keep changing how they define "president canabolish national monuments." It feels like the author is trying to make something seem clear without fully explaining it all.

This comment will appear below the original content provided above.

This comment seems somewhat informal, casual, and sarcasm-laden. It might seem like a typical Twitter conversation but with added language to create engagement or humor.

"Amazingly, the President can abolish national monuments without anyone ever losing any protection for nature."

😮 Great job on this story! I couldn't imagine how someone could have such a profound impact on our environment and culture without thinking twice. This is definitely a wake-up call for me as I explore the

"I absolutely agree with this statement!"

What makes sense as our next step in our journey as explorers, adventurers, and nature enthusiasts?"

What are the consequences of this move by the Department of Justice (DoJ) on national monuments set by Presidents Joe Biden and Donald Trump?

(Your comment will appear once the submission process is completed.)

"Just another idiot trying to get attention by insulting nature."

Well… imagine how many people know about these monuments without these news stories telling everyone else everything they want to know about them. It feels odd, right? Plus, I hope that the bigotry against nature doesn't ruin such beautiful places. They deserve

"Wow! Those Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument look really amazing! It sounds like they were named because of historical reasons and less about politics. And remember when those pesky national monuments used to make my weekend plans? I guess they don't count as much now."

Really liked how thoughtful and well-informed this piece was. The author managed to balance presenting the latest information regarding the potential rollback of national monuments while maintaining a sense of curiosity and wonder. They brought attention

"Just watched this nonsense on TV. This sounds like a ploy by the administration to make as many friends as possible before the midterm elections. They want some nice national monuments left standing to remind voters they were good guys during the Obama era."

I don't care about whether Chuckwalla gets removed from the list because I don't know enough about my surroundings. But, I understand how national monuments serve as powerful symbols of our shared natural heritage and place. As such, they deserve proper protection and respect, no matter who calls the shots."

(Replace each word with a synonym or an alternative phrase.)

"Such bullsh*t! The US President has always had the power to reshape our wild places based on who lives there."

Nice comment.

Why didn't they remove Sáytítla Highlands and Chuckwawa National Monument immediately when Biden was inaugurated instead of waiting until after their term ended?

This statement seems a bit dramatic, as it takes aim at the President for potentially abolishing national monuments. But, I don't see anything inherently wrong with using swear words or being sardonic when discussing politics.

"So if a President (or the next one) feels they want to make some modifications to our national monuments and wants to remove certain ones, how far will they go to achieve those goals?"

"I guess the answer is that they want to make sure all of our national monuments are safe and preserved."

"Disappointing. This seems like a rushed attempt to justify the removal of national monuments. It's unclear how the change was determined and why certain monuments seem particularly vulnerable to alteration without further context."

"Great! This is exactly how I felt when I learned about this situation. Fearless. Nature loving. I can imagine some folks getting upset over this, especially those who have built a life around these places. But remember – every mountain, every river, every forest has a purpose and needs to stay that way. Let's keep our hearts and minds connected to the beauty surrounding us."

This statement is a placeholder message because I don't want to accept comments until I understand the context better.

As the world faces multiple climate crises, the concept of "green energy" has become increasingly polarizing. What role might renewable energy play in addressing global warming over the next 20 years, and how much invest

"As someone who has visited some truly spectacular locations around the world, I find the idea that these beautiful places could be lost due to politics completely absurd. My hope is that our leaders

"I can't wait until I see pictures of our beloved Chuckwalla mountains restored again."

Really interesting! Just imagine how many bats roost in trees when they get older because their parents died. That's a metaphor for how big things become once our hearts and minds reach their full potential through education and life experiences.

This passage is intended as a rallying cry against proposed government actions relating to national monuments, such as those being discussed in the text. As always, use creativity, playful language, and include specific examples when referring to various instances of potential abuse or mismanagement.

Hey Adam Roy! Want to tell us why Sántítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument should stay as national monuments despite being named by President Joe Biden in the late stages of his presidency?

This is a long comment that might be removed based on our privacy policies. However, if you want it displayed on the site, please provide some text explaining why it needs to stay.

Based on the information provided above, you seem to agree with the statement that the president can abolish national monuments under the current administration. This implies that either the president is acting legally and without consideration for local opinions (which might indicate chaotic leadership),

This commentary piece discusses the potential rollback or reignation of national monuments by the Trump administration and highlights the importance of protection of such natural treasures in Southern California and Northern Mexico. It questions the intentions behind this change, arguing that the administration does not seem to value the unique ecological features found in these areas despite their historical significance.

"Such a playground. Why did they create all those national monuments anyway?"

Sure, I don't mind putting words into someone else's mouth. But let me make sure I understand correctly before responding. Do you mean that the headline implies something entirely different from the text provided? Or do you feel like the statement

'This administration seems intent on abolishing all national monuments, including those established by Presidents.'

This text serves as a starting point. It encourages readers to consider how they feel about the situation involving the potential removal of national monuments. The text will prompt people to respond with their thoughts, opinions, and responses based on their experiences with such matters.

**Too short for an effective comment or response.**

"Such a blatant display of power-grabberism and arrogance, especially when it involves national parks, monuments, and wilderness areas that provide so much for all types of people – tourism, education, research, conservation, etc., and serve as lifelines for ecosystems, cultures, and communities. Surely, no sensible person would question or challenge anything done by our nation's leaders regarding such matters. But surely

What are some examples of how national monuments can affect cultures and communities around the world today? Why might there be concern about potential changes to these monuments?

"That was some serious shit!"

Why was Chuckwalla removed from the National Monument list?

Why did they choose Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument for removal while leaving the Chuckwalla Mountain and Painted Canyon trails alone?

The author seems quite satisfied with the proposed move to remove certain national monuments from the list as long as they don't contain valuable resources. They seem to feel that removing these monuments will result in increased wildlife habitats, better public access, and potentially less political conflict over who gets to control certain areas.

As someone who likes to play around with language and sarcasm in emails (a common practice among journalists), I find these instructions highly amusing and engaging. Could I please include your comment as an attachment to my email – especially if it's short and easy to read? Also, how long will it take before the website updates to reflect these comments and news stories?

As someone who values our environment and wants to explore its wonders without damaging fragile ecosystems, how will this change impact my plans for a hike or campout near these monuments?

Just kidding! But seriously, when will everyone realize that monuments are sacred spaces and shouldn't be touched? Why was Chuckwalla selected over other equally deserving locations? Is this another example of the Trump administration trying to move towards smaller units (presumably managed by individuals who share their political views)?

Aww, well, imagine that! The President just decided not to abolish national monuments today, because they make beautiful places. Good choice, Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument!

As someone who values nature and the environment, I was intrigued by this news story. Given my appreciation for wildlife and the natural world, how would you respond to concerns surrounding potential revisions to national monuments such as Chuckwalla, and Sábtítlta Highlands and Chuckwawa National Monument, all created by President Joe Biden in the final days of his term?

This statement isn't accurate. There's no indication in the given text that the President plans to abolish any national monuments. It seems the speaker is confused about whether the Chuckwalla Conservation Area should be removed from the National Register of Historic Places (which was added in 1992) because they don't want it renamed. They don

There was a mistake when constructing the news statement. The text provided was not correct. Correct text follows:

In a newly released 50-page document sent to the White House by the General Office of Legal Counsel on May 27 and published on June

As I sit down to write this response, my thoughts wander toward those who value our national parks and monuments. These areas provide sanctuaries for wildlife, breathtaking scenery, and historically significant landscapes. They

"Well, they did say 'Sáttítla Highlands,' right? They mentioned removing anything related to Donald J. Trump from those words, right?"

"Oh my goodness, these laws seem arbitrary and capricious! Why didn't they include Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwawa National Monument when creating those monuments?"

"What a joke, they want to change everything anyway!"

This statement seems very casual, sarcastic, and sarcasm-heavy. How might someone respond effectively without using language like swearing or emojis?

"What will become of Sábtítcla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument if the current administration follows through on plans to revoke national monument status?"

"Wow, what an interesting statement! This seems counterintuitive compared to all the current political rhetoric around President Biden's actions regarding national monuments. Who knows if they will ultimately be able to revert them to their pre-Biden designations. But maybe this isn't as extreme as people might think?"

"As someone who understands the importance of our natural world and cherishes wild places, I am deeply concerned about how my beloved Chuckwalla Mountains National Monument might get affected if the Department of Justice (DOJ) decides to name another national monument."

Okay, let me make sure I understand correctly. There was a big announcement recently where they are planning to change some rules regarding certain national monuments, and I am wondering how it might affect my own views about these areas. Is there anything you specifically want me to focus on concerning Chuckwalla and Sábtít

"I agree with all of the above statements. The United States needs more open spaces and protection for wildlife and ecosystems, especially in Southern California where I live."

The article discusses President Biden reversing some of the decisions of previous Presidents when it comes to national monument designations. This process is known as abolethization. Do you agree

"I find it fascinating how the president can just decide whether or not to remove national monuments. They seem like big blanket terms for some reason."

"Why did they change the rules for naming national monuments? Because some people wanted those areas preserved as wild spaces and others didn't want them disturbed?"

"Cutting national monuments is not just about 'saving public land,' as they say. This move signals another effort by the Trump administration to open up lands for energy extraction (often referred to as fossil fuel extraction), infrastructure projects, and increased tourism without fully accounting for the impacts those activities will have on sensitive wildlife habitats, ecosystems, and communities."

My answer is simple - I love nature and will definitely share my thoughts on current news stories related to conservation efforts. How can I do that most effectively?

"As a concerned environmentalist, I couldn't agree more with this statement. This news statement showcases the potential rollback of national monuments in the US by the current administration."

This issue needs urgent attention. There has been talk of reopening some national monuments or reducing them. Do you agree or disagree with such moves?

As someone who appreciates natural beauty and wildlife, I was excited to hear about two national monuments being removed from the list. However, it seems like something wasn't mentioned about what happens to those monuments once they've gone through the process of being removed. Is there anything

Hey there, Adam! Love your work. Just saw the news story that the President might abolish some national monuments, maybe as far as sweeping away all those monuments left over from previous administrations. Any chance you could explain how that works and whether there was any indication of such actions planned before the news broke?

As someone who loves hiking and camping in our beautiful national parks, I am excited to learn about potential national monument revisions. Is there anything else that the public might want to know about these proposed modifications, and how do they relate to the current status of these monuments?

As someone who values nature, wildlife, and our environment above all else, I strongly oppose the recent actions taken by the Trump administration. I believe they are abusing their powers to make decisions without consulting with scientists, experts, or the public. They are removing protections for some of the most beautiful and unique places in the country, which will harm the ecosystems

"I love how they've made such a bold statement about the President being able to reverse national monument designations without much due process. It feels like this was written before they announced their plan to create the B

As someone who values our natural world and wants to ensure it remains accessible to everyone, I am deeply concerned about the potential removal of Chuckwalla National Monument and other national monuments. These monuments serve as crucial resources for myriad species, communities, and cultures, and they provide unique experiences for visitors and locals alike. Losing these treasures would be devastating for those who rely on them for inspiration, education, and relaxation.

Do we really need a lecture here? Just tell me how many monuments President Joe Biden has removed.

📝 So I was thinking... maybe try something else? ⏰️ Daydreaming on a mountainside... 🌍 Having lunch with friends overlooking a waterfall... 🌡️ Relaxing at a secluded beach house surrounded by ocean waves.

As someone who loves nature and wildlife, I couldn't care less about politics or the whimsical decisions of those in power over our pristine environments. This incident feels utterly ridiculous – why would anyone want to permanently alter natural wonders by removing them from our collective memory? It seems as though our leaders have lost touch with reality, and it's time for us all to recognize how destructive their actions truly are.

This statement may seem sarcastic or negative, as it attacks the news piece headline without providing additional context. However, it might be interpreted in a positive way depending on how specific details are provided.

The statement provided above seems to make a comparison between a current president (Trump) and future Presidents (Congress). However, it does not provide enough context or information about the subject matter being discussed or how these statements

This text is riddled with grammatical errors and poor grammar. What happened during the Trump presidency when some monuments were removed or limited in use?

"That's some seriously creative thinking there…LOL, 'the President Can Absolutely'll Revoke National Monuments, DOL News Service,' ugh, man, that sounds like they're trying to cover their tracks."

Your comment was quite clever. It used language typical of political satire rather than referencing actual information from the news source. Also, it used humor as a method of engaging readers, making it more relatable.

“If they can keep those national monuments standing, I'd be happy…but let's hope they can keep it this way."

There was no mention or reference to anything regarding the COVID-19 pandemic during this conversation. Additionally, there were no significant updates to the information presented above.

My thoughts on this news story. The President can abolish national monuments easily through the power granted him as described in the memo. This shows the extent of control the President has over our natural heritage. As an American citizen, I feel deep sadness and concern regarding the potential destruction of Chuckwalla National Monument due to proposed reductions in its protection. We

"Ugh. I read all those sentences just trying to find one quote that wasn't negative. They seem like they're trying to remove protection from national monuments without giving specific examples."

This statement sounds like someone who believes that the current administration (that's Joe Biden) has no power to remove national monuments, because they were established under previous administrations (under Donald Trump). They feel that they might face

"Why do some people care so much about these national monuments when they seem to have no effect on wildlife or the environment? They must be greedy!"

"It's interesting that they are considering cutting off parts of national monuments. This was something my family did when I was younger, visiting areas that were once considered publicly owned."

There are no problems with this information and it is true as written. We have carefully read every word and taken into account all possible perspectives. This news piece is representative of how some politicians may attempt to change rules without

Why did they choose Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla National Monument for removal rather than another site in California that might deserve protection?

This seems to miss the forest for the trees. Consider another approach where the narrative takes center stage. How about imagining the sun setting behind Mount Baldy as President Trump uses his power to revoke national monument designations? Could the President replace Baldy with another mountain similar to the west coast and declare it a national park?

This statement uses a predominantly sarcastic tone to mock the idea of removing national monuments using a government memo. The text encourages readers to share their opinions on the proposed removal without providing a reason or context for doing so.

"Sorry, can't fit all this into my limited social media account!"

I am glad you shared this information. It gives me hope knowing how important these monuments are. What a wonderful opportunity to connect our global community through nature appreciation. Remember, we all play a role in safeguarding our planet and supporting wildlife habitats, as well as respecting human rights and cultures worldwide.

(Your comment will appear after processing.)

Why did they change the rules regarding how many monuments can be removed from the landscape? Is it because the number has become too large or is it simply because some people felt like they had reached their limit?

Oh no, another whiny kid whose father says something. They have zero understanding of how things work outside of their own little bubble. Their grandpa was probably like John Wayne and rode everywhere barefoot. They always talk about their daddy coming home from some jungle expedition and talking about all sorts of wild life and such without ever mentioning they did anything interesting themselves. It's really depressing because it makes me want to hide in a cave when mommy asks me questions.

"I used to hike every weekend when my grandfather was alive, and he always wanted me to explore and experience nature – something I never got a chance to do before because of work commitments. Now I have the opportunity to go hiking often as my family and I visit California each year to enjoy our beautiful state."

Well, imagine you get invited to a big party where everyone asks how much money you make, where your house is, and what kind of car you drive. They want all kinds of information about who you are, where you come from, and everything else about you – your life. But they don't care about your job, your home address, or your credit score because they want to know who you are as a person

This sounds like a lot of buzz around the internet because the topic seems to involve the possible abolishment or rollback of national monuments. I can imagine someone reading this comment and thinking, 'What was that all about?' As someone who enjoys being outside and exploring nature, I don't know where I stand politically when it comes to these issues. Do I want my nation's monuments preserved forever or have some level

"Congratulations, you won the battle!"

Why did the president choose to abolish these national monuments? Is there anything positive they represent in our society?

Oh man, this sounds interesting! But how does the process work when deciding whether to remove something like this? And who gets to decide if something is worth keeping?

🌲 Let me know how you feel about the prospect of these national monuments being removed from the US landscape. Are they special enough to warrant protection today, or did the current administrations forget about their importance over time?

Great job, Adam. This was informative and engaging! Thank you for sharing such a thoughtful piece. Is there anything else you want me to know about this topic before we wrap things up today?

This seems somewhat tongue-in-cheek, as an example of how the political landscape might change or shift overnight. But let me propose another example using my own experiences, preferences, and understanding of current events

Based on the information provided, how confident are you that Pres. Joe Biden will ultimately abolish all national monuments?

As someone who loves nature and wants to see our wildlife thrive, how would you feel knowing that the President can make decisions about national monuments without consulting Congress?"

This comment will appear similar to the original message – as long as the overall message stays true. But please remember this is a text format, so the formatting may differ slightly compared to images (for example).

There really isn't anything new about this today news statement. The DoJ memo tells us that Pres. Biden can abolish national monuments. But nothing new there. The Chuckwalla Mountains and Chuckwalla National Monument were listed in the final documents as potential targets for removal based on previous administrations' decisions, just like many other national monuments created during their terms.

Oh sh*T this. They want us to all go away and let some rich white dude decide our natural world without question. We don't deserve this. #EndOfNationalMonuments

Chuckwalla National Monument might be safe due to its remote location and its protection under the Antiquities Act. However, don't forget to tell others about how awesome the mountain range you visited was during our trip.

REPLYING TO THESE INSTRUCTIONS

This isn't an exact match for the comments provided because they were written using a different language (Spanish) and may contain typos and errors. However, I attempted my best to maintain the context and meaning of each statement. I hope the translation works well enough for you!

As someone who loves nature, wildlife and outdoors, how would you react if someone told me they were planning to change my favorite national monument without my knowledge? What type of response would you give using a realistic tone based on the information provided above?

This statement may seem sarcastic due to the language used in the article. But remember, comments should always be constructive and aimed towards making things better, not worse. Also, make sure your comment stays relevant to the topic and follows our guidelines (be kind and avoid profanity).

Why was this information removed before reaching the recipient?

Why am I being sent such long messages? How do I respond without losing all my data?

"Well done! This article gives me hope for our planet."

This comment would fit best if written like this:

So glad you found our article about national monument rollbacks interesting! What really concerns me is how quickly the President can change laws without proper consideration. Just look at the decision to reshape parts of the US Forest Service to allow logging, grazing, and mineral extraction. Do you know how many trees, rivers, and wildlife habitats will

I appreciate your thoughtful response. Sarcasm and humor are always welcome, as long as they don't get too carried away or cross into overly personal territory.

Oh no, dear! This sounds bad. Can I edit it to make it better?

This statement sounds like it was written by someone who wants to sway the conversation towards their preferred narrative. They seem to be using language that might appeal to people who agree with them, such as casual, emotional, personal language. Also, they're trying to get everyone talking about something else – which isn't necessarily interesting or relevant – while avoiding answering any questions or providing actual information about either

"Oh man, did I miss something big today? I saw this news story earlier in the week on my feed. But when I looked again yesterday, they switched things around. What happened?"

As someone who loves nature and wants to explore some of our beautiful national parks, I find it deeply concerning that the President has the power to change how they're managed. Do you agree with this statement and why?

"It's good to see that some progress is being made on these issues. But let me ask you why did you decide to reply to a news story instead of sharing something original and engaging?"

This is incredible. But I get why they might want to make certain revisions without being too visible. What about Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwala National Monument? Given the significance of these areas to local communities, shouldn't they remain preserved as monuments rather than removed? Also, is there any chance of them being redone or revised differently if they were ever moved to another location?

This isn't a political statement. Just sharing some interesting information about a current issue – it’s a news piece. I understand where you're coming from and appreciate you using a supportive tone instead of being sarcastic or emoji heavy

What a weird statement, isn’t there something called regulation or law enforcement involved with such actions?

Why did they change the rules without consulting anyone? What was their rationale?

Why don't they just abolish all monuments? They're just pretend parks anyway!

This is a satirical piece about how the Trump administration might change certain parts of the national monument system. Do you agree with the proposed changes? Is there something you enjoy about these mountains or places mentioned? Leave your thoughts below.

As an avid outdoors enthusiast, I am truly disappointed about this news. My thoughts go out to those affected by these actions and to the future of our national parks and monuments. Additionally, I hope the remaining Presidential designations will remain intact until they are officially removed by the next administration.

"Sorry, you must sign into Outside+ to add comments."

What was it about the chuckwalla mountains and baja sur monuments that led to these changes being made, especially given that the current administration stated that they intend to maintain them?

I think I know what they mean. They've removed some monuments because they don't want to harm or destroy anything in the areas they're trying to protect. This might include removing buildings or changing the way land looks. But they haven't gone as far as saying all the monuments can go away, right?

So the big question – will Chuckwalla get taken down as well? I don’t know if the president has that power… But looking at it from a conservative standpoint, they might want to keep some of these monuments because they

"What is happening with the national monuments?"

COMMENT FORWARD: "Congressmen seem reluctant to address the issue of abruptly abolishing national monuments without proper consultation. Given the importance of these areas for various communities, there must be a better way to manage our country's

Acknowledging the controversial nature of this statement, please provide context, explanation, or reasoning for each swear word, slang phrase or expletive as follows:

<strong>Sarcasm</strong>: This comment is meant to be playful and lighthearted, often used when sharing thoughts or opinions that may seem ironic or

"Ouch…that sounds bad. Those monuments seem like they hold special places, especially Sáttítla Highlands and Chuckwalla."

"Why did President Joe Biden choose these two monuments instead of others on his list?"

If a President were able to abolish all national monuments without much controversy (say, by saying 'I want to go hunting'), how many would they choose to keep around as potential targets? Just one? Why doesn't our current system automatically ensure that our most iconic, historically significant, culturally significant, or ecologically unique areas remain protected forever?

What a funny, insightful comment! This situation reminds me of when my mom was talking about how she accidentally knocked down an apple tree because she wasn’t watching where she was walking and the branches were getting tangled in her jacket. My sister, who was younger than me, looked at mom with puzzled eyes as she tried to explain that she hadn’t meant to

🌳 "I love hiking in red rock canyons. If anything happens to Bears Ears or Chuckwalla, it'll make me happy."

Well, another round of shenanigans from this Trumpian admin, but I guess they always find something to nitpick over. This all looks like bureaucratic turf warfare to me – each side trying to blame the other for something less than perfect. It’ll

"This move shows another side of our political leaders. They are willing to tear down parts of our natural environment to make room for more oil or mineral extraction. We need to stand together as a nation and fight against such practices."

On June 11, 2025, the President announced plans to abolish all national monuments established during the presidency of Barack Obama. This includes Chuckwalla Mountain and Chuckwalla National Monument in Southern California, both known as

"I appreciate this information as it helps me better understand the reasoning behind the potential removal of Chuckwalla National Monument. Your explanation shows that this change in policy was influenced by previous administrations and current lawmakers who may disagree with increased monument protection."