preservation for the greater good

On April 26, 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13792, directing the Secretary of the Interior to review certain National Monuments designated or expanded under the Antiquities Act of 1906, including those designations and expansions made since January 1, 1996, those that cover more than 100,000 acres, and those made seemingly without adequate public outreach and coordination with relevant stakeholders.

To many of us in the heritage preservation industry, this Executive Order is seen as direct and credible threat to the Antiquities Act and especially to monuments designated in recent years to protect sacred American Indian sites and cultural resources. Included on the list is Mojave Trails National Monument, designated last year and located adjacent to one of my favorite places on earth: Joshua Tree National Park (seen in the featured image above and formerly a National Monument).

The Secretary of the Interior is now carrying out Executive Order 13792 by requesting comments on National Monuments through regulations.gov. Of particular note in both the Executive Order and the request for comments, comments on Bears Ears National Monument are due before May 26 in order to meet the Executive Order’s requirement for an interim report by early June, while comments on the remaining National Monuments are not due until before July 10.

Bears Ears
Bears Ears National Monument, as seen in an image from Wikimedia Commons

Bears Ears National Monument was designated by President Obama at the request of a number of American Indian tribes. It encompasses over 1.3 million acres and includes two prominent mesas in southeast Utah that together look like bear’s ears on the landscape (see image). This designation has pitted American Indian tribes against development interests worried about the federal government taking private property and obstructing business interests. (The New York Times recently published an article and video on the matter here.)

Given the fast-tracked request for comments on this National Monument and Secretary Zinke’s finger wagging at a woman requesting information about whether he intended to meet with the tribes, I suspect the recommendation for Bears Ears was decided before the ink on the Executive Order was dry. At this point, I hope the result will be a boundary adjustment rather than full rescinding of the Bears Ears National Monument designation, which would set a horrible precedent.

While I understand concerns about property rights, I also know that preserving our nation’s cultural heritage—both tangible and intangible—benefits everyone. I truly believe the federal government, if it truly embraced the idea of historic preservation as envisioned many years ago, could adequately balance preservation with the rights of private property owners, businesses, and local, state, and tribal governments. Unfortunately, not all federal agencies have embraced the idea that preserving our nation’s heritage will improve our nation. And, sadly, designation of National Monuments without adequate resources or planning tools in place has only provided ammunition to be used against the federal historic preservation program.

I encourage you to consider responding to the Department of the Interior’s request for comments. My response is included below, submitted on May 15, 2017.

I write to offer these comments for your consideration while reviewing National Monuments designated under the Antiquities Act of 1906 (Public Law 59-209, as amended, 34 Stat. 225, 54 U.S.C. 320301–320303).

In short:

  • I support the Antiquities Act of 1906 as one of the first steps to preserving cultural, historic, and environmental resources on federal lands for public benefit.
  • Based on my experience, I believe National Monument designations over the last two decades have adequately considered the concerns of citizens, businesses, private property owners, and local, state, and tribal governments.
  • I see no reason to modify National Monument designations made since January 1, 1996, and urge the Department of the Interior to seek financial and human resources to adequately maintain all of our public lands and resources.

As an architectural historian and preservation specialist, I believe the Antiquities Act of 1906 is a critical tool in preserving cultural resources throughout the United States. Not only was it the first law to provide legal protection for historic resources on federally controlled lands, it also provided a means to designate National Monuments without the added and unnecessary step of Congressional review. Designation and protection of these resources belongs with the environmental and cultural heritage professionals found within the executive branch of the US government.

To my knowledge, designation of National Monuments in recent years has included extensive outreach to citizens, private property owners, and to associated local, state, and tribal governments. While all designations are bound to have a few vocal critics, the vast majority of public response to these designations has been positive. All Americans will benefit from the careful balancing of preservation with the interests of citizens, businesses, private property owners, and local, state, and tribal governments.

I see no reason to modify the National Monument designations made since January 1, 1996, unless conditions have substantially changed since designation. Typically, the National Monument boundaries chosen barely begin to cover the resources that could or should be protected. The amount of land designated for Bears Ears alone, for example, was reduced by nearly 30% from the area originally requested for designation. Of greater concern to me is the lack of federal financial and human resources to properly manage designated areas. I urge you to carefully consider fully funding adequate resources as part of future budget requests.

Going forward, I recommend the President and the executive branch continue to carefully consider designation of new National Monuments as well as decisions to divest in federal lands. Property acquisition and disposal should always be carefully considered under both the National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation Act, though I do not believe National Monument designation has previously been considered under these laws. Further, those responsible for management of National Monuments should be adequately armed with Cultural Resource Management Plans that allow for balancing resource preservation with the other public interests of citizens, businesses, and local, state, and tribal governments.

Thank you for taking these comments into consideration as part of your review.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *