Despite President Biden's 30x30 initiative to increase federal ownership of land, controversies have arisen over presidential authority, monument size, resource protection, inclusion of nonfederal lands, managing agencies, land use restrictions, and the process of monument creation.
The 30x30 conservation initiative aims to increase the amount of land that falls under federal ownership. Congress is deliberating on whether to prioritize the acquisition of new lands or allocate resources towards addressing the state of existing federal infrastructure. The significant $19.38 billion maintenance backlog faced by the four main land management agencies is a key consideration in this ongoing debate, as highlighted by the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
The Antiquities Act of 1906 grants the president the power to establish national monuments on federal lands that contain significant historical or scientific landmarks, structures, or objects of interest. The act requires the president to designate the smallest possible area necessary for the protection and management of these objects.
Presidents have proclaimed a total of 161 monuments, and there have been instances where monuments were enlarged, diminished, or had their terms modified by subsequent presidents or Congress, according to the CRS.
The ownership of land by the federal government in the United States is estimated to be around 640 million acres, constituting approximately 28% of the total land area in the country. There are a total of 2.27 billion acres of land in the U.S., CRS said.
The main point of controversy related to the Antiquities Act is the extent of the president's authority to establish and modify national monuments, according to the CRS. There are debates regarding the president's power to designate monuments, the size of protected areas, the types of resources to be safeguarded, the inclusion of nonfederal lands, the choice of managing agency, potential land use restrictions, and the process of monument creation.
Advocates argue that the act is crucial for preserving resources for future generations, and they believe that the president should maintain the authority to act swiftly in protecting valuable resources on federal lands from potential threats. Supporters also assert that the public has generally backed the president's designations, and courts have upheld them, CRS said.
Critics question the lack of state or congressional approval prior to presidential proclamations and argue that the act may not align with other laws related to land withdrawals, environmental reviews, and public participation, the office said. These controversies have led to lawsuits, legislative changes, and proposals seeking to limit the president's authority and impose restrictions on monument designations.
In light of the ongoing controversies surrounding the establishment and modification of national monuments by presidents, recent sessions of Congress have undertaken evaluations regarding the future of the president's authority under the Antiquities Act, according to CRS.
Several measures have been considered, including:
– limiting the size or duration of withdrawals; prohibiting or restrict withdrawals in particular states or other locations (e.g., the exclusive economic zone);
– narrowing the types of resources that could be protected;
– banning the inclusion of nonfederal land within monument boundaries;
– encouraging public participation in the monument designation process;
– revoking the president’s authority to designate monuments or require congressional and/or state approval of some or all monument designations; and
– promoting presidential creation of monuments in accordance with certain federal land management laws and environmental laws.
Other measures considered by Congress had a range of additional objectives, including proposals to modify land uses within national monuments and imposing conditions on agency implementation of restrictions on the use of monuments, CRS said.
