Why the Original Boundaries of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments Matter
A Science-Based Case for Restoring Monument Protections
Few public land decisions in recent history have generated as much debate as the reduction of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments. Supporters of the reductions argued that the original monument designations were too large, restricted local land uses, and represented federal overreach. Critics countered that the reductions removed protections from some of the most ecologically, culturally, and scientifically significant landscapes in the United States. While political opinions vary, the ecological value of these landscapes is well documented. The scientific evidence overwhelmingly supports the importance of protecting large, connected landscapes such as Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante.
This battle is far from over, and there are still opportunities to overturn this decision. More informatio on these options is available at the bottom of this blog post!
The Rationale Behind the Reductions
Several arguments were advanced in support of reducing the monuments:
The monuments were larger than necessary to protect significant resources.
Traditional outdoor activities such as hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, and grazing were allegedly restricted by monument status.
Local communities would benefit from increased flexibility in land management and resource development.
Existing federal land management regulations were sufficient to protect important resources.
These arguments deserve careful examination.
Monument Status Did Not Prohibit Hunting, Fishing, Camping, or Hiking
One of the most frequently repeated claims was that monument designations prevented public access and traditional outdoor recreation. In reality, neither Bears Ears nor Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument prohibited hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, wildlife viewing, or most other forms of outdoor recreation. These activities remained available under existing state and federal regulations both before and after designation. In fact, many sportsmen's organizations supported monument protections because they helped conserve wildlife habitat, migration corridors, and public access opportunities. The notion that hunters, anglers, campers, and hikers were being excluded from these landscapes is not supported by the actual management plans governing the monuments.
Why Size Matters in Conservation
One argument for reducing the monuments was that only specific archaeological sites or scenic landmarks required protection. Modern conservation science demonstrates that ecosystems cannot be effectively protected by drawing small circles around isolated features. Wildlife populations, watersheds, plant communities, fire regimes, and ecological processes operate across entire landscapes. Large protected areas provide connected wildlife habitat, genetic exchange among populations, climate change resilience, protection of watersheds, reduced habitat fragmentation, and greater ecological stability. When protected landscapes are reduced and fragmented, wildlife populations often become more vulnerable to disturbance, invasive species, and habitat degradation. Protecting an archaeological site while removing protections from the surrounding ecosystem ignores how ecological systems function.
Fragmentation Creates Long-Term Ecological Costs
The lands removed from monument protection include extensive desert ecosystems, canyon systems, mesas, and wildlife habitat that function as interconnected ecological networks. Scientific research consistently shows that fragmentation can, disrupt wildlife movement, reduce biodiversity, increase invasive species establishment, alter predator-prey relationships, change fire behavior, and degrade watershed function. Species ranging from mule deer and desert bighorn sheep to countless reptiles, birds, pollinators, and native plants depend upon large, intact landscapes. The ecological value of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante extends far beyond individual scenic overlooks or archaeological sites.
Scientific Value Cannot Be Recreated
Grand Staircase-Escalante is internationally recognized as one of the most significant paleontological landscapes in North America. Scientists continue to discover previously unknown dinosaur species, fossil deposits, and geological records that help explain millions of years of Earth's history. Likewise, Bears Ears contains exceptional opportunities for studying desert ecology, cultural landscapes, climate adaptation, and long-term ecosystem processes. Once these resources are disturbed or damaged, they cannot be replaced. The scientific value of these landscapes often lies not in isolated sites but in the integrity of the broader landscape that surrounds them.
Resource Extraction and Conservation Are Often in Conflict
Supporters of the reductions argued that greater management flexibility could allow for economic opportunities, including mineral and energy development. While economic development is an important consideration, conservation science recognizes that certain activities can permanently alter landscapes through road construction, habitat fragmentation, increased erosion, noise disturbance, vegetation loss, and introduction of invasive species. Even relatively small infrastructure footprints can have outsized ecological impacts when they occur in previously intact landscapes. The question is not whether development has benefits, but whether those benefits outweigh the long-term loss of irreplaceable natural and cultural resources; and whether there are more appropriate areas to focus on to meet development needs while preserving pristine habitats. Opening up these large expanses of land for development are certainly the path of least resistance, but that ease comes at a significant cost.
Why Hunters and Anglers Should Care
Conservation and public access have long been linked under the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. Large, intact public landscapes support healthy wildlife populations, seasonal migrations, watershed protection, public access opportunities, and long-term hunting and fishing traditions. History has repeatedly shown that fragmented landscapes tend to support fewer wildlife resources and provide fewer hunting and fishing opportunities for future generations. Protecting habitat is one of the most effective forms of wildlife conservation.
The Path Forward
Reasonable people can disagree about public land policy. However, decisions affecting millions of acres of nationally significant landscapes should be informed by ecological science, not misconceptions about public access or recreation restrictions. The evidence demonstrates that Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante contain extraordinary ecological, cultural, recreational, and scientific values that benefit all Americans. Restoring and maintaining protections for these landscapes would help ensure that future generations inherit the same opportunities to hunt, fish, hike, camp, study, and explore these remarkable public lands. Conservation is not about locking people out. It is about ensuring that the natural systems, wildlife habitats, cultural resources, and recreational opportunities that make these places special remain intact for generations to come.
This decision can still be overturned by congress and the supreme court. We have shown time and time again that when we stand together on public land issues, our legislators listen. And this is no different. Let your presidential administration and congressional representatives know where you stand on this issue. The link below will take you to a letter campaign that will automatically contact your regions representatives on your behalf with the option of writing your own letter or using our prewritten letter. Your voice matters, and it needs to be heard!
Works Cited:
Fahrig, L. (2003). Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 34, 487–515.
Crooks, K. R., & Sanjayan, M. (Eds.). (2006). Connectivity Conservation. Cambridge University Press.
Crooks, K. R., & Sanjayan, M. (2010). Connectivity conservation: maintaining connections for nature. Cambridge University Press.
Carroll, C., et al. (2025). Current approaches and future opportunities for climate-smart protected areas. Nature Reviews Biodiversity.
Titus, A. L., & Loewen, M. A. (2013). At the Top of the Grand Staircase: The Late Cretaceous of Southern Utah.
