White House Targets Bears Ears National Monument for Second Major Reduction

Updated July 17, 2026, 03:05 PM PST – In a move that echoes a contentious chapter from less than a decade ago, the White House has once again initiated efforts to significantly curtail the boundaries of Bears Ears National Monument. This latest attempt follows a dramatic reduction in 2017, which was subsequently reversed, and now sees the Trump administration proposing a staggering 91 percent cut to the monument’s original acreage. This decision plunges the future of this spectacular and historically significant Utah landscape into renewed uncertainty, leaving hikers and conservationists with pressing questions about what this drastic redefinition means for one of America’s most treasured natural and cultural resources. Backpacker Editor-in-Chief Adam Roy provides a comprehensive breakdown of five critical points that outdoor enthusiasts and the public at large should understand about this evolving situation.

On July 13, 2026, the Trump administration unveiled executive orders that enacted sweeping reductions not only to Bears Ears but also to Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, two iconic Utah landscapes that have been at the epicenter of national debate for over three decades. This marks the second significant attempt by the current administration to diminish these protected areas. The initial reduction in 2017 was a pivotal moment, sparking widespread protest and legal challenges, only to be later reversed by President Joe Biden upon his inauguration, restoring the monuments to their congressionally designated sizes. The current administration’s renewed efforts to shrink these monuments signal a persistent ideological divide over land management and resource extraction in the American West.

Adam Roy, the Editor-in-Chief of Backpacker magazine, brings a unique and informed perspective to this ongoing saga. His early career included contributing to the local newspaper in Moab, Utah, a region intimately connected with Bears Ears, serving as a common gateway for exploration into the monument’s vast expanse. Roy has been a dedicated observer and chronicler of the Bears Ears narrative since its initial designation as a national monument in 2016. His deep engagement with the area was further solidified in 2019 when he participated in Backpacker’s annual Editors’ Choice trip, an expedition that allowed him and his colleagues to immerse themselves in the rugged beauty and profound significance of Bears Ears. Drawing upon this extensive experience and firsthand knowledge, Roy outlines five crucial aspects for hikers and the broader public to consider regarding the latest developments.

1. The Scale of the Latest Reductions is Monumental

The executive order signed by the administration represents a drastic reduction in the protected area of Bears Ears National Monument, diminishing it by an astonishing 91 percent. This translates to the removal of approximately 1.2 million acres from federal protection. To contextualize the sheer magnitude of this loss, this area is roughly equivalent in size to Grand Canyon National Park, one of the most visited and iconic national parks in the United States. The implications of such a significant excision are profound, affecting not only the ecological integrity of the landscape but also access to and protection of numerous significant cultural and recreational sites.

Several critically important destinations for backpackers and sites of immense cultural value are now situated outside the monument’s drastically reduced boundaries. Among these are Grand Gulch, a renowned and highly sought-after backpacking destination celebrated for its slot canyons and Ancestral Puebloan cliff dwellings. Cedar Mesa, a vast plateau renowned for housing one of the densest and most significant concentrations of Ancestral Puebloan architecture in the entire United States, is also largely excluded. Cheesebox Canyon, a spectacular and challenging slot canyon, and Valley of the Gods, a broad, scenic valley characterized by striking sandstone monoliths reminiscent of the more famous Monument Valley, are also no longer part of the protected monument. The loss of these areas from federal protection raises serious concerns about their future management, potential development, and preservation of their unique natural and archaeological resources.

2. The Shadow of Mining Looms Large

A significant, though not exclusive, driving force behind the repeated attempts to shrink Bears Ears National Monument appears to be the potential for mineral extraction. From the moment the monument was first designated, a persistent argument from opponents has been that its protected status would impede access to valuable mineral deposits. While the precise extent and economic viability of these deposits remain a subject of debate and exploration, historical records indicate that significant exploration activities have occurred in this region. Indeed, in 2017, the Trump administration cited the presence of critical mineral resources as a primary justification for its initial boundary reductions.

In 2026, the same rationale is being invoked. The latest executive order explicitly cites "critical minerals such as silver, copper, molybdenum, lead, uranium, vanadium, and zinc" as a principal motivation for shrinking Bears Ears. The potential for extensive mining operations if these boundary changes are allowed to stand is uncertain, but the prospect is enough to generate considerable concern among some local residents. The history of uranium mining in this specific region is particularly complex and fraught with difficult memories. Throughout the mid-20th century, uranium mining provided a vital economic lifeline for local communities, supporting jobs and industries. However, this economic boon came at a severe cost, leading to devastating health consequences for many who lived and worked in the area.

The town of Monticello, situated in close proximity to Bears Ears, was the site of a uranium mill that operated from 1943 to 1960. For decades following its closure, residents experienced significantly elevated rates of certain types of cancer, a grim legacy of the mining operations. Monticello is not an isolated case; numerous other towns in the region share a similarly troubled history with uranium extraction. In Moab, the Atlas Mill processed vast quantities of uranium ore before its bankruptcy in 1998, leaving taxpayers with the substantial financial burden of environmental cleanup. The reintroduction of mining interests into the Bears Ears region, particularly for uranium, therefore carries the weight of this historical trauma and raises serious environmental and public health concerns.

3. A Fundamental Shift in Monument Management

The current executive order ushers in a significant and potentially transformative change in how Bears Ears National Monument is managed. When the Obama administration first designated Bears Ears in 2016, a key component of its management strategy was the establishment of the Bears Ears Commission. This independent body was designed to be comprised of representatives from the five Native American tribes that had originally petitioned the federal government to create the monument: the Navajo, Hopi, Zuni, Ute Mountain Ute, and the Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation. For these five tribes, Bears Ears holds profound cultural and spiritual significance, representing ancestral homelands and sacred sites. The intention behind the commission was to ensure that these sovereign nations had a direct voice and advisory capacity in the management of federal policy concerning Bears Ears, effectively giving them a seat at the decision-making table.

The executive order issued this month fundamentally alters this collaborative management structure. It proposes to expand the advisory committee for Bears Ears to a total of 15 members. While the five tribal representatives will retain their positions, the composition of the remaining ten seats signals a shift in influence. Four seats will be allocated to representatives from local and county governments, many of which have historically opposed the monument’s protections. The remaining six seats will be directly appointed by the governor of Utah, with the stated intention that these individuals will represent groups such as cattle ranchers, private landowners, and off-road vehicle operators. Given that many of these stakeholder groups, alongside local and state governments, have consistently advocated for reduced federal protection of Bears Ears, this reconstituted committee could dramatically reshape the monument’s management, potentially prioritizing extractive industries and recreational uses over conservation and tribal concerns.

4. Local Opinion: A Complex and Nuanced Landscape

Understanding the true breadth of local opinion regarding Bears Ears National Monument is a complex undertaking, far more nuanced than often presented in public discourse. A primary argument against the monument’s designation has consistently been that it was imposed without the consent of local residents. While this assertion holds some truth in specific instances, it fails to capture the full spectrum of perspectives within the region. The governments of three local towns – Bluff, Blanding, and Monticello – have indeed maintained a consistent stance against the monument’s protections. Furthermore, San Juan County, the administrative jurisdiction where much of the monument is located, has frequently, though not uniformly, opposed the monument’s designation.

However, this narrative of unified local opposition is incomplete. When discussing "local opinion" in the context of public lands, it is crucial to address the question of who qualifies as a "local" and whose voices are prioritized. This issue is particularly contentious in the Bears Ears region. For instance, the Bears Ears National Monument directly abuts the ancestral lands of several of the tribes that spearheaded the movement for its creation. The Navajo Nation shares a significant border with the monument, as does a portion of the Ute Mountain Ute reservation. The other three petitioning tribes, while not directly bordering the monument, possess deep and undeniable historical ties to the area. These tribal governments were instrumental in petitioning the federal government to establish Bears Ears and, following its initial reduction, joined a significant lawsuit aimed at restoring its original boundaries.

Furthermore, the question of geographical proximity and its influence on decision-making is critical. Bears Ears is situated within San Juan County, but the monument garners substantial support from Grand County, located directly to the north. Moab, the county seat of Grand County, sits geographically close to the boundary between the two counties and is approximately a two-hour drive from the core of Bears Ears. While this may seem like a considerable distance by some measures, in the vast landscapes of southern Utah, it is often considered the "next town over." The government of Grand County has been a steadfast supporter of Bears Ears. Its economy is heavily reliant on outdoor recreation, and federal lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), such as Bears Ears, are fundamental to this economic model.

Even within San Juan County itself, opposition to the monument has not been monolithic or static. The political control of the county commission has shifted several times since the monument’s inception. A pivotal moment occurred in 2018 when a voting rights lawsuit necessitated the redrawing of the county’s electoral districts. This redistricting resulted in the election of the county’s first-ever majority-Navajo commission. Following this demographic and political shift, San Juan County transitioned to supporting the designation of Bears Ears. When President Biden assumed office, the county commission actively urged him to restore the monument to its original, larger size.

Examining public sentiment on a broader scale across Utah reveals further complexity. While the state government and its congressional delegation have been vocal opponents of Bears Ears National Monument, polling data suggests that the average resident of Utah may hold a more favorable view. A poll commissioned by an environmental nonprofit organization last year indicated that an impressive 71 percent of Utah voters expressed support for maintaining Bears Ears as a national monument. This significant margin suggests a potential disconnect between the vocal opposition from elected officials and the broader public sentiment within the state.

5. The Inevitable Path to Judicial Resolution

Given the contentious history and the significant stakes involved, it is highly probable that the latest attempts to reduce Bears Ears National Monument will ultimately be settled in the courts. When the Trump administration first implemented its 2017 reductions, a broad coalition of plaintiffs filed lawsuits to challenge the action. This coalition included numerous environmental nonprofits, the five Native American tribes that had originally advocated for the monument’s creation, and prominent outdoor apparel company Patagonia.

These legal battles were actively underway when President Biden took office and subsequently reversed the reductions, rendering the lawsuits moot. However, with the current administration’s renewed efforts to shrink the monument, the prospect of further legal challenges is once again on the horizon. While not all of the previous litigants have definitively committed to returning to court, several have publicly stated their intentions to do so. Notably, Earthjustice and the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) have informed Backpacker magazine that they intend to file new lawsuits.

Their legal argument centers on the interpretation of the Antiquities Act of 1906. This landmark legislation grants presidents the authority to declare federal lands as national monuments, but the plaintiffs contend that it does not empower presidents to diminish or rescind existing monuments. Legal experts consulted by Backpacker have indicated that a literal reading of the Antiquities Act appears to support this interpretation. However, they also acknowledge that U.S. courts have historically shown a degree of deference to presidential power in matters of executive action. Consequently, the ultimate outcome of these legal challenges remains uncertain, highlighting the ongoing struggle for the future of Bears Ears.

Backpacker magazine has been diligently tracking the evolving landscape of Bears Ears National Monument for the past decade and remains committed to providing ongoing coverage of these critical developments. For the latest updates on the challenges facing America’s national monuments, readers are encouraged to visit backpacker.com. This has been Editor-in-Chief Adam Roy, reporting on the ongoing story of Bears Ears.