The House Committee on Natural Resources this past week approved a bill sponsored by Utah Republican Rep. Rob Bishop to rein in the powers granted by the Antiquities Act of 1906 that allow a president to unilaterally create huge national monuments.
The bill advanced on a party-line vote of 27-13, with Democrats in opposition.
The bill, H.R. 3990, the National Monument Creation and Protection Act, amend the Antiquities Act to limit the size of future monuments and specifically grants the sitting president the power to reduce the size of existing monuments ? a power Democrats have argued President Trump does not have under current law.
During his administration, President Obama created 26 national monuments totaling more than 500 million acres ? including the 700,000-acre Basin and Range National Monument on the border of Lincoln and Nye counties and the 300,000-acre Gold Butte National Monument in Clark County.
President Trump ordered Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke to review recent monument designations and Zinke sent a memo to the president recommending the reduction in the size of six of those, including Gold Butte. The president has not yet acted on those recommendations.
Bishop?s bill would allow the president to unilaterally reduce the size of any monument by 85,000 acres ? and by more with the consent of affected counties and states.
The bill would allow a president in the future to create a new monument unilaterally, but only up to 640 acres. Anything larger than that, up to 10,000 acres, would require an environmental review. Anything between 10,000 and 85,000 acres, the apparent size cap on new monuments, would require the approval of counties and state officials, as well as the governor.
?Congress never intended to give one individual the power to unilaterally dictate the manner in which all Americans may enjoy enormous swaths of our nation?s public lands,? Bishop was quoted as saying. ?Designations are no longer made for scientific reasons or archaeological value but for political purposes. Unfortunately, overreach in recent administrations has brought us to this point and it is Congress? duty to clarify the law and end the abuse.?
Like the Natural Resources Committee, Nevada?s congressional delegation is divided along party lines when it comes to national monuments. The four Democrats have all objected bitterly and volubly to reducing the size of Nevada?s monuments.
But its two Republican delegates in January introduced legislation that would prevent future designations of monuments in Nevada without the consent of Congress ? the Nevada Land Sovereignty Act of 2017 (H.R. 243, S. 22).
The legislation introduced by Sen. Dean Heller and Rep. Mark Amodei is terse and to the point. It basically piggybacks onto a current law that reads: ?No extension or establishment of national monuments in Wyoming may be undertaken except by express authorization of Congress.? Their bill would amend this by simply adding the phrase ?or Nevada? after the word Wyoming.
In response to Bishop?s bill passing the committee, a Heller press aide sent out a comment, ?Unilateral federal land grabs in a state like Nevada where the federal government already owns 85 percent of our land should not be permitted. Public input and local support remain critical to the decision-making process of federal land designations, and that is why I?ve introduced legislation that prevents last year?s land grab under the Obama administration from occurring without input from Congress and local officials. I?ll continue working with my colleagues to see that it is signed into law.?
Congressman Amodei said in January before Trump?s inauguration, ?I continue to be amazed by the fact that some people hug unilateral, non-transparent monument designations, while at the same time, protesting vehemently over the introduction and public discussion of congressional lands bills proposals. In contrast to the last eight years of this administration?s one-sided approach on major land management decisions in Nevada, our bill simply ensures local stakeholders have a seat at the table going forward.?
Bishop?s proposal also declares that existing water and land rights are to preserved despite a monument designation.
Thomas Mitchell is a longtime Nevada newspaper columnist. You may email him at email@example.com. He also blogs at http://4thst8.wordpress.com/.