Congress has cut federal funding for public media — a $3.4 million loss for LAist. We count on readers like you to protect our nonprofit newsroom. Become a monthly member and sustain local journalism.
California's national monuments will not be eliminated, but may be modified
U.S. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke is recommending boundary revisions for "a handful" of national monuments but no eliminations. It is not yet clear if any of the millions of acres of protected federal land in California will be modified, because the White House has yet to release the findings of Zinke's review.
Zinke made his comments to the Associated Press on Thursday morning, but isn't providing any additional details of his plan beyond proposals disclosed earlier to downsize the Bears Ears monument in Utah and leave six others unchanged. A summary statement released by the Interior Department today revealed little that is not already general knowledge about the review.
Five national monuments in California, including one in Los Angeles’ backyard, could be affected as part of Zinke's review of all large national monuments created since 1996.
Key details -- like which monuments will be downsized, and by how much -- are now in the hands of the the White House, which has received Zinke's final monument review and is looking it over, according to Chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee Rob Bishop, Republican of Utah. Bishop said he didn't know exactly when President Trump would make the review public.
"It has to be sooner rather than later," he told reporters on a conference call on Thursday morning, adding that he hasn't been fully briefed on the final report, either.
Democratic lawmakers slammed the administration's decision to withhold the report from the public.
“The American people have the right to see his entire report," California Senator Dianne Feinstein who opposes any changes to the state's monuments, wrote in a statement. "A proposal to strip protections from public lands should be made public immediately.”
Congresswoman Judy Chu, who represents the San Gabriel Valley and was a vocal supporter of the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument, also weighed in, as did Rep. Alan Lowenthal of Long Beach.
Any move by the Trump administration to slim down monuments may trigger legal showdowns over whether one chief executive can undo or modify another's decisions about them. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra has previously said he will sue the Trump administration if it alters any of California's monuments.
President Trump ordered the unprecedented review in April as part of an executive order he said was designed to combat “the abusive practice” of turning lands already owned by the federal government into national monuments by giving them a higher level of protection from mining, logging and other extractive industries.
“I’ve spoken with many state and local leaders who care very much about preserving our land, and who are gravely concerned about this massive federal land grab,” Trump said on April 26. “It’s gotten worse and worse and worse, and now we’re going to free it up.”

The president directed Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke to study 27 national monuments and make sure they had been created with sufficient local input, and did not put up barriers to energy development and economic growth.
That included six in California: Berryessa Snow Mountain, Carrizo Plain, Giant Sequoia, Mojave Trails, San Gabriel Mountains and Sand to Snow.
CALIFORNIA MONUMENT | YEAR CREATED | ACREAGE |
---|---|---|
Berryessa Snow Mountain | 2015 | 330,780 |
Carrizo Plain | 2001 | 204,107 |
Giant Sequoia | 2000 | 327,760 |
Mojave Trails | 2016 | 1,600,000 |
San Gabriel Mountains | 2014 | 346,177 |
Earlier this month, Zinke announced he would not be modifying Sand to Snow National Monument, which protects a diverse desert and alpine environment that stretches from the top of the San Bernardino Mountains to the base of the range near Palm Springs. But the fate of five other California monuments is still up in the air.
As part of the review, Zinke, a former Montana congressman, traveled throughout the West visiting various monuments – although he did not visit California, despite the state having the most monuments under review of any state.
That disappointed Daniel Rossman, the acting California Director of the Wilderness Society.
“If the priority is meeting with local communities, come talk to us!” he said. “The fact that he’s chosen not to really goes to discrediting the notion that this process is about inclusion and fairness, and is more about adhering to special interests.”

The Department of Interior didn’t respond for a request for comment on Zinke’s travel schedule. But even though the Secretary did not visit California, he has no shortage of comments to wade through. More than 2.8 public comments poured in, and an analysis of just over a million that were available online found that 99.2 percent supported keeping the monuments intact.
“If there are recommendations that come down the pike that do anything more than keep the monuments as they are designated today, one would have to wonder where he actually got those recommendations, because it certainly wasn’t from the American public,” said Pamela Flick, California Representative with the Defenders of Wildlife.
The Department of Interior's summary of its review appeared to give equal weight to opponents and supporters of the monuments, even as it noted that supporters far outweighed those who wanted the monuments reduced or abolished.
Comments received were overwhelmingly in favor of maintaining existing monuments and demonstrated a well-orchestrated national campaign organized by multiple organizations. Opponents of monuments primarily supported rescinding or modifying the existing monuments to protect traditional multiple use, and those most concerned were often local residents associated with industries such as grazing, timber production, mining, hunting and fishing, and motorized recreation. Opponents point to other cases where monument designation has resulted in reduced public access, road closures, hunting and fishing restrictions, multiple and confusing management plans, reduced grazing allotments and timber production, and pressure applied to private land owners encompassed by or adjacent to a monument to sell.

Congressman Paul Cook (R), who represents the Eastern California desert, was especially vocal. He sent Secretary Zinke maps outlining how he’d like Mojave Trails to be changed to permit existing mines to expand. He also requested the agency alter the boundaries of Castle Mountains National Monument, which was not included in the review, to allow mining there (Zinke did not take him up on that request).
“It is becoming increasingly apparent that federal policies implemented over the last decade have favored a myopic environmentalism at the expense of economic and recreational activities,” Cook wrote, “Anything that you can do to restore this balance would be of tremendous benefit to my district.”
This story has been updated.
As Editor-in-Chief of our newsroom, I’m extremely proud of the work our top-notch journalists are doing here at LAist. We’re doing more hard-hitting watchdog journalism than ever before — powerful reporting on the economy, elections, climate and the homelessness crisis that is making a difference in your lives. At the same time, it’s never been more difficult to maintain a paywall-free, independent news source that informs, inspires, and engages everyone.
Simply put, we cannot do this essential work without your help. Federal funding for public media has been clawed back by Congress and that means LAist has lost $3.4 million in federal funding over the next two years. So we’re asking for your help. LAist has been there for you and we’re asking you to be here for us.
We rely on donations from readers like you to stay independent, which keeps our nonprofit newsroom strong and accountable to you.
No matter where you stand on the political spectrum, press freedom is at the core of keeping our nation free and fair. And as the landscape of free press changes, LAist will remain a voice you know and trust, but the amount of reader support we receive will help determine how strong of a newsroom we are going forward to cover the important news from our community.
Please take action today to support your trusted source for local news with a donation that makes sense for your budget.
Thank you for your generous support and believing in independent news.

-
The L.A. City Council approved the venue change Wednesday, which organizers say will save $12 million in infrastructure costs.
-
Taxes on the sale of some newer apartment buildings would be lowered under a plan by Sacramento lawmakers to partially rein in city Measure ULA.
-
The union representing the restaurant's workers announced Tuesday that The Pantry will welcome back patrons Thursday after suddenly shutting down six months ago.
-
If approved, the more than 62-acre project would include 50 housing lots and a marina less than a mile from Jackie and Shadow's famous nest overlooking the lake.
-
The U.S. Supreme Court lifted limits on immigration sweeps in Southern California, overturning a lower court ruling that prohibited agents from stopping people based on their appearance.
-
Censorship has long been controversial. But lately, the issue of who does and doesn’t have the right to restrict kids’ access to books has been heating up across the country in the so-called culture wars.