National Monuments: Despite objections in the West, most Americans support designations
Despite opposition in West, national monuments are popularWe can expect President Clinton to designate more national monuments before he leaves office. Public support has been overwhelming for his latest designations.
In a recent interview, Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt made it clear that other national monuments are being considered: "There aren't going to be any surprises. There's no master list in a file somewhere. But what the president has asked me to do is where there is interest, expressed interest, to get out on the ground and talk the issues through. And I've been doing that."Later in the interview, Babbitt emphasized that these potential sites are still in the talking stage: "What we're doing is responding to specific opportunities that are put up to us by local communities."
In selecting potential sites for national monument status, the Department of the Interior also looks at land use for the prior 10 years in terms of development and mining.
Oregon is a possible site of two new national monuments. Babbitt plans to meet with the entire congressional delegation and the governor about protecting Steens Mountain and Soda Mountain. Steens Mountain, a geological wonder, is in southeastern Oregon. The Soda Mountain region, southeast of Ashland, has been long recognized for its ecological significance but faces threats posed by a jeep trail and the use of off-road vehicles.
Babbitt said the Oregon politicians he met with are all "interested in putting together legislation. And what I'm saying, that's fine. The issue is not arguing about, Is it Congress or the president? The issue is protecting our heritage. And in Oregon, I think we have an excellent chance of getting a consensus bill worked out between the delegation and the governor that will have administration support. Such a bill, would, by its own terms, make the designation either as a national monument or as a national conservation area."
Babbitt has made three visits to Colorado and had discussions with the delegation. The Department of the Interior has held public meetings on the sites of interest: Canyon of the Ancients near Cortez in southwest Colorado, the expansion of the Colorado National Monument west of Grand Junction and the possible expansion of the Great Sand Dunes National Monument 25 miles northeast of Alamosa.
According to Babbitt, the expansion of the Great Sand Dunes National Monument has the support of Colorado's congressional delegation and the state attorney general. Actually, one member of Colorado's congressional delegation brought the idea of monument's expansion to Babbitt. There has been talk of expanding the site as a national park.
President Herbert Hoover designated the Great Sand Dunes National Monument in 1932. The original boundary was further enlarged through proclamations by Presidents Harry Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower.
In California, Babbitt has also discussed two potential national monument sites with the state's congressional delegation: the Santa Rosa Mountains near Palm Springs and the Carrizo Plain southwest of Bakersfield in the San Joaquin Valley.
Instead of presidential proclamations to make them national monuments, Congress may offer legislation to protect those sites. That would be the best scenario, according to Babbitt. Local residents support special protection for these sites.
Arizona may become home to another national monument, the Empire Ranch near Tucson. The ranch has been administered by the Bureau of Land Management since 1988. It encompasses a vast grasslands area with a rich diversity of wildlife that is threatened by commercial development.
And in Montana -- where the Missouri River begins its long journey -- the river and other geological forces created the Missouri Breaks at the Upper Missouri River, a landscape of unique, white bluffs. There are discussions under way to see if there is support to protect the Missouri Breaks as a national monument.
In 1997, after President Clinton designated the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in southeastern Utah, Congress attempted to limit the president's power under the Antiquities Act. A bill to do just that passed the U.S. House but failed in the Senate even with the support of Utah's powerful Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch.
Sen. Craig Thomas, R-Wyo., promises to introduce a bill in this Congress to limit the power of the president under the Antiquities Act. No doubt there will be some members of Congress who will go along, but it is doubtful that such legislation will pass in an election year when the public solidly supports the protection of such national treasures.
Since the Antiquities Act of 1906 was passed into law, 14 presidents -- seven Republicans and seven Democrats -- have used its power to designate important sites as national monuments.
Sometimes the act had to be used swiftly to protect a site, as was the case of the Muir Woods National Monument in California. President Theodore Roosevelt acted in a mere 12 days after being apprised of the threat to the redwood trees. Congress could not have acted that quickly.
There is no need to attack the Antiquities Act. Congress passed the act, and it can undo any presidential proclamation of a national monument it doesn't like by simply passing legislation to abolish its status as a monument. Of the 106 national monuments created by presidents, six have been abolished by congressional action. One of those, the Gran Quivira National Monument in New Mexico, 80 years later was redesignated as the Salinas Pueblo Missions National Monument.
Thomas, who was raised on a ranch near Cody, Wyo., ought to know that Congress can abolish any particular site's status as a national monument. In 1909, President William Taft designated the Shoshone Cavern National Monument, a 210-acre site adjacent to Cody. The designation was abolished by Congress in 1954, and the cave and acreage were given to the city of Cody to be used as a public park. The park was never successfully developed and reverted back to the federal government in 1977.
The West's 100-year-old antagonism to public lands, federal oversight of those lands and the Antiquities Act hasn't diminished. But neither have urban growth and encroachment upon special public landscapes diminished.
Like it or not, members of Congress from the West will have to learn to live with the new national monuments. The nation, as a whole, sees the need for special protection of certain selected sites that are on federal public lands.
The American public has spoken clearly in poll after poll -- the public lands are to be protected. The designation of national monuments is one way to give greater protection to an area of scientific or historic interest or of great and unusual beauty.
Charles Levendosky, editorial page editor of the Casper (Wyo.) Star-Tribune, has a national reputation for First Amendment commentary. His e-mail address is levendos@trib.com