Beyond the Memes

Why UPLA Made Monument Reform a Top Priority

A monument boundary can change without transferring a single acre of public land. To understand what changed—and why UPLA fought for it—you have to read the plans.

Read the Documents, Not Just the Memes

UPLA does not form its positions by looking at memes. Neither should anyone else.

This is especially important when social media is filled with coordinated messaging from organizations that have repeatedly advocated restrictions on motorized recreation, including the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, The Wilderness Society, Conserve Southwest Utah, the Center for Biological Diversity, and the Sierra Club.

When you see a claim from any organization—including UPLA—look beyond the dramatic photograph or headline. Read the plan. Study the map. Follow the acreage. Find the controlling management directive and see what it actually says.

The number of times a claim appears in a social-media feed does not make it true. Large national organizations have millions of dollars, paid staff, and sophisticated communications operations. UPLA can compete on the facts, but we cannot match those resources dollar for dollar.

A Lesson We Learned the Hard Way

We learned, sometimes the hard way, that effective advocacy begins long before a final decision is announced. It begins with the discipline and professional capacity to read the documents, understand the maps, and engage while the plans are still being written.

That lesson became clear in 2023, through an experience we have not talked about very much. When the Grand Staircase–Escalante planning documents came out, UPLA did not submit its own comprehensive technical comments. We shared information, passed along BlueRibbon Coalition’s action alert, and encouraged people to participate. But the truth is, we did not yet have the professional capacity to work through thousands of pages of federal planning documents and prepare the kind of comments the process demanded.

That experience was a wake-up call. If we wanted to do more than object after a decision had already been made, we had to become effective while the decision was still being written. As a result, we made two important changes. 1) We expanded our Board to include people throughout Utah and beyond our origin’s full size 4×4 community to include all forms of motorized recreation. 2) We secured a grant and hired Rose Winn as our professional Natural Resources Consultant. Those decisions changed what UPLA could do and paved the way for how we have acted since.

That UPLA made overturning the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase–Escalante Monuments is not a new story, but it’s important you understand why we reached that decision to make it one of our top priorities

Building the Ability to Engage

Our involvement did not happen overnight. It developed over several years.

• In 2023, we alerted members to the Grand Staircase planning process and shared BlueRibbon Coalition’s action alert. We were engaged, but we were not yet equipped to prepare comprehensive technical comments of our own. Read UPLA’s 2023 Grand Staircase article.
• That gap became more serious as the federal government moved ahead with the 30×30 initiative, the Conservation and Landscape Health Rule, and other sweeping land-use plans that eliminated 2100 miles of OHV routes in Utah in just two years.
• UPLA recognized that our Board needed to be more representative of our OHV community, so we expanded the Board to include members throughout Utah and from all motorized users.
• UPLA recognized that we needed professional assistance in analyzing the thousands of pages in each plan and to prepare detailed, substantive comments that would be used to not only influence the decision, but also to provide a strong legal basis to challenge bad decisions in court. We responded by securing a grant from the Utah State OHV Program and hired Rose Winn as our Natural Resource Consultant.
• By 2024, UPLA prepared a 60-page technical comment on the Bears Ears plan, conducted a joint webinar with BlueRibbon Coalition, published side-by-side comparisons of the alternatives, and given the public practical tools for submitting substantive comments. Visit UPLA’s Bears Ears resource center.
• Our comments have never opposed protecting cultural resources. We argued that protection and responsible access can coexist, that the agencies had not considered a true recreation-focused alternative, and that the proposed alternatives depended too heavily on closures and restrictions.
• When the final Resource Management Plans were signed in 2025, they confirmed many of our concerns. Rescission, boundary reduction, administrative reconsideration, or successful court action became one of UPLA’s highest priorities for 2026.

We pursued that priority through public comments, public education, financial and organizational support for BlueRibbon Coalition’s legal work, direct requests to the Trump administration, collaboration with state and local governments, congressional advocacy, and meetings with White House and federal officials. We have reported many of those efforts on our website, but the public record tells only a small part of what took place behind the scenes.

What the Grand Staircase Plan Actually Said

The Grand Staircase–Escalante numbers are especially important because they come directly from the signed 2025 Resource Management Plan. The plan allocated:

• 1,245,600 acres as OHV closed.
• 620,000 acres as OHV limited.
• Zero acres as OHV open.

The OHV-closed allocation covered about 66.6 percent of the 1.87-million-acre monument. Put plainly, roughly two-thirds of the expanded monument was placed in an OHV-closed category before the route-by-route travel planning was finished.

“OHV limited” does not mean unrestricted motorized use. It means vehicles are confined to routes specifically designated for motorized travel, and individual routes within those areas may still be closed in the later travel-planning process.

The 2025 RMP called for new travel management plans, but it temporarily retained most route designations from the 2020 plans. That is why someone could visit Grand Staircase after the RMP was signed, drive many familiar roads, and conclude that nothing had changed. The routes may have looked the same that day, but the policy governing their future had changed.

The 2025 RMP made the controlling land-use decisions first. Later travel management plans were intended to apply those decisions to individual roads and trails within the remaining one-third allocated as OHV limited.

 

Once the RMP designated an area as OHV closed, a later travel plan generally could not turn that same acreage into an OHV-limited area. The broad decision had already been made upstream, even though many of the route-by-route consequences were not yet visible on the ground.

BlueRibbon Coalition captured the point in one sentence: “Monument closures are a process, not an event.” Read BRC’s Bears Ears analysis.

That distinction matters. An agency can establish the governing restrictions in an RMP, postpone many route-level consequences until later travel planning, and then point to temporarily open trails as proof that nothing has changed. But the higher-level plan has already narrowed what can be considered later.

Figure 1. Grand Staircase–Escalante 2025 OHV area designations. Red areas are allocated as OHV closed; cream areas are OHV limited to designated routes. Source: Bureau of Land Management.

Bears Ears Restricted More Than OHV Use

The 2025 Bears Ears RMP reached far beyond motorized recreation. On BLM-administered lands, it allocated 591,185 acres as OHV closed and 483,917 acres as OHV limited. Another 46,348 acres of Forest Service land within the monument are designated wilderness and closed to OHV use.

Together, that is about 637,500 acres of OHV-closed land across the BLM and Forest Service portions of the monument. This is why readers may see two different figures: about 591,000 acres when only BLM land is counted, and about 637,500 acres when the Forest Service wilderness acreage is included.

The plan also included:

• A roughly 775,000-acre Remote Zone restricting mechanized as well as motorized recreation. “Mechanized” includes bicycles.
• Individual permits and seasonal restrictions for motorized travel in Arch Canyon.
• Motorized group-size limits affecting club rides, guided trips, and larger family outings.
• Restrictions on organized and competitive motorized events.
• Limits on dispersed camping and provisions for future designation of approved campsites.
• A monument-wide prohibition on recreational target shooting.
• Restrictions involving mountain bikes, climbing anchors, dogs, drones, geocaching, casual mineral collecting, and other activities.

UPLA represents motorized off-highway recreation, but our review does not stop there. These plans affected hunters, campers, cyclists, climbers, organized clubs, people with disabilities, and families who depend on a vehicle to reach the backcountry. When we find restrictions that affect other forms of outdoor recreation, we often address those issues in our comments too.

No Land Was Transferred to Utah

One of the most repeated claims is that the monument reductions transferred—or will automatically transfer—millions of acres of federal land to the State of Utah. They did not.

The proclamations did not transfer a single acre to the State of Utah. Land removed from monument status remains federal public land managed by the BLM or Forest Service.

 

The Bears Ears proclamation reduced the monument from about 1.36 million acres to 121,096 acres. The Grand Staircase–Escalante proclamation reduced that monument from about 1.87 million acres to 181,541 acres. Changing a monument boundary is not a change in ownership. The excluded lands remain federal public lands.

Any future sale, exchange, lease, mining approval, or other disposition would require a separate process under applicable law. The proclamations themselves approved no such transaction. Read the language in the Grand Staircase–Escalante proclamation and the Bears Ears proclamation.

Can a President Modify a National Monument?

Presidents have modified national monument boundaries many times over more than a century. In May 2025, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel concluded that the Antiquities Act permits a President to alter or revoke an earlier monument declaration.

The 2025 Justice Department opinion provides the administration’s legal basis for that authority. Once again, don’t take my word for it, read the Justice Department’s opinion and see if it makes sense to you.

Additionally, the Tenth Circuit’s June 2026 decision did not rule that the Bears Ears or Grand Staircase expansions were unlawful, and it did not decide whether one President may reduce a monument created or expanded by an earlier President. It held that the district court had erred by refusing to examine whether President Biden exceeded the limits Congress placed in the Antiquities Act.

Those limits include the requirement that protected objects qualify as historic landmarks, historic or prehistoric structures, or other objects of historic or scientific interest, and that the reserved land be confined to the “smallest area compatible” with protecting those objects.

The court sent the case back for further proceedings. UPLA’s article on the Tenth Circuit decision explains the distinction. The Justice Department’s interpretation may now be tested in further litigation, and we hope the broader question eventually reaches the United States Supreme Court so the scope of presidential authority under the Antiquities Act can finally be settled.

What About Mining and Mineral Leasing?

The proclamations make excluded lands legally available for mineral leasing and mining claims, subject to valid existing rights, existing withdrawals, and other applicable laws. That deserves a straightforward explanation.

The proclamations do not approve a mine, issue a mineral lease, authorize ground disturbance, or guarantee that development will occur. Each of those actions will require separate applications, agency decisions, and environmental and cultural-resource review.

Mineral potential also does not mean commercially viable development is imminent. Much of this land saw little or no large-scale modern development immediately before its monument designation, and many leases or claims never become operating mines.

UPLA wants these remarkable public lands protected and beautiful. We also believe BLM and Forest Service lands should be managed under the multiple-use and sustained-yield direction Congress established. Administrative rules should not elevate one interest by sweeping every other lawful use aside.

We cannot know today how many viable proposals will emerge. When they do, UPLA will evaluate them individually and take positions that defend OHV access, protect important routes, and preserve the resources that make these landscapes worth visiting.

Hunting Is Defined in the Proclamations as an Express Priority

The proclamations direct federal agencies to consider maintaining and improving public access for recreation and hunting. That does not guarantee that every road will stay open or that every hunter will immediately have better access. The actual results will depend on the resource management and transportation plans that follow, but without the burden of the 30×30 or the Minimization Criteria clouding it.

What we can say is that hunting and recreational access are once again expressly identified as management priorities, rather than being treated mainly as threats to monument resources.

What Comes Next

The July 2026 proclamations were an important victory, but they did not finish the work. New resource management plans, transportation plans, route inventories, administrative decisions, and court proceedings will determine what the changes mean on the ground. We also hope to persuade Congress to act to clarify intent of the Antiquities Act.

What happens next will depend on whether people who care about responsible access stay involved while the new plans are being written.

UPLA will be there—reading the thousands of pages of documents, analyzing the maps, keeping you informed and educated, and submitting substantive comments. We will continue fighting for decisions that protect these landscapes while keeping them accessible to the public.

If you value this work, please make a donation today and give as generously as you can. Your support helps us obtain professional analysis, participate in federal planning, educate the public, and defend responsible access.

 

The future of public access will not be decided by the loudest meme. It will be decided in the plans—and by the people willing to show up before those plans become final.

Sources and Further Reading

Bears Ears National Monument Poses Devastating Loss to OHV — UPLA’s 2022 warning.

Grand Staircase Comments Due by November 9 — UPLA’s 2023 engagement and the capacity gap that experience revealed.

Fight Back to Keep Our Roads and Access Rights — UPLA’s decision to support and help fund BlueRibbon Coalition’s legal work.

Bears Ears RMP Resource Center — Rose Winn’s analysis, the joint UPLA–BRC webinar, comment tools, and UPLA’s 2024 participation.

Department of Justice Responds to Trump’s Inquiry — The 2025 legal opinion and its implications.

A Turning Point for the Antiquities Act — UPLA’s explanation of the June 2026 Tenth Circuit decision.

Two Years of UPLA Advocacy Helped Shape a New Direction — UPLA’s meetings, objectives, and response to the July 2026 proclamations.

Every time you turn onto a dirt road, climb a rocky trail, or head into Utah’s backcountry, you’re enjoying something that can no longer be taken for granted: motorized access to our public lands.

Keeping that access takes work—and money.

The Utah Public Lands Alliance (UPLA) works to protect and defend responsible motorized access across Utah—for full-size 4x4s, UTVs, ATVs, motorcycles, overlanders, and everyone who depends on motorized access to enjoy our public lands.

The Fight Happens Long Before a Trail Closes

Most trail closures don’t begin with a gate across the road. They begin years earlier in planning documents, environmental reviews, travel management plans, agency policies, regulations, legislation, and courtrooms.

That means we have to be involved before the closure happens—and wherever the decisions are being made.

UPLA reviews federal land-management proposals, prepares substantive public comments, educates and mobilizes the off-road community, works with land managers and elected officials, advocates for policies that protect responsible access, and helps fund litigation when legal action becomes necessary.

What Have Your Donations Helped Accomplish?

UPLA doesn’t just talk about protecting access. We put your donations to work.

We built professional capacity to fight travel-management closures. UPLA has expanded its ability to analyze thousands of pages of federal planning documents and prepare detailed, substantive comments on travel management plans affecting motorized access across Utah. These decisions can determine which roads and trails remain available for decades to come, so having knowledgeable people involved in the process matters.

We mobilize Utah’s off-road community. UPLA works with a network of 49 Utah OHV clubs and thousands of independent volunteers to document routes, identify maintenance needs, provide local knowledge, and make sure the people who actually use these roads and trails have a voice in federal planning decisions.

We take Utah’s OHV voice to Washington. UPLA is focused on protecting motorized access and OHV recreation here in Utah. But many of the federal policies, regulations, and agency decisions that ultimately determine what happens on the ground in Utah are made or influenced in Washington, D.C.

For that reason, UPLA has developed strategic but limited contacts with federal agency officials, members of Congress, and congressional staff. We use those relationships when issues in Washington could directly affect motorized access in Utah—providing information from people who know these lands, explaining the real-world consequences of proposed policies and legislation, and making sure Utah’s OHV community has a voice in decisions that could affect our roads and trails.

Our Washington efforts aren’t about expanding UPLA’s mission beyond Utah. They’re about protecting Utah by being present where decisions affecting Utah are made.

We invest in the legal fight. UPLA has contributed nearly $150,000 to BlueRibbon Coalition’s Legal Defense Fund in the last two years, helping support litigation defending motorized access—including major legal battles right here in Utah. Sometimes administrative and political efforts aren’t enough, and the courtroom becomes the last line of defense.

And we’re still fighting. From travel management planning in places like Trail Canyon, Dino North, the Henry Mountains, Paunsaugunt, and the Dolores River area to larger policy, regulatory, legislative, and legal battles affecting motorized recreation across the West, UPLA continues to show up where access is at stake.

We Are Massively Outgunned

There is another reality every Utah off-roader needs to understand.

Organizations advocating for public-land policies that often restrict motorized access have financial resources that dwarf ours.

These aren’t simply conservation organizations with a different philosophy about public lands. They are actively involved in the policies, travel plans, legislation, and litigation that determine where motorized recreation will and will not be allowed.

Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) makes its position particularly clear in its own description of the organization: it says that since 1983 it has worked full-time to defend America’s redrock wilderness from threats including “rampant off-road vehicle use” and unnecessary road construction. Read SUWA’s statement for yourself.

That makes this more than a philosophical disagreement for Utah’s OHV community. Decisions these organizations advocate for can directly affect the roads and trails we depend on for motorized access.

Now consider the resources available to just two organizations active on public-land issues affecting Utah.

According to financial information extracted directly from IRS Form 990 filings and published by ProPublica’s Nonprofit Explorer:

Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) — ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer reported for 2024:

$12.67 million in revenue

$5.78 million in total expenses

$32.11 million in net assets

And The Wilderness Society — ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer reported for its fiscal year ending in 2024:

$42.03 million in revenue

$43.48 million in total expenses

$93.34 million in net assets

Click either organization’s name above and you can see the financial information for yourself.

To be clear, we are not suggesting that every dollar those organizations spend is directed at restricting OHV access. These figures represent their total organizational expenses.

But they demonstrate the enormous difference in resources between organizations involved in the public-lands debate and UPLA.

Together, SUWA and The Wilderness Society reported more than $49.25 million in annual expenses.

Now compare that with UPLA.

2026 has made huge progress in fundraising and expanding our capacity to fight back and we are on track to have our largest spending year in UPLA’s history—but still only $250,000.

The combined annual spending of just those two organizations is nearly 200 times UPLA’s projected record spending for 2026.

This Is David Versus Goliath

We are massively outgunned. Our adversaries have the resources for attorneys, professional staff, policy experts, communications programs, government-relations efforts, fundraising operations, and years of sustained involvement in public-land policy.

UPLA operates on a fraction of those resources. And yet we keep showing up.

• We analyze massive federal planning documents.
• We prepare substantive public comments.
• We organize and mobilize Utah’s OHV community.
• We work with federal land managers.
• We maintain strategic contacts with decision-makers in Washington.
• We advocate for legislative and policy changes affecting Utah access.
• And when necessary, we help fund litigation to defend motorized recreation.

UPLA has become very good at operating on a shoestring and accomplishing far more than our budget would suggest. But there is a limit to what determination, volunteers, and a shoestring budget can accomplish.

We Don’t Need $49 Million. We Need You.

UPLA isn’t trying to become a $49 million organization. And we don’t have to match our adversaries dollar for dollar. But we do need enough resources to fight effectively.

We need professional expertise when thousands of pages of federal planning documents determine the future of hundreds of miles of roads and trails. We need to be at the table when important decisions are being made. We need the ability to mobilize Utah’s OHV community when thousands of voices can make a difference. And when every other option has failed, we need the resources to fight in court.

That’s where you come in.

How Much Is Your Access Worth to You?

Think about what you’ve invested in enjoying Utah’s public lands.

Your 4×4, UTV, ATV or motorcycle. Your trailer. Camping equipment. Fuel. Tires. Repairs. Trips with your family and friends.

For many of us, off-roading isn’t simply something we do. It’s part of how we live and how we experience Utah.

But none of that investment means very much if we lose the places to ride.

So we’re asking you to do more than agree with UPLA. We’re asking you to invest in protecting your access.

Show us how much you value your right to responsibly recreate on Utah’s public lands using a motorized OHV. Maybe that’s $25. Maybe it’s $100. Maybe it’s $500, $1,000 or more. Only you can decide what protecting motorized access is worth to you.

But think about what could happen if every Utah off-roader who cares about keeping our roads and trails open contributed even a fraction of what they spend each year enjoying them.

We may be outspent nearly 200 to 1. But they don’t have what we have: 250,000 Utah off-roaders with a personal stake in keeping these lands accessible.

We need you standing with us. We Need You.

Don’t wait until your favorite trail appears on a closure map. Don’t wait until there’s a gate across the road.

Show us how much your motorized access means to you.

Help give UPLA the resources to fight for the roads, trails, and public lands you use and love.

Protect your access. Protect your trails. Protect the future of motorized recreation in Utah.

Public Lands Must Be Accessible to Everyone

Help Us Advance the Outdoor Americans with Disabilities Act

Public lands belong to every American. But they are not truly public when millions of people cannot reach them.

For many Americans with disabilities, wounded veterans, older adults, and people with limited mobility, a motorized vehicle is not simply a recreational convenience. It is their means of access. It allows them to reach a scenic overlook, campsite, fishing area, hunting location, historic site, or backcountry destination that would otherwise be completely beyond their reach.

When a federal agency closes a road or motorized trail, an able-bodied visitor may still be able to hike or bicycle into the area. A person with a mobility limitation may lose access entirely. That is why the Utah Public Lands Alliance strongly supports the Outdoor Americans with Disabilities Act.

What the Legislation Does

The Outdoor Americans with Disabilities Act would require the Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service to make disability access a meaningful part of federal travel management decisions.

The legislation has now been introduced in both chambers of Congress in exactly the same form. You can see the actual bills here.

• 2968 was introduced in the Senate by Senator Mike Lee, with Senator John Curtis as a cosponsor.
• R. 9221 was introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Mike Kennedy.

Among its major provisions, the legislation would:

• Establish a measurable standard for disability-accessible public land based on the availability of authorized motorized roads and routes.
• Require the Department of the Interior and the Forest Service to consider accessibility when updating travel management plans and motor vehicle use maps.
• Prioritize roads that provide access to a variety of recreational opportunities.
• Require coordination with state, county, local, and Tribal governments when identifying important access routes.
• Restrict road closures that would cause an area to fall below the bill’s accessibility standard, except for emergencies or significant safety concerns.
• Require an alternative route when an important access road must be closed.
• Give local communities and the public a greater voice before access is eliminated.

Accessibility Cannot Be an Afterthought

Federal land managers carefully evaluate how proposed road closures could affect wildlife, soil, vegetation, water, cultural resources, and other environmental concerns. Those are important considerations.

But the effect of a closure on people with disabilities is too often treated as an afterthought—or not meaningfully considered at all.

That must change. The Outdoor Americans with Disabilities Act would make accessibility part of the travel-management process from the beginning. It recognizes that motorized access can be a form of adaptive access and that eliminating a road can have a dramatically different effect on a person who cannot simply continue the journey on foot.

In February 2026, S. 2968 received a legislative hearing before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests and Mining. In its official testimony, the U.S. Forest Service said the Department of Agriculture supports the intent of the legislation and is willing to work with its sponsors on implementation.

That is encouraging, but introduction and a committee hearing are only the beginning. Passage will require support from members of both parties and from elected officials across the country.

Disability access should not be a Republican issue or a Democratic issue. It is an American issue.

We Need Your Voice

We are beginning an effort to build support for this legislation from individuals, organizations, clubs, businesses, veterans’ groups, adaptive recreation programs, local governments, and disability advocates throughout Utah and across the country.

You can help by:

• Sharing your personal experience with disability, limited mobility, or motorized access.
• Telling us about a road closure that prevented you or someone you know from reaching a public-land destination.
• Providing photographs or examples showing how motorized access allows people with disabilities to participate in outdoor recreation.
• Using the official USAGov elected-official lookup to find the names and contact information for your U.S. representative and senators.
• Asking your representative to cosponsor H.R. 9221.
• Asking both of your senators to cosponsor S. 2968.
• Encouraging your club, organization, business, county, or community to formally endorse the legislation.
• Sharing this article so we can reach people whose experiences need to be heard.
• If you have a story to share or want your organization added to the growing list of supporters, please contact UPLA.

Access Is More Than Recreation

For people who can easily walk long distances, a closed road may mean a longer hike. For a person with a disability, that same closure may mean never seeing that place again.

Motorized access provides independence. It supports physical and emotional health. It allows veterans to reconnect with the landscapes they defended. It lets parents and grandparents continue outdoor traditions with their families. It gives people with disabilities the freedom to explore, camp, hunt, fish, photograph, volunteer, and experience the same public lands that belong to every other American.

The Outdoor Americans with Disabilities Act is an important step toward making sure federal land-management decisions recognize that reality.

Public lands belong to all of us. Access to them should not depend on whether someone can hike ten miles to get there.

 

Utah Public Lands Alliance submitted extensive comments yesterday on both the Trail Canyon (Kanab) and Dino North (Vernal) Travel Management Plans. UPLA visited both Kanab and Vernal and met with local OHV leaders and government officials to help with efforts to keep these areas open.

We are extremely grateful for the huge number of comments that were made by the public using our TrailSaver.com application. For users that authorized us to share their reports, we redacted your personal identification information and submitted your actual responses as well as a narrative version of your comments where we used artificial intelligence to write your comments in natural language instructed to preserve your intent and tone in the narrative attached to our comments as Addendum A. There were more groups that submitted comments, but we did not have permission to share them publicly. Thank you to all who

Trail Canyon (Kanab) Comments

• Trail Canyon UPLA Comments
• Addendum A-TrailSaver Narrative Reports
• UT/AZ ATV Club Comments
• Castle Country OHV Association Comments

Dino North (Vernal) CommentsCountry

• Dino North UPLA Comments
• Addendum A-TrailSaver Narrative Reports
• Castle Country OHV Association Comments

We are winning this battle to stop closures and win back some of the routes already closed, but we can only do this with your support.

 

 

 

Since the new monument proclamations were issued, social media has been flooded with claims about what the changes will mean for Utah’s public lands. A few claims are partially accurate. Most are misleading or simply false. This article examines the most common claims against the language of the Presidential Proclamation, the Grand Staircase–Escalante Resource Management Plan, and existing federal law.

FALSE

Claim #1: ‘Federal land was given to the State of Utah.’

One of the most common statements circulating on social media is that the recent monument proclamation ‘gave away federal land’ or transferred millions of acres to the State of Utah. That simply did not happen.

The proclamation modified the boundaries of the National Monument. It did not transfer ownership of a single acre. Every acre removed from the monument remains federal public land managed by the Bureau of Land Management. A National Monument designation changes how federal land is managed—not who owns it. Congress would have to enact separate legislation to transfer ownership.

Bottom Line: The management designation changed. Ownership did not.

 

FALSE

Claim #2: ‘The President cannot modify the boundaries of a National Monument.’

This claim is contradicted by more than a century of presidential practice. Presidents from both political parties have modified National Monument boundaries dozens of times since the Antiquities Act was enacted in 1906. The Department of Justice issued a comprehensive legal opinion of the history of past modifications and The laconcluding that this authority exists, and Congress has repeatedly legislated against the backdrop of those modifications without prohibiting them.

Although opponents continue to challenge this authority in court, there is currently no judicial decision holding that Presidents lack the authority to modify monument boundaries. The current proclamations therefore remain legally effective.

Bottom Line: More than 100 years of presidential practice, supported by a formal Department of Justice opinion, demonstrates that Presidents have exercised this authority repeatedly. The current proclamations remain in full force unless a court rules otherwise.

 

PARTIALLY FALSE

Claim #3: ‘There will be an explosion of oil, gas, and mineral development.’

The proclamation itself authorizes no drilling, mining, or leasing. It restores management of lands outside the revised monument boundaries to BLM’s multiple-use framework. Any future lease would require separate agency decisions, NEPA review, public comment, consultation, and compliance with numerous federal laws. Many federal leases are never developed.

Bottom Line: Future leasing may be considered, but nothing has been automatically approved.

 

FALSE

Claim #4: ‘Hunting opportunities will be degraded.’

The proclamation specifically directs the Secretary of the Interior to improve public access, including for recreation and hunting. The Proclamation language specifically states “When preparing a management plan for the Monument, the Secretary shall take into account, to the maximum extent consistent with the proper care and management of the objects identified above, the importance of) improving public access, including for recreation and hunting.”

 

Many hunters rely on motorized access to reach trailheads and retrieve game. The current Proclamation only strengthens the importance of improving access for hunting.

Bottom Line: The proclamation expressly recognizes hunting as an important public use.

 

FALSE

Claim #5: ‘The Monument never restricted OHV use.’

The 2025 Resource Management Plan designated approximately 1,245,600 acres—about 67 percent of the monument—as areas where OHV travel would be prohibited. Although a future Travel Management Plan would identify individual routes, it had to conform to that management direction. Every red section of this map from the 2025 RMP would not have allowed any OHV.

Bottom Line: The restrictions were embedded in the approved RMP even though implementation had not yet occurred.

 

PARTIALLY FALSE

Claim #6: ‘I drove there last month, so nothing has been restricted.’

Existing routes remained available because a new Travel Management Plan had not yet been completed. However, the approved RMP had already established the management direction that would govern those routes once travel planning was finalized.

Bottom Line: The restrictions had been approved but not yet implemented.

 

FALSE

Claim #7: ‘The monument changes will result in massive losses of cultural and archaeological resources.’

Changing monument boundaries does not eliminate the extensive framework of federal laws protecting cultural, archaeological, historic, and natural resources. Wilderness Areas, Wilderness Study Areas, FLPMA, NEPA, NHPA, ARPA, the Antiquities Act, and many other statutes continue to apply.

Bottom Line: Monument boundary changes do not remove federal resource protections.

Conclusion

Public lands belong to all Americans, and reasonable people can disagree about how they should be managed. Healthy debate is an important part of the public planning process. However, that debate should be based on facts—not fear, misinformation, or misleading social media posts.

As you’ve seen, many of the claims being circulated about these monument changes simply are not supported by the Presidential Proclamation, the 2025 Resource Management Plan, or existing federal law. That doesn’t mean everyone has to agree with the changes, but it does mean we all have a responsibility to base our opinions on accurate information.

Utah Public Lands Alliance and BlueRibbon Coalition have spent years reviewing these plans, meeting with agency officials, lawmakers, and local communities, and advocating for balanced public land management that protects our natural and cultural resources while preserving responsible public access for future generations. We believe Americans deserve honest information so they can make informed decisions for themselves.

If you found this article helpful, please consider sharing it with your friends and family. The best way to combat misinformation is with facts.

Tell Me What You Think

Have you heard any of these claims? Do you agree or disagree with the recent monument changes?

We’d love to hear your thoughts. 

If you found this fact check useful, please share it on social media and help others separate fact from fiction.

Two Years of UPLA Advocacy Helped Shape a New Direction for Utah’s Public Lands

July 13, 2026, marks a historic day for public lands in Utah, and for Utah Public Lands Alliance.

President Donald J. Trump signed proclamations modifying both the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase–Escalante National Monuments. While much of the media coverage has focused on the reduction in monument acreage, the proclamations accomplish far more than simply redrawing boundaries. They fundamentally change how these lands will be managed in the future, restoring multiple-use principles, improving local representation, and placing renewed emphasis on public access.

For Utah Public Lands Alliance (UPLA), this day represents the culmination of more than two years of persistent advocacy.

A Vision We Have Pursued Since Day One

From the beginning, UPLA has never argued that Utah’s priceless archaeological, historical, cultural, and scientific treasures should be left unprotected. Instead, we have consistently advocated for a balanced approach that:

• Protects the specific objects identified under the Antiquities Act.
• Limits monument boundaries to the “smallest area compatible” with protecting those resources, as required by federal law.
• Restores the Bureau of Land Management’s traditional multiple-use mission on surrounding public lands.
• Preserves opportunities for responsible recreation, grazing, hunting, energy development, and other lawful public uses.

Those principles have guided every meeting, every letter, every public comment, and every conversation we have had with decision-makers over the past two years.

Taking Utah’s Message to Washington

Last month, UPLA traveled to Washington, D.C., where we met with senior officials from the White House, the Department of the Interior, the Department of Agriculture, Members of Congress, and numerous national partners. Restoring Utah’s National Monuments was one of our primary objectives during those meetings.

We emphasized that these landscapes could—and should—protect nationally significant resources while also respecting the rights of the American people to responsibly enjoy and use their public lands. We advocated for restoring multiple-use management, expanding recreational opportunities, improving local involvement in monument management, and ensuring that monument boundaries complied with the Antiquities Act.

Seeing many of those same principles reflected in the President’s proclamations is both encouraging and gratifying.

The Story Is Much Bigger Than Monument Boundaries

Although the reduction in monument acreage has received the most attention, several other provisions may have an even greater long-term impact.

A Balanced Advisory Committee

The proclamation replaces the previous Bears Ears Commission with a new Monument Advisory Committee designed to provide broader representation.

The new committee includes:

• Five representatives of the federally recognized Tribes with historical ties to Bears Ears.
• Representatives from San Juan County, Monticello, Blanding, and Bluff.
• Six members recommended by the Governor of Utah representing diverse stakeholder groups, including:
  • Archaeological and historical experts.
  • Livestock grazing permittees.
  • Outdoor recreation interests, including commercial recreation providers or off-highway vehicle users.
  • Conservation organizations.
  • Private landowners.
  • Local business owners.

For the first time, off-highway vehicle users are specifically recognized as an important stakeholder in monument management.

Recreation Restored as a Core Management Objective

UPLA has long argued that responsible recreation deserves equal consideration alongside other traditional public-land uses.

The proclamation restores emphasis on multiple-use management, specifically identifying recreation—including off-road recreation—as an important use of these public lands.

This recognizes that responsible motorized recreation and resource protection are not mutually exclusive and can coexist through thoughtful planning and management.

Protecting What the Antiquities Act Was Intended to Protect

Rather than managing millions of acres under monument status, the proclamation establishes new boundaries focused on protecting the specific objects identified under the Antiquities Act.

The revised Bears Ears Monument continues to protect nationally significant resources, including the Shash Jáa Unit and the Indian Creek Unit, while returning surrounding lands to traditional multiple-use management.

This reflects the principle UPLA has consistently advocated: protect the important resources while allowing the surrounding public lands to remain available for the many uses Congress intended.

A New Transportation Plan Focused on Public Access

Perhaps one of the most exciting provisions for recreation is the direction given to the Secretary of the Interior and Agriculture.

The proclamation requires preparation of a new transportation plan that endeavors to maximize public access throughout the monument by designating roads and trails for both motorized and non-motorized use while providing for their maintenance.

Even more significant, pending completion of that transportation plan, the Secretary may allow public use of roads and trails that existed before the original Bears Ears proclamation and maintain those routes for continued public access.

For those who have spent years advocating for responsible access to public lands, this represents a remarkable change in direction.

Our Work Is Not Finished

These proclamations do not automatically reopen every road or trail.Future travel management plans, transportation planning, and resource management decisions will still require extensive public involvement.

That is where UPLA will continue to play an essential role.

Through our TrailSaver program, route inventory analyses, public education, and continued engagement with federal agencies, we will work to ensure these new opportunities result in meaningful improvements for public access while continuing to protect the remarkable resources that make these landscapes so special.

Thank You

None of this happens without you.

• Every membership.
• Every donation.
• Every volunteer.
• Every substantive public comment.
• Every conversation with elected officials.

Together, we have demonstrated that informed, respectful, and persistent advocacy can influence public policy at the highest levels of government.

It feels great to win, and today’s proclamations are not the end of our work—but they are an important milestone.

UPLA will continue fighting to ensure that Utah’s public lands remain protected, accessible, and responsibly managed for generations to come.

Loren Campbell
Utah Public Lands Alliance President
Email Your Comments