Yesterday, February 25, 2026, just hours after setting up a softball nomination hearing for Steve Pearce to become director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) launched another attack on our public lands—specifically: Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument.
He did that via a technical legislative measure that triggers the Congressional Review Act (CRA), the very same act Congressional Republicans have already used to undo six different BLM Resource Management Plans—in North Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, and Alaska.
They’re also trying to use the CRA to overturn a mineral withdrawal just upstream from Minnesota’s Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness—an issue that’s enraged public lands users all across the country, including Theodore Roosevelt’s own descendants, for the simple reason that this sets a dangerous precedent, which potentially endangers all other public lands and waters in the nation.
“Anti-public-lands crusader Senator Mike Lee has formally begun the process to fast-track the destruction of Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah by adding the Government Accountability Office (GAO) opinion regarding the Monument’s Management Plan to the Congressional Record,” a joint statement by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, The Wilderness Society, Earthjustice, Grand Canyon Trust, National Resources Defense Council, and Conservation Lands Fund says.
“Under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), once a “resolution of disapproval” is introduced (anticipated to occur any day), both chambers of Congress can expedite their votes and pass the measures by simple majority votes,” the conservation organizations warn.
“If that happens and the resolution is signed into law by the President, the Monument Management Plan – which sets expectations for how the land will be managed for wildlife, outdoor access, dark night skies, grazing, and other uses – will be undone and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) will be barred from issuing another plan that is “substantially the same” in the future.”
This is unprecedented: while the CRA has been used to overturn other federal rules, this appears to be the first attempt to use it against a national monument management plan.
Monument plans guide how an area’s wildlife, cultural resources, recreation, grazing, night skies, and other values are protected and managed. Eliminating that plan doesn’t immediately change the monument’s boundaries, but it removes the regulatory framework that gives effect to its conservation mandate.
Established in 1996 by President Bill Clinton, Grand Staircase-Escalante sprawls across 1.9 million acres of what many regard as some of the most spectacular desert and redrock landscapes in the United States.
The Hopi Tribe, Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians, Navajo Nation, Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, and Zuni Tribe all helped to establish the national monument. The monument was also established with the overwhelming support of the American public.
“An attack on Grand Staircase-Escalante is an attack on our freedom to enjoy this special place today and generations from now,” said Ronni Flannery, senior staff attorney at The Wilderness Society. “This move disregards years of hard work and broad support, and, instead, attempts to hand our public lands over to the highest paying polluters. A vote to pass this bill is a vote against the people to erode a crown jewel of the American West.”
Grand Staircase-Escalante was the first national monument administered by the BLM and became a cornerstone of that agency’s National Conservation Lands system. The monument conserves a remarkable array of geological formations, paleontological resources, Indigenous cultural sites, and desert ecosystems.
Supporters of Lee’s effort, including Utah’s congressional delegation and some local stakeholders, argue that the current management plan, which was created after years of local input, overly prioritizes conservation at the expense of local economic interests, traditional uses, and access.
The conservation groups I listed above have blasted the move as an attack on the public’s ability to enjoy these lands and on the rule of law itself.
They emphasize that national monuments were created through the Antiquities Act, which grants presidents broad authority to protect sites of historic, scientific, or cultural significance—protections that helped create much of the modern public-lands system.
“The Utah Delegation’s attack on the Grand Staircase-Escalante is a call to action for Americans from across the nation,” said Steve Bloch, Legal Director at the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. “This wild landscape is quintessential southern Utah redrock country with its stunning geology, irreplaceable cultural resources, unique fossils, and wide-open spaces. All of that is at risk if this attack succeeds and the monument management plan is undone. We intend to move heaven and earth to stop that from happening.”
There’s a justified fear among public lands advocates, including myself, that this could be a test case in a broader campaign to weaken national monument protections across the country—one that begins not by shrinking boundaries, but by dismantling the regulatory frameworks that give life to those boundaries.
Rep. Celeste Maloy (R-UT) requested the GAO opinion last year, questioning whether Congress could nullify the plan. On January 15, the GAO issued an opinion confirming that, in their view, such plans do, in fact, fall under the CRA’s scope. That interpretation has emboldened lawmakers seeking to employ the statute in ways never previously attempted.
And that’s the real danger here.
Using the CRA to overturn a previously approved Monument Management Plan would not downgrade the status or reduce the size of Grand Staircase-Escalante. But it would completely nullify that management plan, which was prepared after years of public input, and—this is crucial—would prevent the Bureau of Land Management from ever implementing any other plans that are similar.
In plain words: current conservation-focused protections, gone forever. Current wildlife habitat protections, gone forever. Current safeguards against pollution, gone forever. Current permits for uses like grazing, hunting, and guiding, gone forever.
This throws literally everything into chaos—and that’s the point.
Without a guiding plan, day-to-day decision-making becomes murkier, and longstanding protections for wildlife habitat, paleontological sites, and Indigenous cultural resources could be weakened or eliminated altogether.
The goal? More resource extraction: more logging, more mining, more drilling. More livestock grazing. More off-road vehicle access.
If Congress does this by using the Congressional Review Act, no other national monument managed by the BLM would be safe.
That includes Oregon’s Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument, California’s Chuckwalla National Monument, Colorado’s Canyons of the Ancients National Monument, New Mexico’s Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument, and Nevada’s Avi Kwa Ame National Monument.
They’ll come for all of them.
And remember, if the Republicans in Congress manage to pull this off, and Steve Pearce—who’s notoriously anti-public lands and pro-industry—gets confirmed as the new BLM director, he’ll be in charge of creating the new management plans.
“No one ought to mistake this effort as isolated—it’s part of a concerted effort to destroy the Bureau of Land Management’s ability to manage public lands, so that privatizing or industrializing them are the only viable options,” said Chris Hill, CEO of the Conservation Lands Foundation. “Going after BLM’s first national monument sends the signal that the rest of the 30 monuments and all of the National Conservation Lands that BLM oversees are in the crosshairs, and we know from experience that the public will fight like never before to keep these places protected.”
In light of this new, unprecedented attack on national monuments, it’s worth looking into the economic benefits they already provide. A recent study by Headwater Economics, published on January 20, 2026, did just that.
The study analyzed what happens to local economies after new national monuments are designated. The result: national monuments do not disrupt local economies.
In fact, employment and population trends continue as before designation, there are no downturns in sectors like farming or mining, and local per-capita income increases after monument designation.
The study also analyzed the economic impacts of Grand Staircase-Escalante specifically.
“Research shows that conserving public lands like the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument helps to safeguard and highlight amenities that draw new visitors, businesses, and residents to surrounding communities,” the analysis shows.
And the numbers are striking.
From 2001 to 2022, service jobs in the Grand Staircase-Escalante region grew by 83%. The local population increased by 26%, while total job numbers rose by 51%.
The largest growth, however, was in non-labor income, which includes dividends, interest, rent, and Social Security and Medicare payments—it increased by 99% from 2001 to 2022. It basically doubled, in other words.
“For people with investment income and many retirees, protected public lands and recreation provide important aspects of a high quality of life,” the study concludes. “Non-labor income already represents more than a third of all personal income in the West—and will grow as the Baby Boomer generation retires.”
“The Utah delegation knows that our national monuments are well-loved by Americans and protecting them is overwhelmingly popular among Utahns regardless of party affiliation,” said Tim Peterson, Cultural Landscapes Director at the Grand Canyon Trust. “The public would not stand for legislation that gets rid of Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument outright, so they’re trying to eliminate the commonsense management plan that affords day-to-day protections to the monument. We can’t let that happen.”
A last word on Celeste Maloy and Mike Lee’s attack on Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument: voters across Utah and, by extent, the American West vehemently oppose changes to national monument designations. That includes voters across the political spectrum.
A poll conducted by New Bridge Strategy between December 12-18, 2024, surveyed how 500 registered voters in Utah—55% Republicans, 30% Independents, and 15% Democrats—feel about national monuments.
Almost two-thirds (65%) of those Utah voters support keeping the number and size of existing national monuments. Among Republican voters, that’s a majority of 54%.
With regard to Grand Staircase-Escalante specifically, however, the support among Utah voters is even greater. Nearly three-quarters (74%) of Utahns support keeping it a national monument. Among Republican voters, a significant 65% voiced their support.
Another, more recent poll that surveyed more than 3,400 voters across eight Western states—which I wrote about here—shows even more bipartisan support for national monuments. For example, an eye-opening 87% of self-identified MAGA supporters say that they want to keep existing national monument designations.
Representative Maloy is up for reelection in November.
Senator Mike Lee, unfortunately, will remain in the U.S. Senate through 2028—unless he resigns, of course.
As threats to Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument unfold, another legislative push is gaining momentum in the House.
Also yesterday, February 25, 2026, Congresswoman Harriet Hageman (R-WY) introduced a bill aimed at nullifying the 2001 Roadless Rule—a landmark regulation that has protected millions of acres of National Forest System lands from most road construction and timber harvest activities for over two decades.
The Roadless Rule was adopted under President Bill Clinton to safeguard inventoried roadless areas—remote forests often prized for their ecological integrity, biodiversity, and recreation opportunities. These areas cover roughly 58 million acres across the country and have been the subject of intense legal and political disputes since their inception.
I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that the Roadless Rule was created, in large part, because the Forest Service could not maintain the existing roads it already had. It lacked both the funding and staff necessary to do that, which is why the agency determined it would be prudent to stop building roads and bridges in remote areas.
Of course, those funding and staffing issues have not improved since—after last year’s DOGE fiasco, they’re much worse today.
At the time, 1.6 million public comments were submitted, a truly astonishing number, over 90% of which were in support of the proposed Roadless Rule.
Now, however, in a press release, Hageman decried the rule as outdated and harmful, arguing that it has blocked access, prevented active management, and increased the risk of catastrophic wildfires. Her bill, she says, would “restore active, responsible forest management,” reduce wildfire threats, and support rural economies dependent on timber production and land stewardship.
This legislative push follows broader administrative action: last summer, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)—under Secretary Brooke L. Rollins—announced rescission of the Roadless Rule, citing the need to enhance local forest management and timber production in the face of wildfire and other pressures.
Supporters, including state officials and industry groups, of course, lauded the move as a “commonsense” step toward more flexible forest policy.
However, in the broader context of ongoing Republican attacks on our public lands and waters, there’s no other way to interpret these rollbacks and now Hageman’s bill as anything else than a capitulation to industry interests.
Removing roadless protections could open vast swaths of forest to timber extraction, road building, and fragmentation, with consequences for wildlife habitat connectivity, watershed health, recreational values, and carbon sequestration.
While all of that is true, it’s also important to realize that, even if the Roadless Rule gets eliminated, the Forest Service is going to need a lot of extra money to do anything. Money it currently doesn’t have.
Representative Hageman is running for the U.S. Senate in November.
What Can You Do?
I’ll keep an eye on both these Republican actions as the bills move through Congress. Mike Lee’s misuse of the CRA to attack Grand Staircase-Escalante will be the far more urgent one of the two.
If used successfully, Republicans in Congress will almost certainly use it in the near future to assault more national monuments than just Grand Staircase-Escalante. This threatens all 31 national monuments managed by the BLM.
To help protect these exceptionally beautiful and extraordinarily vulnerable places, you can send a message directly to Congress via this handy form provided by the Conservation Lands Foundation.
Another action you can undertake is supporting the conservation organizations who are fighting this directly. That includes:
increasing awareness of these issues is powerful, too. Hit the share button below and help spread the word. The more people know about this, the more people will step up to protect our public lands and waters.
Thanks for reading!
See you out there,
Bram
Image 1: Tim Peterson / LightHawk / Grand Canyon Trust
Image 2: Tim Peterson / Grand Canyon Trust
Image 3: Tim Peterson / Grand Canyon Trust
Help….