A recent analysis by the Center for American Progress reveals that 31 national monuments designated since the Clinton administration are indispensable for the clean water supply of millions of Americans, a vital role now imperiled by ongoing political maneuvers to open more public lands to extractive industries. This comprehensive report, utilizing advanced geospatial data, meticulously quantifies the extensive network of rivers and watersheds protected within these monument boundaries, along with the vast number of citizens who rely on these pristine sources. It concludes that over 13 million Americans receive their direct water supply from watersheds situated within or downstream of these protected national monuments. Crucially, the study emphasizes that approximately 83% of the water flowing through these public lands benefits from no other explicit federal protection beyond their national monument status, underscoring the profound significance of these designations.

These designated areas collectively safeguard more than 21,000 miles of waterways across the United States, a figure nearly double the total mileage protected under the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. This extensive network of protected rivers, streams, and aquifers highlights the national monuments’ often-underestimated role as crucial hydrological preserves, essential for ecological balance and human well-being. The findings emerge at a pivotal moment, as the Trump administration has repeatedly weighed the downsizing or outright revocation of several national monument designations, sparking widespread concern among conservationists and public health advocates.

The contentious debate surrounding national monuments gained significant traction in March, when the Trump administration initially signaled its intent to eliminate California’s Chuckwalla and Sáttítla Highlands national monuments, although language announcing this specific decision was later removed from a White House fact sheet. The following month, reports indicated that the administration was actively considering reductions or eliminations for at least six national monuments across the country, potentially paving the way for increased mining and oil and gas exploration. Further solidifying the administration’s stance, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a legal opinion in June, asserting that the president possesses the authority to rescind national monument designations – a significant reversal from decades of prior legal interpretations that largely affirmed the permanency of such protections once established.

The power to designate national monuments stems from the Antiquities Act of 1906, a landmark piece of legislation signed into law by President Theodore Roosevelt, intended to allow presidents to protect "historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest" on federal lands. While the act grants presidents broad authority to create monuments, the power to undo them has historically been contested and rarely exercised, making the Trump administration’s actions and the DOJ’s opinion particularly noteworthy and legally challenging. During Trump’s previous term, the administration significantly reduced the size of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments, both of which had been established by the Obama and Clinton administrations, respectively. These lands were subsequently restored to their original boundaries by President Joe Biden upon taking office, illustrating the sharp political divisions and the cyclical nature of conservation policy in the United States.

The potential ramifications of downsizing or eliminating national monuments extend far beyond mere boundary adjustments. Such actions would strip away critical environmental protections from vast areas surrounding vital waterways, rendering them vulnerable to the unchecked impacts of extractive industries, including oil and gas drilling, hardrock mining, and large-scale grazing. The consequences for water quality are dire: contamination from these industrial activities, such as chemical runoff, heavy metals, and sediment, could easily seep into streams and subsequently pollute larger rivers, compromising drinking water sources for downstream communities. Furthermore, many of these industries are inherently water-intensive, particularly in arid regions where water resources are already scarce. Increased industrial water usage would further diminish available supplies, exacerbating drought conditions and placing additional strain on ecosystems and human populations. While some limited mining and grazing are permitted within certain national monument boundaries, these activities are typically subject to stringent regulations and scale limitations that would be significantly relaxed or removed entirely if monument protections were lifted.

Drew McConville, a senior fellow for conservation policy at the Center for American Progress and a co-author of the report, underscored the intrinsic connection between land and water protection. "Landscapes and waterways go hand in hand," McConville stated, emphasizing that the integrity of clean water is inextricably linked to the health of the surrounding natural lands. "Just protecting the wet stuff itself doesn’t guarantee that you’re keeping [water] clean and durable." This perspective highlights the critical importance of a holistic approach to conservation, where the protection of an entire watershed – the land area that channels rainfall and snowmelt to a common outlet – is recognized as paramount for maintaining water quality and availability.

The analysis also shed light on significant environmental justice implications, revealing that a disproportionately higher percentage of historically marginalized communities reside within the watersheds of these national monuments compared to the national average. These communities often bear the brunt of environmental degradation and are more vulnerable to the impacts of polluted water, underscoring the social equity dimensions of conservation policy. Compounding this challenge, 23 of the studied monuments are located in regions projected to experience severe water shortages in the coming decades due to climate change. This convergence of factors – increased industrial pressure, diminished protective status, and heightened climate vulnerability – threatens to make already arid downstream regions even drier and more susceptible to water crises.

Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in southern Utah serves as a potent example of these vulnerabilities. The analysis reveals that this monument alone protects an astounding 2,517 miles of waterways, with nearly 90% of its internal watersheds anticipated to face significant declines in water levels due to climate change. Geographically, the monument strategically straddles the Upper and Lower Colorado River Basins, with critical tributaries like the Paria and Escalante rivers flowing within its boundaries. Just to its south lies Lake Powell, the nation’s second-largest reservoir, which is a linchpin of the Colorado River System, providing water to millions of people across seven U.S. states and parts of Mexico.

Despite its often-perceived image as a sparse, arid expanse, Grand Staircase-Escalante plays an indispensable role in the regional water cycle, as highlighted by Jackie Grant, executive director of Grand Staircase Escalante Partners, a non-profit dedicated to the monument’s protection. Grant’s organization has invested $11 million to safeguard the Escalante River watershed and its tributaries, recognizing its profound importance. The monument’s high plateaus, such as the Paunsaugunt Plateau in Bryce Canyon National Park, collect substantial snowpack that, upon melting, feeds these crucial river systems. "People don’t think of water when they think of Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument," Grant observed. "So when we can bring this view of water and how important it is to the protection of the monument, it helps us put another building block in our case for supporting the monument, because not only is it important for the animals, the native plants, the geology and the paleontology, water plays a huge role in the monument, and the monument protects the water itself."

Spanning 1.87 million acres of breathtaking public land, Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument is one of the country’s most expansive national monuments, celebrated for its unique geological formations, rich paleontological resources, and diverse wildlife. Yet, beneath its protected surface lie significant deposits, including an estimated nine-billion-ton coal reserve in its central section, alongside valuable minerals like uranium and nickel. The Trump administration has consistently championed a pro-mining agenda and sought to boost domestic coal production, creating a direct conflict between resource extraction interests and conservation objectives for areas like Grand Staircase-Escalante. The presence of these valuable mineral and fossil fuel reserves makes the monument a prime target for industrial development, despite its ecological and hydrological significance.

Grant further warned of the specific risks posed by such development: "It’d be very easy to contaminate either one of those rivers if mining were to take place in the center section of the monument." The intricate web of waterways within the monument makes them highly susceptible to pollution from mining operations, which can introduce acid mine drainage, heavy metals, and other toxic substances into the water system, with devastating long-term consequences.

Margaret Walls, a senior fellow at Resources for the Future who has extensively studied national monuments, though not directly involved in this particular report, echoed the sentiment that the water protection benefits of these designations are often overlooked. Walls noted that national monuments are primarily designated to preserve cultural or historical landmarks, leading to an underappreciation of their critical ecological functions, particularly concerning water. While acknowledging that even if monument protections are loosened, the areas remain federal lands and their change in status does not guarantee immediate development, Walls emphasized a crucial principle: "We don’t protect waterways the way we do land; we’re going to get those water benefits by protecting the land." This statement encapsulates the fundamental argument for robust land conservation as the most effective strategy for ensuring the purity and abundance of vital water resources for future generations. The ongoing debate over national monuments thus represents a critical juncture for environmental policy, balancing economic development interests with the imperative of safeguarding essential natural resources.