Thirty-one national monuments established since the Clinton administration stand as critical bulwarks for clean water, safeguarding the precious resource for millions of Americans, according to a recent analysis by the Center for American Progress (CAP). This vital protective role faces significant challenges as the Trump administration signals renewed interest in downsizing or revoking these designations, potentially opening vast swathes of public lands to extractive industries. The report underscores a profound and often overlooked function of these protected areas: ensuring the health and availability of water supplies in an increasingly water-stressed nation.

The comprehensive CAP analysis, which leveraged advanced geospatial data, meticulously quantified the extensive network of rivers and watersheds nestled within these national monument boundaries. The findings are stark: the water supplies for more than 13 million Americans are directly sourced from watersheds located within or downstream of these designated areas. Furthermore, the study revealed that a staggering 83 percent of the water flowing through these public lands benefits from no other explicit protection beyond their monument status, highlighting the irreplaceable role these designations play in preserving water quality. Across the U.S., national monuments collectively shield over 21,000 miles of waterways—a remarkable expanse nearly double that safeguarded by the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.

This crucial report emerges amidst a landscape of heightened uncertainty surrounding the future of America’s public lands. The Trump administration has historically pursued policies aimed at expanding access for resource extraction, often clashing with established conservation priorities. Precedent for such actions was set during his previous term, when the boundaries of both Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments, initially established by Presidents Obama and Clinton respectively, were dramatically reduced. Although these lands were later restored to their original sizes by President Joe Biden upon taking office, the episode signaled a willingness to challenge long-standing conservation frameworks. More recently, in March, the administration initially announced plans to eliminate California’s Chuckwalla and Sáttíila Highlands national monuments, a decision that was subsequently retracted from an official White House fact sheet. The following month, reports from The Washington Post indicated that the administration was actively considering downsizing or eliminating at least six additional national monuments, further fueling anxieties among environmental groups and local communities. In a significant legal development in June, the U.S. Department of Justice issued an opinion asserting the president’s power to rescind national monument designations—a reversal of decades-old legal interpretations that had largely constrained such executive authority.

The potential ramifications of downsizing or eliminating these monuments extend far beyond the loss of scenic beauty or archaeological sites; they pose a direct threat to water quality and availability. Should monument protections be loosened, areas surrounding vital waterways would become vulnerable to a range of extractive activities, including oil and gas drilling, hardrock mining, and intensive livestock grazing. Such industries are notorious for generating contaminants—from acid mine drainage and heavy metals to sediment runoff and chemical pollutants—which can seep into streams and, subsequently, contaminate larger river systems. Moreover, these industries are often water-intensive, particularly in arid regions where water resources are already scarce, further diminishing supplies crucial for downstream communities and ecosystems. While some limited, regulated mining and grazing activities are permitted within certain national monuments, these operations are typically far more restricted and carefully managed than those allowed on unprotected public lands.

Drew McConville, a senior fellow for conservation policy at the Center for American Progress and a co-author of the report, succinctly captured the interconnectedness of these systems, stating, "Landscapes and waterways go hand in hand. The clean water depends on what comes into them from natural lands… Just protecting the wet stuff itself doesn’t guarantee that you’re keeping [water] clean and durable." This perspective highlights the holistic nature of conservation, where the integrity of terrestrial ecosystems is intrinsically linked to the health of aquatic environments.

The CAP analysis also brought to light critical environmental justice implications, revealing that a disproportionately higher percentage of historically marginalized communities reside within the watersheds of the studied national monuments compared to the national average. These communities often bear the brunt of environmental pollution and resource depletion, making the protection offered by monument designations even more critical for their health and well-being. Adding another layer of urgency, 23 of the monuments examined are situated in regions projected to experience severe water shortages in the coming decades due to climate change. In these arid landscapes, where every drop of water is invaluable, the loss of protection could exacerbate existing vulnerabilities, making already dry regions even more parched and vulnerable to ecological collapse and human displacement.

The Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in southern Utah serves as a powerful case study for these concerns. Spanning an expansive 1.87 million acres of public land, this monument is not only a treasure trove of wildlife and invaluable archaeological resources but also a critical component of the regional water system. According to the CAP analysis, it alone protects 2,517 miles of waterways, with nearly 90 percent of the watersheds within its boundaries anticipated to experience declines in water levels. The monument strategically straddles the Upper and Lower Colorado River Basins, encompassing the vital Paria and Escalante rivers, and lies just north of Lake Powell, the nation’s second-largest reservoir. This strategic location makes it indispensable to the broader Colorado River System, which provides drinking water, agricultural irrigation, and hydropower to over 40 million people across seven U.S. states and parts of Mexico.

Jackie Grant, the executive director of Grand Staircase Escalante Partners, a nonprofit dedicated to the monument’s protection, emphasized its often-underappreciated role in water conservation. "People don’t think of water when they think of Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument," Grant noted, despite its arid appearance. She explained how the monument plays a crucial role in regulating water flow, particularly from the snowpack of the Paunsaugunt Plateau in nearby Bryce Canyon National Park, which melts and flows downstream through its canyons. "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."

Despite its ecological and hydrological significance, Grand Staircase-Escalante holds vast mineral wealth, including an estimated nine-billion-ton coal deposit buried within its central section, alongside significant reserves of uranium and nickel. The Trump administration’s consistent promotion of increased domestic coal production and its broader pro-mining agenda place these natural resources squarely in the crosshairs of development. Grant warned of the severe consequences should mining be permitted in the monument’s core: "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." Such contamination would not only devastate local ecosystems but also ripple downstream, impacting communities reliant on the Colorado River.

Margaret Walls, a senior fellow at Resources for the Future who has extensively studied national monuments but was not involved in the CAP report, echoed the sentiment that the water protection benefits of these designations are often overlooked. She pointed out that while national monuments are typically designated to safeguard cultural or historical landmarks, their indirect role in preserving water quality is profoundly significant. Walls also offered a nuanced perspective, noting that even if monument protections are reduced, the lands remain under federal ownership, and a change in status does not automatically guarantee immediate development. However, she affirmed the fundamental principle: "We don’t protect waterways the way we do land, we’re going to get those water benefits by protecting the land."

The debate over national monuments and their future transcends partisan politics, touching upon fundamental questions of land stewardship, resource management, public health, and environmental resilience. The Antiquities Act of 1906, under which these monuments are designated, was designed to protect federal lands of historic or scientific interest, and it has been used by presidents of both parties to safeguard America’s natural and cultural heritage. The current challenge to these protections highlights the ongoing tension between conservation and resource extraction, especially in a world grappling with escalating climate change impacts and increasing demands on finite water resources. The CAP report serves as a timely reminder that the landscapes we choose to protect today will profoundly shape the water security and environmental health of generations to come.