Agency recommends reductions to some U.S. national monuments, parks

Green sea turtle, Papahānaumokuākea

Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument. (© Greg McFall/NOAA)

Editor’s note: News from the U.S. Department of the Interior indicates that Papahānaumokuākea and America’s other marine national monuments are not safe yet. Join Conservation International’s action campaign to raise your voice in support for these critical ocean areas.

U.S. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke on Thursday recommended reductions to some of the 27 national monuments and parks under review by the Trump administration, The Washington Post reported.

Zinke did not say what changes were recommended nor which of the conservation areas would be affected.

His recommendation — which now goes to the White House — did not completely eliminate any of the national monuments or parks under review, including Hawaii’s Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument, which was extended just last year to create the world’s largest marine protected area.

Whether U.S. President Donald Trump adopts the secretary’s recommendation remains to be seen.

The announcement Thursday was the culmination of an unusual, months-long review of national monuments established by previous U.S. presidents under the Antiquities Act. In the weeks before the recommendation, over 3 million public comments flooded in to the Interior Department in overwhelming support of these areas, and multiple groups vowed legal opposition.

In a report summary about the recommendations, the agency acknowledged the nearly 3 million comments it received from the public during the review period: “Comments received were overwhelmingly in favor of maintaining existing monuments.


Stay up to date with CI’s research and work to protect oceans.


A bipartisan conservation legacy

Downsizing or changing protections within any of the national monuments would likely spark a legal battle. According to the Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan policy agency, the case for presidential action of this kind is unclear at best.

The establishment of national monuments has been a hallmark of presidents on both sides of the political aisle. Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument, for instance, is the result of action by President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama,  an example of the bipartisan support that protected areas in the U.S. have long enjoyed. 

“Americans have already spoken overwhelmingly in support of strong protections for this special ocean region for over 20 years,” said ‘Aulani Wilhelm, senior vice president for oceans at Conservation International and a former superintendent of Papahānaumokuākea.

“Simply put, Papahānaumokuākea is one of the most extraordinary ocean places on the planet. We stand with everyone who has fought so hard to secure the highest possible protections for this special place.”

An example for others?

Revoking or reducing the size of national parks — a phenomenon known as PADDD (protected area downgrading, downsizing and degazettement) — can have adverse or unexpected effects on local people and economies, said Mike Mascia, senior director for social science at Conservation International and an expert on PADDD.

The ripple effects, however, can be felt much farther afield, he said.

“Beyond the potentially harmful effects on the environment and the livelihoods of the communities near these areas, decisions by the U.S. government have a global impact,” Mascia said. “If we downgrade our national monuments, does that give other countries the moral license to do the same?”

Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument (© Mark Sullivan/NOAA)

A departure from U.S. leadership

According to Conservation International CEO M. Sanjayan, the administration’s actions may have already undermined America’s traditional leading role in conservation worldwide.

“Conservation and careful management of our world’s precious natural resources is critical to long-term growth and prosperity,” Sanjayan said. “The President ought to reject any recommendation to reduce conservation areas held in trust for the American people.

“The United States has long led the world in conservation. Any recommendation to reduce protections is unworthy of that proud legacy.”

Bruno Vander Velde is Conservation International’s editorial director.

Want to read more stories like this? Sign up for email updates. Donate to Conservation International.


  1. Gina Hennekens says

    Nature doesn’t need people, people need nature. It’s not the governments decision to destroy this earth’s natural habitat.

    1. Claude Margouleff says

      These are the Dismantilers of our World….Lawyers and quasi Adminstratirs with misguided agendas that promotes more regressive thinking by simple minded followers; all of having limited intrinsic Value to the surrounding Environment that includes living things….people who are Brain Dead now and don’t appear to give one Wit about what’s happens as a result
      Of their misinformed misguided work ….in the name of votes money and a constituency.that would follow any smallish thinking as long they can call it their “side”…
      This turns out to cost much much more than we all everimagined.

    2. monica says

      I think there is a politics to destroy the Earth by all means and the world is led by mad people unfortunately!

  2. Sheila Preston says

    These natural resources were set aside for the citizens to enjoy – peace, quiet, nature. Our natural environment. We, as a nation, have destroyed what God has given to us. I suggest we leave what is left, alone. Let’s preserve what we have🙏

  3. Karen Wessenberg says

    These sites have been set aside for all of us to enjoy and continue to preserve for future generations! Please help us save them.

  4. Annemarie Bakker says

    We should want to conserve these areas and their inhabitants in reality, not just in our memory. It’s the government’s resonsability to stand right behind this conservation and to do its utmost to make this conservation come true. Please, government, we depend on you …

  5. Barbara Miller says

    We need to keep our national treasures. Not let someone who only cares about himself and his friends take that away.

  6. Patricia Williams says

    Do NOT reduce any of the Parks. Man has screwed up and ruined Enough of the world. The Animals and the people need more safe and protected places!

  7. John Brigham says

    What is wrong with these Government people. What planet or world do they live in or on as its obviously not here on earth.If they were here they would not be making these absolutely stupid recommendations.
    They should be doing the exact opposite and that is to establish more nature reserves not take them away or reduce their size

  8. Pingback: UPDATE: U.S. recommends reductions to 10 national monuments | Human Nature - Conservation International Blog

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *