Tuesday, July 14, 2026

Donny gets land rapey

MODIFYING THE GRAND STAIRCASE-ESCALANTE NATIONAL MONUMENT

Proclamations

July 13, 2026

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

On September 18, 1996, as part of an effort to prevent development of significant coal reserves and other resources on the Kaiparowits Plateau, President Clinton issued Proclamation 6920, which established the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument (Monument) in the State of Utah, reserving approximately 1.7 million acres of Federal lands as part of the Monument, and directing that it be managed by the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

On December 4, 2017, exercising my authority under section 320301 of title 54, United States Code (the “Antiquities Act”), I issued Proclamation 9682 to modify the boundaries of the Monument, ensure proper management, and more closely reflect the intent of the Antiquities Act.  Proclamation 9682 removed approximately 860,000 acres from the Monument.  On October 8, 2021, President Biden issued Proclamation 10286, increasing the size of the Monument to approximately 1.87 million acres, the size of the Monument immediately prior to the issuance of Proclamation 9682.

The Antiquities Act authorizes the President to declare historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are situated on land owned or controlled by the Federal Government to be national monuments.  The Antiquities Act further requires that any parcel of land reserved as part of a monument be confined to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.  Where the President determines that the structures and objects identified by a prior monument proclamation no longer are, or never were, deserving of the Antiquities Act’s protections, the Antiquities Act permits the President to remove land from the monument and return it to its prior federally managed status.  Determining the appropriate protective area involves examining several factors, including the uniqueness and nature of the objects to be protected, the nature of the protection needed, the protection provided to those objects by other laws, executive department and agency resources available to manage the parcel, and whether the lands are better suited for other non-monument uses.

Proclamation 10286 suffers from several flaws that warrant its reconsideration.  First, Proclamation 10286 was premised on the purported need to protect items that are not historic landmarks, historic or prehistoric structures, or objects of historic or scientific interest.  This included a long list of generic topographic and geologic features such as “vast and austere landscape[s],” “sedimentary rock layers,” and “bold plateaus and multihued cliffs.”  These generic features described in Proclamation 10286 do not become “landmarks,” “structures,” or “objects of historic or scientific interest” worthy of protection under the Antiquities Act simply because they are scenic.

Second, certain landmarks, structures, or objects identified in Proclamation 10286 that could, in other circumstances, have the necessary historic or scientific interest, are not unique to the Monument, and their relative commonness suggests that the specific instances of such objects found within the Monument are not of particular historic or scientific interest.  Examples of these relatively common objects include cultural, paleontological, and geological resources within the Monument that are found throughout the Four Corners region and, in some cases, throughout the American West.  Accordingly, a monument reservation was neither necessary nor appropriate to protect items that are not historic landmarks, historic or prehistoric structures, or other objects of historic or scientific interest or items that may qualify as such but are sufficiently common to not warrant protection under the Antiquities Act.

Third, because Proclamation 10286 expanded the land reserved for the Monument only to protect objects of no significant historic or scientific interest, that Proclamation disregarded the Antiquities Act’s requirement that the reservation of Federal lands for a national monument be confined to the “smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.”  Had the reservation been properly tailored to protect only those objects warranting protection under the Antiquities Act, it would have been much smaller.

Finally, the added reservation of land was unnecessary to protect many of the objects of historic or scientific identified by Proclamation 10286, which are already subject to the enhanced protections provided under Federal laws enacted after the Antiquities Act that preserve archaeological, historic, cultural, paleontological resources as well as plants and animals, and their respective habitats.  These laws, including the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 U.S.C. 470aa–470mm), National Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. 300101 et seq.), Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668–668d), Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988 (16 U.S.C. 4301 et seq.), Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703–712), Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1976 (25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.), and Paleontological Resources Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470aaa–470aaa–11), authorize the BLM to limit and condition activities on Federal lands for the protection of certain natural and cultural resources, whether they are within or outside a national monument.

For instance, the BLM manages more than 800,000 acres of the Monument as Wilderness Study Areas, which the BLM is required by law to manage so as not to impair their suitability for future congressional designation as Wilderness.  As a result, many of the objects previously designated as monuments by Proclamation 10286 are already adequately protected by Federal law and do not require a reservation of land under the Antiquities Act for protection.

The Monument reservation established by Proclamation 10286 is, therefore, not confined to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of those objects worthy of the Antiquity Act’s protection.  Proper care and management can instead be provided to those objects of historic and scientific interest by a smaller and more appropriate reservation of approximately 181,541 acres comprising two units:  the Canyons of the Escalante Unit and Kaiparowits Horizon Unit.  Revising the boundaries of the Monument in this way will ensure that, in accordance with the Antiquities Act, the reservation is the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.  Revising the Monument’s boundaries to encompass approximately 181,541 acres will also account for practical limitations on the BLM’s land management resources and funding, ensuring that these remain adequate to provide proper care and management for the Monument now and in the future.  

Revising the boundaries will better align the use of these public lands with the public interest.  The Grand Staircase-Escalante region contains several resources that are vital to our economic and national security.  These resources include several critical minerals, such as chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, silver, thorium, titanium, uranium, vanadium, zinc, and zirconium, create jobs, fuel prosperity, and are essential to important sectors of the economy of the United States, including defense, manufacturing, and transportation.  It is imperative that the United States not be dependent on foreign sources of these resources.  Modifying the Monument’s boundaries will help ensure that adequate domestic supplies exist, thereby reducing the threat posed by our Nation’s reliance on foreign sources.

The approximately 172,641-acre Canyons of the Escalante Unit contains the heart of the lands that remain within the Monument.  Carved by the Escalante River and its tributaries, this area contains objects of historic or scientific interest worthy of protection, including the 130-foot-tall Escalante Natural Bridge.  This area also boasts Calf Creek Canyon, a canyon of red alcoved walls with expanses of white slickrock, and other canyons along the Escalante River that contain a high density of Fremont prehistoric sites, including pithouses, villages, and storage cysts, as well as petroglyphs and pictographs, such as the Hundred Hands pictograph panel.  The canyon of the Escalante River and its tributary canyons contain one of the highest densities of rock art sites in southwestern Utah outside of Capitol Reef National Park, with sites dating from the Archaic to the Historic periods.  There are also historic sites of interest in the area related to grazing and ranching, along with the Boulder Mail Trail, which was used to ferry mail between the small desert outpost towns of Escalante and Boulder beginning in 1902.

Objects of historic and scientific interest can also be found in the approximately 8,900-acre Kaiparowits Horizon Unit.  A recently discovered bonebed assemblage has produced rare specimens of theropods, including one of the most complete tyrannosaurid specimens in the region and well-preserved remains of hadrosaurs, turtles, and crocodilians.  The site has provided critical insights into the ancient ecosystems of the Western Interior Seaway and the rich diversity of dinosaurs, reptiles, and other vertebrates and is considered a globally important paleontological resource.  Accordingly, the establishment of the Kaiparowits Horizon Unit serves not only to properly care for and manage this uniquely intact snapshot of ancient biodiversity and environmental conditions, but also to foster continued research, education, and stewardship of a singular resource for the benefit of future generations.

Accordingly, the area described above and on the accompanying map are the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of those objects identified above, which I have determined in my discretion warrant protection under the Antiquities Act.  This modification of Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument will maintain and protect those objects and preserve the area’s cultural, scientific, and historic legacy.

WHEREAS, section 320301 of title 54, United States Code, authorizes the President, in his discretion, to declare by public proclamation historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are situated upon the lands owned or controlled by the Federal Government to be national monuments, and to reserve as a part thereof parcels of land; and

WHEREAS, the Antiquities Act permits the President, in the President’s discretion, to alter a prior declaration of a national monument, including by finding that objects identified in the prior declaration either are no longer deserving of the Antiquities Act’s protections, or never were; and

WHEREAS, many of the items and resources identified by Proclamation 10286 are not historic landmarks, historic structures, or otherwise objects of historic or scientific interest of national importance and, therefore, should not have been declared to be national monuments under the Antiquities Act; and

WHEREAS, many of the resources and objects designated as monuments by Proclamation 10286 do not require a reservation of land to protect them because they are not unique to those areas, were not under threat of damage or destruction before designation, or are sufficiently protected by Federal law; and

WHEREAS, the reservation of land established by Proclamation 10286 was not “the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected;” and

WHEREAS, given the greater budgetary and resource constraints of the BLM than in 2017, the boundaries established by Proclamations 9682 and 10286 encompass areas too vast for the proper care and management of the objects located therein; and

WHEREAS, our Nation’s need to reduce its reliance on foreign sources of several resources vital to our economic and national security, including resources located within the Monument, is greater than it was in 2017, thereby necessitating the exclusion of lands that were retained within the Monument by Proclamation 9682; and

WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to modify the boundaries of the Monument boundary to exclude approximately 1.69 million acres of land that I find are unnecessary for or disadvantageous to the proper care and management of the objects to be protected within the Monument; and

WHEREAS, I find that the boundaries of the Monument as described above and on the accompanying map represent the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects of historic and scientific interest identified above;

NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, by the authority vested in me by section 320301 of title 54, United States Code, hereby proclaim that the boundaries of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument are hereby modified to include those lands owned or controlled by the Federal Government within the boundaries described on the accompanying map, which is attached to and forms a part of this proclamation.  I hereby further proclaim that the modified Monument areas identified on the accompanying map shall be known as the Canyons and Escalante Unit and the Kaiparowits Horizon Unit.  These reserved Federal lands encompass approximately 181,541 acres.  The boundaries described on the accompanying map are confined to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.  Any lands reserved by Proclamations 6920, 9682, or 10286 not within the boundaries identified on the accompanying map are hereby excluded from the Monument.

At 9:00 a.m., eastern daylight time, on the date that is 60 days after the date of this proclamation, subject to valid existing rights, the provisions of existing withdrawals, and the requirements of applicable law, the public lands excluded from the Monument reservation shall be open to:

(1)  entry, location, selection, sale, or other disposition under the public land laws;

(2)  disposition under all laws relating to mineral and geothermal leasing; and

(3)  location, entry, and patent under the mining laws.

Appropriation of lands under the mining laws before the date and time of restoration is unauthorized.  Any such attempted appropriation, including attempted adverse possession under 30 U.S.C. 38, shall vest no rights against the United States.  Acts required to establish a location and to initiate a right of possession are governed by State law, where not in conflict with Federal law.

Nothing in this proclamation shall be construed to revoke, modify, or affect any withdrawal, reservation, or appropriation, other than those set forth in Proclamations 6920, 9862 and 10286.

Nothing in this proclamation shall change the management of the areas designated and reserved by Proclamations 6920, 9682, and 10286 that remain part of the Monument in accordance with the terms of this proclamation, except as provided by the following nine paragraphs:

For purposes of providing for the proper care and management of the objects identified above and to facilitate multiple uses that are consistent with the care and management of those objects, the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) shall maintain a management plan for the Monument and shall promulgate such regulations for its management as he deems appropriate.  The Secretary, through the BLM, shall consult with other Federal land management agencies or agency components in the local area, including the National Park Service, when developing any management plan.  The Secretary shall provide for public involvement in the development of the management plan, including consultation with federally recognized Tribes and State and local governments.  In developing and implementing any management plan, the Secretary shall provide opportunities, pursuant to applicable legal authorities, for shared resources, operational efficiency, and cooperation with other Federal land management agencies, State and local governments, and federally recognized Tribes.  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 (1) providing appropriate access for and otherwise facilitating livestock grazing; (2) maintaining; and (3) improving public access, including for recreation and hunting; and providing educational experiences that reflect the diversity of the Monument’s natural and anthropogenic features and their use throughout the region’s history.

Nothing in this proclamation affects the designation, maintenance, and improvement of existing roads and trails within the Monument, which shall continue to be governed by laws and regulations other than this proclamation.  The Secretary shall prepare a new transportation plan that endeavors to maximize public access in the Monument through the designation of roads and trails on which motorized and non-motorized vehicle use will be allowed as well as provide for appropriate maintenance of those roads and trails.  Pending completion of that transportation plan, the Secretary may allow motorized and non‑motorized vehicle use on roads and trails designated for use before the issuance of Proclamation 6920 and shall maintain roads and trails for such use.

The Secretary shall consider the effects of proposed activities, including potential road closures, on historic roads in the Monument, in accordance with the regulations at 36 C.F.R. part 800, as appropriate.

Consistent with the proper care and management of the objects identified above, the Secretary may authorize ecological restoration and active vegetation management activities in the Monument.  When engaging in management planning for the Monument, the Secretary shall consider the full range of vegetation management tools, including mechanical mastication, grazing, and new vegetation management technology that becomes available in the future.  Additionally, because noxious weeds and invasive plant species increase wildfire risks, the Secretary may authorize the use of available mechanical, natural, and chemical tools for controlling the proliferation of noxious weed and invasive plant species, and all treatment plans should be developed and implemented in coordination with the Garfield and Kane Counties Weed Boards.  Livestock grazing should be utilized as a primary option for mitigating noxious weeds, as well as managing fuels and vegetation.

In recognition of the enduring tradition of livestock grazing in the Monument and its historical and cultural significance to local communities, nothing in this proclamation shall be deemed to affect authorizations for livestock grazing, or administration thereof, on Federal lands within the Monument.  Livestock grazing within the Monument shall continue to be governed by the laws and regulations other than this Proclamation.

The Secretary shall endeavor to authorize traditional land uses within the Monument, such as grazing, recreation, timber management, public access, and infrastructure development, to the greatest extent possible, consistent with applicable law.  Where restrictions on proposed uses are necessary to comply with applicable laws, such restrictions shall be narrowly tailored.

The Secretary shall consider livestock grazing lands in the Monument to constitute a traditional cultural place (TCP) and shall consider how proposed activities will impact that TCP in accordance with the regulation at 36 C.F.R. part 800, as appropriate.

If any livestock grazing permits or leases within the Monument are voluntarily relinquished by existing holders, the Secretary shall, within 1 year, re-allocate the relinquished forage, including by issuing a new permit or lease for the relevant allotment, as appropriate, unless the Secretary specifically finds that such reallocation is inconsistent with the proper care and management of the objects identified above.

If any provision of this proclamation, including its application to a particular parcel of land, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this proclamation shall not be affected thereby.  Furthermore, to the extent that any provision of Proclamations 6920, 9682, or 10286 is inconsistent with or contradicts this proclamation, the terms of this proclamation shall govern.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirteenth day of July, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-six, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and fifty-first.

                             DONALD J. TRUMP

 

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

On December 28, 2016, President Obama issued Proclamation 9558, which established the Bears Ears National Monument (Monument) in the State of Utah; reserved approximately 1.35 million acres of Federal land as part of the Monument; and directed that the Monument be jointly managed by the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Department of Agriculture’s United States Forest Service (USFS). 

On December 4, 2017, exercising my authority under section 320301 of title 54, United States Code (the “Antiquities Act”), I issued Proclamation 9681 to modify the boundaries of the Monument in accordance with the requirements of that Act, as well as to ensure the Monument’s proper management.  Proclamation 9681 excluded approximately 1.15 million acres from the Monument, and also reserved approximately 11,200 acres as part of the Monument that were not originally reserved by Proclamation 9558.  On October 8, 2021, President Biden issued Proclamation 10285 to modify the boundaries of the Monument to include all lands previously excluded, expanding the Monument to encompass approximately 1.36 million acres.

The Antiquities Act authorizes the President to declare historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are situated on land owned or controlled by the Federal Government to be national monuments.  The Antiquities Act further requires that any parcel of land reserved as part of a monument be confined to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.  Where the President determines that the structures and objects identified by a prior monument proclamation no longer are, or never were, deserving of the Antiquities Act’s protections, the Antiquities Act permits the President to remove land from the monument and return it to its prior federally managed status.  Determining the appropriate protective area involves examining several factors, including the uniqueness and nature of the objects to be protected, the nature of the protection needed, the protection provided those objects by other laws, executive department and agency resources available to manage the parcel, and whether the lands are better suited for other non-monument uses.

Given these considerations, the monument designation made in Proclamation 10285 suffers from several flaws under Antiquities Act analysis that require the action taken by this proclamation.  First, Proclamation 10285’s designation rests on the purported need to protect items that are not historic landmarks, historic or prehistoric structures, or other objects of historic or scientific interest.  For example, Proclamation 10285 protects various generic features and landscapes found within the Bears Ears region, such as “deep sandstone canyons, broad desert mesas, towering monoliths, forested mountaintops dotted with lush meadows” and “low bluffs and high mesas.”  While scenic, these generic features are not “landmarks,” “structures,” or “objects of historical or scientific interest” worthy of protection under the Antiquities Act.

Second, certain landmarks, structures, or objects identified in Proclamation 10285 that could have the necessary historic or scientific interest in other contexts are prevalent throughout the Four Corners region and, in some cases, throughout the American West.  The relative commonness of these cultural resources within the broader area suggests that the specific instances of such objects found within the Monument are not of particular historic or scientific interest.  For instance, lithic scatters, projectile points, prehistoric campsites, petroglyphs, and pictographs are found across the American West and are not unique to the Bears Ears region.  Accordingly, a monument reservation was neither necessary nor appropriate to protect these items.

Third, because Proclamation 10285 reserved lands that were intended to protect several landmarks, structures, or objects that lack the necessary historic or scientific interest, it also disregards the Antiquities Act’s requirement that the reservation of Federal lands for a national monument be confined to the “smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.”  If the parcel had been properly tailored to protect only those objects identified in Proclamation 10285 that do warrant protection under the Antiquities Act, it would have been much smaller.

Finally, a monument designation and reservation of land were unnecessary to protect many of the objects of historic and scientific interest identified by Proclamation 10285, which are already subject to enhanced protections under Federal laws enacted after the Antiquities Act that preserve archaeological, historic, cultural and paleontological resources, as well as plants and animals and their respective habitats.  These laws, including the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 U.S.C. 470aa–470mm), National Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. 300101 et seq.), Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668–668d), Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988 (16 U.S.C. 4301 et seq.), Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), National Forest Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1600 et seq.),Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703–712), Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1976 (25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.), and Paleontological Resources Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470aaa–470aaa–11), authorize the BLM or the USFS to limit and condition activities on Federal lands for the protection of certain natural or cultural resources, whether they are within or outside a national monument.  

For instance, more than 500,000 acres of the Monument were already being managed to maintain, enhance, or protect their roadless character before they were designated as part of a national monument.  Specifically, the BLM manages approximately 380,759 acres of lands within the existing monument as Wilderness Study Areas, which the BLM is required by law to manage so as not to impair their suitability for future congressional designation as Wilderness.  On lands managed by the USFS, 46,348 acres are part of the congressionally designated Dark Canyon Wilderness Area, which, under the 1964 Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131-1136), and the Utah Wilderness Act of 1984 (Public Law 98-428), the USFS must manage so as to maintain or enhance its wilderness character.  As a result, many of the objects previously designated as monuments by Proclamation 10285 are already adequately protected by Federal law and do not require a reservation of land under the Antiquities Act for protection.   

In light of these flaws, I have determined, in my discretion, that the parcel of land reserved by Proclamation 10285 is not confined to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects of scientific or historic interest identified therein.  Instead, proper care and management can be provided to those objects by a smaller reservation of approximately 121,096 acres comprising two units:  the Shash Jáa Unit and the Indian Creek Unit.  Revising the boundaries of the Monument in this way will ensure that, in accordance with the Antiquities Act, the reservation is the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.  Revising the Monument’s boundaries to encompass approximately 121,096 acres will also account for practical limitations on the BLM’s and the USFS’s land management resources and funding, ensuring that these remain adequate to provide proper care and management for the protected objects now and in the future.

Revising the boundaries of the Monument will also unburden public National Forest System lands that can and should be put to a higher-priority use.  The Bears Ears region contains several resources that are vital to energy and resource independence and, in turn, critical to national security.  These resources — which include critical minerals such as silver, copper, molybdenum, lead, uranium, vanadium, and zinc — create jobs, fuel prosperity, and are essential to important sectors of the economy of the United States, including defense, manufacturing, and transportation.  It is imperative that the United States not rely on foreign sources for these resources.  Modifying the Monument’s boundaries will help ensure that adequate domestic supplies exist, thereby reducing the threat posed by our Nation’s reliance on foreign sources.

The approximately 106,816-acre Shash Jáa Unit is the heart of the Monument.  These lands encompass a collection of objects of historic and scientific interest that represent the Bears Ears region’s natural and cultural heritage.  For example, the Shash Jáa Unit contains notable geologic features, including the iconic twin buttes known as the Bears Ears, which are considered sacred by the Native American tribes that call this area their ancestral home and which were a prominent landmark for both ancient peoples and the more recent inhabitants of the region.  The Shash Jáa Unit also holds Arch Canyon, Mule Canyon, and Comb Ridge — a north-south trending monocline that resembles a rooster’s comb.  

The Shash Jáa Unit contains an abundance of cultural and archaeological objects spanning thousands of years of human history, such as dispersed villages, pit houses, kivas, storage pits, storage rooms, pottery, lithic scatters, campsites, rock shelters, pictographs, and baskets, as well as manos and metates for grinding corn.  These objects also include large villages from the Pueblo I period, cliff dwellings from the Pueblo III period, and expansive and complex multi-family dwellings from the Pueblo II period near Comb Wash; the Arch Canyon ruin, which contains pictographs and petroglyphs ranging from the Archaic to the historic period; shelter-cliff dwellings from the Pueblo II and III periods in the north and south forks of Mule Canyon, as well as other archaeological sites there, including the House on Fire Ruin; alcoves near Whiskers Draw containing evidence of human habitation from the Basketmaker period; portions of the Butler Wash Archeological District, an Ancestral Puebloan ruin with multiple rooms and kivas that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places; the Butler Wash Kachina Panel, a wall-sized mural of San Juan Anthropomorph figures; and Milk Ranch Point, which is home to a rich concentration of kivas, granaries, and dwellings.

The Shash Jáa Unit also contains important paleontological objects, including Triassic vertebrate trace fossils near Comb Ridge.  Additionally, the Shash Jáa Unit contains several historic sites that shed light on the Bears Ears region’s more modern cultural heritage.  For example, the unit contains objects related to the cowboys, trappers, and explorers that moved into the region in the mid-1800s, as well as objects related to settlers from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter‑day Saints (Latter Day Saints).  This last group of objects includes prominent features of the Hole-in-the-Rock Road, such as Salvation Knoll, and San Juan Hill, which served as navigation points for Latter Day Saints traveling into southeastern Utah.  

Finally, the Shash Jáa Unit described on the accompanying map includes five non-contiguous parcels of land encompassing significant historic and prehistoric structures and objects of historic and scientific interest, including:

1)  a 157-acre parcel reserved for Doll House Ruin, a fully-intact and well-preserved single-room granary, as well as for other prehistoric structures and objects in a tributary of Woodenshoe Canyon;

2)  a 314-acre parcel reserved for Scorup Cabin, a line cabin originally built in Rig Canyon and later moved to its current location, used by early cowboys as a summer camp while tending cattle in the area;

3)  a 693-acre parcel reserved for the Rig Canyon Mining Exploration Site, which supported a vertical oil well, drilled in 1926, in a wildcat oil field;  

4)  a 318-acre parcel reserved for the Moon House complex, an example of Pueblo-decorated architecture that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and is likely the last human occupied site on Cedar Mesa; and

5)  an 88-acre parcel reserved for the Citadel, an Ancestral Puebloan site featuring several masonry rooms and a series of deteriorating features on Cedar Mesa.

The approximately 14,279-acre Indian Creek Unit also contains objects of historic and scientific interest that are representative of the region’s natural and cultural heritage, such as dinosaur tracks and distinctive and well-preserved petroglyphs in Shay Canyon; Newspaper Rock, a roadside rock art panel that has been listed on the National Register of Historic Places since 1976; and notable paleontological resources, including abundant fossilized flora and fauna. 

Accordingly, the area described above and on the accompanying map is the smallest compatible with the proper care and management of the objects of historic and scientific interest identified above, which I have determined in my discretion warrant protection under the Antiquities Act.  This modification of the Monument will maintain and protect those objects and preserve the area’s cultural, scientific, and historic legacy.

WHEREAS, section 320301 of title 54, United States Code authorizes the President, in the President’s discretion, to declare by public proclamation historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are situated upon the lands owned or controlled by the Federal Government to be national monuments, and to reserve as a part thereof parcels of land; and

WHEREAS, the Antiquities Act also permits the President, in the President’s discretion, to alter a prior declaration of a national monument by finding that objects identified in the prior declaration either are no longer deserving of the Antiquities Act’s protections, or never were; and

WHEREAS, many of the resources and objects identified by Proclamation 10285 are not historic landmarks, historic structures, or other objects of historic or scientific interest and, therefore, should not have been declared to be national monuments under the Antiquities Act; and 

WHEREAS, many of the resources and objects designated as monuments by Proclamation 10285 do not require a reservation of land to protect them because they are not unique to those areas, were not under threat of damage or destruction before designation, or are sufficiently protected by Federal law; and

WHEREAS, the reservation of land established by Proclamation 10285 is not “the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected”; and

WHEREAS, given the budgetary and resource constraints of the BLM and the USFS, which have only intensified since 2017, the boundaries established by Proclamations 9681 and 10285 encompass lands too vast to ensure the proper care and management of all of the protected objects located therein; and

WHEREAS, the need to reduce our Nation’s reliance on foreign sources of several resources vital to our economic and national security, including resources located within the historic and current boundaries of the Monument, is also greater than it was in 2017, thereby further necessitating the exclusion of lands that were retained within the Monument by Proclamation 9681; and     

WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to modify the boundaries of the Monument to exclude from its reservation approximately 1,238,904 acres of land that I find unnecessary for or disadvantageous to the proper care and management of objects to be protected within the Monument; and

WHEREAS, I find that the boundaries of the Monument as described above and on the accompanying map represent the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects of historic and scientific interest identified above.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, by the authority vested in me by section 320301 of title 54, United States Code, proclaim that the boundaries of the Bears Ears National Monument are hereby modified to include those lands owned or controlled by the Federal Government within the boundaries described on the accompanying map, which is attached to and forms a part of this proclamation.  I hereby further proclaim that the modified Monument areas identified on the accompanying map shall be known as the Indian Creek Unit and Shash Jáa Unit, the latter of which shall include the Moon House complex, the Citadel, Doll House Ruins, Scorup Cabin, and the Rig Canyon Exploration site.  These reserved Federal lands cumulatively encompass approximately 121,096 acres.  The boundaries described on the accompanying map are confined to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.  Any lands reserved by Proclamations 9558, 9681, or 10285 not within the boundaries identified on the accompanying map are hereby excluded from the Monument.

At 9:00 a.m., eastern daylight time, on the date that is 60 days after the date of this proclamation, subject to valid existing rights, the provisions of existing withdrawals, and the requirements of applicable law, the public and National Forest System lands excluded from the Monument reservation shall be open to:

(1)  entry, location, selection, sale, or other disposition under the public land laws and laws applicable to the USFS;

(2)  disposition under all laws relating to mineral and geothermal leasing; and

(3)  location, entry, and patent under the mining laws.

Appropriation of lands under the mining laws before the date and time of restoration is unauthorized.  Any such attempted appropriation, including attempted adverse possession under 30 U.S.C. 38, shall vest no rights against the United States.  Acts required to establish a location and to initiate a right of possession are governed by State law where not in conflict with Federal law.

Nothing in this proclamation shall be construed to remove any lands from the Manti-La Sal National Forest or to otherwise revoke, modify, or affect any withdrawal, reservation, or appropriation, other than those set forth in Proclamations 9558, 9681, and 10285.

Nothing in this proclamation shall change the management of the areas designated and reserved by Proclamations 9558, 9681, and 10285 that remain part of the Monument in accordance with the terms of this proclamation, except as provided by the following eleven paragraphs:

For purposes of providing for the proper care and management of the objects identified above, and to facilitate multiple uses of the Monument that are consistent with the proper care and management of those objects, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture (the Secretaries) shall jointly maintain a management plan for the Monument and shall promulgate such regulations for its management, consistent with applicable law, as they deem appropriate.  The Secretaries, through the BLM and the USFS, shall consult with other Federal land management agencies or agency components in the local area, including the National Park Service, when developing any management plan.  In promulgating any management rules and regulations governing the National Forest System lands within the Monument and developing any management plan, the Secretary of Agriculture, through the USFS, shall consult with the Secretary of the Interior, through the BLM.  The Secretaries shall provide for public involvement in the development of any management plan, including consultation with federally recognized Tribes and State and local governments.  In developing and implementing any management plan, the Secretaries shall provide opportunities, pursuant to applicable legal authorities, for resource sharing, operational efficiency, and cooperation with other Federal land management agencies, State and local governments, and federally recognized Tribes.  When developing any management plan for lands within the Monument, the Secretaries shall take into account, to the maximum extent consistent with the proper care and management of the objects identified above, the importance of (1) providing appropriate access for and otherwise facilitating livestock grazing; (2) maintaining and improving public access to the Monument, including for recreation and hunting; and (3) providing educational experiences that reflect the diversity of the Monument’s natural and anthropogenic features and their use throughout the history of the Bears Ears region.

Proclamations 9558 and 10285 established the Bears Ears Commission (BEC) to provide guidance and recommendations on the development and implementation of management plans and on management of the Monument.  The BEC is hereby disbanded and terminated, and the Secretaries shall have no obligation to engage, consult, or coordinate with the BEC or a comparable entity as provided in, or derived from, either Proclamation 9558 or 10285, though the Secretaries shall continue to consult with Tribal Nations in accordance with other applicable authorities.

Proclamation 9558 established an advisory committee under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) to provide information and advice regarding the development of management plans for the Monument and, as appropriate, management of the Monument.  Proclamation 9558 is hereby revised to clarify that the Monument advisory committee shall consist of a balanced representation of interested stakeholders that specifically includes one member each from the Hopi Nation, the Navajo Nation, the Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, and the Pueblo of Zuni; one member each from San Juan County, Monticello City, Blanding City, and the Town of Bluff; and six members recommended by the Governor of Utah.  Of those six members recommended by the Governor of Utah, each shall belong to one of the following stakeholder groups:  archaeological or historical experts; livestock grazing permittees; outdoor recreation participants, including commercial recreation providers or off-highway vehicle users; conservationists; private landowners; and local business owners.

Nothing in this proclamation affects the designation, maintenance, and improvement of existing roads and trails within the Monument, which shall continue to be governed by laws and regulations other than this proclamation.  The Secretaries shall prepare a new transportation plan that endeavors to maximize public access to the Monument by designating roads and trails on which motorized and non-motorized vehicle use will be allowed, as well as providing for appropriate maintenance of those roads and trails.  Pending completion of that transportation plan, the Secretaries may allow motorized and non-motorized vehicle use on roads and trails designated for such use immediately before the issuance of Proclamation 9558 and may maintain roads and trails for such use.  The Secretaries may also designate for motorized vehicle use roads and trails that were not designated for such use prior to the issuance of Proclamation 9558, regardless of the purpose of that use.

The Secretaries shall consider the effects of proposed activities, including potential road closures, on historic roads in the Monument, in accordance with the regulations at 36 C.F.R. part 800, as appropriate.

Consistent with the proper care and management of the objects identified above, the Secretaries may authorize ecological restoration and active vegetation management activities in the Monument.  When engaging in management planning for the Monument, the Secretaries shall consider the full range of vegetation management tools, including mechanical mastication, grazing, and new vegetation management technology that becomes available in the future.  Additionally, because noxious weeds and invasive plant species increase wildfire risks, the Secretaries may authorize the use of mechanical, natural, and chemical tools for controlling the proliferation of noxious weeds and invasive plant species, and should coordinate with the San Juan County Weed Board, as appropriate, in developing and implementing treatment plans.  Livestock grazing should be utilized as a primary option for mitigating noxious weeds as well as managing fuels and vegetation.

In recognition of the enduring tradition of livestock grazing in the Monument and its historical and cultural significance to local communities, nothing in this proclamation shall be deemed to affect authorizations for livestock grazing, or administration thereof, on Federal lands within the Monument.  Livestock grazing within the Monument shall continue to be governed by laws and regulations other than this proclamation.

The Secretaries shall endeavor to authorize traditional land uses within the Monument, such as grazing, recreation, timber management, public access, and infrastructure development, to the greatest extent possible, consistent with applicable law.  Where restrictions on proposed uses are necessary to comply with applicable laws, such restrictions shall be narrowly tailored.

The Secretaries shall consider livestock grazing lands in the Monument to constitute a traditional cultural place (TCP) and shall consider how proposed activities will impact that TCP in accordance with the regulations at 36 C.F.R. part 800, as appropriate. 

If any livestock grazing permits or leases are voluntarily relinquished by existing holders, the Secretaries shall, within 1 year, re-allocate the relinquished forage, including by issuing a new permit or lease for the relevant allotment, as appropriate, unless the Secretaries specifically find that such reallocation is inconsistent with the proper care and management of the objects identified above.  

If any provision of this proclamation, including its application to a particular parcel of land, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this proclamation shall not be affected thereby.  Furthermore, to the extent that any provision of Proclamations 9558, 9681, or 10285 is inconsistent with or contradicts this proclamation, the terms of this proclamation shall govern.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirteenth day of July, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-six, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and fifty-first.

                             DONALD J. TRUMP

Tuesday, July 7, 2026

Lex Anteinternet: Friday, July 7, 1911. Fur seals.

Lex Anteinternet: Friday, July 7, 1911. Fur seals, heat wave.: The United States, Russia, the United Kingdom and Japan signed the Convention on the International Protection of Fur Seals, prohibiting hunt...

Friday, July 7, 1911. Fur seals, heat wave.

The United States, Russia, the United Kingdom and Japan signed the Convention on the International Protection of Fur Seals, prohibiting hunting of the endangered animals in the North Pacific Ocean.

Populations rebounded by 30% within six years.

Friday, July 3, 2026

Sunscreen advice.

From our favorite Galwegian.



Is she right?  No idea, but I did read the other day a new super sunscreen is coming out which is supposed to virtually guarantee that you can't get skin cancer while wearing it.

I won't be wearing it.

Perhaps that's stupid, but I have a problem with slathering myself with goop and I rely on the oldest method of sun protect, clothing.

How I will note that the producer of this vlog is always fairly heavily dressed, so I'm not throwing rocks at her, but a lot of people I see in the sticks, particularly along rivers, are dressed stupidly in this regard.  In contrast, the last couple of years, some people on fishing boats on the rivers are practically dressed in hazmat suits.

It's as if, we've forgotten how to dress.

Ditch the shorts.  Put on a broad brimmed hat.  And, yes, wear some sunscreen.

National park signs in Wyoming must be restored by July 4

 

National park signs in Wyoming must be restored by July 4

After More Than 20 Years, Cheyenne Opens Belvoir Ranch To The Public

 

Chief Tom Schultz details, defends largest Forest Service reorganization in a century

 

Chief Tom Schultz details, defends largest Forest Service reorganization in a century

Tuesday, June 30, 2026

Utah's burning while Deseret Mike Lee is grinning.

The U.S. Forest Service closed Utah’s Bears Ears National Monument and Dark Canyon Wilderness on Sunday, June 28, due to the catastrophic Babylon Wildfire. The same day, the National Park Service (NPS) announced it was closing the Needles District of Canyonlands National Park as well.

Wake up Utah. 

This is the result of climate change.  You keep electing people like MAGA zealot Deseret Mike Lee.  In Lee's case he feels climate science is a fib, and, based upon his background, he wants to take the public lands for housing (and development) so that as many souls can be downloaded onto Earth as soon as possible to bring about the end of the world, under his belief system, probably.

Vote these people out.  It's not too late to reverse this idiocy.

Trump administration revives controversial Moose-Wilson Road project with eye on recreational path

 

Trump administration revives controversial Moose-Wilson Road project with eye on recreational path

City to install video monitoring at Casper Mountain slash pile

City to install video monitoring at Casper Mountain slash pile

Friday, June 26, 2026

Lex Anteinternet: The 2026 Election, 14th Edition. The “If you are n...

Lex Anteinternet: The 2026 Election, 14th Edition. The “If you are n...: If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. Desmond Tutu   June 26, 2026 The candidate running...

The 2026 Election, 14th Edition. The “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor" edition.

If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.

Desmond Tutu

 


June 26, 2026

The candidate running against Bob Ide:

Lisa Engebretsen: Protect Wyoming’s Public Lands and Reject the Seminoe Dam Project

Getting rid of Bob Ide should be an absolute priority for anyone who cares about: 1) Wyoming's wildlands, and 2) anyone who is not a multimillionaire. A diehard MAGA/WFC who was in Washington D.C. at the time of the January 6 insurrection (he did not take part in it), his "less government, more freedom" is an absolute joke.  He's a major Natrona County landlord whose very livelihood depends on the government protecting his rental lands property rights, which only exist due to the government.  He is apparently unaware of the hypocrisy.  

He's been amongst the most extreme members of the WFC.

Last edition:

The 2026 Election, 13th Edition. The choosing lanes edition.

Upper Sunshine Reservoir Near Meeteetse Drained, No More Fishing For Two years

 

Upper Sunshine Reservoir Near Meeteetse Drained, No More Fishing For Two years

Colorado And Oregon Lift Fishing Restrictions, Drought Will Kill Fish Anyway

 

After pushback, Wyoming delays repeal of wildlife monitoring rules at coal mines

 

After pushback, Wyoming delays repeal of wildlife monitoring rules at coal mines

Monday, June 22, 2026

Lex Anteinternet: Courthouse Facility Dogs? Sign of how screwed up ...

Lex Anteinternet: Courthouse Facility Dogs? Sign of how screwed up ...: I received this in my legal email: Wyoming State Bar Members, I am sending this email on behalf of a graduate student at the University of W...

Courthouse Facility Dogs? Sign of how screwed up we are, or that we miss the natural world?

I received this in my legal email:

Wyoming State Bar Members,

I am sending this email on behalf of a graduate student at the University of Wyoming who is in the psychology and law program.

The purpose of this survey is to assess legal professionals’ attitudes and beliefs about courthouse facility dogs and their impact on civil and criminal trials. You do not need to have any prior familiarity with courthouse facility dogs to complete this survey. The results of this survey will be used to inform future research on the impact of courthouse facility dogs on legal procedures and decisions, so it is essential that we hear the perspectives of as many legal professionals as possible. To be eligible for participation, you must be older than 18, fluent in English, and a current or former legal professional. This survey should take about 5-10 minutes to complete.

Lex Anteinternet: Central Stoneroller (Campostoma anomalum)

Lex Anteinternet: Central Stoneroller (Campostoma anomalum): Central Stoneroller (Campostoma anomalum). They only eat algae and they're native to North America.   The perfect solution. I'm will...

Central Stoneroller (Campostoma anomalum)

Central Stoneroller (Campostoma anomalum).

They only eat algae and they're native to North America.  

The perfect solution.

I'm willing to accept a no bid contract to put them in the reflecting pool for a mere $15,000,000.


Okay, I posted this as a joke, but you know, it's not that bad of an idea.  Stonerollers require a big pool and they only eat algae.

The reflecting pool isn't doing anything else anyway.   Why not?

Bear Aware Reminders


 

Sunday, June 21, 2026

The Agrarian's Lament: The Boeing VC-25B Bridge. A reminder to that it is time to be the people that founded the country.

The Agrarian's Lament: The Boeing VC-25B Bridge. A reminder to that it i...:   The Aerodrome: Boeing VC-25B Bridge. A shameful flying monument. : This blog was never intended to be political, but in the age of Donald...

The Boeing VC-25B Bridge. A reminder to that it is time to be the people that founded the country.

 


The Aerodrome: Boeing VC-25B Bridge. A shameful flying monument.: This blog was never intended to be political, but in the age of Donald Trump, which will go down as the most corrupt political era in U.S. h...

On the 250ths Anniversary of American Independence it'd do us well to recall that while the Revolution may have been lead by landed patricians, it was fought by landed yeoman.

It's a great misfortune to the country, or perhaps a timely reminder, of exactly how far we've fallen in that regard. We have, in the form of Donald J. Trump, a President, albeit an illegitimate one, who is the very symbol of what Americans rebelled against 250 years ago. This monumental palace coach should serve to remind us. 

Had Donald Trump been alive in 1776, he'd have been a Loyalist. 

At the end of the war he'd have been packed up to Canada to annoy the French, who at least would largely have not understood him.  Not, in his dementia, that we do either.

Washington on Blueskin.

George Washington owned his own mounts.  John Adams broke one of his own mounts as late as his 80s.  Taft kept a cow on the White House lawn.


Donald Trump flies back and forth to his golf resort in Florida on the American taxpayers dime.1  And now, at the expense of some $400,000,000 taxpayer dollars, he's unveiled the new one, and gushes about its "luxury":

Boeing VC-25B Bridge. A shameful flying monument.

This blog was never intended to be political, but in the age of Donald Trump, which will go down as the most corrupt political era in U.S. history, it just can't be avoided.

The Federal Government, funded by the American taxpayers in the form of taxes, and by individuals and foreign governments in the form of loans, has taken delivery of one Boeing "VC-25B Bridge", a military conversion of a Boeing 747-8 originally built as a Boeing Business Jet.  The plane was delivered in 2012 to Qatar Amiri Flight and used by the House of Thani. In June 2023, it was delivered to Global Jet Isle of Man. The Qatari government gave it as a gift. . . if we assume governments really give gifts to other governments.  Poor little King Donny just wasn't happy with the existing Air Force One and given that he's in his last term he couldn't wait for new ones under construction to be completed.

After he leaves office, which given his advanced age and rapidly declining mental status is likely to be before his term expires, the airplane, which has cost the United States at least $400,000,000 in "upgrades" to make it work in its role as a royal coach for his majesty, will be transferred to his presidential library foundation.  Indeed, that will happen before his unfortunate illegitimate reign is over.

This is complete bullshit.

I've posted on this story, and this airplane, here before:

Air Force One.

Air Force One has been in the news a lot recently, and it  started before the Qatari proposal to give the United States, or Donald Trump (it isn't clear which) a luxury outfitted Boeing 747.

Technically "Air Force One" is a call sign, and merely denotes an airplane the Chief Executive is a passenger in.  If a President rode in an Air Force Cessna, that would be Air Force One.  But everyone knows that it refers to one of two Boeing VC-25s, militarized 747s, that are designated for the Presidents use.

RD-2

Interestingly, the first aircraft designated for Presidential use was a Navy airplane, an amphibious Douglas Dolphin RD-2 that was luxury outfitted for use by President Roosevelt.  It was used from 1933 to 1939, and obviously not for transglobal flight.  The President didn't really do extensive travel until World War Two.

Roosevelt's once used VC-54C.

In spite of concerns over commercial aviation being used to carry the President during the war, it was in fact used and it wasn 't until 1945 that a new designated Presidential aircraft was acquired, that being a  Secret Service reconfigured a Douglas C-54 Skymaster (VC-54C) which was named the Sacred Cow.  It contained a sleeping area, radiotelephone, and retractable battery-powered elevator to lift Roosevelt in his wheelchair. It's only use by Roosevelt was to fly the then dying President to Yalta.  Truman used it thereafter, but it was replaced by military DC-6 (VC-118) thereafter.

Truman's VC-118.

President Eisenhower, who of course knew planes well, to Lockheed C-121 Constellations, Columbine II and Columbine III. The Constellation was a very popular airplane at the time, and Douglas MacArthur also had one, that one spending many years after its service at the Natrona County International Airport on an abandoned runway.

Columbine II was the first Presidential aircraft to receive the designation Air Force One.

At the end of Eisenhower's Presidency Boeing 707s came in, in part because the Soviets were using a jet to transport their Premier.  707s remained through the Nixon era, giving good service in this role.

747s, as VC-25s, entered specialized manufacture for use as Air Force One during Reagan's administration, although the first one would enter service after that.  They've been used ever since.

These aren't normal 747s.  They are packed with communications and electronic warfare equipment in order to have combat survivability.  

Replacing the current two aircraft that are used as Air Force One is a topic that the Air Force started looking at quite a few years ago.  The 747 variant which the VC-25 isn't made anymore.  Production of 747s stopped in 2023 in favor of more modern aircraft.  Still, the airframe remains useful in this role, and after the Air Force started to look into options, updating a 747-8 appeared to be the best option.  Only Boeing was interested in the project anyway, and it will take a massive financial loss to do it.  

The aircraft that are being retrofitted for this role was built, originally, as a commercial airliner. The projected is a massive one, and the delivery date will be in 2027.

What the new Air Force Ones will look like.

Enter Qatar.

Qatar has offered to give the US (I guess) a luxury Boeing 747-8 for use as Air Force One until the other 747-8s are complete.  But here's the thing.  Boeing has been working on the complicated task fo converting the two existing 747-8s for this use for several years. After all, it's basically a combat aircraft.  All accepting the plane would do is give Boeing a third one to convert, which wouldn't be ready for years.

Trump is being childish about this, as he is about a lot of things.  He doesn't seem to grasp the nature of the aircraft, and likely a lot of other people don't as well.  In his case, this is inexcusable.  It's a combat airplane.

Frankly, it's a Cold War combat airplane.

Which gets to this.

The 747 was a big massive airliner in an era in which it was the queen of the sky. That era is over and airlines have moved on to more modern aircraft.  The world in which Ronald Reagan ordered 747s is gone as well.  It's still useful to have an aircraft that can be used in a global thermonuclear war, which is what it is, but that's not going to happen and it makes no sense to use it to go on weekend golfing trips to Florida.

But that's what Trump tends to use it for.

That raises an entire series of other questions, many of which have little to do with aircraft, but some of which do.  It's notable that other Presidents have used lighter aircraft for more mundane trips.  In November 1999, President Bill Clinton flew from Ankara, Turkey, to Cengiz Topel Naval Air Station outside Izmit, Turkey, aboard a marked C-20C.  In 2000, President Clinton flew to Pakistan aboard an unmarked Gulfstream III.  In 2003, President George W. Bush flew in the co-pilot seat of a Sea Control Squadron Thirty-Five (VS-35) S-3B Viking from Naval Air Station North Island, California to the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, with that latter obviously being an exception. Barack Obama used a Gulfstream C-37 variant on a personal trip in 2009.

Trump can use something else than a 747 for what he uses Air Force One for in almost every single instance.

Indeed, the entire topic brings up a lot of things about the risks of having an airplane like this, a luxury airliner inside, which is really a combat aircraft.  It makes it easy to forget what it really is, and it makes a President feel like an Emperor, which he is not.

So why am I doing it again?

Since May, 2025 Donald Trump has used the existing Air Force One to fly back and forth to his Florida golf home/resort, effectively using the airplane as a toy, repeatedly.  He's also used it for what are basically campaign trips.  He's launched an illegal war against Iran for which the Department of Defense now seeks $80,000,000,000 to cover, and which killed thirteen Americans and untold numbers of Iranians.  That war encouraged Israel to not only participate in it, or perhaps the other way around, but also to engage in an invasion of Lebanon.  He's spent something like $13,000,000 to Rhino Line the Washington D. C. reflecting pool, he's trying to build a massive ballroom that will ultimately cost the taxpayer one way or another, and he's trying to build a triumphal arch, making the United States the first country in the world to build an arch after getting solidly defeated in a war.

He's demented, and he acts like an emperor. This airplane is part of that delusion.

Truth be known, the entire Air Force One thing hasn't made sense for years.  Having some sort of aircraft available for Presidential use for Presidential work makes some limited sense. But most of what Trump uses the aircraft for could be achieved through commercial aviation.  Indeed, not one single trip Trump has taken could not have been accomplished that way.

And that's how this should be done.  Back when transpiration was by rail, the President didn't own a train.  When Trump goes over to the G7 to insult the Italian Prime Minister with his lunacy, that could be done by commercial air, and should be done that way.  And I mean commercial air, not chartered air.  The government could get him a ticket on a regularly scheduled flight.

And when he goes to Mar A Lago he can pay for his own ticket.

I know that the objections will be "oh my, it isn't safe".  That is, frankly, for the most part complete BS.  Trump could get a ticket on Ryan Air and be just as safe as anyone else. 

And if its a little less safe, that's a good thing.  One of the problems with the modern presidency is that the occupant of the White House is too insulated from the people he supposedly serves.  At one time the President shook the hands of all who lined up on New Years Day.  Not anymore.

If the President had to travel with the great unwashed masses maybe he'd be less of a lunatic.  Or maybe he'd just realize that its a real job.  

Anyway you look at it, Air Force One is a titanic waste of money.  The Air Force has aircraft.  If he needs to go, he can load up on a C5A with the equipment going wherever its going.  

And this waste of money is going to a Trump library just before Trump leaves office.

WTF?

If the US had to spend money on it, it should keep it.  This is appalling.  That should be addressed as soon as possible.  If there's a current way to address it, it just should be silently done.  Trump can leave office and his library, which frankly is a pointless thing in the first place, can buy a Revell model kit of a Boeing 747. This absurd flying castle can carry on in its existing role and join the two that are being built, or preferably at least one of those two contracts cancelled seeing as the US has this thing.

At that point, the signature on the under panel that Trump affixed yesterday can be fittingly modified, recalling World War Two nose art.  A realistic Trump nude torso doodle, a la Epstein, can be installed.  A fitting monument.

It's a gift form Qatar, an authoritarian, semi-constitutional hereditary emirate monarchy ruled by the House of Thani.  The Emir is the absolute authority.

Just the sort of government that King Donald can related to.  Apparently they could relate to him, or more likely, thought they could obtain some advantage by appealing to his pathetic vanity.

The plane will be transferred to his Presidential library before he leaves office.  What books would even appear in Donald Trump's library boggles the imagination.  He does not appear to be a well read man, or even really read anything.  Figures from his last administration related he had a hard time reading memos they gave him as he lost interest so rapidly.  He does not appear to be a smart man.2

And, current American worship of wealth aside, we shouldn't expect him to be.  What I've long suspected turns out to be true.  The wealthy are often stupid.

Does Being Rich Make You Stupid?

False consciousness goes upscale.

Billionaires Are Actually Less Intelligent Than Lower-Paid People New Study Shows

Does Having Too Much Money Make Us Stupid?

World’s Richest People May Actually Be Dumber Than Those Who Earn Less, Study Says

This actually doesn't surprise me at all.  The question is whether wealth makes you stupid, or encourages the breeding down of intelligence.  Either can be maintained.

It was Chesterton who noted that "AMONG the Very Rich you will never find a really generous man, even by accident. They may give their money away, but they will never give themselves away; they are egoistic, secretive, dry as old bones. To be smart enough to get all that money you must be dull enough to want it."  There's something to that.  But beyond that, there's plenty of evolutionary evidence of the latter point.  Wild cattle are quite a bit smarter than domestic ones.  Wolves are smarter than dogs.  Wild turkeys are very smart birds whereas domestic ones, apparently are dumb as a post.

Cave drawing of an Aurochs.  Modern cows can be dicey, but aurochs wanted to kill you.

The question would be, of course, why this is true, and selective breeding by human beings largely explains it.  We'd rather not have a mean cow that seeks to break free, raising a gang of mean cows, and lay siege to the village.  Hunters and herdsmen like smart dogs, but bred to be fairly compliant. If you've ever owned a standard poodle, one of the oldest hunting breeds, you'll see how much of the wolf wasn't bread out of them, they think for themselves, we've worked a lot on dogs since then.  

French Poodle in the early 1900s. The coat may look weird but they're a hunting dog, and a German bred one.  Even now, the Puddle Dog has opinions on everything and isn't shy about giving you them. The only other modern hunting dog that rivals them that way is the Chesapeake Bay Retriever, another old breed..

It's a dangerous thing to say, and contrary to the thesis advanced by eugenicists, but there's pretty good evidence that people on average were getting smarter and smarter all along throughout human history, in very real terms, up until just recently.  Evolution was forcing it.  Some evolutionary biologist argue that the homo sapien sapien of our current era is demonstrably smarter than homo sapiens of, say, 100,000 years ago. . . or 50,000 years ago. . . or 10,000 years ago, or 5,000.3   And it makes some sense.

In a normal, i.e., not rich, environment a lot of things go into mate selection, oh heck let's say spouse selection other than what goes into attracting people, oh heck let's say men, to Only Fans.  Love has always been an aspect of it, but its interesting to note how even when I was a teen, teenagers selected dates on character, which included intelligence, more than anything else.  It's funny to think of now, but if a guy had a "pretty" girlfriend, he was just considered lucky, and a girl with brains and other positive characteristics would have a boyfriend who featured the same, irrespective of her looks. When the girl was good looking, it was just sort of like winning a bonus prize.  Purely good looking girls, if that's all they had going for them, weren't really sought out.  


This remained true, I'd note, throughout my entire single life.  Maybe it's largely true now.

But with the wealthy, it's another matter.

Future Playboy model Anna Nicole Smith and her first husband, Billy Ray Smith.  She was 17  and he was 16 when she married.  He was cook.  She changed her image enormously after they divorced and ended up married to an octogenarian after being a Playboy Centerfold and Guess Jeans model. Do we think that late union was a marriage for love on either side?  She paid the price, of course, dying young.  Her first husband is still alive, but never speaks much.  He was apparently crushed by the death of their son, pictured here, when he was in his twenties.  He never remarried.

Donald Trump, who gives no evidence of being an intelligent man, has been married three times, with each spouse having a certain sort of look save for one.  Two have been Slavic beauties of a certain sort, which means they present a certain look that certain people regard as glamorous beauty.4. The second, Marla Maples, actually presents as pretty smart. That marriage lasted six years.5

The point here?

I'm not thinking that a lot of the super rich determine their mates the way regular people do.  I don't think "is he/she a good helpmate?" or "do we have the same interests, faiths, worldview?", or to be really old school, "can this guy/gal help me around the farm?" has gone into it much.  Rather, they often seem to be chosen on looser characteristics that might more resemble how oriental potentates chose concubines for the harem, i.e., looks.

When Arab raiders stole Irish women, after all, smart as those women tend to be, they weren't marketing them on "look at this ginger. . . she's really got the brains!"

Now, a person can take this too far, but we live in a rich society.  The richest of us may in fact be stupider than the rest of us, or a lot of us.  And we collectively, just like a placid cow in the field, may be starting to get dumber overall.

We live in a materially very wealthy culture.  Even the average impoverished American is wealthier than many thought to be well off in former eras. And to add to that, the decay in morality, brought about by material wealth, which has allowed us to focus only on ourselves, has developed a self centered sexual culture that contributes to this.

Put another way, as one female observer seriously noted:


But its not making people happier.  People know something is wrong.

Gallup informs us that most Americans believe in the "American Dream", whatever that is, but that a very high percentage believe its unobtainable.

American Dream Endures as U.S. Approaches 250 Years

That's because it is unobtainable.

The American Dream has been defined in various ways.  I think it might be best defined in the film The Best Years Of Our Lives.


In that film there's a moment when discharged sergeant Fred Derry gives a loan to a discharged Navy vet who is a tenant farmer.  He wants to buy his own farm.  He knows he can do it.

That's the best description of the American Dream I've ever seen.

The real dream is to own your own.  And at the time of the American Revolution, most did. That's what had brought them to the country.

I don't know what they teach the young now, but when I was growing up it was a lot of crap about how people came over for freedom, mostly freedom of religion.

Yeah, some did, sort of. The best example might be the Puritans on the Mayflower, who were seeking freedom to worship in their own way and to tell everyone else in the world how they were supposed to do it.  If you were in a Puritan community you were worshipping with them or getting punished, severely.

Only about 1/3d of the Mayflower passengers were Puritans.  The rest were likely members of the Church of England which itself was less than 100 years separated from the Catholic Church, and even less separated from the Prayer Book Rebellion.6 Point is, those passengers, who were all part of the group that put in as they were out of beer, didn't come for religious freedom.

They came for land.

Land is, and was, independent.  People knew then, and they knew now, that land was independence, freedom, and a decent life worth living.  If you could obtain, as Chesterton would later put it, "three acres and a cow", or more likely 40, and a mule, you had it made.  You were not rich.  You were not poor. You were your own family.

Land is what caused Englishmen to risk their lives in 1607 to come to a new continent, or Frenchmen to come to it in 1608, or Spanish to come to it in 1565.  Here they could get it, at some cost, but a none the less obtainable one.  In Europe, they could not.  And if not all came as farmers, tradesmen who came, came because they could open their own shops, essentially operating on the same ideal.  Those who couldn't muster up the cash for transit indentured themselves to do so which, in spite of latter day white apologist, was not slavery.  It was a temporary means of getting started, in some ways like apprenticeships or joining the service operates for many today.

We cannot say that it was universally benign. That would be a lie. The land in fact already belonged to somebody else, the native inhabitants, whose claims were excused due to their rotational agricultural practices and low population density. But that doesn't change the basic fact.  It was land, not "freedom" of any type that drew the immigrant.

By moving, they freed themselves from some landowning overlord and made themselves independent farmers.  That dream lasted all the way up until the mid 20th Century in some fashion.  While it remains alive today, the truth is that the reality it of it is as dead, yielded to the bloated interests of the rich.  The largest landowner in the US today is billionaire sports and real estate mogul Stan Kroenke, who owns land in Wyoming.  Mom and pop shops have yielded to the nightmare created by Sam Walton.  

People who think the American dream is alive are largely fooling themselves.

Nonetheless, a dream is a dream, and revolutions are based on dreams.

The American Revolution was based on a landowning dream.  It wasn't, frankly necessarily wholly admirable.  The Intolerable Acts included, in a very real sense, the sense that the Crown was going to restrict the right of expanding countrymen's families to settle new lands, and they were right. The fear also was that the Crown would restrict economic activity in the Colonies for revenue purposes, and that was partially correct.  Common Sense and the like aside, a real cause of the Revolution was the native sense that the free right to settle land, and engage in small free enterprise, was the only thing that separated American Colonist form the English and European masses.

They were right, if not necessarily morally right.

A large number, maybe most, revolutions since that time, and some before it, have been based on the same cause. The French Revolution was not, and it remains a global oddball.  The Russian Revolution, failed as it was, is such an example, however, as was the Russian Revolution of 1905.  The Chinese Revolution of 1911, and the Chinese Civil War, both failed examples, also were.  The Mexican Revolution, also a failed revolution, very much was.

The Mexican Revolution provides, in fact, an excellent example.  Through every phase, from 1911 onwards, the rich landed class fought back, and when defeat arrived, they stepped aside and regrouped.  It kept the Revolution from really being successful.  Indeed, of all the revolutions we have noted, only the American Revolution was really successful.

But the success it created is dead.  Today,. we have the Donald Trumps and Elon Musks and other 1%ers that control the economy, and which some like Jonah Goldberg even feel we should celebrate (as to Musk).

Well, no.

Time for a second American revolution.

Not, we might note, one with guns.  Indeed, that would inevitably be not only immoral, but outright moronic, lead by people festooned with Second Amendment tattoos while advocating outright fascism.

No, something more radical than that, a revolution at the ballot box.

It's time to end the moronic celebration of a "free market system" that isn't free in any sense.  Corporate Capitalist are shoving pablum down the throats of the electorate while pocking the largess. Large scale corporatism needs to end.

And so too does a weird millennialism appropriations of public lands by people like Deseret Mike Lee and pathetic fellow travellers like John Barrasso and Harriet Hageman.

A revolution can be had at the ballot box.  It won't happen all at once, but if started now the two party system can be ended, and the creation of wealth for the wealthy can be as well.  Remote land ownership, something the colonist came here to escape, can be as well.

It won't happen as long as people don't think.  But they need to think now.  At some point they will, and if we don't take on the yoke of this burden now, when the plow ox bulks, it'll be bad.

Footnotes

1.  Donald Trump is such a WASP, with the adherence to the "P", that he's converted some property in Washington D.C. to become a golf course and is putting in courses on some military bases.

Put in shooting ranges or something.  Not something that fat old white guys play.

2. The fact that Trump is a Wharton graduate is really a slam at the Ivy League. Yes, they have some great schools, but the system they operate in really has graduated some failures.  Pete Hegseth provides such an example.  

Wharton owes the country an apology, and I say that as somebody who has a relative that graduated from there. The fact that Trump graduated is applying. The fact that Chuck Gray is their product is as well.

3.  Some theologians have speculated that there was a point with our species when God converted us from just a smart hominid into what we are in the Divine Plan, with an immortal soul. The speculation is that it was the moment language arrived, and there's some archeological and biological evidence that moment was in fact sudden and radical.  

4. Frankly, Trump spouses 1 and 3 really aren't bombshells.  Melania is more properly characterized as "handsome".

5.  We can't really speculate on the smarts of 1 and particularly 3.  Melania is hard to figure as she's never obtained a really good command of English.  None the less, people who admire her, are frankly doing so willfully.

6. Recusant Catholics are estimated to be less than 5% of the English population at the time, which means that were likely to probably have actually been 10 to 15%.  Today, more Catholics attend weekly services in the UK than the established church.  Recently one Anglican convert in the UK described her transition as "going Full Fat Catholicism"