This is the first in a series of four Public Lands Blog posts regarding the infamous “O&C” lands, a variant of public lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management in western Oregon. Part 1 sets the stage with a brief history and description of recent epochal events.

Big Timber’s and Addicted Counties’ supreme gambits to gut the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument have failed, but the monument is still in mortal peril from the Bureau of Land Management.

This is the second of a three-part exploration of retiring permits for grazing on federal public lands. Part 1 examined the state of the public lands grazing industry and made the case for the equitable end to abusive livestock grazing on public lands. Part 2 reviews the history of congressional and other actions to facilitate retirement of federal grazing permits. Part 3 will speculate on the future of this conservation tool.

This is the fourth of four Public Lands Blog posts that examine the topic of national parks in Oregon. Part 1 explored Oregon’s one success in establishing a national park. Part 2 discussed multiple failures to establish additional national parks in the state. Part 3 examined both successful and failed attempts to expand Crater Lake National Park. Part 4 looks at the potential supply and demand for additional national parks in Oregon and the political challenges and chances.

This is the first of three Public Lands Blog posts that examine the increasingly difficult political decisions facing Oregon’s public lands conservationists. Part 1 poses a still hypothetical—but prospectively probable—public lands conservation package that contains some great, some good, some bad, and some ugly provisions. Part 2 will examine what Oregon public lands conservationists have done in the past when faced with such choices. Part 3 will wrestle with the devil of principle and the angel of pragmatism and make recommendations.

If not for Mary Gautreaux, many good things would not have happened for Oregon’s public lands. Several wilderness areas and wild and scenic rivers or additions to them would not have happened. Portland’s drinking water sources, the Bull Run and Little Sandy Rivers, would be dirtier.

As of today, the BLM recognizes a total of 4.2 million acres as California Desert National Conservation Lands, 2.89 million acres of which were designated in a recent update to BLM’s comprehensive management plans.

The Trump administration is moving ahead with its intention to review and rescind national monument designations for some public lands. Now a leaked memorandum from Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke shows that he will be pointing to unproclamations of portions of national monuments by previous presidents as precedent.

Back in the day, an Act of Congress, signed into law by President Theodore Roosevelt on June 8, 1906, soon after became commonly known as the “National Monument Act.” The more recently used name of the “Antiquities Act of 1906” must now be changed back to “National Monument Act of 1906.” Here’s why…

There is no question that an Act of Congress can eliminate, shrink, or weaken a national monument proclaimed by a president pursuant to authority granted by Congress. What Congress giveth, Congress can taketh away.

National monuments are “proclamations,” not “executive orders.” The president issues executive orders under the faithful execution clause of the Constitution (in Article II, Section 3). A president may expand, revoke, or modify a previous executive order. An executive order and a presidential proclamation under the Antiquities Act are absolutely not one and the same.