The mandate also targets oil and gas leasing in the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and again revokes the conservation status of 28 million acres of public land that had been withdrawn from mineral and energy development since 1971. In January 2021 the first Trump administration began withdrawing those protections, which had previously endured no matter which political party controlled the White House.<\/p>\n
\u201cPresident Trump\u2019s actions suggest \u2018energy dominance\u2019 means letting fossil fuels totally rule over our public lands and overshadow all other uses. That isn\u2019t what most people want,\u201d said senior director for government relations of the Wilderness Society Lydia Weiss in a statement. \u201cAmerica\u2019s public lands are part of what makes us great as a nation. They are a key part of our shared heritage and can unite us when so much is threatening to tear us apart. Today\u2019s actions are a dire threat to this common ground. We depend on public lands as places to hunt, hike and play; havens for hallowed ancestral and cultural sites; and refuge for threatened wildlife.\u201d<\/p>\n
The executive order doesn\u2019t completely clear the way for instant development. Controversial developments like proposed mines in Alaska\u2019s Bristol Bay and near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness in Minnesota have routinely been shut down, green lit, and shut down again as presidential administrations turn over. Lawsuits have proven a key weapon in the battles for these types of public lands, and we can expect to see those continue.<\/p>\n
More Hunting Opportunity on Federal Land<\/h2>\n
While the full-speed ahead philosophy on resource extraction doesn\u2019t signal a willingness to compromise, another section of President Trump\u2019s mandate actually focuses on resolving a growing gulf between Alaska\u2019s state and federal land managers.<\/p>\n
Among other guidance, the White House instructs \u201call bureaus of the Department of the Interior to ensure to the greatest extent possible that hunting and fishing opportunities on Federal lands are consistent with similar opportunities on State lands.\u201d It also requires the DOI to \u201cconduct meaningful consultation with the State fish and wildlife management agencies prior to enacting land management plans or other regulations that affect the ability of Alaskans to hunt and fish on public lands.\u201d<\/p>\n
The biggest loss of hunting access in Alaska, as we mentioned, was when the Federal Subsistence Board closed 60-million acres of public land to everyone but qualified local subsistence caribou hunters in 2022. That closure followed a smaller but still notable loss of access when nearly 1.5 million acres of BLM land in unit 13 were closed in 2020 to everyone but, again, qualified local subsistence hunters.<\/p>\n
While the proposed closures cited concerns about caribou herd health, Freel has maintained that herds fluctuate over time and the real issue was rooted in human conflict.<\/p>\n Another blow to Alaska sportsmen came in July 2023. Just as Alaska hunters were preparing for their 2023 sheep season, all federal lands in the central Brooks Range were closed to Dall sheep hunting. Notably, that included the archery-only Dalton Highway Corridor Management Area. These two-year closures were extended in 2024, and expanded further when the National Park Service successfully lobbied the Federal Subsistence Board to close federal lands to sheep hunters in the Yukon Charlie National Preserve.<\/p>\n Then, in December, the National Park Service issued its final rule restricting bear baiting on Alaska lands managed by the NPS. State officials have been trying to regain control over wildlife management on places like the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. (This dispute between the State of Alaska and the USFWS stems from an Obama administration policy that banned several common and traditional hunting practices \u2014 namely the ban on hunting brown or grizzly bears with the aid of bait on more than 6 million acres of federal refuge and preserve lands.)<\/p>\n \u201cMany Alaskans have a skeptical or downright sour view of federal agencies and Interior Department-appointed land managers,\u201d Freel wrote in 2023. \u201cThe struggle goes back decades, and agencies like the National Park Service have an earned reputation for pressing anti-hunting, especially anti-predator hunting, restrictions and agendas. The NPS proposal [then on the table] cites \u2018public safety\u2019 concerns, but ignores countless examples of successful and well-managed bear baiting areas that have healthy populations of bears and minimal negative human contact.\u201d<\/p>\n The language in Trump\u2019s executive order echoes the lawsuit filed by the state, urging federal agencies to comply with ANILCA. That legislation, passed in 1980, acknowledges the unique management challenges of Alaska\u2019s vast tracts of public lands and requires federal agencies to cooperate with state managers. ANILCA also has a statutory requirement to prioritize subsistence management.<\/p>\n