America鈥檚 660 million acres of public land now have a news organization devoted entirely to them. Launched this week by former 国产吃瓜黑料 editor-in-chief Christopher Keyes, RE:PUBLIC plans to deliver independent, in-depth reporting on conservation, access, and the politics shaping public outdoor spaces.

At a time when U.S. public lands face a combination of budget cuts, weakened environmental regulations, and proposals for land transfers or sales, RE:PUBLIC鈥檚 stated mission is to increase public awareness of these challenges, give citizens tools to better understand policy changes, and hold decision makers accountable.

In its first year, RE:PUBLIC will partner with established media outlets to distribute its stories while developing its own . The website will be funded through听grants, memberships, and individual donations.

The newsroom plans to produce long-form investigations, special reports such as the 鈥淩E:PUBLIC Endangered List,鈥� and a weekly . It will also launch a weekly podcast in collaboration with outdoor industry podcast Rock Fight Media.

We talked to Keyes to learn more.

OUTSIDE: What is RE:PUBLIC all about?

Christopher Keyes: RE:PUBLIC is an independent nonprofit newsroom that’s focused entirely on public land鈥攖hat’s the only issue we’re going to be covering. And we’re set up as a nonprofit so it’s a way for me to try out a new business model after 25 years in commercial media.

Tell me about the need for RE:PUBLIC and why you founded it.

It’s a response to a couple of things. I’ve been in media for 25 years, and I’ve seen so much contraction across the industry. I’ve seen some analysis that said we have 75 percent fewer journalists than we had two decades ago. So I think what we’re seeing is a media industry that is overwhelmed by all of the news and doesn’t know what to cover first. From a national media perspective, public lands issues are just not at the top of the list. They’re maybe number 17 on the list of things that journalists feel the need to be covering right now. I see a real vacuum that needs to be filled, and that’s what RE:PUBLIC is attempting to fill.

I’d also say that conservation of public lands, and the idea of keeping public lands in public hands, is one of the few remaining bipartisan issues that we have left. That’s all the more reason for us to really want to dedicate our time to this topic. It’s a rare opportunity to speak to both sides of the aisle about something that’s important and that we have consensus around.

Specifically, what kinds of issues will you cover?

The issues around public land change from administration to administration, and without question this administration has presented an unprecedented number of threats, as we saw this summer with Utah Senator Mike Lee proposing massive public land sales. There’s the recission of the Roadless Rule, which protects 58 million acres of national forest from further road development. You have the gutting of environmental regulations that slow down extractive industries on public lands. Everywhere you look the conservation movement is playing defense. Right now, I think that’s going to inform a lot of our coverage: the massive existential policy threats that are out there affecting our public lands. But I see a need for coverage in the space no matter who’s in office and well into the future because these lands dictate so much of how we recreate and how this outdoor industry thrives. I think we’re going to need to be covering stories about access, overcrowding, and how to manage all these lands going forward.

What do you hope to do with RE:PUBLIC as it evolves?

Our first year focus is on assigning, commissioning, and paying for 10 to 12 deeply reported investigative stories about public lands. I’m a big believer that听less is more sometimes in reporting, and really aiming for high-impact stories versus the daily drip of information and what is often bad news, which can overwhelm people. I really want to focus on high-impact stories with a real narrative core that is going to draw people into the read and learn something along the way.

That’s going to be our focus in year one, but over time we hope to expand our reporting network so that we have regional reporters covering these issues. Some of these issues are national issues, but a lot of of them are very regional as well in scope. We want a partner with regional and local newspapers on a lot of the coverage, too.

The last thing I would say is whatever my vision is for RE:PUBLIC going forward for the next five years will probably change multiple times. I just know that that’s the nature of startups, so I’m really open to how this will evolve over time. All I know is that I really want to throw energy and resources into this particular space and see what the best methods are for finding an audience for this content.

Can you share a little about the partnership model RE:PUBLIC is embracing?

One of the things that really attracted me to the nonprofit model of journalism is that it’s really built more on partnership than competition. I love the idea that for what we work on, we will be finding partners to publish our big stories. I’m super excited, given that I spent most of my career 国产吃瓜黑料, that our first big story will be published in 国产吃瓜黑料 as a co-publication in October.

Editor’s note: This interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.

The post New Nonprofit Newsroom RE:PUBLIC Launches to Cover America鈥檚 Public Lands appeared first on 国产吃瓜黑料 Online.

Federal agents from the Department of Homeland Security arrested two firefighters who were battling the largest wildfire in Washington state.

The incident, which occurred on August 27, was the Seattle Times, and then confirmed to听国产吃瓜黑料 by a spokesman with the state’s department of natural resources.

On August 28, Washington Governor听Bob Ferguson that his office was investigating the incident.

“Deeply concerned about this situation with two individuals helping to fight fires in Washington state,” Ferguson wrote. “I’ve directed my team to get more information about what happened.

According to the听Seattle Times,听federal agents wearing police vests confronted firefighting crews on the morning of Wednesday, August 27. The crews were part of six separate firefighting teams battling the Bear Gulch fire in Washington’s Olympic National Forest, about two hours from Seattle. The blaze, which started in early July, has burned approximately 9,000 acres and is 13 percent contained.

Eyewitnesses told the Seattle Times that agents demanded identification cards from members of two private contractor fire crews. They prevented crew members from leaving the area during the check.

Speaking anonymously, firefighters who witnessed the confrontation told the听罢颈尘别蝉听that they were prevented from speaking to the detained members of their crew.

鈥淚 asked them if his [family] can say goodbye to him because they鈥檙e family, and they鈥檙e just ripping them away,鈥� one firefighter told the Times. 鈥淎nd this is what he said: 鈥榊ou need to get the [expletive] out of here. I鈥檓 gonna make you leave.’鈥�

A spokesperson for the firefighter’s incident management team said that the federal agents did not interfere with the firefighter’s response to the blaze.

Arresting firefighters marks a major change in policy by the Department of Homeland Security. In 2021, that it would not conduct immigration enforcement in locations where disaster or emergency response teams were working.

The incident prompted an angry responses from U.S. senator Patty Murray, who represents Washington. In a statement, Murray demanded answers from the federal government about the arrests, and then called the Trump administration’s immigration policy “fundamentally sick.”

“Here in the Pacific Northwest, wildfires can, and have, burned entire towns to the ground,” Murray said in a statement. “We count on our brave firefighters, who put their lives on the line, to keep our communities safe鈥攖his new Republican policy to detain firefighters on the job is as immoral as it is dangerous.”

The post Immigration Agents Arrested Two Firefighters Battling a Wildfire in Washington appeared first on 国产吃瓜黑料 Online.

It鈥檚 6:15 P.M. on a Thursday in late August, and there鈥檚 a short line to get into Fisher Brewing in Salt Lake City, Utah. The beer hall sits within walking distance of at least 20 or so nonprofit organizations.

Strolling from the bar to a seating area I pass Millennial hippies, bored looking Gen Zs, clean-shaven sales bros, a woman in pink kitten heels, and a group of academic looking Boomers. The hodgepodge has come for the The Center for Western Priorities’s (CPW) 鈥淜eep Parks Public鈥� campaign, a multi-state speaking tour focused on the preservation of public lands. Utah is the group’s fourth state after Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona.

In each location, the group has brought together various agencies, elected officials, and the public to talk about the ongoing battle to protect the country鈥檚鈥攁nd particularly the West鈥檚鈥攑ublic lands. CPW staffers are also recording episodes of as they travel.

The CWP’s idea for the events came out of the recent political fight to stop the federal government from selling millions of acres of public lands. The sale was initially proposed by Utah Republican Mike Lee, and it was soundly defeated in July.

People take their seats as the panel discussion begins. Away from the crowd, I see a middle-aged man sipping his beer. I ask why he came to the event. 鈥淔or me, public land is medicine,鈥� Russell Daniels, a Salt Lake City photographer tells me. 鈥淲e can鈥檛 replace it once it鈥檚 gone. The public wants to keep these lands public.鈥�

The Mike Lee Effect

Mike Lee’s name is repeated again and again as the evening unfolds. 鈥淢ike Lee gave us the best gift he could have given us, which is that he made this issue so high profile,鈥� Kate Groetzinger, CWP communications manager and host of the podcast, says.

I look around the room and see proof of Groetzinger’s opinion. All 150 seats for the Salt Lake City event were reserved prior to the event, and as the panel begins to speak, it is standing room only.

In June 2025, Lee made headlines for his added provision to President Trump鈥檚 so-called 鈥淏ig Beautiful Bill鈥� that called for auctioning off as much as 3 million acres of Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management property across 11 western states.

Nonprofits like the CWP rallied against the proposal, but so did conservative lawmakers and right-leaning online communities.

The opposition was amplified in places as unexpected as , and opponents rallied under the tagline 鈥淣ot One Acre.” Hunter Nation, a non-profit group for hunters, posted its opposition to the sale of any public lands on social media.

Eighty-five Wyoming businesses signed a letter to their senators telling them that the state鈥檚 outdoor recreation, tourism, and culture 鈥渋s under threat by a concerted movement to transfer or sell federal public lands.鈥�

Ultimately, five House Republicans (Mike Simpson of Idaho, Dan Newhouse of Washington, Cliff Bentz of Oregon, David Valadao of California, and Ryan Zinke of Montana) and four Republican senators (Steve Daines and Tim Sheehy of Montana, and Jim Risch and Mike Crapo of Idaho) said they did not support the plan.

On June 28, Lee from the megabill. Lee’s defeat represented a watershed moment for the groups fighting for public lands.

鈥淓veryone knows about it now,鈥� Groetzinger says. 鈥淭here鈥檚 this growing awareness that public lands are under attack. And I think that just doesn’t sit well with people.鈥�

Lessons Learned from Defeating Lee

In the month after Lee’s defeat, conservation groups and lawmakers have considered a similar question: What can defenders of public land learn from the bipartisan alliance?

“We learned that the people who populate Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana are the same type of people who populate Colorado and New Mexico,” John Hickenlooper, Colorado’s Democratic senator, told听翱耻迟蝉颈诲别听on a phone call. “We have the same bias. We want to protect our public lands for our descendants. And that is a pretty powerful political force.”

Hickenlooper and his staff watched as online opposition built toward Lee’s proposal in May and June, and noticed that some of the loudest voices came from right-leaning groups. Hunters, anglers, and even farmers and ranchers said that the public land sale was a bad idea. On social media, the Democratic senator and his staff amplified these voices.

“We would repost some social media from others and often times it was from conservative groups,” Hickenlooper said. “I was enthusiastic, because it showed that social media could bring together discordant groups of people around a common goal.”

Hickenlooper said the outpouring of opposition also showed that voters didn’t trust Lee’s justification. Lee framed the public land sale as a way to combat the housing crisis gripping cities and towns across the west. Hickenlooper said his office received hundreds of letters from local elected officials across Colorado saying that the idea would not solve their problems.

“We got 62,000 emails and letters from 50 county commissioners, mayors, and elected officials鈥攁bout a third of them Republicans鈥攁ll of them opposed to this. These are people whose positions are dependent on them getting more housing,” he said. “They brought up that there are already processes in place to build on this type of land.”

“People could tell this was a bait-and-switch,” he said.

At the Utah event, Scott Braden, executive director of the Southern Wilderness Alliance, tells me that the biggest lesson was that the fight grew from a regional one to a national one.

鈥淚t wasn鈥檛 because he listened to constituents here in Utah,鈥� Braden says. 鈥淚t was because there was a nationwide response. People in all 50 states called their senators. That鈥檚 what matters.鈥�

Not All Public Lands Battles Are United

Not all public land fights are as unified as the battle against Lee. In June, the Trump Administration rescinded the so-called Roadless Rule, a prohibition of road construction and timber harvesting on 58.5 million acres of roadless Forest Service territory.

In a statement issued by the Western Caucus, House Representative听Zinke called the move “a victory for Montana, public lands, and forest management everywhere.” Zinke said that the roadless rule鈥攚hich the CPW supports鈥攚as an impediment to wildfire management.

While speaking on the podcast, Doug Tolman with the group Save Our Canyons, says the wildfire argument is misinformation. 鈥淚’m afraid of a ski reserve development in pristine, forested land,鈥� he says. 鈥淚’m afraid of increased logging and mining in areas that are not currently used for that and roads being built to access private parcels of land to build luxury developments.鈥�

Tolman says he is worried, but hopeful that eventually, people outside the traditional conservation community will get involved.

鈥淚 have seen a few attempts to get hunting and angling communities engaged, but it is not nearly as strong as the public land sell-offs at the moment,鈥� he says. 鈥淚 am curious though, if those communities might step in with a heavier hand once the comment periods open and all the press releases are out in the coming weeks.鈥�

The Fight Continues

Groetzinger says that, after the Lee fight, people are paying more attention to public land issues. 鈥淣ow people who didn鈥檛 even know what BLM lands were six months ago are on alert. Next time, they鈥檒l be ready,” she says.

Groetzinger and others expect future fights to erupt around a long list of public land issues. Continued budget and staffing cuts听to the National Park Service (NPS) and U.S. Forest Service are expected.

Throughout the spring, both agencies underwent major staffing cuts. Erika Pollard of the National Parks Conservation Association tells the attendees that that the NPS听has lost more than 5,000 employees since January, with the threat of another thousand cuts looming. Behind-the-scenes specialists鈥攖hose who safeguard water quality, air quality, and long-term planning鈥攁re the ones who risk being cut.

鈥淔or people going to the parks right now, it might look like everything is fine, but we know it鈥檚 not,鈥� Pollard says. 鈥淭he administration is basically forcing the parks to keep their visitor services open uninterrupted. We are really seeing an all-out assault on our national parks and our national park system like we鈥檝e never seen before.鈥�

There are setbacks to Biden administration-era plans to establish a historic resource management plan for sacred tribal lands like Bears Ears National Monument. Another podcast guest, Davina Smith, of the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition and Grand Staircase Escalante Partners, says that while it鈥檚 moving forward, she鈥檚 devastated by the dismissal of staffers she鈥檚 worked with to make the plan a reality for two years.

鈥淭hese efforts at cutting the budget, cutting the workers, and ruining morale are a cynical attempt to make public lands management in America fail,鈥� Scott Braden, the executive director of the Southern Wilderness Alliance tells the crowd. 鈥淎nd that becomes the justification for those who want to seize and sell off public lands.鈥�

Decades-long conservation laws are also at risk. After about an hour of discussing various setbacks in protecting Utah鈥檚 public lands, an audience member has a question. She jokes that she鈥檚 never learned so many acronyms in one night before. Then she pauses, and with a voice of sincerity asks: 鈥淪o, what do we do?鈥�

The answer is unsatisfying, if simple: get involved, stay involved, and make your voice heard. 鈥淚t really is going to take all of our voices, all of the different pieces of our public lands puzzle and the people who love these places to really make some change,鈥� Pollard says.

国产吃瓜黑料 articles editor Frederick Dreier contributed to this report.

The post What Was Learned From the Latest Fight Over Public Lands? appeared first on 国产吃瓜黑料 Online.

In 2022, a conservation nonprofit called the Deschutes Trails Coalition (DTC) started working with the U.S. Forest Service to build and maintain hundreds of miles of hiking trails in central Oregon.

The agreement was pretty straightforward: DTC would pay two employees to pitch in alongside the Forest Service鈥檚 own trail crew, which numbered six. The eight-person team would repair bridges, clear overgrowth, and cut out trees that had fallen across the trails over the winter鈥攙ital work that kept 1,200 miles of trails open to hikers.

As the relationship evolved, the Forest Service struggled to maintain its workforce. In September 2024, then-USFS chief Randy Moore said it wouldn鈥檛 hire back 2,400 seasonal employees for 2025, including most of its trail crews. Then, in March 2025, the Trump Administration fired 3,400 full-time USFS employees.

The staffing woes within the agency forced the DTC to step up. This summer, the nonprofit has paid for five staffers to do trail work. The USFS, meanwhile, employs just one.

鈥淥ur crew kind of absorbed them, rather than the other way around,鈥� says Jana Johnson, executive director of the DTC. 鈥淥ur roles just flip-flopped.鈥�

Across the country, nonprofits like the DTC are navigating similarly chaotic situations, fueled by the rapid change to federal agencies that oversee public land. On January 20, the same day he was inaugurated, President Trump froze all federal hiring by executive order. In February, the administration announced its staffing cuts to National Parks and the National Forest Service. Thousands of veteran USFS employees then took voluntary retirement or deferred resignation agreements.

Legal challenges have since reinstated some of those employees, but the USFS hasn鈥檛 divulged how many employees were fired or left the agency this year (the USFS didn鈥檛 respond to 翱耻迟蝉颈诲别鈥檚 request for comment). Meanwhile, the 2025 budget reconciliation bill, also known as the One Big Beautiful Bill, stripped funds from other USFS programs: old-growth forest protection, climate resilience and forest health programs, and tree planting efforts.

The chaos at the Forest Service and other federal land management agencies has left public lands increasingly reliant on nonprofit partners like the DTC. The problem with this new model? Grants and funding from federal agencies鈥攎oney that many trail building nonprofits rely on鈥� is also drying up. And now, some nonprofits like the DTC are starting to feel the pinch.

Nonprofits Are Operating in a New Era

If you visit a national forest in 2025 and come across someone clearing a trail, cleaning a bathroom, or collecting campsite fees, chances are high that they work for a nonprofit organization rather than the Forest Service.

The operational structure involves both parties. Johnson told 国产吃瓜黑料 that the DTC operates with a great deal of autonomy when it works on public lands. Projects are assigned or approved by a USFS trails manager, but daily work plans are under the purview of DTC鈥檚 trails coordinator and trail crew leader. DTC interviews and hires its own employees, signs the paychecks, and purchases tools, hard hats, and work trucks.

鈥淚t鈥檚 a very new world,鈥� Johnson says. 鈥淲e鈥檙e the only paid crew working on the Deschutes National Forest now.鈥�

Employees wear DTC shirts, rather than USFS uniforms. Training, like First Aid classes and chainsaw certifications鈥攐nce the responsibility of the USFS鈥攁re now run by DTC and another local nonprofit, the Central Oregon Trail Alliance.

In some ways, arrangements like this are business as usual. The USFS has long relied on nonprofit partners, contractors, and volunteer crews to supplement its recreation and trails programs, which include tasks like clearing trails and patrolling campgrounds. The big difference for 2025 is that nonprofits are no longer confident if or when the federal government will pay for the work.

Prior to 2025, the DTC was paid by the USFS through funds approved by the Great American Outdoors Act of 2020. The group signed an agreement with the agency in 2023, and was due about $200,000 in funding in 2025. That payment has yet to materialize.

鈥淭he message was, 鈥榃e really don鈥檛 know if or when these funds will make it to you,鈥欌�� says Johnson. The USFS did not respond to听国产吃瓜黑料’s听request for comment.

Scrambling, Johnson managed to secure three different state-level grants in time to hire a full trail crew for the season.

鈥淲e got really lucky, and it bought us a little bit of time to figure out how we鈥檙e going to fundraise in the future,鈥� Johnson says.

The grant money comes with limitations, though. First, the cash is temporary. Next year, Johnson will have to reapply or find new grant money elsewhere. Secondly, the restrictions on the cash are tight. Under its original funding agreement with the Forest Service, DTC could work on any trail in Forest Service territory. The state grants, however, are for specific trail projects.

Johnson says that this is a common pitfall at nonprofits like DTC鈥攖here鈥檚 grant money out there for 鈥渟exy鈥� projects like new trails, bridge building, and watershed restoration, but not routine maintenance. But in a typical year, this maintenance can spell the difference between an open or a closed trail.

鈥淭hese grants are really project specific. Basic maintenance鈥攍ogging out, clearing brush, cleaning drains鈥攖hose do not count as a project. Very few grants will cover basic maintenance,鈥� she says.

Where Will the Money Come From?

The financial pressure that DTC and other trail nonprofits are under is unlikely to abate anytime soon. President Trump鈥檚 will axe more than $4 billion from public land management agencies. In June, he signed an executive order mandating the Forest Service transfer its $2.4 billion wildland firefighting program to the Department of the Interior within 90 days, and cut all firefighting funds at the agency for 2026.

A further $1.6 billion in USFS cuts would deliver a 34 percent cut to payroll, a 50 percent cut to forest maintenance and improvement, and remove the agency鈥檚 forest and rangeland research program entirely.

At the DTC, this new funding situation has forced Johnson to rethink where the group鈥檚 money comes from. The group has tools to purchase, work trucks to maintain, and rising costs-of-living in an expensive mountain town to contend with.

鈥淔undraising has become a much greater focus,鈥� she says. 鈥淲e鈥檒l continue to do some of the things that have been successful, like going after grants. That said, grants are becoming more competitive, so we need to expand.鈥�

One example is DTC鈥檚 $1 for Trails program, which recruits businesses to collect $1 voluntary donations from customers. For now, the program is small: it has generated about $220,000 since it began in 2018, and only a handful of local hotels and resorts participate. The funds don鈥檛 stay with DTC either. Instead, they鈥檙e doled out to a number of local nonprofits for small projects, like replacing trail signs and hosting volunteer maintenance days.

Johnson says expanding the program is a top priority. 鈥淚 think it has great potential to fund the trail program into the future,鈥� she says.

Combined, the state grants, the fundraising efforts, and the potential for restored federal funding leaves Johnson confident that DTC will navigate the 2025 trail work season and prepare for the future. She knows that鈥檚 not the case for every nonprofit.

鈥淲e are extremely unique in central Oregon that we have so many individual partner groups and nonprofit groups that are able to pick this up,鈥� she says. 鈥淢ost places around the country don鈥檛 have the nonprofit infrastructure that was already in place here.鈥�

A Model for Public Land Funding Is Quickly Reshaped

Around the country, a number of similar nonprofits have had difficulties navigating the funding crisis brought on by the Trump administration.

The Pacific Crest Trail Association, which oversees the famed hiking route in California, Oregon, and Washington, decided not to hire six seasonal trail workers this year due to funding concerns. It canceled 50 weeks worth of planned trail projects, and pulled out of most of its commitments working with AmeriCorps-funded conservation corps.

AmeriCorps crews are facing their own funding crisis. In April, the Trump administration . Since then, some regional programs, like the Lakes Region Conservation Corps, have been forced to shutter entirely. Others have been largely unaffected so far.

Montana Conservation Corps CEO Jono McKinney says his program, which hires nearly 400 AmeriCorps听members each year, hasn鈥檛 lost its AmeriCorps funding. Similar to DTC, though, McKinney says other federal grants and payments have been delayed.

鈥淭here鈥檚 over $1 million in trail program funding under review that we鈥檙e counting on,鈥� McKinney says. 鈥淓very day I wonder, 鈥楢re we next? What can we count on?鈥欌��

Some nonprofits are turning to fundraisers to replace missing federal dollars. After learning in February that all five Forest Service trail crew workers in the Sitka Ranger district had been fired, Sitka Trail Works, a trail nonprofit in Alaska, launched a funding campaign to hire the crew on as employees.

鈥淲e were already working super closely with the USFS folks in the field,鈥� says executive director Ben Hughey. Results were mixed: Sitka Trail Works raised over $60,000 and hired four trail workers; none of the Forest Service workers took the job. Instead, several returned to the USFS after a court order forced the agency to reinstate their positions in March. Others had already moved on to other jobs with better pay. 鈥淭rail work is a skilled trade. Why not quit, get your contractor鈥檚 license, and make three times as much money?鈥� Hughey explains.

One uncommon success story is the Nevada-based Great Basin Institute. In the three years since CEO Peter Woodruff assumed leadership at GBI, the organization has doubled in size to more than 1,000 employees and increased total revenues from $20 million to $50 million. GBI has staffers and researchers tackling nearly every subset of conservation work: trail maintenance, forestry, wildfire prevention, wildlife biology, even running visitor鈥檚 centers. They partner with nearly every federal agency that manages public lands, including the Forest Service, Park Service, and Bureau of Land Management.

Woodruff says that, despite the recent growth, GBI is currently navigating what amounts to a financial tightrope. It hired about 100 more employees in 2025 compared to the previous year, but also faced serious funding concerns. The Nevada Conservations Corps鈥攖he trail maintenance program that鈥檚 part of GBI鈥攊s funded in large part by AmeriCorps grants, which face an uncertain future under the Trump administration. This March, all payments to GBI from the Forest Service were put on hold for several weeks. And the Forest Service has not approved any new funding for GBI鈥檚 forestry work in 2025, even for projects that had already been OKed.

Through one lens, public land agencies鈥� increased reliance on nonprofit partners could be seen as a benefit. After all, both GBI and DTC have managed to expand and hire more employees, even as they navigate an uncertain future. For both groups, there is no shortage of work to be done. But Woodruff ultimately sees the current funding landscape as a poor replacement for functional federal agencies. In an ideal world, he says federal agencies would have suitable budgets, and organizations like GBI shouldn鈥檛 have to exist.

鈥淭o see a public servant workforce get replaced with this smattering of different uniforms and backgrounds and organizations鈥攚hat happened to the vision of a park ranger?鈥� he says. 鈥淵oung people don鈥檛 grow up wanting to work for GBI, they want to work for the Park Service or Forest Service. When people lose faith in that, or they鈥檙e seeing the career so clearly jeopardized, or treated with such disdain, that鈥檚 a huge loss.鈥�

The post The Messy Business of Building Trails in the Era of Trump Cuts appeared first on 国产吃瓜黑料 Online.

Billionaire Elon Musk was recently spotted touring Utah’s Arches National Park.

Well, kinda.

On Saturday, July 12, visitors to the park were greeted by a 12-foot tall sculpture of the tech kingpin鈥檚 head, his expression chiseled into a self-satisfied smirk. The massive effigy was towed around the park in a trailer behind a white pickup truck.

The sculpture was accompanied by a sign emblazoned with 鈥淢AKE AMERICA WAIT AGAIN鈥� and below that 鈥淣ow With Longer Lines Thanks To DOGE Cuts!鈥�

The stunt appears to be an act of protest against Musk鈥檚 work as the head of the newly-formed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Musk has since left his role in the federal government, but under his tenure, DOGE was responsible for significant cuts to staff and budget, including the Department of the Interior (DOI) and its National Park Service (NPS), as well as other DOI agencies responsible for the management of public lands.

The federal government’s gutting of public land management has sparked widespread protest. According to the National Parks Conservation Association (NCPA), a nonprofit, the NPS has lost 24 percent of its staff since January as a result of the cuts. President Trump鈥檚 鈥淥ne Big, Beautiful Bill Act,鈥� which was signed into law on July 4, cuts an additional $267 million from the park service鈥檚 budget. This all comes as park visitation has risen year-on-year, to a record-setting 331.9 million in 2024.

So, who made the giant Musk head? The phrasing on the sign is similar to that used in a series of billboards placed outside many U.S. national parks earlier this summer by a labor advocacy group, More Perfect Union. More Perfect Union鈥檚 founder, Faiz Shakir, told 国产吃瓜黑料 that although the Elon Musk head was a 鈥渃reative鈥� idea, his organization had nothing to do with the project.

A Family Vacation Interrupted by Elon鈥檚 Head

Nancy Carmichael, a mother of two from Florida, was touring Arches National Park with her family when the trip was interrupted by the giant head. Carmichael told听翱耻迟蝉颈诲别听she was “excited” by the sighting, and that she and her husband decided to follow the sculpture for a few minutes as it was towed by the truck.

“We saw the big Elon head driving around鈥攖hat’s something you don’t see everyday,” she said. “I personally think it was a creative way to protest, and to people to think about the things that are going on at a higher level and how they trickle down to the park.”

Carmichael toured Arches National Park over the weekend and said that, despite waiting in a line to enter the park, she did not encounter queues or interruptions in service.听Carmichael said that onlookers seemed curious when the head drove by, and sight of it elicited questions and laughs.

“People seemed receptive to it,” she said. “It was a protest but not your typical protest.”

Frederick Dreier contributed to this report.听

The post Who Made the Giant Elon Musk Head Spotted at Arches National Park? appeared first on 国产吃瓜黑料 Online.

In an , President Donald Trump has mandated an increase in entry fees for all international visitors to U.S. national parks.

The order, titled 鈥淢aking America Beautiful Again by Improving Our National Parks,鈥� requires that Secretary of the Interior Douglas Burgum increase both entrance fees and recreation pass fees for nonresidents, and use the resulting funds to 鈥渋mprove the infrastructure of, or otherwise enhance enjoyment of or access to,鈥� federally managed recreation areas. According to a published by the Department of the Interior (DOI) in May, the scheme will raise as much as $90 million for national parks and other federally managed public lands.

The order did not specify the increase in price. National parks currently charge different rates, and only around 100 sites managed by the National Park Service鈥攚hich also oversees national monuments, historic sites, seashores, and other public lands鈥攔equire an admission fee to enter.

The executive order specifies that the fee increase will only apply to parks that currently charge admission, but some parks have a nuanced fee structure. Smoky Mountains National Park, for example, does not technically charge entrance fees, but parking anywhere inside the park for more than 15 minutes costs $5.

However, based on the language in the White House order, although fee increase may vary park-to-park, all national parks are now required to have some margin of difference between the rates charged to U.S. citizens and foreign visitors. In addition to the fee increases, the executive order also requires that action be taken to 鈥済rant American residents preferential treatment鈥� in other competitive access scenarios, such as permit lotteries.

The idea to increase fees for foreign tourists is the brainchild of Property and Environment Research Center (PERC), a think tank based in Montana. In 2023 a PERC economist, Tate Watkins, suggesting that a $25 surcharge on all foreign park visitors could raise $330 million annually for the beleaguered park service. PERC went on to include Watkins鈥� idea in a paper published in March: 10 Ideas for the Interior Department.

The plan to increase park fees comes as the National Park Service budget has been gutted by budget cuts even as admissions surged to a record high of 331 million last year, up 6 million from 2023. According to , roughly 14.6 million foreign tourists will visit at least one national park during their trip, so the increased fees could impact around 4.4 percent of all park visitors.

In an interview in June, Watkins told 国产吃瓜黑料 that 鈥淚f your goal is to make sure national parks have the resources they need to be stewarded properly now and for future generations, the entry fee structure is the lowest hanging fruit.鈥�

While historically U.S. national parks have charged the same rates to nonresidents and residents alike, in other countries it鈥檚 common鈥攊n fact, it鈥檚 arguably the norm鈥攆or national parks to charge an increased entry fee for foreign visitors. South Africa鈥檚 Kruger National Park charges around $30 for foreign tourists, while locals can enter for just $7. In other countries, the margins are even higher. At Ecuador鈥檚 Gal谩pagos National Park, foreigners pay $100 to enter, while Ecuadorian citizens are only charged $6.

Watkins also noted in his report that, 鈥渢he idea of differential pricing for outdoor recreation has relevant precedents elsewhere in the United States,鈥� as well. 鈥淔or example, it鈥檚 standard practice for state fish and wildlife agencies to charge different prices for residents and non-residents to hunt and fish.鈥�

鈥淭he American family is actually paying more than the international tourists,鈥� Watkins argued, 鈥渂ecause Americans already contribute a small portion to the National Park Service budget through taxes.鈥�

Critics theorize that an in fees might deter visits from foreign travelers, but Watkins and PERC believe this is unlikely, citing a that estimated raising entry fee for vehicles at Yellowstone National Park from $30 to $70 would only decrease visitation from foreign visitors by 0.07 percent. 鈥淔or people traveling from overseas, it鈥檚 a tiny slice of their overall budget,鈥� Watkins said.

The post President Trump Orders National Parks to Raise Fees on International Visitors appeared first on 国产吃瓜黑料 Online.

It鈥檚 6 A.M., and I鈥檓 looking over a small canyon with my baby strapped to my chest and my two labs darting zoomies around my legs. In the distance, I can make out Black Rock Mesa and the snow-capped Jemez and Sangre de Cristo Mountains, and I haven鈥檛 seen another person on the trail all morning. We鈥檝e got four miles left to hike, and then I鈥檒l be back at my home office in time to log on to work for the day.

This is the beauty of land managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM): in the Southwest, where I live, it鈥檚 the land in between鈥攖he vast patches of beautiful nothingness that make up many of our backyards. One-tenth of land in the U.S.鈥� acres to be exact鈥攊s managed by the BLM, making it one of the most accessible places to recreate.

It鈥檚 also one of the freest. Unlike other public land agencies that are riddled with rules and regulations for outdoor recreationists, on BLM land, pretty much anything goes. Dogs can run off-leash, dispersed camping is allowed for two weeks at a time in most areas, and even ATVers and off-roaders are tolerated. Extreme sports like BASE-jumping, climbing, and highlining are accepted鈥攁nd celebrated in BLM meccas, like Moab, Utah.

Have you ever heard of Burning Man? The Moab Easter Jeep Safari? Creeksgiving? Many of the desert meet-ups, festivals, and wilderness rallies that form the axis of outdoor culture are pretty much only possible on BLM land, where the horizon seems to stretch on forever and you can truly forget that the rest of the world exists. And while entry to Yellowstone, Yosemite, and Zion National Parks will set you back $35, recreation on most BLM land costs a few bucks or nothing at all.

From the natural arches of California鈥檚 Alabama Hills to the glittering hot springs of Soldier Meadows in Nevada, BLM manages some of the most scenic recreation hubs in the country. For those of us who seek solitude in the outdoors, BLM is our first choice. If you think the outdoors are getting crowded, you just haven鈥檛 been to BLM land recently. While hordes of visitors flock to many of our most sought-after national parks, BLM receives notably less traffic. Last year, a record people visited national parks, but only went to BLM.

So while some sighed with relief on Wednesday, when Utah Senator Mike Lee鈥檚 revised plan to sell public lands excluded the Forest Service and limited BLM land sales to , my hackles remained up. Under the revised proposal, 1.2 million acres of our precious land remain at risk. The bill also maps out that only land within five miles of 鈥減opulation centers鈥� will be for sale.

Remote spots like Indian Creek and Burning Man鈥檚 Black Rock Desert might be safe, but that doesn鈥檛 mean the new plan isn鈥檛 without huge loss. Those parcels near population centers are the most accessible areas to recreate. They鈥檙e where many of us hike, bike, and run our favorite backyard trails. But most importantly, selling off any of this precious land sets a bad precedent and opens up the haunting question of what might be next.

The post Op-Ed: BLM Is the Best Public Land, and If We Sell It Off, I’ll Scream appeared first on 国产吃瓜黑料 Online.

The Department of the Interior has a new plan to help fund the U.S. National Parks: raise the price for foreign visitors.

The department recently outlining its 2026 budget plans, and included in the brief is a plan to levy a surcharge on visitors coming from outside of the United States. According to the document, the fee could generate more than $90 million to help cover the costs of maintaining visitor services at national parks, which are facing a proposed budget cut of $1.2 billion next year.

鈥淚 think we鈥檙e way undercharging, as a nation, for international visitors,鈥� Secretary Doug Burgum said during a House Committee on Natural Resources oversight hearing in early June.

The origins of the plan came from a Bozeman, Montana-based think tank that works on environmental policy called the Property and Environment Research Center (PERC).

In 2023, PERC titled How Overseas Visitors Can Help Steward Our National Parks that suggested a $25 surcharge on foreign visitors could generate $330 million, which would double the revenue the NPS generates in fees.

In March, the 听10 Ideas for the Interior Department that included the proposal.听, Brian Yablonski, the CEO of PERC proposed the idea to Burgum earlier this year.听国产吃瓜黑料 reached out to the National Park Service for comment but did not hear back by the publishing date of this story.

国产吃瓜黑料 reached out to PERC to discuss the plans. A PERC economist named Tate Watkins, who authored the 2023 report, said that raising the price to entry represents the easiest way to generate more revenue for the NPS.

鈥淚f your goal is to make sure national parks have the resources they need to be stewarded properly now and for future generations, the entry fee structure is the lowest hanging fruit,鈥� Watkins told 国产吃瓜黑料.

Currently the NPS operates on a $3.1 billion annual budget, with most of the money coming via federal funding allocated by Congress. But the NPS sites do generate revenue via entry fees. more than 80 percent of the money generated by these fees is invested back into the parks.

Entry fees for NPS sites vary. Yellowstone National Park currently charges $20 per person or $35 for a single car. Great Smoky Mountains National Park requires a $5 daily parking fee.

Watkins pointed out that several other countries charge international visitors extra to visit natural wonders, parklands, and historic sites. At Gal谩pagos National Park in Ecuador, foreign guests pay $100 to enter, compared to $6 for locals. Serengeti National Park in Tanzania and Masai Mara National Reserve in Kenya both charge international visitors $70, while residents of either country pay $4 and $7, respectively.

Meanwhile, in the U.S., a family from France visiting Zion National Park for three days would pay $35 for a week-long park pass鈥攖he same as an American family.

鈥淭he American family is actually paying more than the international tourists because Americans already contribute a small portion to the National Park Service budget through taxes,鈥� Watkins said.

Critics of the plan have suggested the increase in fees might deter visits from foreign travelers. SFGATE estimates that 14 million people from outside of the United States visited an NPS site in 2024. Watkins says his research suggests the contrary. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a negligible amount,鈥� Watkins said. 鈥淔or people traveling from overseas it鈥檚 a tiny slice of their overall budget.鈥�

A PERC study in 2017 estimated that raising the vehicle entry fee at Yellowstone National Park from $30 to $70 would decrease visitation from foreign visitors by only 0.07 percent.

鈥淚t won鈥檛 deter many at all,鈥� Watkins said. 鈥淥n the flip side, even a modest increase could bring in a ton of revenue.鈥�

In its March report, PERC outlined other strategies for NPS, including a revamped fee structure for U.S. visitors as well. Watkins said the current structure is 鈥淎 relatively blunt system today.”

One of PERC鈥檚 recommendations is to offer weekday discounts for American visitors. The report also recommends increasing the price of the America the Beautiful Parks Pass, which grants a holder entry to 2,000 recreation sites, including all 433 NPS sites. The pass currently costs $80.

鈥淭hat鈥檚 an immense value,鈥� Watkins said. 鈥淓specially when you compare it with the cost of private attractions or even similar passes offered by state parks.鈥�

The Department of the Interior has released few details about its proposed fee on foreign visitors, and has not divulged which parks would see an increase or by how much.

Watkins predicts the fee increase will impact 鈥渂ig name destination parks鈥� such as Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon, and Yosemite. In 2024 the NPS sites recorded 331.9 million visits, the most in history.

Despite the uptick in visits, the NPS is slated to endure a 40 percent decrease in federal funding in 2026. Major cuts are slated for the NPS’s maintenance division.

According to Watkins, the total NPS maintenance backlog across all sites is approaching $24 billion鈥攎ore than double what it was ten years ago. Additional revenue generated by new fees, he said, could alleviate some of the pressure.

鈥淲ithout some kind of action, our crown jewel parks are on an unsustainable path of deterioration,鈥� Watkins said.

The post The New Plan for National Parks: Increase Prices for International Visitors appeared first on 国产吃瓜黑料 Online.

The U.S. Senate’s plan to sell off millions of acres of public land just lost considerable steam in the halls of power.

And the Republican Senator behind the plan says he will adopt a new strategy.

On Monday, June 23, Elizabeth MacDonough, the Senate Parliamentarian鈥攁n advisor and referee-like figure who enforces the voting rules of the U.S. Senate鈥攔uled that the provision could not added to the Republican-led reconciliation bill. The decision was announced in a and was first reported by .

The move has raised the political bar for the provision. Instead of passing via a simple 51-vote majority, the plan would require a two-thirds vote to pass.

The current party division in the U.S. Senate is 53 Republicans, 45 Democrats, and two Independents.

The shift comes after the proposed sell-off generated vocal backlash not only from Democrats and conservation groups, but also from Republican officials, business owners, and non-profits focused on hunting and fishing.

The public lands sell-off was originally part of President Trump’s so-called “Big Beautiful Bill,” and was added by Utah Senator Mike Lee, the chair of the Senate’s Energy and Natural Resources committee. The original plan called for the U.S. to auction off up to 3 million acres of land in 11 western states managed by the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management to raise funds for federal spending.

Housing prices are crushing families and keeping young Americans from living where they grew up. We need to change that.

Thanks to YOU鈥攖he AMERICAN PEOPLE鈥攈ere鈥檚 what I plan to do:

1. REMOVE ALL Forest Service land. We are NOT selling off our forests.

2. SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE鈥�

鈥� Mike Lee (@SenMikeLee)

On Monday, Lee saying he would alter the proposal鈥攂ut still include plans to sell public land.

“Remove all Forest Service land. We are not selling off our forests,” Lee wrote. “Significantly reduce the amount of BLM land in the bill. Only land within 5 miles of population centers is eligible.”

According to E&E News Lee has not yet submitted any changes to the plan to the Senate parliamentarian.

In late June, four Republican senators came out in opposition of the plan: Steve Daines and Tim Sheehy of Montana, and Jim Risch and Mike Crapo of Idaho.

“After reviewing the Senate Energy and Natural Resources reconciliation language, I do not support the proposed provision to sell public lands,” Risch released on June 20.

More pushback came from hunting groups. Hunter Nation, a non-profit group that aims to “preserve and protect our nation’s hunting heritage,” told its members on social media that it “stands opposed to the indiscriminate sale of our public lands.”

Update from Capitol Hill on the proposed sell off of public lands: is currently headed into a meeting with lawmakers to make sure our voices are heard!

Be sure to do your part as well and message or call your Senator TODAY!

鈥� James Jinnette (@james_jinnette1)

“These lands belong to ‘We the People’ and they should continue to remain as such,” the group wrote.

In Wyoming, to Senators John Barrasso and Cynthia Lummis, calling the plan a “non-starter for Wyomingites.”

The news sparked a wave of positive public statements from conservation and wildlife non-profits.

The sell-off plan is out鈥攆or now. Last night鈥檚 win is a big step forward, but public lands are still under threat. Americans have spoken: These places belong to all of us. Let鈥檚 keep it that way. Read more from :

鈥� Trust for Public Land (@tpl_org)

The Trust for Public Land called the development “an important victory,” and the result of Americans making it “overwhelming clear they do not want to see their public lands sold off to the highest bidder.”

Tracy Stone-Manning, the president of , and former head of the Bureau of Land Management, said the news was “a victory for the American public.”

“We trust the next politician who wants to sell off public lands will remember that people of all stripes will stand against the idea,” Stone-Manning added. “Our public lands are not for sale.”

The post Political Forces Are Shifting Against the Public Lands Sell-Off appeared first on 国产吃瓜黑料 Online.

New messaging posted at U.S. national parks and historic sites is requesting that park visitors report 鈥渁ny signs or other information that are negative about either past or living Americans.鈥�

The Colorado Sun, signs with the directive were posted on Friday, June 13, at the in eastern Colorado. Amache was one of ten incarceration sites for Japanese Americans during World War II.

An identical sign was posted at the nearby Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site in Colorado. In 1864, the U.S. Army slaughtered approximately 750 Southern Cheyenne and Arapaho indigenous people on the grounds.

In a , Rachel Pawlitz, a spokesperson for the NPS, said the order “reaffirms the NPS mission by emphasizing the importance of accuracy in how we tell stories of American history.”

But the听request has sparked concern that the federal government is attempting to whitewash its own history.

Theresa Pierno, president and CEO of the National Parks Conservation Association, called the order an attempt to rewrite American history.

“Rangers should be able to talk about the history of Japanese American incarceration at Amache, or the history of slavery at Fort Monroe, without looking over their shoulders in fear,” Pierno . “If our country erases the darker chapters of our history, we will never learn from our mistakes. These signs must come down immediately.鈥�

In addition to reporting any negative depictions of Americans, the signs also request that visitors file a report if they see any information that does not 鈥渆mphasize the beauty, grandeur, and abundance of landscapes and other natural features,鈥� and notify the Park Service of any 鈥渁reas that need repair鈥� or 鈥渟ervices that need improvement.鈥� Each sign includes a URL and scannable QR code, which leads to a webpage.

The signage comes on the heels of an executive order, 鈥淩estoring Truth and Sanity to American History,鈥� issued by President Donald Trump in late March, which was implemented by Doug Burgum, U.S. Secretary of the Interior (DOI) on May 20.

Trump鈥檚 order decried 鈥渁 concerted and widespread effort to rewrite our Nation鈥檚 history, replacing objective facts with a distorted narrative driven by ideology rather than truth鈥� and said this effort has seen to it that 鈥渙ur Nation鈥檚 unparalleled legacy of advancing liberty, individual rights, and human happiness is reconstructed as inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed.鈥�

When it was issued on March 27, the 鈥溾�� order made national news because it aggressively targeted the Smithsonian Institution, requiring that the museum 鈥渞emove improper ideology.鈥� of the order鈥檚 implementation in the DOI also requires the posting of the signs seen at Amache and Sand Creek last week.

Burgum ordered the leaders of the National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Bureau of Reclamation to post such signage 鈥渢hroughout each property, in as many locations within each property as necessary and appropriate to ensure public awareness.鈥�

The order also requires that within 120 days, every department remove any information that 鈥渋nappropriately disparages Americans past or living.鈥�

The implementation of this order obviously will hinge on each park manager鈥檚 interpretation of the word 鈥渋nappropriately.鈥�

John Hopper, founder of the Amache Preservation Society, runs a museum dedicated to the internment camp in the town of Granada. 鈥淚t鈥檚 simple,鈥� he told the Sun. 鈥淵ou can鈥檛 sugarcoat history. You have to learn from it, right?鈥�

The post The Latest National Park Service Order: No 鈥淣egative鈥� Information About American History appeared first on 国产吃瓜黑料 Online.