The Trump administration is suggesting a significant reevaluation of how public lands across the U.S. are utilized and managed, based on an Interior Department document released in late April. This draft strategic plan outlines objectives for the next five years, focusing on maximizing economic benefits through resource extraction, such as oil and gas, while minimizing emphasis on conservation.

“This serves as a roadmap for industrializing public land,” stated Taylor McKinnon of the Center for Biodiversity. McKinnon expressed skepticism regarding the administration’s ability to achieve these goals, signaling potential lawsuits from his organization and others.

Many ambitious proposals are being floated that are specific to Washington, DC, and are unlikely to materialize. However, Donald J. Trump is commencing his second presidential term with determined momentum, reshaping federal agencies at a speed previously unseen.

“I am fully committed to implementing the directives of Project 2025,” remarked Jacob Malcolm, who recently led the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Policy Analysis. Project 2025, a 900-page document published by the Heritage Foundation in 2023, acts as a guiding framework for various policies, including those regarding public land. Much of the section related to the Department of the Interior was authored by William Perry Pendley, a conservative activist.

Among the numerous objectives highlighted in the strategic plan released on April 22, coinciding with Earth Day, “Restoring America’s Prosperity” is a focal point. To realize this goal, the Department of the Interior aims to “open Alaska and other federal lands for mineral extraction,” “boost revenues from grazing, timber, precious minerals, gravel, and other non-energy resources,” and “enhance production of clean coal, oil, and gas with expedited permitting processes.”

The newsletter discussing public domain initiatives first reported this documentation. In a statement via email, a spokesperson for the Interior Department criticized the leak, which seemingly prepares environmental groups, including McKinnon, for legal challenges. The statement labeled the leak as “unacceptable” and claimed it is “irresponsible for media outlets to publish draft documents.” They assured that the leak of internal pre-decision documents would be taken “very seriously,” and an investigation would follow, although no further details were provided by the department’s media office.

The plan does touch upon more conventional goals, such as enhancing “resilience against natural disasters,” improving infrastructure like dams and bridges, and promoting recreation, particularly hunting and fishing. However, the overarching outlook reflected in the 23-page document aligns with long-held Republican views that regard federal land protection as overly burdensome and intrusive—beliefs that gained traction during the late 1970s and the early Reagan administration. After the Sagebrush Rebels began advocating for privatization over conservation, these ideas became more mainstream. (Pendley identifies himself under the handle @sagebrush_rebel on social media, with an avatar featuring Ronald Reagan in western attire.)

“The strategic plan clearly prioritizes the extraction and sale of public land,” stated Aaron H. Weiss, Deputy Director of the Western Priority Center, a nonpartisan nonprofit advocating land protection. “Conservation, protection, recreation, and tribal responsibilities are all deprioritized.” (The Department of Interior sometimes overlaps with “all other departments,” such as the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Bureau, and Bureau of Indian Affairs.)

A significant component of the 2030 plan is already rolling out. Interior Secretary Doug Burgham is moving forward to expedite environmental review processes necessary for approving mines, wells, pipelines, and other industrial infrastructure. Recently, the Trump administration greenlit the construction of homes on federal land. Pendley previously led the Bureau of Land Management during Trump’s first term. Moreover, on May 2, Burgham announced the opening of 87,000 acres managed by his department. for enhanced hunting and fishing opportunities.

Burgham’s strategic plan also includes a provision suggesting the return of federal lands to the states, termed policy diving. As Weiss pointed out, “History teaches us that states often lack the resources to manage such lands, resulting in closures, sales, and increasing privatization. This is the ultimate endgame.”

Still, the vision laid out by the new Home Office may only be partially realized, particularly as courts continue to halt central components of Trump’s agenda. “Much of what they’re doing seems to be illegal,” Dr. Malcolm articulated, referencing the large-scale layoffs instituted by the Trump administration in the Department of the Interior and legal challenges to renewable energy projects. Nevertheless, this document starkly indicates how modern GOPs have significantly diverged from Theodore D. Roosevelt’s legacy of protecting public lands.

Mr. Roosevelt was responsible for implementing the Antiquities Act of 1906, which empowers the president to protect lands of cultural or historical significance. Subsequent Democratic presidents, including Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Joe R. Biden Jr., have utilized this legislation, often leading to accusations of executive overreach from conservative critics.

Burgham’s strategic plan suggests implementing “right-sized monuments,” referring particularly to the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments, which were both downsized during his initial term. While Biden reinstated those changes in 2021, there remains the possibility of additional reductions for these or other monuments.

Additional proposals contemplate restoring historic names, potentially reassigning Native American names, like Denali, Mountain Alaska, back to Mount McKinley. The department also seeks to revoke behavioral protections for certain endangered species and eliminate “unnecessary” electric vehicle policies.

Overall, the vision presented by Burgham sharply contrasts with the 2022-2026 Strategic Plan released by the Biden administration, which emphasized objectives related to “climate change,” “environmental management,” and “environmental justice.” The Biden-era plan celebrated initiatives for diversity, equity, and inclusion—concepts actively dismissed by the Trump administration.

In one of his first actions upon returning to the White House, Trump declared a “national energy emergency.” This move comes in response to the Interior Department’s stated intent to expedite the permitting process for new oil and gas leases.

Experts, however, argue that no such crisis exists. According to the Energy Information Administration, the United States is currently the “world’s largest producer of crude oil and natural gas.” Moreover, with the increasing affordability of renewable energy options, supporting the opening of federal land to excavation appears to lack justification. “We’ve witnessed significant advancements globally,” commented Mark Squilas, a natural resource expert at the University of Colorado Law School in Boulder, who also described claims of a national energy emergency as “absurd.”

Dr. Scrice raised concerns regarding the limited opportunities available for public input on the strategic plans set to be finalized by October. “This essentially circumvents the comprehensive engagement process,” he remarked. “This is not a genuinely thorough process.”

Mary Joe Rugwell, who leads the Public Land Foundation, previously served as the state director of Wyoming’s Bureau of Land Management. She noted that land use policies oscillate between ideological extremes, often leading to legal disputes.

“They’re bound to face lawsuits,” she stated regarding the Trump administration. “And the thing is, once litigation starts, progress comes to a halt; all that arises is a barrage of legal counsel.”