recommendations to restore. watch american history tv and book tv every weekend on c-span2. find us full schedule on your program guide or visit c-span.orgil. >> jennifer joins us now via zoom from jennifer colorado. she is joining us after president biden took executive action last week to protect three national monuments. exactly wherere these monuments why president biden took this action. >> thanks for having me. two of the monuments are in utah. that is grand staircase escalante and a national monument and a third monument out in the atlantic ocean. northeast canyon and seamounts national marine monument. what president biden did last week was reverse some cuts to other changes that president

trump had made. back in late 2017, the utah lawmakers who had thought that these monuments in their state s,where an overreach by previous democratic presidents, they successfully asked president trump to roll those monuments back and cut about 2 million acres of land. and then in 2020, a little over a year ago, president trump moved to remove fishing restrictions in the atlanticri ocean. the president biden did on friday was to restore protections to all of those lands to reincorporate them into the monuments in utah and also to reinstate those commercial fishing prohibition. >> utah or the marine monument, how old are they and how big are they? >> so, they all vary in age. the marine monument is about five years old. in utah, president clinton first made the grand staircase back in

1996.nt then, changed a little bit over the years. congress has come in and tweak the boundaries a few times himself. 1.9 million acres before the cut and that is with the back to now. that is in southwest utah. then in southeastern utah, you have the monument which is now 1.36 million acres. that is a vast sprawling monument. a little bit bigger than what president obama first created in 2016 because president trump did actually add about 11,000 acres. just a little bit to that when he made the boundary changes. >> boundary changes of national monuments. is this something that happens a lot? >> no. this is super unusual. national monuments get created under the 1906 law called the antiquities act. it lets presidents set aside land that have historic cultural

or scientific interest. and that could be, you know, obviously a range of things that are there. stwhat they are protecting and y it is on existing public lands. over the years, monuments have been tweaked by congress and fairly rarely coming into abolish monument. it just a of times. up until president trump nobody had used the antiquities act to cut in line the way that he did. idand, so, that in itself has raised questions. if you lawsuits out there pending over his actions. but then, the proclamations that were signed on friday, they sort of reference at action and they are little bit more traditional. they talk about the objects that are being protected. >> four viewers that want to talk about the national monuments, the national parks and public lands, now is a good time to call in. public landspu reporter.

if you are in the eastern or central time zone, 2,027,488,000. if you are in the mountain or specific timeframe. jennifer, national monument versus national park. what is the difference? >> this is sort of a two track answer. the onepa big difference is howo create it. a national park can only beal created by congress. congress can also create a national monument, but they really don't. congress has authority to set all sorts of different types of public lands. in addition to parks, national wildlife refuges. there is wilderness areas. there are forests. when it comes to monuments, that is really the president of the primary. under that 1906 law. and, so, some of the things that you've seen over the years, you've seen monuments become parks, of course. the grand canyon is a great

example. one of the first monuments created back in the early 1900s. now, of course, a national park. >> for the national park service, do they manage national monuments or is there some other service thatge manages the monument? >> the national park service does manage the book of national monuments. pabut in addition to that, there are a few that are managed by the bureau of land management like the ones in utah that we are talking about. they also handle some of those. it is not strictly the park service. and then i should have mentioned sort of a different between parks and national monuments is sort of the idea of what they are used for and what they are preserving, really. a lot think of national parks as a way you think the fan the family will want to go for vacation. hiking. there may sort of be extensive visitor services. a national monument, either marine or terrestrial, that is

about serving the land in the state that it is with water in the state that it is. in terms of what these things are used for, when president trump shrank some of the national monuments in utah, private enterprise is coming and start setting up whether it is mining or other businesses on this shrunken part of the national monument and do those organizations then have to leave when president biden re- expands the monument size? >> that is a great question. businesses would not have come and say 24 hours after president trump shrank the monuments. what happens is the policy, the management plan for those areas, each national monument has a better plan. those would have changed a little bit. the areasd that have been excid for the monuments became open to, let's say grazing extractive industries, oil and gas.

gthose lands are now eligible r mining claims. we did see that once the management plans were completed. those areas in utah in particular were open up to those activities. not every acre that was removed, not throughout the entirety of it. but there were claims that were made for a grand staircase and a good deal of that had already been extracted. there was a question about mining claims. i do not know that any of those are in active use, but there is a question about whether or not those mining claims will still be allowed. so, because it is not clear whether or not president trump's actions were legal, whether he actually had the authority to shrink these monuments, there lawsuits out there say that he exceeded his authority. a president could only create or expand aon monument. atif they eventually come back d say we agree he did not have the

authority to do this, it would have gone out the window. that is not the case and the court comes back and says it looks like a president can shrink a monument as well as expand one or create one. those mining claims will have to go through an internal process where they will look at them and decide if they want to try and challenge them. that could certainly take years. .... .... separation of powers issue you are talking about, how likely is this to move all the way through the federal court system? is this something that could end up the supreme court. guest: >> justice roberts wrote a four-page aside to raise

questions if 5000 of the square one —- of the atlantic was overly large and then they had said effectively that presidents can make a monument any size that they want as long as it is on federal land to observe the purpose of the act. but justice roberts said the argument that they are not protecting the smallest area possible. whic' really isn't a defined concept. but he said essentially he invited additional challenges to that he would be interested in hearing those arguments and whether or not that particular aspect has been ground and not abuse by over abused. so it remains to be seen with the current court case is

pending so to put on administrative hold or on i.c.e. for president biden while making his decision about restoring his monuments and then to see in the next couple of weeks if those become active cases again or whether or not they will proceed through. >> the idea protecting the smallest area possible, where does that come from? >> it is in the language of the antiquities act. host: there is no further definition when they t created this in 19 oh six quick. >> it has long been a point of contention for monuments there was a case that did go before the supreme court in 1920 whether or not the grand canyon was overly large or whether or not congress had intended for these to be a tiny fraction. in congress created the law they were trying to dissuade

folks going into areas and then taking antiquity off of federal lands from tribal nations ancestors or other areas of cultural importance so the supreme court looked at that in 1920 and said no this is the smallest area necessary to protect what is laid out in the proclamation you understand that if you have been there and that set the precedent that has held sense that they can dictate how large a monument can be. >> 150 years ago the antiquities act signed into law by theodore roosevelt. they've used it to doesn't national parks and monuments. if you want to talk about the antiquities act in national

monuments and public land in general and we are taking you to to the supreme court not the public land but those oral arguments stay with us on c-span. amsterdam ohio. >>caller: in the first year of donald trump rain, did he try to sell parts of the grand canyon to chinese for mining quick. >> that is not an issue i am not familiar with i could not say. host: up next south carolina. >>caller: my question is do

you believe the government is spending too much money on these types of monuments and parks as far as the federal government was state and local government have enough money already to fund these with this beif sold to the independent buyer why waste the money to try to keep and preserve the land quick. >> this is a very big question and very loud v voices on both sides i'm glad you asked because in utah that is one of the western states we have the bulk of public land in america

the government owns 640 million acres of public land that is broadly managed by four agencies blm, forest service fish and wildlife, and i just blanked out on the fourth one. but at any rate, those agencies all have their own respective budget with timber harvest so there is income from some of these land even other not all national monumentno and then the funds that come that way but there are arguments to be made with the benefits to be outside of those who like to hunt and fish and have access is not just the land in your stay as an american you on a little

bit of allos public lands across the united states. >> what is the reaction from the various stakeholders and the scene at the white house quick. >> absolutely the white house invited tribal leader representatives as well as others that were involved in the effort if you push hard to have those reinstated and it was pretty joyous event the secretary holland said at the top of her remarks which was very moving and of course there was some pushback from the utah lawmakers with the

decision they were not in attendance at white house events and they also raise the specter of filing a new lawsuit to challenge the monuments. host: we would you catch your voice from new jersey, jeffrey good morning. >> how are you. >> how the biden public land policy and christopher columbus and new york city that is not fair towards everybody but also is her summer you could go? host: the present with this proclamation last week about indigenous people day and the debate over columbus day how much did you see that playing out with publicly international parks quick. >> i'm not 100 percent sure i grasped the question. one thing in particular is the

fact that the first national monument that was created that was instigated by tribal nations that push back in 2010 and really got momentum in 2014 and 2015 before its creation and the push with the cultural ancestral land for multiple tribes. some are not in the state of utahon anymore but have connection to that from their ancestors to go back and hunter gather traditional medicine or for those religious ceremonies is important. >> good morning i used to work for blm and utah in the seventies are at you mean jobs

was to clean the floors to keep them healthy say don't have the date fires that they have out west. those are unhealthy fires and the state used to own the land people get huntt and fish and it would boost the economy for these little towns within the federal government and took them then we had to start building fences i saw how the federal government cook to the economy so when trump gave the land back to the state was the right thing to do because they owned it in the first place i don't think they should do oil but it was a boost to the economy and then i saw the businesses get destroyed in these little towns and people losing their livelihood because the federal government. that is just my take but i work for blm and that is what i saw. host: how many years we there quick. >> two years. i was in utah ten years i went to college here in iran

accruing like what i said acl the forest burning up they are not managed right i got to colorado that will be the next tinderbox i'm an environmentalist but i see where they don't take care of the forest the trees are unhealthy diameter wise they should be a certain thickness now they are small and that's why they ares forest fires. host: what makes somebody a lefty environmentalist? >>caller: every time the forest service or blm want to do their job they are sued in court i could see what was going on in california i knew eventually it would be a tinderbox and it is all through the west now in colorado they arei doing the same thing they don't let the blm do the job if you let a

forest a natural it is unhealthy you have to clean it out it is just common sense but they fight them everywhere. >>caller: okay. >> i just want to clarify one remark about utah and the state. actually that is not quite right so what happens when trump removed monument protections those did not transfer ownership and go from federal to state. they stay in federal hands but they revert back to the previous status so a lot of that is blm land and the protection shifts so that's for mining claims and nominated for oil and gas extraction they may open up to other uses.

and those with under plans but they were not given to utah. >> and then to be shrinking those two monuments here is the remarks from that day. >> they think the natural resources of utah shoulds be controlled by a small handful of distant bureaucrats located in washington. guess what? they are wrong. [cheers and applause] >> the families of utah nobody loves the land of the best you know the best how to take care of your land. you know how to protect it you

know best how to conserve this land for many generations to come. your timeless bond with the outdoors should not be replaced with the whims of regulators, thousands and thousands of miles away. they don't know your land and truly they don't care for your land like you do. [cheers and applause] but from nowis on that won't matter. i come to you to take very historic action to reverse federal f overreach to restore the rights of this land to your citizens. host: on the broad strokes for land management compared to the biden administration?

>> there was definitely are much more aggressive push for oil and gas the energy dominance agenda to increase the number of lease sales with somesm criticism from the oil and gas industry the administration had not n done enough and holding them often enough and then the biden administration we saw that shift back there was a pause on new leases as administration wanted to take a look at how it works and royalties and those sorts of things. >> thank you for waiting. >> some politics got involved in the clear connections with the congressman today by those leases are they there permanently so now in

st. john's most of that is national park will it stay that way or can they change that? there is very little private land there. >> i'm not entirely clear what you're asking about the oil and gaspi leases but typically oil and gas once they get out they do continue for extended periods. they have to be captain progress made. as far as the national parks in general that's an easier question. only congress can decide with the accepted donation of land to change boundaries and typically national parks were very popular. theyf tend to see there was a

recent push last year the great american outdoors act with a maintenance backlog that is being addressed and currently a push with the biden administration to ensure all americans have access whether a national park or state or local but it is unusual for congress to try to shrink or selloff. that would be a notable event the federal government on 640 million acres of land so layou will see that exchange and you'll probably see that in utah so when that was creative on —- created there was the land and those are supposed to benefit the states and

hospitals and schools whether through extraction and leasing that might generate funds. although in the boundaries they are ownede by the federal government but they come to an agreement so utah picked up the land that turned out to be great for coal and also with the 40 million-dollar payment. and then to see something similar for what is to have more valuable pieces of federal land —- is one example you could see federal land fails. >> . >> talking to a veteran of public lands coverage, in ten

minutes we will head to the supreme court case today that is being argued the united states concerning the justice department attempt to reinstate the boston marathon's bomber death sentence you can listen to oral arguments. back to phone calls columbus ohio go ahead. h >>caller: good morning. how come gas prices are cheaper in the south than the north i am in ohio.

host: let's focus on that. gas prices. what can you tell us about gas prices around the country quick. >> that is out w of my wheelhouse and i am afraid i'm not confident i can given answer that is entirely accurate. host: with whatle is in your wheelhouse talking about the e droughts out west and in utah with the national monuments. >> it has been a pygmy on —- pretty significant drought year one of my colleagues wrote a great piece yesterday and check that out how the droughts are action on —- are affecting the greatn salt lake. it doesn't circle back to gas prices but also going back to forest management and how that drought is exacerbating many

of the large fires we see across the west. host: how you cover public lands how much traveling dode you do you are based in denver colorado how many america's public lands havee you seen in your travels? >> i cannot count offhand. i have been with a any now for quite some time and before the pandemic happened i was on the road quite a bit i bends to some beautiful corners of utah and nevada and arizona and new mexico hoping to get a little more travel back on the schedule but i do try to go out to see what we are writing about many are on inspiring to see what is hard to imagine from sitting behind a desk. >> what about those that

spurred national monuments. >> i have been to those they are both distinct there are some slot canyons it is action on is the science monument there has been some major paleontology discoveries in earlier this year there was an announcement made that within the monument they found a tyrannosaurus that lived in a social setting they discover this within the monument because it was off-limits for drilling and other extraction so they could dig down look at the sediment and so that is a big part of grand steering on

—- grand staircase so the tribal nations there is a lot of interesting antiquities like the house on fire and areas and homes for hundreds if not thousands of years ago pottery shards have been found in visitors are reminded treat the area with respect don't take pottery shards leave them as they are so others can experience it. >> talk about stakeholder reactionqu from one of the twitter followers what is the oil and gas lobbyist doing that they be rage field about

this announcement from the biden administration? >> there was an argument being made these were not areas that would have huge oil and gas deposits. there were some that were nominated but they hadn'tad moved to the process so it is the extraction issue on that and so when president clinton made that a monument there was a large plateau that had lease on it at the time that were bought out and became in active from the new mining claims as the boundaries were reduced. host: fort dodge iowa. >>caller: good morning. i appreciate you having her on. in iowa i referred to it as a

desert day tile and drain that used to be known as the perry pothole region do nebraska and minnesota now it is just a north dakota and south dakota so with water problems they have in the west and the dehydration that would occur so maybe you could look into it i will hang up and listen to comments. >> so in terms of drought and dehydration for agricultural

areas that is one question that here in the last headed to the pacific coast of california there is a lot of efforts going on in terms of water recycling there are several water compacts that dictate how different reservoirs are used with the colorado river they executed one of those contracts they drain several reservoirs in the state to ensure water was flowing to users in nevada and elsewhere. host: with the text messaging

service we use when a national park or monument is set up do they also protect the aquifer in that area quick. >> that's a great question and that will vary from state to state. for example states like here in colorado we have split right somebody made onas the land but not the water right. things are different in states like arizona if you only and you can drill a well yourself. host: with the supreme court getting ready to come in for oral arguments we have to ended there. a staffer covering public land find your on twitter we appreciate your time. >> thank you

>> opportunity zones 8674 tax havens across the country and gave wealthy people incentives to put the money in the poor community and exchange for capital gains tax break. unfortunately we don't know how much money has gone into them as a result of the arcane senate process known as reconciliation. the provision that requires reporting was stripped out. it's tens of billions of dollars going into opportunity zones. but unfortunately the both of them money it didn't really need the money it was already improving or went to projects that probably would've then built otherwise.

i will open up with a four minute introduction