Maine's attorney general has threatened to sue the Trump administration if it tries to abolish or reduce Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument/Mark Picard

While Maine Gov. Paul LePage might want Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument abolished, the state's attorney general has a message for the Trump administration: Don't mess with our monument.

In comments submitted to the Interior Department as part of Secretary Ryan Zinke's review of national monuments, Attorney General Janet T. Mills didn't mince words:

We are prepared to challenge any unlawful Executive Branch action that purports to abolish or reduce the Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument. DOI should instead terminate its review of the Katahdin Woods and Waters designation and reaffirm the agency's commitment to making the Monument work well for all people, and particularly the residents of the Katahdin region who are now counting on its for their economic future.

In her comments (attached below), Attorney General Mills pointed out that not only has the monument stimulated the economy in the communities surrounding it, but some of those who initially opposed the designation now support it.

"(State) Rep. (Steve) Stanley has witnessed a wave of investment activity and community excellence attributable to the designation of Katahdin Woods and Waters. He is now convinced that the Monument is the centerpiece of economic development in the region, and that losing it would be a terrible setback," she wrote.

Monday marks the last day that Interior is officially collecting public comments on whether 27 national monuments Secretary Zinke has been reviewing should be reduced in size, abolished, or embraced.

Back in April, the president ordered the Interior secretary to undertake the review, saying that his predecessors' use of the Antiquities Act to create national monuments was an "egregious abuse of federal power." 

The unprecedented move to order Secretary Zinke to review the national monuments to see whether they were carefully created under the guidelines of the Antiquities Act, which calls for the smallest possible monument in acreage to provide the necessary protection of historic, prehistoric, and scientific settings, accelerated protests by conservationists, non-governmental organizations, tribes, and corporations tied to the outdoors.

Regarding Katahdin Woods and Waters, the Trump administration questioned whether proper public input was received and considered by the Obama administration. That monument was created not out of federal lands, but rather private property donated to the government so it could be included within the National Park System. 

More than 100 law professors who focus on environmental, natural resources, and administrative law this past week sent a letter (attached below) to Secretary Zinke to argue that the president lacks the authority to review his predecessors' use of the Antiquities Act.

"In short, (the president's executive order) represents an attempt by the Executive to wield a power that Congress alone possesses," stated the letter, which was signed by 121 professors.

The letter went on to argue that the executive order 1) directed Secretary Zinke to review matters that fall under Congressional purview, not the president's; 2) the Antiquities Act does not require a public comment process, and so a lack of public input cannot poison a designation. That said, "As a factual matter, Presidents have, at times, sought significant public input on a proposed national monument. President Obama proceeded in that manner before designating the Bears Ears National Monument," reads the letter; 3) While President Trump called national monuments a "massive federal land grab," the Antiquities Act "applies only to land owned by the federal government and effects no transfer of title from any state or private landowner"; 4) the Antiquities Act does not limit "the acreage of a monument or limit the 'other objects of historic or scientific interest' that can be protected"; 5) "the President expressed an intent to give power 'back to the states and to the people.' This misunderstands the nature of federal public lands law. Congress possesses plenary power over federal public lands, managing them on behalf of the American people," and; 6) While Secretary Zinke's initial report on Bears Ears "suggests that it is 'unnecessary' to designate lands within a national monument that are also wilderness or wilderness study areas. There is no legal principle that prevents areas with one conservation designation from inclusion within the boundaries of another. Indeed, more than 44 million acres of wilderness area are included within fifty National Park units."

"It is beyond question that the proclamations creating the national monuments under review — both the terrestrial and the marine monuments — identify a wealth of unique and precious resources that qualify as 'objects of historic and scientific interest' throughout the reserved federal lands," the law professors concluded. "These proclamations are, therefore, lawful.

"If the new administration believes that those objects and the lands containing them do not warrant protection, or that factors external to the Antiquities Act should be considered in evaluating national monument designations, the administration must turn to Congress for a remedy."

Traveler footnote: You can leave your comment on the matter at this page.