Trump

The Impact of Trade Wars and Tariffs on the Outdoor Recreation Economy 

The words “tariff” and “trade wars” are plastering the newscycle this month. With 25% tariffs in effect and more drama brewing between the U.S. and China, we wanted to unpack what tariffs are, the impact they have on the outdoor recreation economy, and what we can do to support outdoor retailers and the towns impacted by the economic blows during this time.

In short, tariffs are taxes on global imported goods received at the ports of entry. Governments utilize tariffs as a tool to keep American spending within our country to increase the national economy. By raising prices on imported products, retailers then have to sell these items for more money creating an incentive for consumers to purchase lower-cost American goods. 

The current administration has announced that it is committed to “American Protectionism,” which puts American businesses and manufacturing first in order to tax our global competitors. What complicates this notion is our modern day global economy. Many finished products purchased in the U.S. either contain material parts imported from other countries or were assembled in different countries around the world. Applying tariffs aren’t so cut and dry. 

Zooming out a bit, it is important to remember the impact that the outdoor recreation economy has on the greater U.S. economy. According to the Outdoor Industry Association’s (OIA) latest report on The Outdoor Recreation Economy, released in 2017, outdoor recreation raised over $880 billion in consumer spending and generated 7.6 million jobs, and these numbers continue to grow annually. Outdoor recreation is a powerful force in the U.S. economy and outdoor industry leaders need a spot at the table when discussing taxes that impact their industry. 

Currently, there are 25% tariffs on imported steel from select countries and 10% on imported aluminum. As an example of potential tariff impacts on the climbing community, camalots are made from steel (piece on Black Diamond cams here). Meaning it could potentially cost 25% more to manufacture cams abroad, which most companies do, including major players like Black Diamond and Metolius. The total cost of the steel tariff alone is $15.5 billion. While these numbers are jarring, according to research and reporting done by OIA, the hardest part of the ongoing tariff wars aren’t the tariffs themselves, but the “unpredictability of the Trump administration’s trade policies.” 

Companies often release pricing for next years’ product line in advance, so any modifications may present a challenge. Once tariffs are in place, companies are forced to either raise prices significantly for the consumer or to simply absorb the cost internally. Companies are then required to be reactive rather than proactive in their planning, negatively impacting innovation, design, customer service, and internal human resources.

When it comes to getting outdoors, The American Alpine Club doesn’t want to see tariffs creating additional barriers. According to an article recently published by OIA, Patricia Rojas-Ungar, OIA’s Vice President of Government Affairs, stated that all sorts of gear from “jackets to backpacks to hiking boots will see increases in tariffs of up to 30%.” She goes on to warn that due to these dramatic increases, businesses in the outdoor industry will be forced to make “drastic decisions” like hiring fewer employees. Or for smaller businesses, potentially closing their doors all together. She concludes by stating that the trade wars “have to stop, and real trade negotiations need to begin in earnest. . . . [k]nee-jerk reactions have long term devastating impacts on Americans, and we need Congress to stand up for its constituents.”  

OIA has created an Action Alert - tell your representatives that the tariff wars are negatively impacting you and your greater outdoor recreation industry.




Bears Ears Opened to Mining and Energy Claims

Photo: BLM

On December 4th, President Donald Trump announced his intention to reduce the size of Bears Ears National Monument by more than 80% and Grand Staircase-Escalante by half. Prior to Obama’s designation of the Bears Ears Monument, climbers have been advocating for protection of this landscape-- for its cultural significance and for its incredible splitter cracks and breathtaking desert sunsets. Since Trump’s move to reduce the monument, climbers have been active in speaking out against this drastic and possibly illegal action through protests, letters and petitions. Now, several months after Trump’s proclamation, we are seeing the implications.

On February 2nd, 2018, a small provision in the proclamation to reduce Bears Ears went into effect that opened the lands outside the monument boundaries to new mining claims and energy development. This move threatens the roughly 40% of climbing areas and the Bears Ears landscape as a whole. In addition, the Bureau of Land Management is beginning its management planning process for the new, smaller monuments. This is all despite the ongoing lawsuits and legislative debates over the reductions of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments, which we hope will restore the original national monument boundaries.

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is moving forward prematurely with these monument management plans, and the American Alpine Club, along with its partners, has asked the agency to wait until the dust settles from the legal and legislative battles before planning and permitting the staking of mining claims. If the lawsuits succeed and the reductions are overturned, the BLM will have wasted time and resources on a costly management planning process.

Multiple bills regarding these national monuments have also been introduced in the House of Representatives, and are currently being debated in the House Committee on Natural Resources. The outcome of these lawsuits and legislation will likely alter the final boundaries of and management directives for Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante.

Join us in asking the BLM to wait until the legal and legislative debates are over before beginning any monument management planning and permitting new mining claims and energy development in the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante areas. Visit the BLM comment page to share your thoughts about the future of these landscapes. For example:

I am a rock climber and a member of the American Alpine Club. The Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante regions hold great value to our community. I am concerned by the possibility of new mining and energy development in these special places. As climbers, we ask that the Bureau of Land Management keep these areas closed to new claims, and wait to begin the management planning process until the lawsuits and legislative debates over these monuments are resolved. These areas deserve protection and a management plan that prioritizes sustainable recreation. Thank you for your consideration.

Stay tuned for more updates on Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments.

Executive Power over National Monuments: An AAC Member and natural resource law Scholar weighs in on the future of Bears Ears

Photo by Taylor Luneau

Taylor Luneau, AAC member & Natural Resource Law Scholar 

As happens to many climbers on their first trip to Indian Creek, I got spanked! The splitter sandstone was relentless and the grades fleeting. With the absence of face features, it was a whole new ball game for a climber born and raised on northeast schist and granite. However, within a matter of days, the climbing style grew on me and by the end of my first week I was floating up Incredible and Generic Hand Crack, stuffing in a #2 cam every ten feet or so. The trip was a formative one and I was hooked.

Leaving our slice of Heaven was made easier only with the knowledge that the Creek would always be there, waiting for me, nestled there in the canyons with desert washes and endless red rock walls. And, as many did on December 28th, 2016, I celebrated after President Obama issued a Presidential Proclamation establishing Bears Ears National Monument—a 1.35 million acre area area in San Juan County, Utah that encompasses Indian Creek, as well as the Valley of the Gods and Arch Canyon. This Presidential Proclamation is the first to recognize rock climbing as a valued activity and to ensure it as a priority in the management plan. It conserves these climbing meccas for future generations and for my chance of reunion. Or so I thought.

Today, the future of the Bears Ears is uncertain. Utah’s political leadership has formally requested that the President rescind Bears Ears National Monument through a joint resolution. As a legal scholar, I began to investigate if President Trump could actually lawfully abolish the designation of Bears Ears’ national monument status.

The short answer is NO!

But that answer is riddled with caveats and requires an understanding of The Antiquities Act, the law that enables the President to designate National Monuments.

The Antiquities Act of 1906

The Antiquities Act has been used to create more than 100 national monuments and protect 80 million acres of federal land since it was passed in 1906 (1). While the Antiquities Act gives the President authority to declare national monuments, it’s silent about the abolishment of a national monument. The core provisions of the Antiquities Act:

1) Give the President the authority to declare historic landmarks, prehistoric structures and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are situated upon lands owned or controlled by the Federal Government to be National Monuments.

2) Allow that the amount of land reserved must not exceed the smallest area necessary for its proper management. (2)

The Antiquities Act is clear about the President’s authority to create national monuments, but does the President have the authority to reverse a national monument designation?

In 1938, President Roosevelt considered abolishing the Castle Pickney National Monument in South Carolina. However, his Attorney General, Homer Cummings, said the President had no such authority because the law did not authorize the President to abolish national monuments (3). As a result, President Roosevelt did not change the status of the monument. While Roosevelt could not undo Pickney National Monument, it was eventually abolished by Congress in 1956 (4). Although Cummings advice was not a judicial ruling, his statement was the only legal authority to provide a statutory interpretation (5). Cumming's legal analysis was challenged for the first time ever this past week by conservative legal scholars at the American Enterprise Institute but their argument raises constitutional issues and overreach by the Executive Office. 

Although Presidents do not have the authority to abolish national monuments, they have altered monument sizes in order to meet the smallest area compatible criteria. (6) For example, Woodrow Wilson reduced the size of Mount Olympus National Monument in 1915. (7)

If President Trump attempts a full revocation of Bears Ears National Monument, litigation will follow. While courts would likely deny an Executive Order to fully repeal Bears Ears, the President may attempt to alter the size of the monument to meet the smallest area compatible to protect the cultural resources. Such an attempt would require the President to establish that the Monument was designated unnecessarily large for the protection of the scientific, historic or archeological objects of interest-- a fact that would likely be challenged by the Native American Tribes who claim ancestral ties to the landscape. Another consideration here is that The Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) bars the Secretary of the Interior from altering the boundaries of monuments on BLM land so any Executive Order that attempts to direct the Secretary to make adjustments would not be legal (8). 

Congressional Discretion & Implications for Bears Ears National Monument

While the President does not have legal authority to undo a national monument, Congress does. Congress has broad discretion over national monuments primarily because of the Constitution’s Property Clause, which provides Congress the power to make decisions about public lands in the United States. Therefore, Congress does have the constitutional authority to create, modify, and abolish national monuments and it has exercised each of these powers in the past. (9)

What now?

The Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service, in cooperation with the Bears Ears Commission, will continue to work together to create and implement a management plan for the new national monument. Recreation, conservation and tribal groups will be watching closely as the Trump administration and Congress sets its public lands priorities.

In the meantime, as climbers, we must continue to speak up together about why public lands matter and why we value the Bears Ears area in particular. Let’s push back against efforts to weaken federal land protections and undermine conservation designations. We need to vigilantly remind our legislators that we want to keep our public lands in public hands.

Finally, I encourage you all to continue to support groups like the American Alpine Club and Access Fund that persistently look out for the preservation of our climbing landscapes. I’ll be there with you, because the indigenous peoples, the land, water, and wildlife of the Bears Ears region deserve this monument designation. And … I want a second chance at sending Anunnaki in the Creek.

---

Taylor Luneau, American Alpine Club Member

Dual Masters Candidate, 2018: Master of Environmental Law and Policy, Vermont Law School and Master of Science in Natural Resources, University of Vermont

 


ENDNOTES

[1] Coggins, Wilkinson, Leshy, Fischman, Federal Public Land and Resources Law, p. 394, 7th Ed., Foundation Press, 2014.

[2] Id.

[3] 39 Op. Att’y Gen. 185, 187 (1938).

[4] Vincent, Carol Hardy, National Monuments and the Antiquities Act, Congressional Research Service, p. 2, 2017.

[5] Id.

[6] Antiquities Act 1906-2006, National Parks Service Archeology Program, https://www.nps.gov/archeology/sites/antiquities/MonumentsList.htm (Last updated Dec. 28, 2016).

[7] Id.

[8] Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976, https://www.blm.gov/or/regulations/files/FLPMA.pdf

[9] U.S. Const. art. IV, §3, cl. 2.