Oppose the Sattitla National Monument in California

Dec 4, 2024

Why you should submit here, even if you already have elsewhere!

We keep them honest. If everyone only comments through the government/agency site, we have to take their word on how many comments were received. By submitting through BRC, we create an independent record of our community’s response that can’t be buried or under-reported.

We protect your voice. If this fight ends up in court, having our own record of submitted comments means we don’t have to wait a year or more for a government agency to turn over documents. We can move quickly with proof that thousands of you spoke up.
We keep you in the loop. When you comment through our site, we can send you updates on what comes next. If you only use the government/agency site, you’re depending on them to tell you what happens next — and they won’t.

Double coverage matters. Even if you’ve already commented through the government/agency site, submitting through ours makes your voice count twice — once in their system, and once in ours. That way they know the OHV community is watching and tracking every move.

For years, BRC has been trusted to run action alerts like this. Thousands of members and supporters have used this system effectively to defend access to public lands. This isn’t about collecting your info — it’s about building the strongest, most transparent record possible to hold agencies accountable.

Why you should submit here, even if you already have elsewhere!

We keep them honest. If everyone only comments through the government/agency site, we have to take their word on how many comments were received. By submitting through BRC, we create an independent record of our community’s response that can’t be buried or under-reported.

We protect your voice. If this fight ends up in court, having our own record of submitted comments means we don’t have to wait a year or more for a government agency to turn over documents. We can move quickly with proof that thousands of you spoke up.

We keep you in the loop. When you comment through our site, we can send you updates on what comes next. If you only use the government/agency site, you’re depending on them to tell you what happens next — and they won’t.

Double coverage matters. Even if you’ve already commented through the government/agency site, submitting through ours makes your voice count twice — once in their system, and once in ours. That way they know the OHV community is watching and tracking every move.

For years, BRC has been trusted to run action alerts like this. Thousands of members and supporters have used this system effectively to defend access to public lands. This isn’t about collecting your info — it’s about building the strongest, most transparent record possible to hold agencies accountable.

UPDATE: On January 27, 2025, President Biden designated this monument. We encourage everyone to contact their members of Congress to ask them to reverse this land grab. If you’ve already submitted this alert in the past, you should do it again, since many members of Congress are newly elected.

The proposed Sáttítla National Monument seeks to designate over 200,000 acres in northeastern California’s Medicine Lake Highlands as a protected area. This region includes portions of the Shasta-Trinity, Klamath, and Modoc National Forests. Proponents of the monument claim it will “protect” Tribal interests and the volcanic aquifer. Let’s be clear, Tribal interests are already legally protected as well as water and biodiversity through numerous laws and regulations both federally and state.

In August 2024, U.S. Senators Alex Padilla and Laphonza Butler, alongside Representative Adam Schiff, introduced legislation to establish Sáttítla as a national monument. They also urged President Biden to use the Antiquities Act to expedite the designation, bypassing traditional legislative processes. This legislation never gained enough to support to actually be passed.

Using the Antiquities Act to establish the monument sidesteps the broader public involvement and legislative debate that are hallmarks of traditional land management decisions. A designation ignores local input and bypasses Congress.
National monument designations lead to significant restrictions on land use, including motorized recreation, hunting, and grazing, which are vital for rural economies and lifestyles.
This proposal is another example of federal overreach, where large tracts of land are placed under restrictive management without sufficient consideration of local stakeholders or the socio-economic impacts on rural communities.
Designating the area as a national monument would transfer significant management authority to federal agencies, potentially reducing existing land uses.
Wildfire is a massive area of concern for this area. National Monuments only increase regulations and red tape for implementing forest treatments.

Join the petition to oppose this land grab!

Appreciate What We Do?

It takes a team of people to investigate, review, advocate and litigate in order to protect your rights to public lands. Please consider donating today so we can defend your ground.

Tax-Deductible Donation