Establishment of the Ironwood Forest National Monument

President Clinton established the Ironwood Forest National Monument in Arizona, withdrawing approximately 128,917 acres of federal land from development, mining, and mineral leasing. The proclamation directs the Secretary of the Interior to manage the monument through the Bureau of Land Management, prohibit off-road motorized vehicle use, and prepare a transportation plan to protect biological, geological, and archaeological resources.

Federal Register Open PDF 65 FR 37259

Impact dates

Date TBD
Transportation plan preparation

Key directives

Establish Ironwood Forest National Monument on approximately 128,917 acres
Withdraw federal lands from all forms of entry, location, selection, sale, leasing under public land laws
Withdraw from location, entry, and patent under mining laws
Withdraw from mineral and geothermal leasing disposition
Secretary of the Interior shall prohibit all motorized and mechanized vehicle use off road except for emergency or authorized administrative purposes
Secretary of the Interior shall manage monument through Bureau of Land Management
Secretary of the Interior shall prepare a transportation plan addressing road closures or travel restrictions
Reserve non-federal lands upon acquisition by the United States

Who is ordered

Secretary of the Interior · Department of the Interior

Timeline

Immediate

Monument establishment and land withdrawal take effect upon proclamation
Federal lands appropriated and withdrawn from entry, sale, leasing, mining, and mineral/geothermal leasing

Near term (90d)

Secretary of the Interior to prepare transportation plan addressing road closures and travel restrictions

Long term

Ongoing monument management through BLM
Potential acquisition of non-federal lands for inclusion
Continued grazing under existing BLM policies

Risks & tensions

No explicit deadline for transportation plan creates implementation uncertainty
Mining and mineral leasing withdrawals may face economic opposition
Off-road vehicle restrictions may conflict with recreational use interests
Non-federal land acquisition depends on future voluntary sales or exchanges
Water rights language preserves federal claims but defers to state coordination
Grazing continuation may create tension with conservation goals