Dark skies and the Second Trump Administration

Image credit: U.S. National Park Service (public domain)
1598 words / 6-minute read

On Wednesday, 6th November, the world awoke to the news that former U.S. President Donald Trump won election for the second time. The 2024 campaign was long and bruising, but the win was definitive. On 20th January 2025, Trump will take office as the 47th President of the United States. Changes are of course coming to many aspects of American governance. And some people are wondering what this means for efforts to advance the cause of dark skies in the United States.

As 2024 draws to a close, it's worth considering what the new year may bring. Here we must set aside politics and leave this year's campaign in the past. Instead, in this post we focus on the relevant policies of the first Trump Administration and what little we know about relevant plans for the second.

Dark skies and U.S. federal policy

Before diving into specifics of policies past and future, it's worth discussing how U.S. policies interact with dark-sky conservation in general. There is little association between federal priorities and how the U.S. regulates outdoor lighting. Most such policy decisions are made at the local level, in cities and counties. Federal guidelines determine such things as minimum lighting energy efficiency standards. But determinations about when and where lighting is and isn't allowed are almost always in local hands.

That is in part because there is no overarching national policy about outdoor lighting set by Congress. We have written here before about how that may change in the future. For now, there is little means by which the federal government can exert oversight in this realm. Some have suggested that federal courts could apply existing environmental law to the issue. And there's scant relevant case law to serve as a guide.

​Where federal policy really comes into play concerns the administration of federal public lands. The federal government owns a little more than 27% of the land area of the United States. But that ownership is not uniform across U.S. territory. It owns 46.4% of the land area in the 11 contiguous Western states, but only 4.2% of the land area of other states excluding Alaska. This is significant because much of the remaining pristine natural nighttime darkness occurs only in the Western states.

These maps of the contiguous 48 U.S. states compare areas of federal land ownership (top) with the brightness of the night sky (bottom). The colors of the upper map show which federal agencies manage which lands. The false colors of the lower map correspond to night-sky brightness predicted from satellite data. Warmer colors mean brighter night skies. Credit: U.S. Geological Survey/U.S. National Park Service

​The way the U.S. government manages federally owned lands has much to do with landscape-scale preservation of dark skies. Despite lacking a Congressional mandate, all the major land-management agencies take part. But they also oversee various activities on those lands that can yield light pollution. And there is a complex interplay between federal, state and local government in terms of activities next to public lands. The good news is that the land managers have largely embraced dark skies as an important conservation goal.

Public lands in the first Trump Administration

Trump's first term in office saw radical changes to the U.S. land management regime. Organizations like the Center for American Progress branded him "The Most Anti-Nature President in U.S. History". The Administration sought to roll back protections of millions of acres of federal land through executive action. It famously reduced the size of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments in Utah. This action drew lawsuits and was reversed by President Biden. Academics criticized these and other actions as "clearly the most substantial rollback in public lands protections in American history".

But Trump also took certain actions that bolstered protections for federal lands, such as signing into law the Great American Outdoors Act. The Act also permanently authorized funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), which "helps strengthen communities, preserve history and protect the national endowment of lands and waters". The Administration also increased recreational access on public lands. This built on the tradition of support among hunters and fishermen for protections of their species of interest.

​We don't know exactly what effect these policies had on dark skies in and near federal public lands. Some land use changes involved further exploitation of mineral resources, including oil and gas drilling. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management ramped up sales of drilling permits on BLM-managed lands in places like southern New Mexico. This approach catered to the Administration's "America First Energy Plan" that aimed to shore up U.S. energy independence by boosting production of fossil fuels. One result was that areas near sensitive sites like Carlsbad Caverns National Park became much brighter at night.

This graph plots total nighttime light emissions measured by satellite between 2017 and 2021 from a 7500-square-kilometer region of BLM land managed by the Carlsbad Field Office in New Mexico. Much of this light comes from oil and gas extraction activities on federal lands. During the first Trump administration it increased in brightness by a factor of three.

What could happen during a second Trump term

There is a lot we don't know about what changes are coming next year. Public lands and resource management were not significant presidential campaign issues in 2024. There was some environmental policy discussed at the margins, much of which connects to the controversial "Project 2025" presidential transition plan published by the Heritage Foundation. The Center For Western Priorities argues that "Project 2025 would devastate America’s public lands". Many regulations on the fossil fuel industry would be relaxed. Sensitive territory in national monuments would be removed from many legal protections.

Importantly, it would also roll back the existing implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA. This is a key piece of environmental legislation that insists on analysis of potential environmental harms from actions taken under the supervision of federal agencies. Reductions across the federal workforce could deprive agencies of expertise needed to adequately assess environmental impacts of projects on and near federal lands. This is significant, as the idea of applying NEPA to situations involving potential light pollution effects is still fairly new.

​It's safe to assume that there will be no new major initiatives that expand protections of public lands. In fact, there may be new efforts to weaken existing protections in the second Trump Administration. The executive branch may well attempt to transfer management of some federal lands directly to states. And in many instances, the biggest threat to dark skies in those places are surrounding or adjacent communities. As a matter of policy, their light emissions are not subject to federal jurisdiction or control. And some ideas, while unlikely to succeed, bring entirely new challenges. For example, during the campaign, Trump called for building new housing developments on public lands.

How dark skies can survive and thrive in 2025

Despite the uncertainties involved in coming policy changes, the story for dark skies is not all doom-and-gloom. While there are inevitable challenges ahead, there may also be new opportunities. The key to getting the lay of the land is in the broad appeal that dark skies represent to people across the political spectrum. Support for preserving natural nighttime darkness on public lands seems to transcend political differences. For example, we should continue to connect to what locals in these places care about. Dark skies maintain the rural lifestyle — a selling point for dark skies in areas near public lands. In this sense, it may be that voluntary protections for darkness "fly under the radar" while other changes take place more in the open.

We should also continue to promote the beauty of nighttime landscapes in places like national parks. This in turn fuels a growing astrotourism industry, which often yields the biggest economic impact in rural places. Often these same places are suffering after the withdrawal of extractive industries like mining and logging.

And throughout, it's important to engage in the process rather than disengaging from it. Opportunities will arise to contribute during public comment periods on proposed federal actions impacting dark skies on public lands. A groundswell of opposition to a potential action might persuade the Administration to abandon a plan. In a similar vein, it's important to recognize and praise the right actions when taken. Dark skies can help offset losses when other policies are chipped away.
​
It's important to understand the status quo of light pollution that already exists on and near federal lands. Land management agencies such as the U.S. National Park Service have already built up significant resources. The next step is to ramp up monitoring of nighttime light emissions to identify trouble spots quickly. There is an emerging best practice in outdoor lighting in and around sensitive places that's worth promoting. New projects on public lands might come with monitoring requirements identified in the NEPA process. Collaboration with partners such as NGOs will be an important component of that effort. Examples that demonstrate its value include programs run by the Mojave Desert Land Trust and Friends of Nevada Wilderness.

The Mojave Desert Land Trust helps measure and monitor night-sky quality in Mojave Trails National Monument in support of future International Dark Sky Sanctuary status for the land.

Finally, some of the burden of protecting dark night skies around federal lands will shift to the states. For instance, in New Mexico an effort is underway to update that state's Night Sky Protection Act in the next legislative session. DarkSky New Mexico and others are working to align the efforts of advocacy groups with the drilling-site safety needs of the oil and gas industry. Drawing on the success of similar pairings in West Texas, the result could be win-win-win all the way around.
​
Given that there are many unknowns at the moment, it's difficult to accurately guess what changes the new Administration will bring. For now, looking back on its previous history offers some important context in divining the possibilities. Gaming out various scenarios empowers dark-sky advocates to plan for different outcomes. In turn, this can help ratchet down some of the anxiety many folks have felt since election day. Night skies are a shared resource and one that should remain apolitical. A combination of vigilance, realism and a touch of hope for the future may well be what gets us through a bumpy ride ahead.