Explainer: What the Proposed Removal of the Chaco Canyon Buffer Zone Means for the Landscape

The federal government is moving to revoke a protective buffer zone surrounding Chaco Culture National Historical Park, a UNESCO World Heritage site in northwestern New Mexico. The Bureau of Land Management recently opened a 14-day public comment period on a Draft Environmental Assessment that proposes eliminating or shrinking the 10-mile boundary that currently shields the park from new oil and gas leasing. The proposal has ignited a fierce debate over the balance between domestic energy production and the preservation of one of North America's most significant cultural and ecological landscapes.[1][2]

The buffer zone was established in 2023 by then-Interior Secretary Deb Haaland through Public Land Order 7923. The order withdrew approximately 336,400 acres of federal lands and minerals from unchecked extractive development for a period of 20 years. The protection was designed to safeguard the vast network of ancient roads, shrines, and multi-story structures that extend far beyond the official park boundaries.[1][2][3]

Beyond its archaeological value, the buffer zone serves as a critical ecological sanctuary. The Chaco landscape is a biological haven for desert wildlife seeking refuge from the noise, light pollution, and habitat fragmentation caused by industrial activity. With more than 37,000 oil and gas wells already operating in the broader San Juan Basin, the protected radius provides a rare, undisturbed corridor for native species to migrate and forage.[7]

The historical significance of the region is unparalleled. Between 850 and 1250 A.D., Chaco Canyon was the hub of the ancestral Puebloan civilization. The sophisticated architecture, including massive stone great houses and ceremonial kivas, demonstrates a highly advanced society that drew people from across the Southwest to trade and pray.[1][2]

Experts emphasize that the visible ruins inside the park are only a fraction of the story. The 10-mile buffer zone contains more than 4,200 documented archaeological sites. Because only 15 to 20 percent of the area has been formally surveyed, archaeologists estimate that as many as 12,000 cultural sites and traditional cultural places could lie within the protected radius.[2][7]

The mechanism of the 2023 withdrawal is specific: it only applies to federal public lands. It does not affect valid existing leases, nor does it prevent Navajo Nation allottees from leasing their own minerals. However, the new Draft Environmental Assessment offers two alternatives to this arrangement: revoking the protections entirely, or reducing the buffer size by half, to just five miles.[2][7]

The timeline for the proposed changes has drawn sharp criticism. The Bureau of Land Management provided a 14-day window for public comment, which opponents argue is exceptionally short for a decision of this magnitude. In contrast, the original 2023 withdrawal involved 150 days of public comment and multiple public meetings.[2][7]

Supporters of the revocation argue that the buffer zone unnecessarily restricts economic development. The Navajo Nation government has expressed support for removing the buffer, citing the need for royalty payments and infrastructure investments derived from oil and gas production. Proponents view the rollback as a necessary step to maximize the region's energy potential.[2][7]

This push aligns with the broader "Unleashing American Energy" agenda championed by the current administration. Federal officials are seeking to streamline the regulatory process for energy extraction on public lands, arguing that domestic production must take precedence over expansive conservation boundaries.[2][7]

Conversely, Pueblo leaders and conservationists have condemned the proposal. Representatives from 20 pueblos recently joined New Mexico's congressional delegates in Washington, D.C., to urge Interior Secretary Doug Burgum to maintain the protections. They describe the landscape as a living, spiritual homeland that cannot be replaced or repaired once industrialized.[1][5]

Former Interior Secretary Deb Haaland has also spoken out against the rollback, emphasizing that the buffer land holds thousands of known archaeological sites that are integral to the cultural identity of modern Indigenous communities. Opponents warn that bringing drill rigs to the doorstep of Chaco Canyon would turn a sacred site into a sacrifice zone.[1][3]

The debate over Chaco Canyon is unfolding alongside proposed changes to broader federal preservation laws. The administration is currently advancing dramatic revisions to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. This section requires federal agencies to evaluate how their actions will affect historic properties before proceeding with development.[4][6]

Preservation advocates warn that weakening Section 106 regulations would limit public input and smooth the path for drilling near Chaco Canyon. By altering the criteria for what constitutes an adverse effect on historic properties, the administration could bypass traditional environmental and cultural reviews.[4][6]

As the public comment period closes, the Bureau of Land Management will review the feedback before issuing a final decision on the environmental assessment. The outcome will not only determine the future of the Chaco Canyon buffer zone but also set a precedent for how the federal government balances energy extraction with the protection of irreplaceable heritage and wildlife habitats.[2][7]