There was a time in the U.S. when support for nature and conservation was as American as apple pie. It is more partisan now and one group wants Congress to help reduce the divisiveness.
Sixty years ago, there was almost unanimous support by lawmakers for passage of the 1964 Wilderness Act and for the 1973 Endangered Species Act. Now, while many Democrats still support the laws, some Republicans in Congress want to weaken both. The group Nature is Nonpartisan launched last year to address the issue, with the goal of reviving a more impartial environmental legacy.
Amelia Joy, communications director for the group, said the partisan back-and-forth has left communities behind.
"If there's anything that we can agree on, it's nature," Joy contended. "It's stewardship, it's that our kids and our grandkids should be able to enjoy the same natural beauty that we do, and that's a point that no one can disagree with."
Nature is Nonpartisan supports the Senate Stewardship Caucus launched in 2025 by a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators, including Sen. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M. The caucus adopted a goal to advance bipartisan efforts aimed at protecting and expanding access to public lands and waters. It also promoted recovering wildlife through common sense policies in support of conservation, habitat restoration and economic benefits for rural communities.
According to Joy, 60 years ago, 80% to 90% of Americans self-identified as environmentalists. Now, polls show only 40% do. She believes depoliticizing environmental and conservation issues would foster bipartisan solutions for public lands and natural resources.
"When we talk to people about the actual issues, a sweeping majority, 90%+ Americans agree that the government has an obligation to ensure that all Americans have access to clean drinking water, that they have clean air, that we need to be protecting our endangered wildlife species," Joy outlined.
Since returning to the White House for a second term, President Donald Trump has supported various policies to open up public lands for commercial development by the oil and gas, mining and timber industries, while transferring management of some National Park sites to states. It is likely financial constraints could then force some states to sell park lands to the highest bidder.