A notice issued on August 29, 2025, by the Forest Service, an agency of the Department of Agriculture, announced the intent to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The intent of the Rule is "to provide lasting protection for inventoried roadless areas within the National Forest System in the context of multiple-use management." MBCA's opposition letter describes the likely negative consequences of rolling back this rule, including environmental harm to wildlife, watersheds, and water quality, plus increased fire danger (not less). Recent polling concludes that there is also widespread public support for maintaining designated roadless areas. 

MBCA submitted a letter to California's Wildlife Conservation Board in support of grant funding to plan two wildlife crossing overpasses on Highway 62. Mojave Desert Land Trust is spearheading the effort. Learn more about the proposal from MDLT's August Press Release and this story from local radio station Z107.7. In MBCA's Wildlife Corridors map below, notice the bright pink area in the lower left, representing an area of "Irreplaceable and Essential Corridors" between Morongo Valley and Yucca Valley, the targeted area. Additional detailed maps can be found in MDLT's Press Release.

A revised plan for the Soda Mountain Solar Project in the Mojave Desert near Zzyxx is being reviewed by the California Energy Commission. In MBCA's short comment letter (which includes links to background research and data), MBCA focuses on two critical issues. One is the question of whether additional such projects are even needed in California, as questioned in Melody Peterson's LA Times article "California has so much solar power that increasingly it goes to waste." The second major concern is the inevitable damage to desert ecosystems. If left undisturbed, this land could provide significant carbon sequestration, as described in the report The California Desert's Role in 30x30: Carbon Sequestration and Biodiversity.

With a focus on the lack of environmental review as required by the California Environmental Quality Act, the Center for Biological Diversity and local group Indian Cove Neighbors filed a lawsuit against the City of Twentynine Palms for its approval of the OfLand resort development. The lawsuit maintains that a full environmental review is required rather than the weaker Mitigated Negative Declaration that was accepted by the City Council. Read more in this press release from CBD and from the local news outlet The Desert Trumpet. 

A National Public Radio story notes the potentially negative effects of federal agency changes on California's endangered desert tortoise. The efforts of Mojave Desert Land Trust on the animal's behalf are noted, as well as research by respected desert research scientists including Cameron Barrows and Ed LaRue. Listen to or read the story here.

California began to address the observed and predicted decline of the Western Joshua tree initially through passage of the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act in 2023, as an alternative to granting threatened/endangered species status. To enforce the Act, the California Fish and Game Commission was tasked to develop a Conservation Plan. After two years of administrative planning and public input, the Commission approved the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Plan on August 13. Public input included not only pleas for stronger conservation but also opposition to regulations perceived to be too restrictive and expensive. An overview of the issues and ongoing concerns are explored in this Los Angeles Times article, and comments about the expected effects in the Morongo Basin can found in this story at radio station Z107.7's website.

Despite an extensive array of public comments mostly expressing concerns to the Twentynine Palms City Council about the OfLand Resort proposed for Indian Cove Area (this very large document may take a while to open) , the City Council accepted the Planning Commission's recommendation to change the zoning and approve the project with a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Local radio station Z107.7 provides a comprehensive overview of the City Council meeting, and an update on the resort developer's comments about moving forward.

MBCA's comment letter to the City of Twentynine Palms Planning Department about the 100-unit luxury resort project details points of conflict with the City's General Plan but also makes suggestions for change. MBCA encourages a reduction in the size of the project, and makes additional detailed points about project deficits and discrepancies on issues including "edge effects" on wildlife; the Mojave Desert Sentinel Landscape provisions; aesthetic and viewshed degradation; and light trespass.   

After hearing three hours of public comment, the San Bernardino County Supervisors unanimously denied the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of the Lovemore Ranch housing project. The appeal was filed by MBCA and supported by the Joshua Tree Village Neighbors group and others. Public comments were almost entirely in support of the appeal. You can view the entire hearing by clicking "video" on the April 8 line of the list of Supervisor meetings at this page; timestamps for various stages of the appeal are shown below. Read or listen to the Z107.7 radio report here.

Appeal Item #42 begins at 30:40
   32:05 – Mark Wardlaw, head of Land Use Services, responds to MBCA’s appeal specifics.
   44:40 – Begin presentation by appellant (MBCA and Joshua Tree Village Neighbors)
1:00:36 – Begin presentation by project proponent (Lovemore Ranch)
1:13:13 – Begin public comment at San Bernardino Location
1:47:11 – Begin public comment at Joshua Tree Community Center
2:27:15 – RECESS
2:43:00 – Restart public comment at Joshua Tree Community Center
3:06:00 – Final comments from project proponent (Lovemore Ranch)
3:15:09 – Final comments from appellant (MBCA and JTVN)
3:21:52 – Board Chair Dawn Rowe begins questions to Staff
3:33:50 – Chair Rowe asks County Counsel about State Housing Affordability Act
3:35:12 – Chair Rowe asks for Supervisor Questions
3:44:25 – Public Hearing is Closed and Supervisors vote to deny the appeal.