This chapter concludes the book, but the book concludes only midway through the quiet revolution that modern public trust advocacy has engendered. The Mono Lake litigation advanced public trust principles as a source of environmental law – and even environmental rights – highlighting the role of the doctrine in providing needed support for environmental protection amid weak legal foundations. The Conclusion turns to several open questions, including objections that the judicial role the doctrine invites may threaten the constitutional separation of powers. It considers whether trust-rights claims raise the kind of generalized harms that jurisprudential standing limitations are intended to prevent, but also the counterargument that the doctrine is the original “citizen suit” provision of the common law, deputizing private attorneys general to champion diffuse environmental interests that special interests would otherwise dominate. Finally, it considers what the world might look like without public trust governance – visiting parallel stories unfolding at the Great Salt Lake, Dead Sea, Sea of Galilee, and Aral Sea – before returning at last to the ongoing story at Mono Lake itself.