Showing posts with label Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. Show all posts

April 17, 2015

Utah Supreme Court request could have big implications for state's bid to claim roads on federal land

Road claims » Clarification of statute could shape counties’ ownership petitions

Rancher Chris Odekerken poses for a portrait along K2825 on his property on Glendale Bench Wednesday May 8, 2013. (Chris Detrick | The Salt Lake Tribune)

By KRISTEN MOULTON
The Salt Lake Tribune


Three federal judges are asking the Utah Supreme Court to clarify the meaning of a short section of Utah law that has big implications for counties' claims to roads criss-crossing federal lands.

Counties, joined by the state, have filed more than 20 federal lawsuits in recent years, trying to get control of more than 35,000 miles of roads or road segments under a Civil War-era statute known as RS2477.

On Friday, though, U.S. District Judges David Nuffer, Clark Waddoups and Robert J. Shelby sent an order to the Utah Supreme Court asking, essentially, whether Utah law bars the lawsuits.

The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, an intervenor in the federal cases, argues that the Utah Code has a seven-year "statute of repose" that means any lawsuits making a claim to the roads had to be filed by 1983, seven years after RS2477 was repealed in 1976.

The first of the lawsuits was not filed until 2011.

The federal judges write in their order that "If SUWA's assertion is correct, then the R.S. 2477 Road Cases pending before this court would be barred."

But if the code is interpreted as a "statute of limitations," the seven-year clock may not have begun ticking until the counties discovered they were injured by federal action to close the roads, according to case law cited in the order.

The federal judges ask the Utah Supreme Court to answer this question of law: "Are Utah Code 78B-2-201(1) and its predecessor statutes of limitations or statutes of repose?"

It's not clear how soon the Supreme Court will take up the question. In an apparent response to SUWA's challenge, the Utah Legislature this winter passed a bill, retroactive to 1972, specifying that the statute of limitations doesn't apply in cases involving claims against the federal government for real property. HB401 was sponsored by Rep. Mike Noel, R-Kanab.

Last week, Waddoups took the unusual step of issuing a temporary restraining order to block a state judge from hearing a lawsuit involving Tooele County's RS2477 claims.Tooele County resident Michael Abdo and SUWA filed the lawsuit in 3rd District Court last summer.

Waddoups agreed with state attorneys that it was an "end run" around his jurisdiction in Tooele County's federal case, pending since 2012.

June 22, 2014

The grand compromise: The search for a public lands resolution

A possible solution to the bickering over land use in a big chunk of Utah is being negotiated with all varieties of groups at the table under an effort shepherded by Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah. Despite the challenges, he and others remain optimistic.

The moon sets in Desolation Canyon Thursday, July 1, 2010, on the Green River. (Tom Smart, Deseret News)

By Amy Joi O'Donoghue
Deseret News


SALT LAKE CITY — Imagine Rob Bishop with his head under the hood of a car and a line of people behind him telling him the best way to fix it.

That's the scenario for the Utah congressman, the "car" in this case the delicate issue of federal lands oversight in Utah, and few would dispute the current system is a junker, rife with lawsuits, stalemates and uncertainty.

Bishop, a Republican, has spent the past 20 months as the fixer mechanic, brokering a public lands initiative process that attempts to meld a legislative solution to land use issues in seven Utah counties.

"Everybody is going to get something, but not everything they demand," he said. "That is the beauty of doing it big."

Bishop's bill will propose solutions for some 18 million acres in the extreme eastern part of Utah, with possible wilderness designations that number in the millions of acres. At the same time, it would carve out certainty for recreationers, the oil and gas industry, coal mining interests, potash extraction and more.

This is no minor tune-up.

Wednesday Bishop met with Interior Secretary Sally Jewell at her request. He said she wanted to know how his "grand bargain" legislative effort was coming along.

"It was positive," he said. "She wanted a quick update of where we were in the process...We did go through in detail over the kind of things we would be putting on the table. She actually seemed very positive about it going forward."

Positive and optimistic

"Positive" is the key word that swirls around any discussions on Bishop's public lands initiative. It is the oil that keeps this engine running, even in the face of such disparate interests.

"It's quite encouraging to see the stakeholders still hitched," said Kim Christy, deputy director of Utah's School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA), which manages lands conveyed at statehood and held in trust for financial benefit of school children.

"I am the first to admit it is a long shot." But it is a shot.

The stakes are high for Utah.

Bishop's bill, which he hopes to ready to be introduced in January, involves land swaps — it could be SITLA's largest in its history — and would mean it could trade out high-value cultural or wilderness quality lands in exchange for acreage with potential for development.

It leaves the Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument off the table and it attempts to solve disputes in this swath of Utah that arise over oil and gas development, endangered species, off-roading, grazing and more.

Bishop believes faith in the continuing negotiations is helping to keep a possible monument designation in Utah by President Obama at bay, although no outright promises have been made.

"What they have said is they are positive about the process and as long as we seem to be making progress toward the solution that this would be the preferable solution where everyone is involved, as opposed to the president making a political statement," he said.

Bishop said each side can gain something and the threat of losing everything keeps everyone involved in the process.

"What we are seeing is everyone sees a potential win out of this process and that encourages them to continue on," he said. "It is important to say that unlike maybe a few years ago, when other people were less successful in trying this same kind of stuff, that everyone also views the potential of defeat."

Strange bedfellows

He said, "There have been times...that there was one side or the other who thought they had the guaranteed, safe upper hand as it was and if they stood pat, and stuck with the status quo, they would come out OK." He said now the threat of losing something provides a healthy détente.

This lands process, as a concept, has forged like positions for two unlikely bedfellows — Emery County and the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA).

Representatives of both say they prefer a wilderness bill to a monument designation.

"The impetus for us doing this is to have some local control for what gets designated as wilderness," said Ray Petersen, Emery County's public lands coordinator. "SUWA's Red Rock Wilderness deal or a monument designation is totally out of control, so if we can maintain some input, and some control in this process, why would we not want to do that?"

And from Scott Groene, SUWA's executive director: "I would rather we reach agreement on wilderness legislation. It would affect a much larger amount of wilderness and there could be greater certainty with legislation. We could resolve more issues."

Working the deal

Bishop is working with each of the seven counties to come up with individual public lands management proposals that contemplate wilderness designations and zones where oil and gas development, mining and recreation occur. It could be that all seven counties are part of the final package. It could be that all are not.

"All of them are just looking for certainty," Bishop said, who is still months out from having maps that detail what that proposal ultimately will look like.

Emery County is farther along in the process than the others, having submitted its plan to Bishop two years ago.

"We have negotiated a compromise over time, since this latest effort, going back a couple of decades," Petersen said.

When the Bureau of Land Management abolished cross-country motorized travel and instead designated only specific routes where it was allowed, Petersen said it was a rancorous and dramatic change for residents.

"It was the most painful process, a big change. For some of the users, it was nearly the end of the world to have to be confined to ride on trails."

The decision closed hundreds of miles of trails and was not well received, Petersen said. But within a couple of years the locals decided they could live with it.

"It took a lot of time to go through that. The end result is that we have better management of the resources."

Park expansion?

He said that same idea is at play with the idea of expanding Goblin Valley State Park by 136,000 acres. Such a move involves a transfer of BLM-managed lands and could be accomplished through Bishop's bill.

"The east side of those canyons, day in and day out, are the busiest slots on the swell. It is the farthest away from the BLM's Price field office and it really needs management now; the BLM acknowledges that."

So how is it accomplished?

"My advice is to start 15 years ago," Petersen said. "It takes time. You have to be committed to it. You cannot do it quickly and it is not going to be easy. You have to commit to collaborate, understanding that you are not going to get everything you want."

Groene said his group is waiting to see what the individual county plans look like and what ultimately is laid out on the bargaining table.

"We have said all along the only way we will reach agreement is everyone will have to make concessions, including ourselves."

Reaching agreement on a sensitive environmental issue in which industry and advocates have to compromise is not without precedent in Utah.

SUWA, the state of Utah, Bill Barrett Corp., and a host of others forged concessions in a programmatic agreement in 2010 hailed by then-Interior Secretary Ken Salazar as historic for what it gave up, and for what it allowed in the Nine Mile Canyon area.

Then, as in the process unfolding now, no one got what they wanted, but they got enough.

Petersen said ideally, public lands planning involves looking beyond one's own hood ornament as you're traveling toward your destination.

"There is plenty of resource, but every resource will not be used for every reason," Petersen said. "The big picture is we have to make land use decisions about what is best for the land, and sometimes that is not what is best for me, and I am not always going to get what I want."

April 29, 2014

Courtroom defeat won't stop Utah in roads fight


By Amy Joi O'Donoghue
KSL.com


SALT LAKE CITY — The state of Utah and San Juan County may have lost a key fight over access to a road in Canyonlands National Park, but the roads war being waged against the U.S. government is far from over.

On Friday, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Utah and San Juan County failed to prove that Salt Creek Canyon Road was a "public thoroughfare," meaning the road remains off-limits to their rights-of-way claims under a Civil War-era statute.

“It would be mistake to consider this decision limiting us from going forward in our other road cases,” said Harry Souvall, public lands section chief for the Utah Attorney General's Office. He added that the decision provides clarity on such issues as statutes of limitations, but does not shut down the state and counties' case in claims to 12,000 other roads.

In their ruling, justices rejected the state's argument that uninterrupted periodic use over a 10-year period was sufficient to establish a claim to the dirt road — and therefore access by motorized vehicles.

"The state and county failed to carry their burden of establishing 10 years of continuous public use of the Salt Creek Road as a public thoroughfare prior to (establishment) of the Canyonlands National Park in 1964," the opinion read.

It would be mistake to consider this decision limiting us from going forward in our other road cases.
Harry Souvall, Utah AG's office

The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance hailed the ruling as key to protecting valuable natural resources within Canyonlands.

"For Salt Creek Canyon, it is a great decision," said Steve Bloch, attorney with the organization. "It means the only perennial stream in the park outside the Green and Colorado rivers will remain protected from signficant adverse impacts of motorized travel."

The issue

At issue is the question of motorized use of an unimproved 12.3-mile road that is intertwined with a creek bed in Salt Creek Canyon. The state argued that periodic historic use by cattle ranchers, uranium miners and tourists was enough to elevate the route to claims under the so-called RS2477 statute.

Before the 1995 implementation of a backcountry management plan for the park, access to the road was unrestricted and then modified to a permit-system only.

At that time, the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance challenged the park service's decision to keep the road open, arguing that continued motorized use of the trail ruined the perennial stream and posed risks of damaging prized archaeological resources in the area.

By 2004, the park service decided to lock the gate on the road, prompting the lawsuit by San Juan County and the state, which claimed its historic use over the years constituted status as a roadway or public thoroughfare.

The state pointed to grazing uses in the late 1880s or early 1890s that gradually increased through the 1950s, uranium mining and exploration in the 1950s, and uses of the canyon by Boy Scouts and tourists beginning as early as the 1950s.

Supporters of preserving access, including the Utah Shared Access Alliance and the Blue Ribbon Coalition, also argued that the road is the primary route for tourists to reach several scenic sites within the park, including Angel Arch.

While the state argued that no "particular frequency" was required under the claim as long as there was no formal interruption of access by the federal government, the court disagreed in its Friday decision, upholding the ruling of the U.S. District Court for Utah.

"While we agree uninterrupted use is necessary, it is not alone sufficient to demonstrate the existence of a public thoroughfare for purposes of RS2477," the court said. "The intensity of public use remains a component in determining the existence of a public thoroughfare."

Important for upcoming cases

Bloch said the Salt Creek ruling helps to flesh out important case law for other road claim cases to come.

"This ruling is another piece of the puzzle in figuring out what types of claims are not sufficient," he said. "We are going to continue to scrutinize it closely and rely on it to defeat similar claims that stream bottoms and cow paths and other dirt trails are highways."

Bloch predicted that the ruling may come into play with another case in Kane County that is also on appeal before the 10th Circuit and scheduled to be heard in September.

There are only 14,000-plus more claims to go. The state has a long, hard road to hoe if they are going to continue this push.
–Steve Bloch, SUWA attorney

"There are only 14,000-plus more claims to go," he said. "The state has a long, hard road to hoe if they are going to continue this push."

Souvall, however, stands by the distinction that the state should only have to prove "available" use over a 10-year period, and frequency need not come into play in a legal claim for the right of way. However, he added, the state is developing evidence of "frequency of use" in other road cases to meet the standard.

That nuance in the argument may prompt a request for an en banc hearing by the full panel of judges to weigh the merits of the state's claims to Salt Creek Road.

Utah is in its second year of an all-out battle over access to roads or routes in 22 of its 29 counties. In 2012, the claims were consolidated into one lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Interior over RS2477 roads, which were part of a transportation network established via an 1866 law to foster movement in the West.

While the statute has since been repealed with the adoption of the Federal Land Management Policy Act, the state's and counties' rights of way to roads that already existed were grandfathered in.

September 3, 2013

Utah counties want to take the roads less traveled -- and keep them

The Island Park Road, which descends 17 miles through sagebrush and pinyon and juniper trees before ending on the banks of the Green River, is one of more than 12,000 roads Utah has claimed under R.S. 2477. (Photo by Phil Taylor.)

Phil Taylor
Greenwire


DINOSAUR NATIONAL MONUMENT, Utah -- A bullet-riddled sign in Utah's pinyon-juniper desert warns of a winding highway ahead.

It's a harbinger of the tortuous political and legal fight among Utah's counties, environmental groups and the Bureau of Land Management that could dramatically change management of the area's stark deserts, red rock canyons and backcountry lands.

Key witnesses say they remember Island Park Road being used by jeeps and trucks at least as far back as the 1950s for livestock operations, farming, fishing and other recreation.

That, according to an 1866 mining law, means management of the road rightfully belongs to Utah, not BLM or the National Park Service, over whose land the road crosses.

The 17-mile road, which winds past ranchlands and American Indian petroglyphs to a historical ranch along the Green River in Dinosaur National Monument, is one of more than 12,000 roads that Utah and its counties last year claimed as their own in federal district court.

Spanning about 36,000 miles, the road claims represent one of Utah's boldest bids yet to assert control over federal lands and, according to conservationists, the most serious threat to Utah's remaining wildlands.

Utah claims the roads at stake have been used for decades by hunters, cattle ranchers, mineral speculators and motorized vehicle enthusiasts, and have either been shut down or restricted, or are in danger of closure by the federal government.

"There will be economic benefits derived from these roads if they're kept open," said Anthony Rampton, Utah's assistant attorney general and lead litigation counsel for the roads lawsuits. "That benefit will come from ranching enterprises, oil and gas development, wind development, solar development, tourist income, hunting and fishing income."

But unlike similar campaigns by Utah to "take back" federal lands through eminent domain or by hamstringing federal law enforcement agents, the law appears to be on Utah's side in its road battle.

In March, Utah's Kane County claimed a major victory when a federal district judge awarded it rights of way over 12 of 15 roads it had claimed, four of which run through the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument (Greenwire, March 25). Some of those 89 miles also run through the Paria-Hackberry wilderness study area, which BLM recognized for its roadless characteristics and which environmentalists have eyed for future wilderness designation.

"Given the facts that we have and the law, we're going to be able to prove the vast majority of these roads," Rampton said of the state's Revised Statute 2477 claims, which are located in 22 of its 29 counties. "It shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone."

The ruling was a shot across the bow for conservationists who fear the road claims, if successful, would fragment Utah's best remaining backcountry, including scenic national parks and monuments. Solitude would be lost, invasive weeds would spread and archaeological sites would be exposed to looters, they say.

Conservationists have assembled a legal team of more than 25 attorneys from national and local law firms to work alongside federal attorneys against the state's claims.

Steve Bloch, conservation director for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, said a majority of Utah's road claims are primitive dirt tracks, not the "highways" that the 1866 law aimed to protect.

"The overwhelming majority of these routes simply noodle out into the desert," Bloch said.

The claims run through every national park except Bryce Canyon and Arches and through at least two designated wilderness areas and would fragment habitat for vehicle-skittish elk and sage grouse, according to SUWA.

The road claims also travel more than 500 miles of wilderness study areas, 2,000 miles of national monuments and 3,600 miles of proposed wilderness, SUWA said. Few of them lead to grocery stores or schools or promote commerce, Bloch said.

"They're really out to thwart congressional wilderness designation," he said. "That's why the stakes are so high in Utah."

Barring a settlement, the legal battle promises to be a costly one -- one rural county in southeast Utah has already spent $1 million litigating a single road in Canyonlands National Park -- and could easily last decades.

"If we can't resolve them ourselves amidst negotiation, we have no choice but to go to court," Utah Gov. Gary Herbert (R) said in an interview. "I'm not willing to continue to kick the can down the road and put off getting that answer."

If Utah prevails, experts say other Western states could follow suit, kicking off an even larger battle.

'Short, sweet and enigmatic'

Utah's road claims -- filed in several massive complaints in spring 2012 -- fall under an obscure 1866 mining law designed to promote settlement in the Western frontier.

"And be it further enacted," R.S. 2477 read, "that the right of way for the construction of highways over public lands, not reserved for public uses, is hereby granted."

The law was "short, sweet and enigmatic," according to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2005 ruling.

The law was an opportunity for miners and homesteaders to build trails or roads over any public lands not yet reserved or claimed for private use. Most of the roads in the West were established under its authority.

As Utah's Supreme Court noted more than 80 years ago, "It was a standing offer of a free right of way over the public domain," which required no formal acceptance or approval by the federal authorities.

That all changed in 1976 when Congress repealed R.S. 2477 as part of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, a watershed law that directed BLM to retain and preserve its lands rather than dispose them for private development.

But Congress grandfathered any valid R.S. 2477 right that existed at the time.

As a result, counties seeking legal recognition of their R.S. 2477 claims must prove -- through historical records, photos or witness testimony -- that the roads were used as far back as the 1960s.

But witnesses who can testify to using the roads are getting old and dying, creating a sense of urgency for Utah counties.

"We've probably lost between half and three-quarters of our witnesses to death," Rampton said. "We're losing more every day."

The state is currently deposing hundreds of "at-risk" witnesses in courthouses, schools, county commission chambers, BLM offices and people's homes.

"'I killed my first buck here. We corralled cattle here,'" Rampton said. "That's the kind of detail we're able to get from these witnesses."

Last month alone, attorneys from the Justice Department, Utah and its counties, and SUWA visited Tooele, Garfield, Beaver, Grand and San Juan counties to take testimony from 10 witnesses.

Pete Steele, a 76-year-old witness from San Juan, testified for three days on roughly 100 roads. Steele, a former cattle rancher, tour guide, BLM employee and San Juan employee, said he used R.S. 2477 roads south of Canyonlands for livestock operations, hunting, predator control, hiking, and other recreation and traveling, according to his affidavit.

"When you spend time with the people who live and work on these roads and have lived there all their lives, you realize they are important, and they're important for intangible reasons," Rampton said. "For instance, there are a lot of hunters who use these roads. They have places they've gone all their lives. They've gone with their fathers and grandfathers and families. Traditions have built up around the use of these roads."

'The whole thing is a travesty'

But critics of Utah's claims say the vast majority of the roads are so-called Class D routes that have never been maintained and aren't critical to the state's transportation needs.

Many were created by off-roaders, oil and gas prospectors or wanderers who left the trodden path decades ago. In the arid desert, where plants and shrubs take hundreds of years to regrow, an improvised two-track can take centuries to fully restore itself.

"People argue about the meaning of the word 'highway,' but it's hard to imagine it means a random oil and gas seismic line from the '60s that hasn't been driven except once every five years," said Kevin Walker, a SUWA volunteer who lives in Moab and works for Microsoft. "To me that seems like abusing the law."

On a searing hot July day, Walker hunted for R.S. 2477 claims along Browns Hole Road, a dirt route that heads east from U.S. 191 toward the La Sal Mountains.

"See that faint line over there?" he asked, pointing to a strip of younger, lighter sagebrush that vanished into a hillside.

It was an oil and gas seismic line, one of thousands that were carved in the 1950s and '60s by prospectors who used dynamite to locate mineral deposits. San Juan County is claiming it under R.S. 2477.

"They were never planning on coming back," Walker said of the prospectors, who are said to have been paid by the mile. "Someone else comes along and sees the tire tracks and tries the road, even though there's nothing there."

Wearing a blue bucket hat, running shorts and sandals, Walker said he takes pride in finding the faintest R.S. 2477 claims. He mapped many of these routes decades ago while taking an inventory of roadless lands for the Utah Wilderness Coalition, of which SUWA is a member.

He said many of the counties' R.S. 2477 routes were even fainter when he first walked them 15 years ago. Since the lawsuits were filed, counties have systematically driven all the routes, he said.

"When the counties claim they need these roads, it's disingenuous and demonstrably false," he said. "What they really want is to control the land."

Once an R.S. 2477 claim is granted, BLM has almost no way to close them down, even if it needs to preserve them for wildlife or quiet recreation. It effectively precludes future wilderness.

"These are federal lands, and the federal government should be able to manage them in a rational way and not encumbered by this loophole in a very ancient law," Walker said. "To me, the whole thing is a travesty."

A handful of other R.S. 2477 road claims spur haphazardly from the Browns Hole Road. One of them narrows into a rocky trough before petering out into the juniper and pinyon flats.

In the late 1990s, Grand County decided to increase the miles of Class B roads in its system to prevent a reduction in state subsidies for road maintenance, Walker said. It unilaterally bladed minor roads and unmaintained jeep trails, he said, but "BLM didn't have the guts to stand up to them."

Several miles south of here, the R.S. 2477 battle is playing out at Hatch Point, a sagebrush plateau coveted by oil and gas and potash developers as well as SUWA and the Sierra Club, which have proposed including the land in a 1.4-million-acre Greater Canyonlands National Monument.

A 22-mile paved road takes visitors to the Needles Overlook, which offers miles of stunning views over labyrinth red rock canyons underneath Canyonlands park.

Hatch Point has plenty of dirt roads, though the area's dense brush, rock buttes and spires make them hard to see. San Juan has staked dozens of R.S. 2477 claims here.

One of them leads to a dried-up stock pond and a field of invasive cheatgrass and Russian thistle. It fades a couple of hundred yards into the desert before disappearing.

"It just goes out here and dies," said Liz Thomas, an attorney for SUWA. "It doesn't circle back. It wasn't intended to go anywhere."

Court-awarded road claims would make the area an easier target for mineral development and potentially a weaker candidate for a national monument.

'A wasting kind of witness'

Roads support San Juan's mineral economy -- oil, gas and mining account for 60 percent of its tax base -- but they also preserve recreation, said John Fellmeth, who helps run the county's roads preservation project.

San Juan claimed roughly 1,800 roads in its R.S. 2477 lawsuit, even though some have never been driven by county officials.

"It looks like there might be a nice overlook," Fellmeth said, pointing to a narrow rust-colored dirt path at Hatch Point.

He was joined by Nick Sandberg, the county's public lands coordinator who previously worked more than 30 years at BLM's Monticello field office, which oversees Hatch Point.

Neither was sure where the road went or what it was used for.

It likely provided access for livestock growers, Sandberg said, pointing to a salt block on the side of the road that may have nourished cows or sheep.

The road ended at the plateau's edge, where a dirt clearing offered sweeping views of Heart Canyon nearly a thousand feet below and the "six shooter" pinnacle -- a sandstone spire named by early cowboys for its resemblance to pistols. The jagged rocks of Canyonlands could be seen in the distance.

The road certainly led somewhere, though whether it is a "highway" is a matter of dispute that will be decided by a federal judge.

Fellmeth said there are about 80 "at-risk" witnesses in San Juan. Some testify on as many as 60 roads in a day, he said.

"Most of them are fairly old, and even those who are still with us, their mental faculties are deteriorating quite dramatically," he said. "It's a wasting kind of witness."

Critics have questioned whether witnesses in their 70s or 80s could accurately identify the roads they used when Lyndon Johnson was president.

Before they testify, witnesses are driven on the roads by the state's attorneys to "refresh their recollection," said Bloch, the attorney from SUWA.

Courts will have to wrestle with issues of credibility, as they do with all trials.

From the Needles Overlook at Hatch Point, Fellmeth pointed to an airstrip about a thousand feet below that may have been used to transport oil and gas equipment to the Lockhart Basin.

Visual clues like that can help orient R.S. 2477 witnesses, Fellmeth said.

However, they can also be deceiving. Less than a mile away is a similar airstrip with similar red rock surroundings.

'We have a high card'

County officials in Utah see R.S. 2477 as a potent defense against the president's use of the Antiquities Act to designate national monuments.

The 1906 law is controversial in Utah, where President Clinton designated the 1.9-million-acre Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in 1996 over the objections of local officials. Monuments bar future mineral claims.

R.S. 2477 adds another twist to Utah's political mine field.

"It just gives the counties an extra card to play that they haven't had in the past," said Lynn Jackson, a councilman for Grand County, whose economy depends heavily on mountain bikers, off-highway vehicle riders and national park visitors.

"We know we have a high card," Jackson said. "For now, we're just going to tuck it up our sleeve, and if we need it, we'll play it."

Utah counties were politically emboldened by Kane County's R.S. 2477 victory, Jackson said. Grand and five other counties are currently negotiating with conservationists and other stakeholders on a major public lands bill.

"SUWA is concerned," Jackson said. "If we take all these 12,000 segments, they're saying 'Holy crap, we're likely to lose all that ... maybe we should negotiate.'"

Jackson, who formerly worked for BLM for 32 years, opposes the proposed Canyonlands National Monument, which he argued would hamper oil and gas and potash development in Grand, stifling economic diversification.

On a recent drive through the butte-marked desert lands northwest of Moab, Jackson pointed to a sandy, riparian wash passable only by motorcycles that descends to an overlook above the Green River.

The path, an R.S. 2477 claim, was kept open in BLM's travel management plan, even though conservationists wanted it closed, Jackson said. The county believes it should have the final say over who uses the road.

"That's a huge draw to the motorized recreation economy," he said. "They're the ones who spend the most money around here."

A spreading fight?

Litigating all of Utah's R.S. 2477 roads to the 10th Circuit could take well over a decade and cost billions of dollars.

"Obviously it's kind of insane to try to litigate 12,000 roads," said one top Interior official who asked not to be named. The first Kane County case, which involved 15 roads, took nine days of trial and field trips, the official said.

The hope is that as cases are decided at the appellate court level, parties will have a better foundation for settlement talks.

Since March, a handful of cases in Garfield, Kane, Emery and San Juan counties have been active. Meanwhile, the state is continuing to depose its old and infirm witnesses in case the rest of the roughly 20 cases become active.

While conservationists have criticized the state's lawsuits as a waste of taxpayer money, the R.S. 2477 campaign is widely supported in the Utah Legislature, where lawmakers earlier this year passed a special appropriation to compensate counties for legal services from outside firms including Holland & Hart. The firm is estimated to have provided at least $1.8 million in services to Kane County alone, The Salt Lake Tribune reported in March, citing former BLM Director and Utah public lands official Kathleen Clarke.

Under the plan, the state would pay for half of the first $700,000 in legal bills a county incurs and would pay the majority of bills beyond that.

Conservationists are skeptical whether the federal government will adequately represent their interests.

According to SUWA's Bloch, conservation groups have twice as many attorneys working on R.S. 2477 cases than the Justice Department. Pro bono work is being provided by law firms Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Cooley LLP and Jenner & Block LLP, he said. There are also two local Salt Lake City firms, former Earthjustice attorney Robert Wiygul, and SUWA and Wilderness Society attorneys working on the cases.

The federal government's appeal of the Kane County case to the 10th Circuit was heartening, Bloch said.

Utah counties have lost some notable R.S. 2477 cases too.

For example, a federal district judge in 2011 rejected San Juan County's claim that several miles of Salt Creek Canyon in Canyonlands National Park was an R.S. 2477 route. "A jeep trail on a creek bed, with its shifting sand and intermittent floods is a by-way, but not a highway," wrote U.S. District Judge Bruce Jenkins (Land Letter, June 2, 2011).

San Juan and Utah appealed the case to the 10th Circuit, which could issue a decision any day.

Utah's R.S. 2477 claims are being closely watched by environmental attorneys as well as other Western states looking to loosen Washington, D.C.'s reins over public lands.

The Vermont Law School included Utah's road claims in its "Top 10 Environmental Watch List 2013," warning that if federal courts affirm even a fraction of the state's claims, it could set off a cascade of threats to national parks, wilderness study areas, monuments and other protected lands across the West.

"Other western states are likely watching Utah's land grab, waiting to see what the federal courts will do with these 26 claims," wrote Hillary Hoffmann, a professor at the law school, and student Sara Imperiale.

Alaska has already earmarked money to study potential R.S. 2477 claims, and Nevada, the birthplace of the Sagebrush Rebellion, would jump on the R.S. 2477 "bandwagon" if Utah prevails in its lawsuits, Hoffmann and Imperiale said.

Attempts to settle

The ongoing litigation has created a great deal of uncertainty on all sides, including BLM, said Robert Keiter, a professor of public lands for the University of Utah who serves on the board of the National Parks Conservation Association, which has criticized the state's road claims.

"That impacts the BLM's ability to make long-term land and resource management decisions wherever these claims are being pressed," he said.

The road claims also complicate a broader effort by Utah GOP Rep. Rob Bishop to pass a comprehensive public lands bill for six eastern Utah counties -- Uintah, Emery, Carbon, Grand, Wayne and San Juan -- that would consolidate lands for oil and gas, potash and mining development while designating others for off-highway vehicles, mountain bikes and wilderness.

Bishop said conservation groups he is working with -- which include SUWA, the Wilderness Society, the Pew Charitable Trusts, the Sierra Club and the Nature Conservancy -- have "legitimate concerns" that future road claims could tarnish wilderness designations, which, by definition, aim to keep the lands "untrammeled by man."

Scott Groene, executive director of SUWA, said Washington County in 2009 agreed to have wilderness designations under legislation passed by former Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah) but has since filed R.S. 2477 claims in those areas.

"Utah's 20-plus lawsuits against the United States over R.S. 2477 may be the biggest hurdle to overcome in trying to reach agreement here," Groene said. "Fortunately, Congressman Bishop has said he believes the R.S. 2477 issue should be resolved as part of this legislation. We are in agreement with him on this point."

Last month, the various sides reached a rare accord to amicably resolve a handful of the disputed road claims in remote mountains west of Salt Lake City.

BLM, Utah, Juab County and environmental groups announced a settlement designed to balance the protection of primitive lands in the Deep Creek Mountains wilderness study area with access for motorized vehicle users (Greenwire, Aug. 20).

It marked the first negotiated settlement in Utah's larger bid over the R.S. 2477 claims.

Congress has tried unsuccessfully a handful of times to address the conflict.

Bills by then-Rep. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) nearly a decade ago sought to narrow the definition of R.S. 2477 rights of ways. Bills by Rep. Steve Pearce (R-N.M.) in 2006 and 2007 would have given states and counties more influence in the process. But lawmakers have done little since then.

Some observers are hopeful Bishop can resolve some claims in eastern Utah.

"There's an opportunity for some, if not all, of those roads to be addressed as a result of this legislative process," said Cody Stewart, an energy adviser for Herbert and former Bishop aide. "It may be one of the negotiated pieces that helps bring this across the finish line."

June 30, 2013

Utah vs. feds: Preparing with road trips, cameras, interviews with old-timers

This road in Dry Canyon in Box Elder County is one of the 12,400 roads the state is seeking title to in its fight with the federal government over preserving access. (Public Lands Policy Coordination Office)

By Amy Joi O'Donoghue
Deseret News


SALT LAKE CITY — A legal team from Utah is traveling to remote areas throughout the state, recording testimony from aging witnesses and filming panoramic views of roads that snake through canyons or cross sagebrush-peppered lands.

The information is being compiled for the state's legal fight against the federal government in which it filed 22 lawsuits in 2012 that have since been consolidated into one case.

In a briefing recently given to a committee of lawmakers, Kathleen Clarke said there is some urgency in getting depositions from witnesses because they are aging.

"Some of these folks are our best witnesses," said Clarke, who is director of the Governor's Public Lands Policy Coordination Office. "Not knowing how long it will take or if any of these cases will ever be heard in court, we have an awfully long line of witnesses to get through."

Clarke said that as part of the requirement that the state prove that the roads existed and had 10 years of use prior to 1976, the legal team is also filming the roads.

"We are filming so the judge won't have to get into a Jeep and drive down these roads."

The roads in question are what's called RS2477 roads — named after a statute enacted in 1866 to promote settlement of the western United States by granting rights-of-way to states and counties for transportation.

The statute was repealed by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, but that action was subject to "valid existing rights," giving rise to an interpretation by Utah and other Western states that the federal government can't forbid access.

Negotiations with the Department of Interior over title to the roads have lingered for years, finally propelling contentious legal battles in which Utah has alternately been victorious and suffered defeat.

One such loss was access to Salt Creek Road in Canyonlands National Park, which the state and San Juan County contend was illegally closed by the National Park Service.

Harry Souvall, public lands section chief for the Utah Attorney General's Office, said the case has been heard on appeal by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, with a decision to be released later this year.

The Salt Creek Road, he told lawmakers, is a good example of why many of the disputed roads are critical for economies of rural counties in Utah.

"Park service attendance and tourism in San Juan County were dropping and it's because people can no longer drive to see Angel Arch. It is now a nine-mile hike to get in there to see it. A lot of people can't do a nine-mile hike in sand to see anything, let alone this gem," he said.

The National Park Service has maintained the road was closed to motorized traffic because it was a streambed that was suffering from environmental degradation.

Souvall said the state has another RS2477 case stemming from a Kane County road dispute that is likely to be heard before the 10th Circuit as well. Together, the two cases have the potential to bring clarity and certainty to the issue.

"There's still that question on what we can or cannot obtain," he said.

The state's efforts have been resoundingly criticized by multiple environmental groups that argue its quest for title to the roads is a costly, irresponsible battle that will only lay waste to pristine landscapes.

"I am sort of shocked when I hear it is 12,500 roads and the largest litigation effort in the state," said Heather Bennett, with For Kids and Lands, an education coalition. "It comes back to the question of what is the best use of resources in this state."

The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance in particular asserts the state wants "roads to nowhere" that are often narrow deer trails or traverse slick rock vistas.

But Souvall said nearly all the 12,400 roads that are part of the consolidated lawsuit have been vetted through a process that includes historical aerial imagery.

"A road that is closed is going to look like a deer trail," he said.

To support its documentation that the roads were used for a decade or more, Souvall said a legal team has been taking testimony from aging witnesses to preserve the historical record.

"In another case, we had taken a bunch of witness statements from 2000 to 2002. In 2009, when we were going through those statements, we found that approximately 40 percent of our witnesses were either dead or incapable of testifying. We lost almost half our witnesses."

The state struck an agreement with the Department of Justice to take 225 "preservation" depositions from witnesses who are 70 years or older who have health conditions and from witnesses age 80 and older.

"They may not be here to testify in live court," he said, adding that two of the witnesses are more than 100 years old.

To prepare the witnesses, Souvall's legal team takes them out on the road in question to see how much they remember. A Google Earth-style camera also captures a 360-degree view of the road as part of the state's documentation.

"Some of them know over 200 roads and some of them are over age 80," he said. "It is impossible to expect them to remember the details if we don't do this."

The process of gathering the preservation depositions is expected to take the full two years that make up the agreement, he added.

"It is a large effort," he said. "The process is designed to be as efficient as possible while still preserving the testimony of witnesses due to poor health or age."

One lawmaker questioned Souvall about that effort and why the state is pursuing claims to the roads in the wake of such criticism.

He mentioned a road in Uintah County that offered a breathtaking view of surrounding scenery.

"It's a stunning vista. You see people camped there. I don't know how you put a price on Scouting trips, family reunions and everyone being able to go there, from grandpa to infants," he said. "Once it is our right, our road, it is much more difficult to close that road. The fact that it is ours does not mean it will be abused."

July 22, 2012

Public lands war heats up between SUWA, Gov. Gary Herbert

Riding out of the Little Grand Canyon of the San Rafael Swell April 2, 2011, in the San Rafael Swell in central Utah. The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance worries public lands like San Rafael Swell would be in peril if Gov. Gary Herbert's public land policies succeed. (Tom Smart, Deseret News)

By Amy Joi O'Donoghue
Deseret News


SALT LAKE CITY — The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance is on the attack, launching a high-profile campaign against Gov. Gary Herbert over his so-called public lands "grab."

The environmental group took out full-page advertisements in both of Salt Lake City's daily newspapers last week and plans to air radio spots and go door-to-door to spread its anti-Herbert message.

Referencing HB148 sponsored by Rep. Ken Ivory, R-West Jordan, the ad says Herbert signed legislation requiring the federal government to hand over more than 30 million acres it manages in Utah.

"But how could Utah afford to manage those lands?" the ad asks. "Right now, the state government can barely afford to keep our state parks open."

Instead of focusing on messages such as preservation or conservation of the land, SUWA asserts such an action would be a financial catastrophe that residents can ill afford.

"Gov. Herbert's efforts to take over public lands would be incredibly expensive for the state of Utah, both environmentally and economically," said Scott Groene, SUWA's director. "We have faith that when Utahns know the facts, they will oppose his land grab."

Groene said the public campaign is also being spurred by lawsuits the state filed earlier this summer against the federal government seeking control of RS2477 or Civil War-era routes and roads, an estimated 12,000 of them.

"(Herbert) has filed 22 lawsuits in front of eight federal judges. It seems serious," Groene said. "He is ready to throw a mountain of public money at it. And we are taking it very seriously."

This latest dust-up adds another dimension to what has become an increasingly active and vitriolic war of words and legal actions over what should — or should not happen — on federal lands controlled by the Bureau of Land Management or the U.S. Forest Service.

From sage grouse protections, the RS2477 battle and angst over rumored monument designations, Herbert has thrust himself front and center into the fray, stressing repeatedly that conservation of public lands and responsible development are not mutually exclusive and local control is best.

But Groene said Herbert's decisions go far beyond what other gubernatorial leaders are doing throughout the West.

"Gov. Herbert's actions to date have been far more radical than what has been taken by any other Western state. You see the issue of (RS2477) pop up here and there across the West, but nothing comparable to the lawsuits in Utah."

Groene said the scope of the state's actions under Herbert's purview constitute one of the most "serious threats Utah wilderness has faced in years. The only thing that is clear is that the state will spend millions and millions of dollars to benefit a small group of anti-federal constituents."

Herbert's spokeswoman, Ally Isom, dismissed the assertions of the environmental group.

"It's the political campaign season, so it is no surprise when special interest groups make political statements for their self-serving purposes. It's nothing more than political grandstanding," she said. "Neither their conduct nor their statements will weaken the governor's commitment to work through his Balanced Resource Council to make meaningful progress."

Ivory, the architect of HB148, said SUWA's criticism of Herbert's public lands policies comes from one small faction.

"SUWA is out to raise money. It is the same throughout time. You try to find a boogeyman and make it as scary as possible and raise as much money as possible so you have a reason for being."

He added that the mainstream public is fed up with over-restrictive federal ownership of lands that gives no concessions to local sentiments, and points to the American Lands Council, a group that grew out what he says is a groundswell of support for Western states to reclaim the federal lands promised to them.

"Because these things are now getting so personal, it's come down to the health, safety and welfare of local communities, the counties and the state," he said. "You either stand up for those rights or allow these arbitrary national policies to negatively impact the health, safety and welfare of these communities going forward."

Ivory said precedent exists for states to have that federal land returned, citing a successful effort by Indiana, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana and several others in 1828.

"They all got together and sent petition after petition after petition to the federal government saying, 'You are not disposing of our lands like you promised.'"

He said the federal government now controls only about 4 percent of the lands in those states.

"It's just crazy," he said. "What they're saying is you people in Utah are not good enough, not strong enough, not smart enough to manage your own lands, but somehow the people in Arkansas, Missouri, Louisiana and Illinois are."

March 3, 2010

In Utah, a move to seize federal land

The state House passes a bill allowing the use of eminent domain to take protected land from the federal government. Utah wants to develop a stretch outside Arches National Park and other areas.


By Nicholas Riccardi
Los Angeles Times


Reporting from Salt Lake City - Long frustrated by Washington's control over much of their state, Utah legislators are proposing a novel way to deal with federal land -- seize it and develop it.

The Utah House of Representatives last week passed a bill allowing the state to use eminent domain to take land the federal government owns and has long protected from development.

The state wants to develop three hotly contested areas -- national forest land in the Wasatch Mountains north of Salt Lake City, land in a proposed wilderness area in the red rock southwestern corner of the state, and a stretch of desert outside of Arches National Park that the Obama administration has declared off-limits to oil and gas development.

Supporters argue that provisions in the legislation that granted Utah statehood allow it to make such a land grab. They also hope to spark a showdown in the Supreme Court that would rearrange the balance of power between states and the federal government.

Some legal experts say the effort is unlikely to succeed, but Republican state Rep. Chris Herrod, one of the authors of the bill, said the state had little choice.

"I love America, and I'm a peaceful guy," Herrod said, "but the only real option we have is rebellion, which I don't believe in, and the courts."

The eminent domain proposal is among the most audacious yet in a state accustomed to heated battles over the two-thirds of its land owned by the federal government.

This is the state, after all, where local officials bulldozed their own roads through Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, tore down signs barring off-roading in Canyonlands National Park and, with funding from the statehouse, spent years unsuccessfully defending those actions in federal court.

The eminent domain proposal quickly drew scorn from environmental groups.

"This is an ideological fantasy," said Scott Groene, executive director of the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance in Moab. "Everybody knows this isn't going to happen. The federal public lands are the thing that makes the American West so great."

The proposal is one of a host in statehouses nationwide that show a deep discontent with federal authority. Eight legislatures have passed resolutions asserting, to various degrees, the sovereignty of their states.

In Utah, a dozen measures have been introduced since January that defy the federal government. It has reached such a pitch that the House's Democratic leader last week complained that Republicans were spending too much time on such proposals.

The most aggressive efforts are generally by conservative groups, but Michael Boldin of the 10th Amendment Center in Los Angeles -- named for the constitutional clause that some contend limits federal power over states -- said that states' rights were also being cited by liberals in support of state proposals to legalize marijuana and gay marriage.

In the Intermountain West, particularly in rural areas, residents have long complained that federal preservation of land has prevented development that could provide reliable jobs and bolster the tax base.

Last week, a Utah congressman warned that the Obama administration was plotting to create two national monuments in the state, and Republican Gov. Gary Herbert announced that he would meet with Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to urge him to reconsider.

The administration said the hullabaloo was sparked by a memo identifying areas that could be protected at some point in the future, not imminently.

A spokeswoman said Herbert supported the concept of the eminent domain proposal but was unsure whether it would survive a legal challenge. The bill's authors contend they can rely on the legislation that brought Utah into the union in 1896, which they read as requiring the federal government to sell its land in the state and give Utah a 5% cut.

The legislators want to seize and open two roads through national forest land that the federal government closed. This would allow access to state land that they hope to sell to developers to build high-end cabins.

A third area would be more provocative: a swath of federal land outside Arches National Park where the George W. Bush administration, on the eve of the 2008 election, authorized oil and gas exploration. The Obama administration reversed the decision.

Legal experts contend that the federal government is under no obligation to sell its land in Utah and that no state could successfully seize federal property.

"It flies in the face of history and is also inconsistent as a point of law," said Bob Keiter, a law professor at the University of Utah.

Keiter and others argue that the move illustrates a pattern in recent Western history -- a conservative backlash to the election of a Democratic president. After Jimmy Carter was elected in 1976, the movement known as the Sagebrush Rebellion helped lock up the West for the GOP and put Ronald Reagan in the White House.

President Clinton faced a similar backlash, aggravated by his creation before the 1996 presidential election of Grand Staircase-Escalante Monument.

"Utah has this history of grand conservation gains," Groene said. "Every time it happens it triggers this anger. And 20 years later we always look back and agree that conservation was a wise idea."

February 19, 2010

In the West, Opposition to New National Monuments

Representative Rob Bishop said he had uncovered this "secret" list of possible monuments.

By KIRK JOHNSON
New York Times


DENVER — In much of the nation, “monument” is an innocuous word, conjuring up images of historical figures cast in bronze or road-side plaques few stop to read.

In the West, though, it’s a fighting word, bound up for years with simmering resentments against the federal government and presidential powers. The feeling dates to the days when, with the stroke of a pen, Theodore Roosevelt declared lands he wished to protect as national monuments under the American Antiquities Act.

A new monument fight erupted this week when Representative Rob Bishop, Republican of Utah, said he had uncovered a “secret” Interior Department memorandum suggesting that the federal government was considering national monument designation for 14 huge blocks of land in nine states from Montana to New Mexico.

A spokeswoman for the Department of the Interior, Kendra Barkoff, said the list was not secret at all, but simply a “very, very, very preliminary,” internal working document resulting from a brainstorming session that Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, a Democrat and former senator from Colorado, had requested about the lands in the West.

“No decisions have been made about which areas, if any, might merit more serious review and consideration,” Ms. Barkoff said in a statement.

But the word “secret,” especially when applied to the possible doings of far-away federal bureaucrats, is right up there with “monument” in its ability to unleash vitriol among Western conservatives. In 1996, President Bill Clinton created the 1.7 million-acre Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in southern Utah with a surprise announcement that still resonates across the region as a symbol of government powers, or what critics call the abuse of those powers.

The new Interior Department memorandum, people in both parties said, has reopened a wound from those days that never quite healed.

“Given the lingering frustration felt by many Utahns, following the 1996 ‘stroke of the pen’ monument designation, it is totally inappropriate for this federal agency to even have preliminary discussions without involving the stakeholders on the ground,” said Representative Jim Matheson, Democrat of Utah, a state that had two of the possible new monuments on the list, the San Rafael Swell and Cedar Mesa.

In Montana, an area of unplowed grassland called the Northern Prairie was listed on the Interior Department memorandum, discussed as a possible home for a new national bison range. But the state’s representative at large, Denny Rehberg, a Republican, said in a statement, “The Antiquities Act was never intended as an end-run around the will of the people nor as a land-grab device for East Coast politicians.”

Ms. Barkoff at the Interior Department said in an interview that Mr. Salazar, as Colorado’s attorney general, United States senator and secretary of the interior, had a history of seeking consensus, and that any discussion of monument designation would be open to public and Congressional involvement.

A spokesman for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, a conservation group, said the appearance of secrecy in monument talks had melded with ideological opposition to the Obama administration — widespread in a deeply Republican part of the country.

“I don’t think it’s as much about the specifics of the land issues as it is pure ideological concerns,” said the group’s executive director, Scott Groene. “There’s already been a great fury going on in this state, and it’s hard to imagine that this really changes any of that.”

The fury is nothing new. In 1969, for example, the town of Boulder, Utah, passed a resolution changing its name to Johnson’s Folly, and predicted the town’s demise after President Lyndon B. Johnson added thousands of acres to Arches and Capitol Reef National Monuments, which were both later designated national parks by Congress.

The town later reverted to its original name, and on its Web site the Boulder Business Group now proudly calls the town the “gateway to the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument.”

Representative Bishop, who was teaching history and government in a high school in northern Utah when that monument was created in 1996, also held out the possibility that cooler heads and calmer discussions could prevail on land protection in the West. The prerequisite, he said, is transparency and genuine dialogue. If Westerners think there is a foregone conclusion, hostility to more national monuments will be unavoidable.

“If they do things in an open and transparent way and involve everyone, then there’s no need for yelling and screaming,” Mr. Bishop said. “Do it the right way, and we can work it out.”

April 13, 2009

Court denies Utah counties' monument road claims

Counties sued over water rights and road access

By Patty Henetz
The Salt Lake Tribune


Kane and Garfield have lost another round in their years-long court fight for more road and water access in the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument.

A three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday upheld an earlier ruling that the Kane County Water Conservancy District, which is seeking to drill a culinary well within the monument, doesn't yet have a case.

In their 32-page ruling, the judges said that because the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, which crafted the management plan for the monument's 1.9 million acres, hasn't completed an environmental analysis on Kane's request to drill the well in Johnson Canyon, the county cannot show it has been harmed.

Kane County, the Kane County Water Conservancy District and Garfield County sued the Interior Department and the BLM to challenge the monument plan on both road and water-right access.

Mike Noel, executive director of the water district and Kane's representative to the Utah House, said the monument plan allows water rights of way only under certain circumstances that make it difficult for his water district to tap its water right, whose headwaters are within the monument boundaries.

The proposed well site is on land proposed for wilderness study, which the BLM already has identified as having wilderness-quality resources.

Earthjustice attorney Ted Zukoski warned that riparian areas on the monument could be jeopardized if Kane County is allowed to siphon the water.

Earthjustice is representing the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the Sierra Club and The Wilderness Alliance as interveners in the lawsuit against Interior.

Kane's water district wants to drill a new well on federal land, Noel said, because too many ranches in the narrow canyon have septic systems that could contaminate a water line laid on private property.

The Denver appeals panel also upheld a lower-court ruling that counties seeking ownership of certain roads across federal land must take their claims to federal court, road by road.

This marks another time a federal court has responded the same way to lawsuits over road claims filed under a Civil War-era law, called Revised Statute 2477, that Congress abolished in 1976.

BLM spokesman Larry Crutchfield said nearly 1,000 miles of roads and trails are open to motorized access within the Grand Staircase -- with about 600 miles open to off-highway-vehicle recreation.

March 26, 2009

Grand County to join state, Carbon County in fighting SUWA legal complaint

by Craig Bigler
Moab Times-Independent


By a 4-3 vote, the Grand County Council last week chose to intervene in a complaint filed in the U.S. District Court of Washington, D.C. by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance and others against the Bureau of Land Management. The complaint alleges the BLM’s new resource management plans do not adequately address air quality issues, issues of climate change, and the impact of ORVs on cultural resources.

The motion to intervene was made by councilman Gene Ciarus and seconded by Ken Ballantyne. They were joined by Pat Holyoak and Chris Baird in the majority vote. Audrey Graham, Chris Conrad, and Bob Greenberg voted against.

According to the resolution the Utah Attorney General will represent Grand County along with the State of Utah and Carbon County. If conflicts arise among those parties, “they shall meet and confer” to resolve those conflicts, the resolution states.

However, the parties may have to retain independent counsel to resolve conflicts. When the potential cost to the county was discussed as a reason to not intervene, Grand County Attorney Happy Morgan said the attorney general has sometimes helped with costs, as he did when the county had to cope with several expensive murder trials in 2004.

Council chairman Greenberg presented a memo he prepared to support his contention that the health, safety, and welfare of county citizens are not threatened by the complaint, as the resolution states, and that there is no need to intervene.

Ciarus said that a confidential memo prepared by Morgan refutes both Greenberg’s memo and his conclusion, especially because it depends on information provided by John Harja, director of the Governor’s Public Lands Policy Coordination Office. “He changes quite a bit,” Ciarus said.

Because Morgan’s memo was submitted to the council as confidential information, a copy was not released to the public.

Ciarus said the county has a vital interest in the court action because the new RMP’s travel plan is identical with the county’s travel plan, which is based on the county’s general plan and calls for new roads for mineral exploration. He expressed concern that if SUWA wins in court the travel plan will be jeopardized.

He also argued that, if SUWA wins its case, then the county’s RS 2477 claims to class D roads will be jeopardized.

According to Harja, Greenberg’s memo states, “the most likely outcome [of the court] is that the parties to the suit will agree to have the BLM amend the portions of the RMP that are in dispute.”

According to Richard Rathbun, assistant Utah Attorney General, there are no RS 2477 issues at stake, Greenberg wrote. He also quoted a disclaimer from the RMP itself: “Nothing in this document is intended to provide evidence bearing on or addressing the validity of any RS 2477 assertions.”

Council member Baird said that he agreed with SUWA “somewhat,” and he worried about potential costs if Grand County’s interests diverge from Carbon County’s. But he said he voted for the resolution because he felt Grand must be part of the process.

February 17, 2009

OHV enthusiasts rally at the Capitol


By KEVIN ASHBY and RICHARD SHAW
Emery County Progress


More than 400 off-road-vehicle enthusiasts gathered on the steps of the Utah Capitol Feb. 6 in support of the state's stance on the multiple use of public lands - both state and federal - within its boundaries.

"This shows a great grass-roots effort," Lt. Gov. Gary Herbert said of the gathering. "Let your voice be heard. Energize coalitions, and understand the policies governing the land. We are supportive of public use, a balanced use, including agriculture, natural resources and recreation. No one should be excluded."

Herbert said, people opposed to multiple use are demanding good science be used in determining the state's policy on land use. "Sound science counts in my opinion," he said. "And this science shows that we can be good stewards and still use the public lands." Herbert said there is a high demand for off-road-vehicle use but that access is shrinking.

"We have got to find a way to work with the new administration," he said. "United voices can make things happen. We have to find solutions and make multiple use a win-win situation. We want to be engaged in the process."

Most of those attending the rally were supportive of off-road recreation in the state. One enthusiast suggested that if the governor wanted to be involved in the process maybe he should take a trail ride with someone from the assembled group rather than with members of the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.

SUWA supports initiatives to permanently protect the Colorado Plateau wild places advocating wilderness preservation. They claim to be the only independent organization working full-time to defend America's redrock wilderness from oil and gas development, unnecessary road construction, rampant off-road vehicle use and other threats to Utah's wilderness-quality lands.

Several of the elected officials present at the rally spoke about the actions of Tim DeChristopher, the University of Utah student who monkey-wrenched the BLMs Dec. 19 oil-and-gas-lease auction. The student was quoted as saying he never had any intention to pay the lease money and encouraged civil disobedience by other environmental activists to further their cause.

DeChristopher's actions, they said, have had a negative affect on Utah's schools and health departments.

"This (leasing) is an important source of money for our kids," said Dennis Stowell, Sen-R, District 28. "We need leases, property access and a good multi-use land policy to make this work."

A letter drafted to the governor's office from the county commissioners in San Juan County was read calling for enforcing the rules of law when dealing with DeChristopher.

Bradley Last, Rep-R, District 71, told the group that lease money does impact education in Utah and that nobody loves Utah's public lands like Utahns. "We know the land, and we will take care of it so that we all can use it in the future," he said.

Officials from Kane County told the group they will continue their RS2477 road identification fight that benefits all Utahns concerning road ownership across federal lands.

David Clark, Rep-R, District 74, said he supports Kane County officials and that legislators need to plan the pathway to turn things around for the state's multiple use land policy.

"When rights are taken away, it impacts everyone," he said.

Kevin VanTassell, Sen-R, District 26, told the group the state receives $.51 per acre from the federal government to rent the federal lands in Utah. He said access to the state's school trust lands is crucial.

"If we can't access our lands and develop the resources there, our education budgets will be impacted negatively," he stated.

Ralph Okerlund, Sen-R, District 24, said Utahns can't speculate on the future.

"We need to ensure our future and that comes from having access to federal lands and responsibly developing the resources found there," said Okerlund.

Karl Malone, former Utah Jazz player, made a surprise appearance at the rally, and he received cheers when he showed his support for land use.

"No way will they kick us off what we own," Malone said. He also promised all the support he could give.

"The state's multi-use vision is a three-legged stool," Herbert said, speaking of using the land in Utah to support agriculture, natural resources and recreation.

"A united voice can make things happen so that solutions can be found."

Mike Noel, state representative from District 72 that represents Kane County, one of the areas that has been spearheading RS-2477 right-of-way fights was one of the leading speakers at the rally along with Mike Swenson from USA-ALL. He suggested that maybe the rural parts of the state need to go back to the 1970-80s in combating what has been going on with road closures.

"We have the right to these lands and we shouldn't be shut out of them," he stated. "In fact I am right now proclaiming that this is the beginning of Sagebrush Rebellion number two in Utah."

The Sagebrush Rebellion was a political movement that had its roots in the 1960s and continued up through the 1990s when interests for open land openly fought with environmentalists and government control of federal land.

A number of people from Eastern Utah attended the rally, with signs and calls for keeping multiple use lands, multiple use.

This year's rally was a far cry from the one USA-ALL tried to orchestrate last year when only about 25 people showed up. Riding and land use clubs from all over the state were represented at the rally.

December 20, 2008

Utah oil drilling leases go fast -- fishily fast in some cases, authorities say

Two bidders, suspected of being environmental activists, are detained.

By DeeDee Correll
December 20, 2008


Reporting from Denver -- Bidders at a federal auction Friday snapped up oil and gas leases in Utah's red-rock country, despite a legal challenge that ultimately could prevent them from drilling there.

Companies paid $48 to $270 an acre, buying up leases on 88% of the offered parcels.

The auction, which netted $7.4 million, was briefly halted Friday afternoon when authorities grew suspicious of two bidders suspected of being environmental activists who had no intention of paying.

They outbid competitors for a number of leases before officials detained them.

Critics of the auction, including actor Robert Redford, have branded the sale as a last-ditch effort by the Bush administration to allow energy development on public lands before the president leaves office. Conservationists contend that some of the parcels are too close to national parks and that federal officials have not considered the effects drilling would have on air quality and other environmental factors.

Environmental groups filed suit this week to block the sale. But late Thursday, they struck an agreement with the Bureau of Land Management that allowed the auction to proceed as long as the leases were not issued for 30 days, giving a federal judge time to consider whether the leases should go forward.

The 30-day period ends Jan. 19 -- Bush's last full day in office.

The judge said he intended to rule before that date, said Stephen Bloch, conservation director for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, which is a party to the lawsuit.

BLM officials have defended the sales as part of their obligation to open federal lands to energy development in an attempt to reduce dependence on foreign oil.

"And let's not forget what energy industry jobs mean to local economies," BLM's Utah Director Selma Sierra said in a written statement.

She noted that because "oil and gas exploration is costly and highly speculative," about 6% of leases actually result in drilling.

The bureau originally planned to lease 360,000 acres in southern and eastern Utah, but it reduced that number to 132,000 acres after weeks of criticism from environmental groups and the National Park Service. It withdrew some proposed leases next to Arches National Park, on a golf course in the town of Moab and beneath the rim of Nine-Mile Canyon, which is lined with ancient Native American rock art.

But environmentalists argue that the remaining leases are adjacent to sensitive areas and other national parks or in other regions that the federal government has declared "wilderness quality."

About 100 protesters marched Friday in the snow and wind outside the BLM's Salt Lake City office, hoisting signs that read "No drilling in Arches" and "Our home is not for sale," said Terry Shepherd, director of Red Rocks Forests, who joined in the demonstration.

Inside, one man drew attention as he repeatedly outbid his competitors for some of the more contested leases.

BLM officials did not say how many leases he acquired, but observers said he bought at least 10 in notably scenic areas.

The man, who was not identified, and a companion were not arrested. Federal prosecutors will review the case next week to determine whether they violated any federal laws, said Melodie Rydalch, spokeswoman for the U.S. attorney's office in Utah.

BLM spokeswoman Mary Wilson said Friday that the agency had not decided whether to reopen the bidding for those parcels.

One industry group suggested to the media that the bidders were in cahoots with the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, but Bloch denied any involvement.

December 3, 2008

Feds halt plan to drill in scenic Utah canyons

Areas populated by big game still will be auctioned, environmentalists say

Utah's Monument Basin in Canyonlands National Park in 2007. Doug Pensinger / Getty Images file

Associated Press
msnbc.com


SALT LAKE CITY - A section of whitewater rapids tucked between high cliffs, little-changed since explorer John Wesley Powell boated through in 1896, and a canyon decorated with thousands of ancient rock art panels have been pulled off the auction block by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

For the second time in a week, the bureau announced late Tuesday that it was pulling auction parcels from an expanded oil-and-gas leasing program in Utah. The latest tracts include land inside Nine Mile Canyon and Desolation Canyon on the Green River.

The bureau didn't say why it was pulling the lease tracts, but the prospect of drilling near Utah's scenic treasures brought condemnation from conservation groups.

Together with previous deferrals, the BLM has pulled nearly 100,000 acres from an auction set for Dec. 19, leaving more than 276,000 acres up for bid.

Last week, the BLM pulled drilling leases that were located on and near the borders of Arches National Park, Dinosaur National Monument and Canyonlands National Park, all in Utah.

The additional deferrals were announced after business hours Tuesday. BLM spokeswoman Mary Wilson said the agency would remove lease parcels from the "canyon bottoms" in Desolation and Nine Mile canyons, while leaving for auction other parcels on bluffs overlooking those canyons.

The BLM never intended to allow drillers to set up rigs inside the canyons, she said. It would have required drillers to reach the parcels from another pad, using directional drilling, she said.

'Rush job'

A quick analysis by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance showed the BLM still planned to auction parcels atop plateaus populated by big game around Nine Mile Canyon, a tributary of the Green River.

Stephen Bloch, an attorney for the environmental group, said the BLM's second reversal in a week showed its original auction list was a "rush job." Bloch said his group still planned to file protests by a Thursday deadline.

The BLM also plans to auction 146,339 acres in Utah later this month for geothermal development.

The bureau made clear it was pulling lease parcels only for the time being and might later decide to auction off the parcels inside the canyons with restrictions on noise, lighting or surface occupancy.

November 10, 2008

Obama Plans to Overturn Bush Executive Orders




Environment News Service



Dirty Devil proposed wilderness in southern Utah (Photo © Ray Bloxham courtesy SUWA)


WASHINGTON, DC, - President-elect Barack Obama and his transition team are already reviewing all of President Bush's executive orders, considering which will be allowed to stand and which will be overturned, the head of his transition team, John Podesta said on Sunday. Obama's decisions could invalidate environmentally damaging orders issued by the current president.

"As a candidate, Senator Obama said that he wanted all the Bush executive orders reviewed, and decide which ones should be kept, and which ones should be repealed, and which ones should be amended," said Podesta, who served as White House chief of staff under President Bill Clinton.

"Across the board, whether it's national security, the economy, the senior leadership that will manage health care, energy and the environment, I think he intends to move very quickly," Podesta told Chris Wallace on Fox News.

"They want to have oil and gas drilling in some of the most sensitive, fragile lands in Utah that they're going to try to do right as they - walking out the door. I think that's a mistake," Podesta said.

On election day, the Bush administration announced that it will open up about 360,000 acres of Utah public lands to oil and gas drilling in its December lease sale.

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management did not publish details of the 241 proposed oil and gas parcels, but some are believed to be near national parks and monuments such as Arches National Park and Canyonlands National Park in southeastern Utah.

Preliminary site lists show the leases for sale in December would include large areas considered worthy of wilderness status.

BLM Utah State Director Selma Sierra said Thursday that the parcels "have been set aside for a number of years pending completion of resource management plans for six field offices." Five of those plans were signed by the Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Stephen Allred last week in Washington, triggering the leasing decisions contained in the plans.

"These decisions represent far more stringent environmental protections than existed in old plans or that have ever been imposed by any BLM Utah plan. In other words, these new environmental restrictions provide many layers of safeguards to prevent environmental damage to sensitive natural resources. So lands previously set aside are now available for leasing, but with stricter-than-ever controls," said Sierra.

But environmentalists are opposed to any further oil and gas development in the Red Rock country of southern Utah.

"The election of Barack Obama represents a new day for environmentalists..."

Scott Groene, executive director of the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, which has fought to keep oil and gas development out of wilderness areas, views the Obama presidency as "the best opportunity for wilderness protection in SUWA's 25 year history."

"We will encourage the new Secretary of Interior and staff at the Bureau of Land Management to protect southern Utah's wilderness, including such places as Labyrinth Canyon, the Dirty Devil, the San Rafael Swell and Cedar Mesa," said Groene.

Groene wants review of what he terms, "disastrous last minute Bush administration decisions for legal violations, including the six awful land use plans the administration just approved, which open millions of acres of redrock wilderness to oil and gas leasing and ORVs."

He wants the Obama administration to give "meaningful protection to the redrock, by re-instating the process, born under President Clinton and killed by the Bush administration, that gives Wilderness Study Area protection to lands identified by the BLM as having wilderness character."

His wish list includes reform of the BLM, which Groene says "manages more of our most spectacular western public lands than any other agency and which folded like a house of cards in a tornado to anti-wilderness interests under pressure from Bush appointees."

Podesta said a president can do a great deal using his executive authority without waiting for congressional action. "I think we'll see the president do that to try to restore a sense that the country is working on behalf of the common good," he said.

Environmental advocates are looking to the incoming administration with hope. Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, said November 4, 'The election of Barack Obama represents a new day for environmentalists. His election brings an end to eight years of unrelenting assaults on the environment."

"Our staff and members are ready to work with President-elect Obama and the new Congress to advance his 'New Energy for America Plan,' which includes creating five million clean technology jobs, putting a million hybrid cars on the road, and capping carbon emissions," said Beinecke.

Podesta was one of several members of the Obama's top leaders who appeared on Sunday TV talk shows across the broadcast band.

Today President-elect Obama and Michelle Obama are meeting with President George W. and Laura Bush at the White House.

October 31, 2008

Bush administration pushing hard to open Utah lands to energy development

By Patty Henetz
The Salt Lake Tribune


The Bush administration is in its final push to open millions of acres in Utah and the West to energy development and along the way, critics warn, possibly destroy prospects for wilderness designation for thousands of acres of redrock desert.

On Friday, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management will release five of six long-range management plans that will open 80 percent of 11 million acres in southern and eastern Utah to oil and gas drilling and designate 20,000 miles of motorized recreation routes.

The actions of the lame-duck administration outrage conservationists, especially since the BLM's plans would have the force of statute for at least 10 years and would be difficult to alter.

"These [plans] are a very obvious attempt of the Bush administration to cement its legacy in Utah," said Steve Bloch, an attorney for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. "[They] are a road map to ruin for Utah's magnificent public lands."

And on Election Day, when citizens most likely will be focused elsewhere, the BLM will announce an oil- and gas-lease sale involving large swaths of public land considered worthy of wilderness status - including artifact-rich Nine Mile Canyon, Desolation Canyon and areas around Dinosaur National Monument.

The actual sale will be held the Friday before Christmas - "the bow atop the massive gift to the oil and gas industry we've seen for the last eight years," said Suzanne Jones, regional director of The Wilderness Society's Central Rockies office.

But the BLM is acting on order from Congress, which in 2001 decided the plans, some of them 30 years old, needed recrafting to reflect new priorities, including increased demand from oil and gas developers and explosive growth in off-road recreation.

In May, a Bush administration study re-emphasized policies established in 2005 that would speed carbon-based energy development with minimal restraints unless federal public-land managers found it "absolutely necessary" to preserve other resources. The directive urged the BLM to find ways around "obstacles" to drilling, which the administration identified as well-established environmental-protection law, municipal development, private-property concerns, wildlife and national parks.

The Moab, Kanab, Vernal, Richfield and Price district plans are now final. Only the Monticello plan remains pending, waiting for state officials to sign off.

In a Thursday announcement, the BLM called the achievement "a collaborative effort in balanced stewardship for the future" that included protections for environmentally sensitive areas while supporting energy resources.

The agency said 53 percent of the more than 8 million acres open to oil and gas leasing would be subject to stricter environmental controls than before the plans were drawn, with about 18 percent of the 11 million acres unavailable to leasing under any circumstances. Less than a half of 1 percent of the public lands would be protected for their special beauty and solitude.

The resource plans came in slightly past their Sept. 30 fiscal-year deadline and cost $35 million, said Don Ogaard, lead planner for the BLM's Utah office. Though 87 protests numbering several hundred pages were filed during a 30-day period, all of them were dismissed or resolved to the BLM's satisfaction, he said.

During public-comment periods, the plans drew fire from all sides. Oil-industry representatives complained of too many restrictions on exploration, and county officials agreed. Conservationists objected to drilling in sensitive lands and laying out so many trails for motorized recreation because OHV users represent a small minority of those who visit the area. Off-roaders disliked the new directive to close Utah's BLM lands to cross-country travel in favor of a trail system. The Environmental Protection Agency criticized the Price, Moab and Vernal plans for inadequate air-quality reviews, lack of analysis of OHV impacts and a failure to evaluate energy extraction's effects on global climate disruption.

Highlights from each area's plan

Monticello: Anasazi ruins in Cedar Mesa, Dark Canyon and Butler Wash will take a back seat to hikers, cyclists and off-roaders when the BLM eliminates protection associated with areas of critical environmental concern in favor of special-recreation designation.

Richfield: Nearly all of more than 2 million acres of public lands in six counties surrounding Richfield will be open to oil and gas drilling and off-highway recreation. OHVs will be allowed into areas of Factory Butte previously closed for endangered-species protection and wilderness-quality lands.

Price: Energy development is the top priority for 2.5 million acres in Carbon and Emery counties and that's fine with county officials who believe their share of the revenues will make possible a more diverse economy in the future. Nearly 1 million acres previously found to have wilderness traits likely won't ever be so designated.

Vernal: A public outcry about wildlife, wilderness and cultural resources in the Vernal area led federal officials to close 186,917 acres to drilling, nearly three times the amount of land the agency wanted off-limits when it released its draft plan for the Book Cliffs and the Uinta Basin a year ago.

Moab: Hiking, biking, grazing, drilling, hunting and off-roading advocates squared off over the plan for 1.8 million acres of red-rock desert near Moab, leaving the BLM to sort out solutions that satisfy few and anger many.

Kanab: The plan for 550,000 acres of public land in Kane and Garfield counties includes 1,462 miles of OHV trails. About 27,000 acres will be managed for wilderness qualities, but the fine print says the BLM would allow OHV travel across those acres, likely making them ineligible for future wilderness designation.