• Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

(UT) RS2477 Roads Issue Is Pressed by Gov. Leavitt

Ed A. Stevens

NAXJA Member
NAXJA Member
http://www2.sltrib.com/politics/Main/Story.asp?VOL=04052003&NUM=45203

Roads Issue Is Pressed by Leavitt

By Judy Fahys
The Salt Lake Tribune

Gov. Mike Leavitt believes the state has found common ground
in the long-running dispute over dirt roads in Utah's back country.
On Friday, the Republican governor said he is pushing the
Interior Department to begin negotiations for the federal
government to grant title to "indisputable" byways known as R.S.
2477 roads.
"I don't think we have much of a chance of satisfying either
extreme," Leavitt said, referring to the passionate interest groups
at the heart of the road fight. "Our hope is that the common-sense
middle is big enough to take a big step forward."
The governor has failed several times in the past to apply a
similar, incremental approach to wilderness designation. And an
effort to address the R.S. 2477 roads in Garfield and Kane
counties also flopped.
This time, though, he's working with more and better
information, plus wisdom gleaned from more than two decades
and $8 million in legal wrangling.
The fight originates with an 1866 law, Revised Statute 2477,
that was intended to help settle the West. The law allowed
counties to claim rights of way on roads they constructed over
federal land, until a 1976 law crimped those county claims.
The dispute goes to the heart of basic public lands battles in the
West and involves somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 dirt
roads in rural Utah.
Counties have fought the federal government for the right to
maintain dirt roads they say are critical to service range, mineral
claims and movement on federal lands.
But wilderness advocates contend the county claims also have
been used -- illegally sometimes -- to undermine federal
wilderness designation. The National Park Service and the U.S.
Bureau of Land Management are among the federal agencies that
have been drawn into the debate by counties that fundamentally
dispute the federal government's authority to control land.
Leavitt's latest effort to address the R.S. 2477 roads began with
a threat in 2000 to sue the Interior Department over dirt roads for
which Utah counties claim they have rights of way. The suit has
not been filed yet, and Leavitt's proposal could eliminate the need
for statewide legal action, if it is accepted.
The state began with a list of "roads" submitted by each county
that might possibly be included in the final lawsuit. The claims
included roads to stock pens and mining claims, Jeep paths up
creek beds and logging tracks.
The claims also included what most people would regard as
hiking paths, such as the popular Pipeline Trail in Salt Lake
County's Mill Creek Canyon, many trails through Wasatch Front
wilderness areas, as well as dirt routes in all five national parks in

Utah.
But Leavitt said Friday those trails will not be included in his
proposal of "indisputable" roads.
The governor said the state will rely largely on a map and
measurement database that state attorneys have been assembling
as part of a three-year, $4.2 million effort. The "obvious" roads
must:
* Be visible in aerial photos taken before 1976 and aerial
photos taken recently.
* Have a center line that can be determined by global imaging.
* Serve some community purpose, such as getting a miner to a
claim, a stockman to watering tanks, or utility workers to
communications towers.
* Show evidence of ongoing construction and maintenance,
such as grading.
* Be supported by affidavits from people who can attest to their
existence and use.
"These are the roads we are looking for," said Leavitt. "There is
documented, undisputed evidence."
Exactly which roads qualify has not been decided yet, but
Leavitt says that once qualified roads have been identified, he
intends to propose roads, county-by-county, to the Interior
Department, the counties and the public.
Nor would Leavitt say when there may be a development in the
state's strategy, although there are indications an announcement
could come as early as next week.
"We commend the governor for his practical approach to this
issue," said John Wright, spokesman for Interior Secretary Gale
Norton. "We are committed to resolving as many disputes as
possible."
About a month ago, the Interior Department quietly
implemented a new regulation that will make it easier for states
and counties to resolve R.S. 2477 claims. The so-called
"disclaimer rule" could be a way for the Interior Department to
hand over "quiet title" to the counties with little administrative
trouble, although environmental groups are already questioning the
legality of this new process.
Combatants on all sides of the fight insist they are eager to find
solutions, but none is saying the battles are over.
Garfield County Commissioner Clare Ramsay doubted his
county will completely agree with the state on "indisputable"
roads. Still, he welcomed Leavitt's latest effort. "Things look very
favorable now for resolving this thing," Ramsay said.
Mark O. Walsh, associate director of the Utah Association of
Counties, pointed out that counties are bound to disagree with the
state's exclusion of many roads from the initial road lists going to
Interior. Yet he agreed with the governor that counties are ready
to move forward.
" The counties would jump at something like that," said Walsh, a
30-year veteran in the R.S. 2477 fight. "[But] there will be a
whole bunch we will still end up fighting over."
Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance's Heidi McIntosh gave a
cautious nod to the concepts behind Leavitt's proposal, but she
complained that the governor has for years refused to share the
state's plans. "If they are stepping back and reassessing their
plans, they are headed in the right direction," she said. "But the
secrecy raises all kinds of red flags."





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted
material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who
have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for
non-profit
research and educational purposes only. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
 
Back
Top