Judge Clark Waddoups, Senior Judge with the Utah Federal District Court, has been presiding over the consolidated Bellwether RS2477 case filed by Kane County and the State of Utah against the United States and SUWA for many years. In August, Judge Waddoups made a couple of very important rulings that show he has a clear predisposition to substantiate the rights of Utah and Kane County in preserving rights for access on RS2477 claims, of which there are almost 12,000 roads. To illustrate the importance of this it should be remembered that 120 miles of the routes closed in Moab are on existing RS2477 claims.

The first ruling was really aimed straight at SUWA, who is acting as a Intervenor Defendant with the United States. Judge Waddoups expressed that he believed the United States was interesting in settling the long running, complex, and expensive case and that SUWA was dragging it on and unwilling to settle. He was openly frustrated with SUWA’s endless motions taking up the court’s time, and he repeated and clarified his prior ruling that barred SUWA from further motions unless they are approved in advance by the court.

The second Decision in the same case was in response to a motion from BLM that would have dismissed all 12,000 RS2477 claims.

Judge Waddoups approved the dismissal of a single road claim, but denied the request for dismissal of the remaining claims. Further, his 80 page Order was a memorandum of his reasoning for his decision, and went into great detail about his thinking on RS2477 Claims, and why they should be honored without the adjudication of each claim as was contained in prior orders. The decision is very interesting reading, and it seems clear that Judge Waddoups is going to flip the tables on RS2477 road claims, putting BLM on the defense to refute claims rather than requiring the State to gain approval on each claim.

Judge Waddoups made a couple other important distinctions in his ruling:

• Cited the recent Corner Post Supreme Court case to refute many of the statute of limitations motions to dismiss, another win for public land users
• Introduced many theories about why the 2017 BLM SUWA Settlement Agreement may be on shaky ground. This is the reason we are in the process of revisiting 17 Utah Travel Management Plans.

The case is still ongoing, but it appears Judge Waddoups wants to see it close soon, but he’s shown us a peek behind the curtain. This ruling is so monumental that the information I’ve been hearing is that BLM is reconsidering their current TMP/RMP processes in Utah. Once the case is is closed and the decision published, it can be cited in many other land use claims.

Here’s the ruling in its entirety with highlighting of some of the key findings.

The Chevron Deference Doctrine was overturned by the Supreme Court today in a 6-3 decision in the Loper Bright v. Raimondo case. Chevron has been the law of the land since 1984, and ordered lower courts to recognize that federal agencies should be regarded as the experts where a law was ambiguous, and as a result caused Federal agencies to get ever more aggressive in their interpretation of underlying laws in making rules, without fear of a court overrruling their interpretation. This is a landmark decision against the Federal Government in their aggressive rulemaking which restricts the rights of not only OHV users, but also many other groups such as gun owners, the environment, the workplace and even health care.

Chief Justice delivered the decision today and said that Courts must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority, as the Administrative Procedure Act] requires, The chief justice called the earlier decision a “judicial invention that required judges to disregard their statutory duties.”

Chevron doctrine has been applied by lower courts in thousands of cases. The Supreme Court itself has invoked the framework to uphold agencies’ interpretations of statutes at least 70 times, but not since 2016, when the Court began to drift away from their conviction for the Doctrine.

This is definitely a landmark decision that will shift our fight against Federal overreaches in restricting responsible use of our public lands, and may lead to many new arguments against devastating rules such as the recently adopted BLM Landscape Health Rule that allows conservation leases and a host of other new rules not addressed by FLPMA.

If you’d like to read the court decision, you can find it here…

This article is 2 pages, please scroll to second page for more. This is the first article in a series about how to take action to stop them. Watch for more to come on specific tips. We will also be scheduling a Webinar soon.

Winn Rose – Bears Ears Article Series 1

This page is dedicated to providing updated information on the Trail Canyon Travel Management Plan, E Planning Project Number DOI-BLM-UT-P020-2021-0002-EA. We will post new resources as they become available, with the most recent posts appearing at the top of this page after the static resource links at the top of the page.

Preliminary Alternative Maps were released in January 2021 with the results of the scoping report. In that scoping report, there were only 19 comments submitted.

The next phase will be the release of the Draft EA, expected this summer. If Alternative B were selected, as it was in Moab, very important routes including the Barracks Trail, Poverty Wash, and Hell Dive Canyon to Lambs Point will be closed. We need a massive effort to get people out and report their trails using www.TrailSaver.com Don’t wait, there’s a lot of trails that will need protecting.

If you have information that you would like added, please email us at landuse@utahpla.com

UPLA Articles

UPLA Article On Writing Substantive Comments 03/10/2024

UPLA Article with Links to All Utah Travel Management Planning Information

BLM Resources
Interactive Map from Scoping Report with Prelimary Alternatives

Trail Canyon Scoping Report 2021

Trail Canyon Scoping Route Reports 2021

So What Do We Need To Do Now?

1. Select an Area that has routes that are marked on the map as targeted for closure. Write down the route numbers.
2. Go to the BLM Route Report, refer to the link above. You can use the Search Bar on the webpage to find the Route Report for your trail, generally it will be about 4 pages long. Print it out, and try to understand what their resource concerns are. How do you determine what things mean in the Route Report? Google should be able to give you answers to abbreviations in the report. For example, I googled “What is PFYC Class 5?” and “What are abbreviation T E S T in BLM route reports for negative impacts” and it gave me all the answers.
3. Schedule time to go out and run the trail. Take your route report. Look for areas or conditions mentioned in the Route Report. Take photos along the route, especially noting any possible resource impacts they may have cited and think about alternatives when you’re on the trail.
4. When you get home, use TrailSaver to draft your substantive comments on the route. Be as specific as you can. 2 or 3 paragraphs on a route is an ideal length, include photos and gpx tracks. Videos are not recommended because of the large file size. If Archeological or Paleontology is listed, you won’t get a specific answer as to where that concern is located, but you can ask questions about possible mitigations around the concern such as rerouting the trail, informational signing, barriers to narrow trail to prevent stopping, etc. It is ok to mention how long you’ve been using the trail, with whom, etc, but this should be like the dessert to your meal, not the main course.
5. TrailSaver will email you a formatted draft of your report. You can edit, add to it or change it. When the BLM comment period opens, TrailSaver will send you another email with your report and more suggestions, along with instructions on how to submit reports to BLM.

Summary When you look at the comments required for one route, it seems like a lot, but when put in the scope of things, it might take you 20-30 minutes to write a good comment. Compare that to the fun you had running the trail, the people you enjoyed the company of on the trail, the overnight camping you did, and being able to enjoy this trail for generations to come and I hope you’ll agree it’s a good investment of your time. Please do your research and get out there and help save our trails!

We Need Your Support to Make This Come Together, please help!

www.TrailSaver.com

The effort to remove access for Off Highway Vehicle Use is not just a movement, it is an all out assault plan that is well orchestrated between Extreme Environmental Groups and Top Management at the BLM and Secretary of the Interior.

To win a war, you must fight on several fronts simultaneously with different strategies and resources. Here’s a brief recap of what’s being done in Utah.

BlueRibbon Coalition serves as our early alert system to keep us abreast of the latest in developments. Many times actions taken in other states are precursors to what we will see next in Utah. BlueRibbon will fight for us in the courts, a very recent example of that is the Federal lawsuits to reverse the Labyrinth Canyon Travel Management Plan. Everyone should be a member of BlueRibbon Coalition, and when submitting comments on land actions, submit them personally and through BlueRibbon by copying them at landuse@sharetrails.org

Utah Public Lands Alliance is focused on preserving access for ALL User groups in Utah and surrounding areas. UPLA hired our first employee recently, Rose Winn, as our Natural Resource Consultant to help us craft both professional comments and provide training for our members. UPLA has been working very closely with BlueRibbon Coalition to develop a comprehensive strategy to take preemptive action against closure efforts. We are focusing on using the same rules that SUWA has employed for years to achieve their success to our favor. To score points in a game, you must have a strong offense strategy, we can’t just play defense..

UPLA recognizes that we have many great employees at BLM and Forest Service that we’ve been working with for years to improve, protect, and preserve our public lands, and we want to enhance and grow those relationships. One of our immediate focuses is to educate our members and subscribers on how to be more effective in commenting, which will influence more favorable decisions initially by Land Managers, and provide a basis for legal action when it’s needed. If you live or recreate in Utah, you should join and support Utah Public Lands Alliance.

Your local Clubs and other User Groups-It’s important that you join and support your local clubs and organizations. They are the glue that holds the fabric of the OHV and related user groups together. Many OHV members are also users of public lands in other activities such as hunting, fighting, equestrian, mountain biking and many others. Share your concerns with these groups as well about overreaches by the Federal Government, go to their meetings to explain yourself. If you need help preparing, reach out to UPLA or BlueRibbon for assistance.

State of Utah-Our State is fighting back hard against overreaches by the Federal Government with several factions of government:

Utah Public Lands Policy Coordinating Office (PLPCO) is the agency that is leading the administrative fight in keeping access to our public lands. They have been fighting for our RS2477 roads for years, but have also now turned their attention to include B and D Class Roads in the fight. PLPCO was also the first to produce intelligible maps for the San Rafael Swell Travel Management Plan.

Legislative-We were fortunate to have both Utah Senator David Hinkins and Speaker of the House Mike Schultz visit with us at the Big Ride on evening. The focus of the 2024 legislative session was on taking back control of our state from the Federal Government. Of particular note were 2 bills (H.B. 471 and S.B. 57 passed and signed by the Governor that will test the limits of the 10^th Amendment in the powers granted by the US Constitution to the Federal Government, with the remaining rights being the jurisdiction of the State.

County Governments-County governments are very important in our fight, and counties with public lands, especially with OHV access have gotten very involved in the fight. Reach out to your local County Commissioners and let them know why public access is so important.

Judicial-The State of Utah currently has more lawsuits filed against the Federal Government than at any other time in our history, and this aggressiveness will accelerate as we move ahead. In addition, the state is seeking to build a coalition with other Western States to fight together against these overreaches. With the Supreme Court balance we now have, this is the best opportunity we’ve ever had to reign in the expanding bureaucracy of our Federal Government.

Together, We Can Win

But We Can’t Do It Without You!

This is not a single skirmish, we must get and stay engaged for the long haul. We have broad support from many organizations and government agencies, but we can’t really make a difference without your personal support and involvement.  Let’s all Join the Fight to Win and Don’t Give Up!

Rose Winn, UPLA’s Natural Resource Consultant, BLM Western Solar Plan (PEIS Comment)

Please get yours sent in before April 18!

There is a shift happening on public lands with the core driver centered in renewable energy: solar and wind power. The climate change agenda is rapidly impacting the priorities that public land managers place on “multiple-use management” of our public lands.

There has been a significant increase of solar farms on public land in recent years. The BLM Western Solar Plan created in 2012 identifies public lands eligible for fast-track solar farm development in multiple states, including: Utah, Colorado, Arizona, Montana, New Mexico, California, Washington, Oregon, and others. The BLM is currently updating the Western Solar Plan in order to expand areas of public land suitable for solar energy development to meet a net carbon electricity goal by 2035. Public comments are now being accepted on the Solar Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. We need OHV enthusiasts to submit public comments to tell BLM to exclude your favorite OHV riding areas from the plan. With this current plan there is a variance process that potential solar projects have to go through in order to be approved. These renewable energy developments often conflict with recreation use, which should be a core variance within the approval process.

On the positive side, all of the five Alternatives proposed for the Western Solar Plan exclude Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) from solar energy development; thus, these areas could be affected only indirectly by solar energy facilities located close to their boundaries. However, on the negative side, the range of indirect impact on the quality and viability of the OHV riding experience at SRMAs is vast, including:

• Change in the overall character of undeveloped BLM-administered lands to an industrialized, developed area that would displace people who are seeking more rural or primitive surroundings for recreation.
• Changes to the visual landscape, impacts on vegetation, development of roads, and displacement of wildlife species resulting in reduction in recreational opportunities could degrade the recreational experience near where solar energy development occurs.

Additionally, the potential for solar projects to close public access to designated OHV routes that are outside of SRMAs is a real and impending threat to the future of OHV recreation in many popular areas of BLM land throughout the West, including Utah. The proposed plan states:

“Many BLM field offices have completed planning activities to designate lands for OHV use. Under these plans, areas open to application for solar energy development may be available for OHV use, and solar energy development in these areas would displace this use. Applications for solar energy facilities may include areas containing designated open OHV routes, thereby eliminating public access along those routes.”

It is imperative for OHV enthusiasts to submit comments on the BLM Western Solar Plan to urge the BLM to exclude areas with designated OHV routes from the range of available land for construction of solar projects, and, to exclude construction of solar projects near the borders of SRMAs.

Public comments will be accepted through April 18. For more information on the BLM Western Solar Plan, and to submit a comment, go to: https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2022371/510

Rose prepared some talking points for you to use when writing your own comments. These should be used as idea starters for you, please don’t just copy and paste them. Form letters or comments with same language are not effective.  It’s not necessary to incorporate all of these in your comments, pick the couple that are most important to you, however, we need lots of comments regarding the first talking point and request them to remove that language about solar energy plants replacing currently designated OHV routes.

If you have questions or would like to discuss how you will craft a comment for the Western Solar Plan, please reach out to UPLA Public Policy Consultant, Rose Winn: rose@utahpla.com.

Plan website: https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2022371/570

Public comment deadline: April 18, 2024

Send your comments via email to: solar@blm.gov

• Utah Public Land Alliance’s Natural Resources Consultant, Rose Winn, is tracking comments for this Solar Plan. Please add Rose to the “CC” field of your email: rose@utahpla.com.

(Sample comment letter  below, but please make it your own, don’t try to copy and paste.)

Key Talking Points:

• Note that the potential for solar projects to close public access to designated OHV routes that are outside of SRMAs is a real threat to the future of OHV recreation in many popular areas of BLM land. The proposed plan states on page 5-159 of the 2023 Draft Solar PEIS Volume 1 (Section 5.14 Recreation, 5.14.1 Direct and Indirect Impacts, 5.14.1.1 Construction and Operations):
  • “Many BLM field offices have completed planning activities to designate lands for OHV use. Under these plans, areas open to application for solar energy development may be available for OHV use, and solar energy development in these areas would displace this use. Applications for solar energy facilities may include areas containing designated open OHV routes, thereby eliminating public access along those routes.”
•  Urge the BLM to cite the following as explicit exclusions within all 5 Alternatives:
• • Exclude designated OHV routes and open OHV riding areas from the range of available land for construction of solar projects
  • Exclude construction of solar projects near the borders of Special Recreation Management Areas
  • Exclude all designated outdoor recreation areas (including dispersed camping, designated camping, mining, along with all forms of outdoor recreation) from the range of available land for construction of solar projects.
• Thank the BLM for excluding land within Special Recreation Management Areas from solar energy development, and urge them to maintain this exclusion within the final draft regardless of which Alternative or combination of Alternatives is selected.
• Name all BLM OHV riding areas that you have, or would like to in the future, recreate at. Wherever possible, itemize the features that make that riding area unique and of high-value to the OHV rider experience. Note how a solar facility development within or nearby that riding area would negatively impact the rider experience and/or wildlife and wildlife habitat in the region.
• The negative impacts of solar facilities on wildlife is of importance to OHV enthusiasts given that a major element of why we enjoy OHV recreation is to get out in nature and view / observe wildlife in its native habitat. Solar facilities destroy habitat for all species that inhabit the footprint where the facility is constructed; they displace wildlife, leading to higher concentrations of species in surrounding areas as those species are forced to flee the solar facility area to survive. This will inflict harm on wildlife as there will be more competition for food and habitat for all species including mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, and insects.
• Solar facilities on OHV riding areas would also displace OHV riders. This will create a higher concentration of people riding in other OHV areas, which will create new negative impact on natural and cultural resources in other areas, thus jeopardizing the long-term viability of other OHV areas, and thereby inflicting harm directly on the OHV recreation community. For this reason, the BLM should exclude designated OHV routes, open OHV riding areas, Special Recreation Management Areas, and lands near the borders of Special Recreation Management Areas from the range of available land for construction of solar projects.
• OHV recreation accounts for a huge segment of the outdoor recreation economy. Outdoor recreation contributes over $1.1 trillion to the US economy. For this reason the BLM should exclude designated OHV routes, open OHV riding areas, Special Recreation Management Areas, lands near the borders of Special Recreation Management Areas, and all designated outdoor recreation areas from the range of available land for construction of solar projects.
  • There is some info that may be of interest to cite from this article on the value of the outdoor recreation economy
• You may suggest that solar facility development is not suitable for construction on America’s public lands, which are intended to be used, stewarded, and protected for the benefit of all Americans. Solar facilities destroy the recreational, resource, cultural, and ecological values of our public lands. Solar facilities are best suited for urban and developed areas – such as rooftops in cities and elevated coverings over parking lots. One of the issues that the BLM has noted in the Western Solar Plan is a desire to place solar facilities near existing power transmission lines – so public lands, which are inherently distant from transmission lines – are unsuitable. Constructing solar facilities in urban, developed areas is more efficient as transmission lines are already in near proximity.
• If you’d like to see a sample comment letter, Sample Template Comment Letter