Posted on 05/06/2009 7:15:50 PM PDT by george76
A southern Utah county has taken its fight to manage roads in the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument to a federal appeals court, claiming that federal officials improperly closed routes to traffic.
Lawyers for Kane County argued Wednesday before the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver that the county managed the roads for years before the nearly 2-million-acre monument was designated in 1996.
(Excerpt) Read more at krdo.com ...
Kane County has appealled the 10th Federal Circuit Court decision that limits the County’s authority over roads that belong to the County.
In the formas and downloads section above you will be able to view several key documents that pertain to and explain this ongoing strugle to protect our right to access public lands.
http://kane.utah.gov/page.cfm?ID=14
Kane County has authority under the 1866 mining law, RS2477, that allowed local governments to claim rights of way across federal land.
http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/182246/
San Juan, Kane and Garfield counties graded 16 routes they claimed under the RS2477 law. Six of the routes were in wilderness study areas and nine in the national monument.
“Six others traverse a mesa overlooking the entrance corridor to the Needles District of Canyonlands National Park,”
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,635163187,00.html?pg=3
SUWA
Does anyone know of a link to the flawed ruling and Kane county's brief before the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals?
This will wind up the same way!!!!
I will look , but not yet.
Does anyone know of a link to the flawed ruling and Kane county’s brief before the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals?
1996, when Bill Clinton employed a moldy law, the American Antiquities Act of 1906, to create out of BLM lands the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, a 1.9 million-acre protected wilderness .
Locals saw it as yet another Washington land grab under RS 2477.
The establishment of Grand Staircase in 1996 made a lot Utahns angry, and not just because President Bill Clinton made his announcement in Arizona.
To many, the feds had scored not just a land grab that nullified plans for a huge coal-fired power plant, it limited access to roads and regions rural folks always had assumed were theirs to use as they wished.
Utah is amazing, in that they have a wonderful system of county roads that cross some of the most spectacular geography around. It is a big moneymaker for the economy. The markings are cryptic, a good map is recommended for this reason. “C392” doesn’t help much, but it might run 80 miles, there are thousands of miles of good graded dirt road, suitable for high clearance 2WD even. Bring plenty of water, camping supplies. Oh, if by chance one does need a tow, it starts around $500. Really only an issue once “off road”.
I have heard rumor the counties in question exercising eminent domain in one case, why would you consider that stealing?
Tons of excellent exploring to do.
A taking under eminent domain has to be for the good of the population.
And to help Clinton’s Indonesian contributors in the market.
Indonesian billionaire James Riady paid a record $8.6 million criminal fine and plead guilty to using corporate funds from his foreign Lippo Group to reimburse contributors to Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign for the presidency
That’s a start! Thanx.
They were numerous cases of stupid individuals thinking the law applied to them.
You claimed the state was stealing property, not individuals. If the state opens up public right of way for everyone via eminent domain how is that stealing? (as long as the deed owner is justly compensated)
That is not what was happening!! The counties were cutting fences and grading roads where no one had been in fifty years claiming it was a legit right of way. Current rules say they need to prove it had been in continuous usage for a period of ten years prior to the grading, other wise there was no road and no right of way. And that is also what the court says.
And A public good is not a trail riding road for 4 wheeler hobbyists.
The reason for the mining road law was access to the land. Four wheelers use that access.
However, since “wilderness” is also a “hobby”, or more accurately either a stalking horse for enviro-socialism or a place where ‘nature worshipers’ want the gooberment to buy a church they feel they are entitled to so that they can worship ‘wilderness’ as they see fit.
The “Church of the Holy Wild” is OK until the whacko adherents want the gooberment to put money into their form of worship.
Yes, we agree that is the opinion of the court and that is being appealed.
And A public good is not a trail riding road for 4 wheeler hobbyists.
An opinion that is quite revealing and legally inaccurate. Your dislike of 4 wheeler hobbyists not withstanding (and no, I'm not one), does not change the fact that right of ways are in the public interest regardless of mode or reason of travel.
Using your logic a hiking trail in Zions NP for hiking hobbyists is not a public good.
balderdash.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.