Trial begins over disputed route at national park
Print- •
-
Share
- Share this item
-
Grab the link
Copy and paste the link:
- Blog about it
- Close
- •
-
Post a Comment
- •
Favorite- •
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Closing arguments over the fate of a remote route in Canyonlands National Park turned on who used it and when — and whether that historic use is enough for a local county to claim ownership and allow motorized vehicles to resume.
The outcome of the case could have important implications in the West over the application of a Civil War era law that some claim gives local authorities title to certain routes that cross federal lands.
Friday's closing arguments in federal court capped a lengthy trial — including a helicopter flyover of Canyonlands on Tuesday with the judges and attorneys — pitting the federal government against the state of Utah and San Juan County, which sued five years ago after the National Park Service closed much of Salt Creek Canyon to vehicles in the late 1990s.
The canyon route, once popular for commercial jeep tours, is the primary access for a famous sandstone formation called Angel Arch.
The county and state say they should get title to the route under a one-sentence 1866 law known as R.S. 2477 that assured passage across federal lands.
The law, repealed in 1976 with protection for existing roads, has led to protracted disputes about which routes crisscrossing the West qualify for local control.
Carlie Christensen, an assistant U.S. attorney for Utah, argued that the state and county's lawsuit is about motorized vehicles, not public access.
"The public already has access" through the canyon by foot and by bicycle, she said.
County officials have said keeping motorized vehicles out of Salt Creek Canyon requires visitors to hike 10 miles each way to see the popular arch.
During more than four hours of closing arguments, county and state attorneys said the route was well-known and well-used by locals in the years leading up to the creation of the national park.
Shawn Welch, an attorney for San Juan County, said a century's worth of human activity in the canyon clearly meets one of the key requirements for a claim under RS 2477: 10 years of continue use.
A small part of Salt Creek Canyon was homesteaded in the late 1890s and was used periodically over the ensuing decades for uranium exploration, cattle operations, oil and gas drilling, Boy Scout trips and commercial jeep tours, Welch said.
He spent much of his closing argument meticulously reviewing testimony from the case, including several people who remembered visiting the canyon in the 1950s.
The winding route which follows Salt Creek and sometimes features pits of quicksand, snakes through majestic canyons among spires and archaeological sites.
Over time, Welch said, the canyon became a popular trip for locals and visitors.
Canyonlands National Park was created in 1964. By the mid-1990s, up to 1,000 vehicles a month were traveling along Salt Creek.
The park service in 1995 installed a gate and began limiting the number of vehicles allowed each day. In 2004, the eight-mile portion of the route above an area called Peekaboo Spring was permanently put off-limits to vehicles.
Welch said the state and county are willing to accept a previous 10-vehicles-per-day limit on the road if the court rules in their favor.
"We understand this is a special road," Welch said.
Christensen argued that the state and the county weren't able to establish that the road was continuously used prior to the formation of Canyonlands.
At best, she said, use of the route was occasional and sporadic.
She added that, when R.S. 2477 was enacted 143 years ago, roads were seen as important for the settlement of the West. Part of the reason the law was repealed in 1976 was a shift in management policies toward more protection of natural places. The Park Service, she said, has recognized Salt Creek as an important natural resources that could be damaged by vehicle use.
Federal lawyers also said the county and the state were too late in filing their claim. Bruce Bernard argued the statute of limitations expired more than 20 years ago when decisions were being made about the route.
It was unclear Friday when U.S. District Judge Bruce Jenkins will make a ruling.
