UFWDA Community Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 24, 2014, 07:45:24 am

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
ATTENTION: Delegates, Lifetime and Ambassador Members if you can not see or access "Delegate Level Private Forums (including Lifetime Members)" please send an e-mail to forums@ufwda.org requesting access.
14,046 Posts in 3,252 Topics by 972 Members
Latest Member: Hiltz
* Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
UFWDA Community Forum  |  Access (Land Use, RTF, Advocacy, etc)  |  General Land Advocacy  |  Topic: RS-2477 RIGHTS OF WAY « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: RS-2477 RIGHTS OF WAY  (Read 532 times)
Todd Ockert
ghost

Offline Offline

Posts: 1,793



WWW
« on: June 22, 2007, 03:35:18 pm »

Someone on our side, and with some reason here.

Todd

One of the most important issues of our time is protecting recreational access to the vast public lands in the West granted by Congress pursuant to section 8 of the Mining Act of 1866, commonly referred to as RS 2477.

Last month, Rep. Stevan Pearce (R-NM) introduced legislation (HR 6298) that would set into law a key federal court decision that state law determines the validity of RS 2477 rights-of-way across public lands.

Since 1976, RS 2477 rights of ways have been subjected to numerous Interior Department interpretations and policies which change with virtually each Interior Secretary. In recent years, RS 2477 rights of ways have been subject to increasing challenge by extreme environmental groups.

In September 2005, the 10th US Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver dealt the anti-access crowd a stunning blow by reversing a Federal District Court decision relating to 17 rights of ways in three counties in Utah. The well-reasoned 10th Circuit decision restores county rights to these access routes, and the court correctly recognizes state law as the basis for determining the legitimacy of any RS 2477 road claims. The legislation offered by Representative Pearce follows the direction set down by the Court of Appeals
Because Pearce's legislation was offered at the end of this session of Congress, HR 6298 will probably not move this year. Pearce, who is chairman of the House subcommittee on National Parks, cautioned supporters not to expect immediate victory. "Supporters of this legislation should keep in mind that the bill I am introducing today is not the conclusive end to this controversy," he said. "Today's introduction marks the start of a dialogue that I hope leads to a comprehensive solution and eventually a victory for all the stakeholders."

Let's hope so. The anti-access groups reacted predictably, saying they oppose any legislation based upon the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals decision. These anti-access attorneys are not likely to concede the fight. Indeed, the Salt Lake Tribune recently reported that Heidi McIntosh, lead attorney for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) has declared "trench warfare" between her group and any county determined to defend the public's rights of access.

Some in Congress realize that the anti-access groups' brand of "trench warfare" gives the advantage to well-funded green groups and disadvantages rural communities and the American people. It is hoped that Pearce's legislation will build on the 10th Circuit Court's findings and will clarify, if not reduce, the role of the courts.

In many areas, RS 2477 routes play a significant role in recreational access. The introduction of this legislation begins a long overdue dialogue in Congress on how best to deal with the controversy over public access rights.
Logged

UFWDA Member #14102
Member of Cal4Wheel, Hanford Trail Busters, Rubicon 4WDA
www.accessarmy.com
UFWDA Forum Admin
UFWDA Forum
Administrator
ghost

Offline Offline

Posts: 0



WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 22, 2007, 04:35:31 pm »

Have to be careful - since RS2477 can now only be enacted or pushed thru court by a public entity - ie county, city, jurisdiction - the problem is that no politician wants to be seen as "taking away someone private property" and that is how it is pushed by the land owner who wants to close off access someplace due an existing route.

Many times if there is no easement the public entity will not push rs2477 simply because of the perception.

It is a very touchy subject in some areas of the country.

- Shawn
Logged

Forum Admin: United Four Wheel Drive Associations
Todd Ockert
ghost

Offline Offline

Posts: 1,793



WWW
« Reply #2 on: June 22, 2007, 04:50:47 pm »

Shawn

You are so right about this one.  Out west here, they are trying to use this as a way to gain access to Surprise Canyon in the Panamint Valley area. 

Todd
« Last Edit: June 22, 2007, 10:54:57 pm by Todd Ockert » Logged

UFWDA Member #14102
Member of Cal4Wheel, Hanford Trail Busters, Rubicon 4WDA
www.accessarmy.com
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
UFWDA Community Forum  |  Access (Land Use, RTF, Advocacy, etc)  |  General Land Advocacy  |  Topic: RS-2477 RIGHTS OF WAY « previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!