VERNAL — Shock waves from a Utah Court of Appeals decision that the Ute Indian Tribe and not the Division of Wildlife Resources has authority over some 2 million acres of land in southern Uintah and Duchesne counties are just beginning to be felt.

About 70 percent of the lands overseen by the DWR in the northeastern region in terms of law enforcement and management are potentially affected by this ruling, said Lt. Torrey Christophersen, DWR northeastern regional law enforcement manager.

Ute Tribe fish and game officials have told their DWR counterparts that they don't have the financial resources or manpower to manage the land and wildlife that has traditionally been under the auspices of the state, Christophersen said.

The Ute Tribe and DWR have operated under a mutual agreement since the 1990s to clarify questions of jurisdiction on the land in question within the exterior boundaries of "Indian Country."

"We have an agreement on who deals with what issues," said Christophersen, "especially with law enforcement, and it has worked well for both parties."

In March, the appellate court rejected the state's petition for a rehearing in the 3-year-old Utah v. Rickie L. Reber case, which deals with complex issues including hunting rights, jurisdiction and questions of the Native American heritage of Reber, a former Lapoint resident.

Assistant Attorney General Joanne Slotnik said she will petition for certiorari, asking the Utah Supreme Court to hear the case.

In September 2005, Slotnik argued that the court needed to clarify whether the 53-year-old Reber — who was convicted of hunting without a state permit within the "exterior boundaries" of the Ute reservation on federal land — was a Native American. The land is administered by the Bureau of Land Management with the exception of hunting and fishing, which is overseen by the DWR.

However, the appellate judges focused not on Reber's 4 percent Native American heritage — he maintains he is a non-terminated Uintah band member — but on jurisdiction.

The court ruled the Ute Indian Tribe, not the state, was the victim in the case. It said the trophy buck that Reber assisted his 13-year-old son in taking occurred on tribal "trust" land. The decision vacated Reber's conviction in 8th District Court but allows the Attorney General's Office to refile for a new trial in federal court.

However, that may well be the last thing on the minds of state prosecutors. Instead, they are preparing to defend against the high court's assertion that millions of acres within the "exterior reservation" — or the land outside of about 1.2 million acres recognized as held "in trust" for the Ute Tribe by the federal government — also falls under the tribe's jurisdiction.