Appeals court: SUWA can take part in road lawsuit

General public has right to intervene in Utah roads lawsuit

Published: Thursday, Oct. 4, 2007 9:43 a.m. MDT
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
A federal appeals court on Tuesday said the environmental group Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance and the general public have the right to intervene in a lawsuit regarding roads in rural areas.

The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals addressed a longstanding dispute over Salt Creek Road, a two-lane dirt road in Canyonlands National Park, that has been claimed by San Juan County.

The National Park Service closed the road to vehicles in 2000 after concerns arose about possible environmental damage and SUWA filed a lawsuit that resulted in the closure.

SUWA had tried to join another lawsuit involving the Park Service, which this time is fighting in court with San Juan County and the state of Utah over which jurisdiction owns the road. The county and state want the road reopened.

SUWA contends the Park Service and the U.S. government would not adequately represent its interests and, therefore, the environmental group wanted to participate.

The 10th Circuit Court's ruling did not grant SUWA the right to be a direct party to this latest lawsuit, but it did leave the door open for the possibility of more active participation as the suit progresses. It also allows intervention in other property disputes

Story continues below

"In that respect, which is the most important, we won," said Jim Angell, managing attorney for the Denver office of Earthjustice, which represents SUWA.

"It's not like we have this unqualified right to intervene. What Utah and the federal government tried to get the court to say was that the public was flatly prohibited from intervening in disputes over property ownership," Angell said.

"As the case goes forward, we'll be watching closely to make sure the federal government is defending itself vigorously. If not, we'll want to be involved and will intervene again. No matter what, we will file an amicus brief arguing our points."

Angell said SUWA was quite happy with the appeals court opinion because it rejected all the "Draconian and anti-public positions" put forth by Utah and the federal government.


E-mail: lindat@desnews.com

Recent comments

Am I missing something here? This headline says the appeals court...

Bluestocking | Oct. 4, 2007 at 11:32 a.m.

The Feds,SUWA,& the Sierra Club have long interfered with the State...

El Capitan says.... | Oct. 3, 2007 at 5:02 p.m.

previousnext

Latest comments

Blazers get the unbalanced trade they seek while not signing Millsap away...

Ricky Bobby - THE JAZZ DO NOT WANT TO TAKE BACK EQUAL SALARIES. They want to...

Owls need holes for nest

Despite the fact that logging has all but stopped in the pacific northwest...

My understanding of what FAIR is trying to do, is to provide well thought out...

Jazz will resign Milsap. If they don't it will be ahuge mistake. First off,...

Stadium of Fire flag burning was fake

I was waiting for it to be burned on the big metal structure right by the...

Hey Ute fan... the Utes had a good season. And keep throwing that BCS bowl...

Tyrus Thomas is in the last year of his contract too so what is the point for...

CougarKeith, people don't know how to properly retire the flag, what they did...

It is just talk but since it was brought up: IF we can get Prizbilla &...

Advertisements