In its fourth and final public meeting Tuesday, the Bureau of Land Management's Price field office received input on what it is calling "a big undertaking."

The future use of 2.5 million acres of land spanning Carbon and Emery counties is left to the revision and adoption of a resource management plan, which has been drafted and is available for public comment until the middle of October.

"We need substantive comment on possible errors we have made or things we have forgotten and left out," said Ruth McCoard, planning specialist in the Price office. The bureau is accepting written comments regarding the plan, which characterizes wildlife areas, off-highway vehicle and recreational use, responsible energy development and protection of the cultural resources available in the area.

The plan, when finalized, will guide how such natural resources, activities and uses will be managed during the next 15-20 years. The two existing plans covering the land area are no longer compatible, prompting the revision process.

"There are some places the two plans didn't jive," said the bureau's Price field office manager, Patrick Gubbins.

Perhaps the most controversial point of the draft is the motor-vehicle route designation, which will regulate how and which roads can be used for what purpose. Off-highway and recreational vehicles will be limited to designated routes, which will include nearly 680 acres of land.

"We want to be as light on the land as we can be," Gubbins said. "New technology allows machines to go places they couldn't go before, and we need to reconsider that."

On the subject of energy development, Gubbins said devices are able to drill deeper and also use directional drilling. The bureau is seeing a need for the protection of such energy resources.

Emery County Commissioner Drew Sitterud said the plan butts heads with some of his county's wishes and even previous regulations set in place. He said Emery County contains 22 rivers or dry washes that provide water to the county. The plan would limit use of the wild and scenic rivers.

"We don't want to lose our water rights," he said. "We don't have any other water source out there. It's our No. 1 concern."

Sitterud said the draft process is a good one, allowing officials to work through differences and obtain input from those interested parties.

"It's still a draft, and it shows that we are working together even if we don't get along," Sitterud said.