The debate over public lands in Utah these days days is largely a debate about wheels, as wilderness advocates and off-road vehicle owners fight over who has access to how much of the state's vast open spaces.

The debate came into focus this past week at a Hinckley Institute of Politics forum featuring Brian Hawthorn, land use director of the Blue Ribbon Coalition, and Heidi McIntosh, conservation director of the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA). The Blue Ribbon Coalition represents ATVers, snowmobilers and other motorized recreationists who want access to backcountry terrain.

While the battle over public lands is generally heated — SUWA's McIntosh says her group gets e-mails calling them "Nazis," and Hawthorn says he, too, has been called "all kinds of names" — the University of Utah debate was civil and even managed to produce some common ground.

Both SUWA and the Blue Ribbon Coalition are eager for the Bureau of Land Management to complete its off-road vehicle trail designations, noting that most other Western states already have trails in place. "Unlimited use (by off-roaders) is no longer appropriate," Hawthorn said.

"Brian has been a voice of reason in the off-road community, and I value that," McIntosh said. But, while SUWA and off-roaders may agree in principle, "where the rubber hits the trail" is when the BLM gets around to actually making its trail decisions, she said. That's when "people are going to be unhappy, probably on both sides."

Much of the current battle centers around "R.S. 2477" roads. The arcane title refers to a Civil War-era law that gave counties the right to build roads over some federal lands. The law was repealed in 1976, with the exception that existing roads could still be used.

The controversy since then has been over what's a road and what's not. In September, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a road doesn't have to be established by "mechanical" construction; it's a road as long as it had been in continuous use for 10 years prior to 1976. The ruling was seen as a victory for Utah's counties and for off-road users. SUWA has until Nov. 23 to decide whether it will appeal.

Most of what the counties call roads are really just "two-tracks," McIntosh argued. She brought along two photos: an overgrown two-track in the Bitter Creek area and an SUV riding over deep ruts in the North Swag area of Kane County.

"We all frame these debates in ways that advance our interests," Hawthorn countered. He said he remembers seeing photos of a road in San Juan County: one picture, taken by the BLM, the other by the county, in different seasons. In one photo the road looked overgrown, in another it didn't.

Hawthorn views off-road access to public lands as a "property right." McIntosh disagreed: "That's no different than your neighbor claiming he has a right of way across your yard, just because he says he has."

Counties "shouldn't be taking the law into their own hands," she said, referring to Kane County, which opened routes closed to ORV traffic in areas that include Bryce Canyon and wilderness study areas on BLM land.

At stake, she says, is protecting Utah's backcountry, including the nine million acres currently being considered for wilderness designation in the Redrock Wilderness Act before Congress. Motorized off-road vehicles are loud, smelly and erode the soil, she said, "but they aren't illegal. . . . If they're controlled, that's all we can ask for."

---

E-mail: jarvik@desnews.com