Groups blast Utah's RS2477 claims to 'roads to nowhere'

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Joane Pappas White Price, Utah
    May 5, 2012 6:08 a.m.

    Of course the employees of SUWA (all 20ish of them in the state of Utah) and the Sierra Club employees are going "create a coalition"(doesn't that sound important) and "blast" us for wanting a voice in our own state's destiny! These are the paid non-profit parasites, most of whom were imported to Utah to suck salaries while they misrepresent the facts and file spurious lawsuits that you, the American Taxpayer, have paid for! The poor SUWA -- they might have to get real jobs!

    Joane Pappas White
    Price, Utah

  • The Authority Richfield, UT
    April 30, 2012 1:46 p.m.

    There is a fundamental misunderstanding of what this is all about in these comments. The state is not doing this to pave roads or grab land. The RS 2477 process is to keep what is already on the ground an in use open. It's not about taking anything, developing anything or paving anything. It's about trying to keep public access where it has been historically. Nothing more, nothing less.

  • KeithB Riverton, UT
    April 28, 2012 4:25 p.m.

    A little homework:

    The San Rafael swap that was torpedoed by environmental groups claiming the appraisal of the swap was not equitable because the appraisal did not include all the estimated oil that might exist under the land:

    Because of those complaints (from environmental groups) the Interior Secretary took up the cry and scuttled the deal:

    This also scuttled the ability of Bush to create another National Monument in the San Rafael Swell on request of Governor Leavitt. Again, Environmentalists, not Utahns or republicans against this.

    Please also refer to the Grand Escalante Staircase Monument created by Clinton which locked away Utah School trust lands and prohibited mining and minerals leases which would have been used to pay for Utah Schools.

  • suzyk#1 Mount Pleasant, UT
    April 28, 2012 9:54 a.m.

    You know, I've never read anything or heard anything positive about the EPA. So drawing a conclusion of what I have researched and been made aware of, these enviromentalists(EPA) are doing nothing but causing problems, costly problems where it is not warranted. There has to be something wrong, actually there is something awry with someone thinking that it is wrong to kill animals, poultry, etc. for survival. The good Lord did not put them on this earth to be a source of beauty; but to provide food for the living. These left wing liberalists waste more time and effort fighting for something that is out of their control and hopefully someday they will see the light and start spending time on things that are useful and beneficial to our Country.

  • andyjaggy American Fork, UT
    April 27, 2012 10:34 a.m.

    'IF' the road is a 'genuine' road that existed before 1976 then I say go for it. Unfortunately many of these are dry wash beds, recently created trails from ATV's, or simply animal trails. Herbert once again is full of lies and deceit.

    Salazar himself has said that he is willing to work with the states in identifying and coming up with a solution for this issue. There is a great story on it at Go look it up.

    I find it hard to believe that we can't fund our education because the Feds own so much of our land. That's a joke, there is no correlation between the amount of land owned by the Feds and the amount of spending per student. We are last in the nation in education because we haven't treated it as a priority.

    Heaven forbid we try to preserve any of our land and heritage for future generations. Herbert would have us drill every acre of our land just to lower gas prices 20 cents. Short sighted and selfish.

  • JimmyJackJohnJones Jonestown, TX
    April 26, 2012 12:19 p.m.

    Thanks for the "clarification" Bear, but I didn't say anything about taking my property, I said I don't want them grading the road to or on my property. I think I was pretty clear about that. So you're OK with the state or county grading across your property? Sorry friend, not me.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    April 25, 2012 5:45 p.m.

    Re: "This isn't about liberal or conservative . . . ."

    Yeah, it is.

    Liberals and tree huggers will say anything, true or not, to ridicule and marginalize those of us pointing out that the federal government has gotten WAY too big and WAY too powerful.

    We refuse to take seriously your assertion that the state may also be too big powerful, as a serious argument against federal land-use power gone wild.

    No one honestly believes federal bureaucrats 2000 miles away will be more protective of Utah property rights than Utah authorities.

  • Bear Somewhere, UT
    April 25, 2012 5:07 p.m.

    RE: JimmyJackJohnJones

    The only way they can take your land is with eminent domain. So unless they are trying to build a freeway on your land or something of that nature they are not trying to take your land. This story is about ROADS, specifically RS2477 roads that have been in place prior to 1976. If a road goes across your property and is a public road then an easement is already in place to have the road. No, Garfield County probably won't be improving the road but if they get ownership then they will maintain it.

  • Morgan Duel Taylorsville, UT
    April 25, 2012 5:01 p.m.

    It seems to me that a number of years ago a group including so called environmentalists in California worked very hard to keep land owners from keeping their claim on land and water in a valley east of LA.

    Finally they took all the water and the land owners lost everything.

    Here in Utah they take the land to keep us from using it and then once that is accomplished they will claim we no longer need the water and give it to California.

    What do we have left. Wilderness with nothing.

  • JimmyJackJohnJones Jonestown, TX
    April 25, 2012 4:49 p.m.

    Boy there sure are some angry posts here. This isn't about liberal or conservative, it's about a ridiculous and specious waste of taxpayer time and money by Utah's elected officials. I own property near where they want to take control. They aren't just trying to "take" roads from the Feds, they have a whole list that are private property, mine included. So where's the outrage about that, state's righters?

    Deseret News, why no link to the maps? If people knew the legislature might have their property in their sights people might feel a little differently. Garfield County sure as heck isn't going to be "improving" the access road to my property.

    Go to the SUWA website and look at the maps, specifically the private property locations. Yours might be there. Do you want the county grading your land?

  • Bear Somewhere, UT
    April 25, 2012 4:27 p.m.

    RE: Happy Valley Heretic
    Those sites you list are not public land and have no reference in this discussion about public roads. Yes, there are cows and sheep on public land and has been since before Utah was settled. They are not unwatched. Just because the rancher was not there when you saw the cow does not mean they are not watching out for them. Those animals are their livelihood and they treat them as such. You do realize that someone pays to have those animals out there? It is called multiple use. We have lots of room in Utah for everyone who wants to use the public land even for the big egos of the environmentalist.

  • Thinkin\' Man Rexburg, ID
    April 25, 2012 12:44 p.m.

    If someone wants to build a road or a facility, they are required to do an environmental impact study. So if someone wants to close a road, they SHOULD be required to do the same to objectively demonstrate the reasons for closure.

    They should have to demonstrate irreparable environmental harm for any road they want to close. As it is, they only assert, but do not demonstrate.

    If your concern is archaeological sites, address their security directly; don't close roads.

  • Anti Government Alpine, UT
    April 25, 2012 11:44 a.m.

    Fringe environmental wackos doing what they do best.....filling newspapers with distortions and half-truths.

    These people are so extreme and inflammatory it is impossible to to take them seriously or give them a shred of credibility.

    These are akin to the same groups who claim all the glaciers would be melted by 2025 and that polar bears were going extinct.

    All lies!!!

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    April 25, 2012 11:42 a.m.

    the existence of two track trails dramatically fosters vandalism at archaeological sites and the results are irreversible. "These roads to nowhere are being used by vandals and looters to pillage our collective past for personal gain or selfish curiosity,"

    No lotter ever hiked into an area to vandalise or loot. What a typical generalization.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    April 25, 2012 11:11 a.m.

    procuradorfiscal said:

    "Special interests," that is, like us rural rubes in farming, ranching, and mining families, that have maintained the land in its pristine state for generations.

    What are you talking about "pristine" "Moab uranium tailings" Murray Super site Clean up" Magna Corp" Cows and sheep through out the Uinta's and the deserts (unwatched and on public land) Energy Solutions and Mike Lee Corp. Attorney. Farmers generally own the land, good guys, don't know why you included them? Yep your right, these wacko's don't understand that Utah Wants to be America's Dump, and Utah's locals are willing to sell School lands for a 1 time paycheck, Your representatives really care.... about a quick buck

  • Bear Somewhere, UT
    April 25, 2012 10:52 a.m.

    The State is not going to pave these roads. Yes, they will be graded and maintained when needed but very few if any will ever be paved. These are roads that have existed for at least 36 years (pre-1976). They are used on a regular basis by the citizens of Utah for outdoor recreation, mining and ranching. People have lived here and used these lands to make a living for hundreds of years and the land is still in pristine shape. I have to tell you I trust a cattle rancher to tell me what the land needs more than some educated environmentalist. The cattle rancher has a vested interest in keeping that land in the best possible shape.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    April 25, 2012 10:47 a.m.

    Keith, have you ever looked at a map to see where these pockets of state land are located? Have you ever investigated what kinds of resource are -- or are not -- located on any of them?

    Several years ago, when the Department of Interior suggested a wholesale land swap in which these lands would be consolidated into several larger parcels located closer to roads, the idea was hooted down by Utah's conservative Republicans. And some of those parcels would have been rich with usable resources.

    Do your homework before you start shouting.

  • P Central, Utah
    April 25, 2012 9:02 a.m.

    I think that the real danger if you travel outsite of Utah and talk to people is the perception of people from Utah and of doing business for or with Utah people. These are real businessmen.

    There has veen talk of MAKING Utah maintain any roads they claim or forfit federal road money which comes to Utah. I don't know how a nationwide vote on that would go but I think we would ultimatelt come up short, I understand our County has said ro some landowners they can't even affort to maintain all the roads on their system now.

    I understand over in Millard County the County is even advertising in the paper that they are going to close some roads now on their (Class D ?) Road system. I guess they do expect any more development or subdivision of property out that way, no pipelines, no powerlines, no public access.

    It does seem like there could be big legal bills for this argument on both sides, and the public is paying the bill for BOTH sides.

  • sodiedog Salt Lake City, UT
    April 25, 2012 8:20 a.m.

    It just doesn't seem realistic to believe the state can solve all its education problems by selling 'desolate' and 'hostile' lands. What happens when the golden goose runs out of desolate lands to sell? Anyway, I thought senator Stephenson said you can't solve the educational crisis (or whatever he called it) by throwing money at it.

  • fish8 Vernal, UT
    April 25, 2012 7:48 a.m.

    The environmentalists love to use the law to get their way, now that the state is using the law to fight them they are calling foul. It's interesting to watch them claim how keeping things as they are now (those roads can and have been driven on for a hundred years) will bring big changes to the enviornment. They fail to admit that it's them wanting to change things not the state.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    April 25, 2012 6:59 a.m.

    Cats: "I am soooooo sick of these people."

    Yeah, I'm with you there. Greedy politicians who want to turn our public lands over to developers and mining corporations so they can get rich while we pay the bills for their misadventures is pretty sickening.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    April 25, 2012 5:55 a.m.

    Re: A coalition of environmental groups said Utah's claims . . . are an "absolute travesty" being pursued despite economic folly and disastrous environmental consequences.

    Well, of course they said that.

    Radical tree huggers consider humans a toxic, exotic species that must be eradicated from all federal lands, and that those lands, particularly in politically irrelevant "flyover country," like Utah, must be permanently locked away as petting zoos for back-East and Left-coast liberal elites -- to protect them from vicious "special interests."

    "Special interests," that is, like us rural rubes in farming, ranching, and mining families, that have maintained the land in its pristine state for generations.

  • Cats Somewhere in Time, UT
    April 24, 2012 11:23 p.m.

    I am soooooo sick of these people.

  • DN Subscriber Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 24, 2012 10:16 p.m.

    Just becasue some tiny band of endless protesters say something or send out a press release does not mean that it is (a) accurate, or (b) worthy of being repeated in a reputable newspaper.

    SUWA and their radical environmental views should be treated as the fringe element it really is.

    The people who have credibility on this issue are the Utahns who live and work in these desolate regions of the state, and have to coax a living out of hostile environments. THey barely make it running cattle, but would go broke if they had to depend on selling granola bars and water in biodegradable bottles to Birkenstock wearing hippies who want to hike into the areas.

  • KeithB Riverton, UT
    April 24, 2012 10:15 p.m.

    Blocked access to Utah school lands has prevented them from being used to pay for Utah schools.

    Yeah, these are your lands and the environMENTALists have blocked them from paying for your children's school, education and enjoyment.

    More power to John Swallow and returning those lands and their usage to their rightful owners... the citizens of Utah.

  • UTAH Bill Salt Lake City, UT
    April 24, 2012 3:58 p.m.

    Awww... those silly enviros - getting in the way of the state taking over those roads and then handing them over to developers and billboard companies. Our wilderness needs development - or else it's just, well, unspoiled wilderness. And, who wants that?