Land Access

SEUALG’s land ownership pattern is predominately federal land with state lands checkerboard within. Tribal and private lands tend to be in chunks.  At issue are the cases in which land owned by one entity is surrounded by or accessible only by crossing land owned by another entity. The Surface Ownership and Administration data as well as the several road and route datasets can be used to identify access areas that cross other landowners.

Access to land for recreational travelling using a variety of vehicles (mountain bikes, motorcycles, 4-wheel drive, etc.) and without vehicles (hiking, climbing, etc.) is a major issue of land access in the area.

County governments play a role in facilitating land access regardless of ownership. This is accomplished by acquiring and maintaining ROWs or easements across property. Counties also acquire and enforce access by participating in planning processes of federal and state agencies and via litigation.

The location of a properties boundary is an important part of land access. The BLM maintains the Public Land Survey System (PLSS). In Utah the latest GIS data update of the PLSS was in 2015, know as CadNSDI Version 2.0 2015. This latest version of GIS data is now available from Utah’s AGRC and can be viewed in this web map.

Gaining or maintaining access to lands is typically accomplished through right-of-way. The process for obtaining a right-of-way is different for each type of landowner as each has specific administrative procedures, management objectives, and historical context.

US Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
The BLM manages ROWs through resource management plans authorized by the Federal Lands Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976 [1]. Prior to FLMPA, ROWs on BLM lands were enabled by Revised Statute 2477 (Section 8 of the Mining Act of 1866) and are generally considered to be available for accessing property within and across US Bureau of Land Management (BLM) property, though this is not always the case. The Price, Moab, and Monticello Field Offices manage the BLM land within SEUALG.

US Forest Service Roads (USFS)
Right of ways on USFS lands are managed through the Forest Planning and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) processes.  The Manti-La Sal National Forest manages the forest service land with SEUALG.

State of Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA)
SITLA is directed by state law to maximize commercial gain from their properties through sale, lease, or exchange [2]. Originally allocated to western states upon statehood by the federal government to support state institutions like schools and hospitals. Utah was given sections 2, 16, 32, and 36 in each township. The resulting checkerboard pattern of ownership means many SITLA parcels are surrounded by federal lands with limited to no access. Land transfers are a common solution to this situation. SITLA has a successful history of working with the BLM, US Forest Service, and private land holders to enable mutually beneficial consolidations of property.

Private Property
Counties can establish new ROWs through private lands in three ways. First, for developing lands, counties can identify ROWs on the transportation component of the General Plan. With ROW’s identified, counties can work with developers to construct ROWs as the land develops over time. Second, counties can work with willing landowners to negotiate a mutually beneficial solution to purchase a public ROW or easement across property. Finally, in cases where landowners do not want a public ROW or easement across their property, counties can use eminent domain to condemn private property. State law enables the right of eminent domain for  roadways for public vehicles but not for recreational uses (78B-6-501 3f) [3].

Access is a pivotal resource management issue that balances resource use and resource preservation goals as well as public and private interests.

Another key issue is the balance of responsibilities and administrative costs between counties and other entities that require access into or through public lands.

Impacts to other resources, e.g. wildlife or water quality, may increase with increased or changed access.