Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Conservation Wildlife Management Units topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
RAC approves two new CWMUs, denies two renewals after heated debate over public land access
Summary
The Central Region RAC split 5–4 to approve two new Conservation Wildlife Management Unit (CWMU) applications — Prohibition Springs and Blackhawk — and to deny renewal applications for Ingham Peak and TL Bar Range. Members debated access, posting of trade lands, and impacts of a recent Tenth Circuit corner‑crossing ruling.
After extended discussion May 13, the Central Region Advisory Council voted 5–4 to accept two new CWMU applications (Prohibition Springs and Blackhawk) and to deny renewal applications for Ingham Peak and TL Bar Range.
The item drew detailed questions from RAC members about public‑land inclusion, enforceable boundary lines and how CWMUs protect or restrict public access. A number of members raised the March Tenth Circuit court ruling on corner crossing during discussion, arguing that land previously considered "inaccessible" might not meet that standard anymore.
Why it matters: CWMUs are private‑land programs in which landowners and the DWR agree to public benefits (such as access or walk‑in opportunities) in exchange for hunting management on private lands. The inclusion of public parcels inside a CWMU perimeter has been contentious because it can limit or change public access depending on posting and boundary practices.
Key discussion points: RAC members pressed the division on several topics: how trade lands offered in exchange would be identified and posted; whether adding public land would meet the program’s stated public‑benefit test; and how the Tenth Circuit ruling affects claims of inaccessibility by corner crossing. Chad Betridge and division staff explained that some public parcels remain effectively inaccessible and that walk‑in access mapping or inclusion in the division’s walk‑in access program could make traded public acreage available to more species and users.
Public comment: Garrett Slatkoff, representing Backcountry Hunters & Anglers, opposed several of the proposed public land inclusions but supported Prohibition Springs, calling it a "model" because the landowner offered a 2:1 ratio of public land to private trade land and allowed multiple species use. Other public commenters argued the inclusion of public land should be reconsidered in light of the corner‑crossing court decision.
Vote and outcome: A RAC motion to accept the two new applications and deny the two renewals passed 5–4 after roll‑call. A number of RAC members said they were comfortable approving Prohibition Springs because the landowner offered demonstrable public benefit (including walk‑in access for several species) but not comfortable with the other public‑land inclusions. The division agreed to continue evaluating how the Tenth Circuit ruling affects CWMU eligibility and reporting.
Next steps: The RAC recommendation will be forwarded to the wildlife board. Several members urged the division and board to review all CWMUs that rely on "inaccessibility" as a justification now that the Tenth Circuit has addressed corner crossing; the division said it would review the issue but noted it has not yet made an official determination.
