Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Recreation Disc Golf topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident proposes disc-golf courses in Dutch John; commission discusses land, costs and partnerships
Summary
At a Daggett County Commission meeting, a resident proposed creating one or more disc-golf courses in the Dutch John area. Commissioners and meeting participants discussed site options (RDA, county, Forest Service, SITLA and BLM land), likely acreage, maintenance, funding sources and permitting constraints. No formal decision or vote was taken.
A resident told the Daggett County Commission on Oct. 27, 2025, that local organizers are exploring the creation of disc-golf courses in the Dutch John area and asked the commission to consider setting aside county or RDA land for the use.
The idea would range from a small, removable nine‑hole course that could fit on roughly five acres to larger, permanent championship‑style courses requiring far more acreage. “We feel like it would be a great thing for the community, the kids, families that go there and have a good activity and, also visitors,” the resident said during the meeting, describing the expected local and tourist appeal.
Why it matters: commissioners and the resident framed the proposal as a community‑recreation and economic development opportunity—potentially drawing visitors and complementing existing outdoor amenities—while raising practical questions about land ownership, maintenance, permits and funding.
Meeting discussion and details
Speakers at the meeting walked through several site and ownership scenarios: county‑owned land, property held by the town’s Redevelopment Agency (RDA), private developments, State Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) parcels, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service land. Participants noted that much of the county’s land near Dutch John is held by the RDA and intended for future monetization or development, which complicates setting aside acreage permanently for recreation.
Commissioners and other participants noted a range of practical considerations: weed control and cleanup before use, a short walking path or informal trails between holes, and whether tee pads would be temporary (paint or removable pads) or permanent (concrete and posts). One participant said a full 18‑hole, competition‑grade course can cost on the order of $9,000–$10,000 for hardware (discs/nets) and installation, while organizers suggested smaller nine‑hole layouts can be built on far less land.
Funding, partners and permitting
Discussion identified several potential funding and implementation paths: grant support through outdoor‑recreation funding programs, private sponsorship (for example, “sponsor a hole” arrangements), volunteer labor for installation and ongoing maintenance, and contracting with experienced course builders. The meeting referenced an outdoor‑recreation organization that has helped finance courses across Utah and said volunteers and regional groups offered design and construction support.
Speakers also discussed partnering with public land managers. U.S. Forest Service parcels, state parks (Antelope Flat was specifically mentioned), and other public lands were suggested as potential sites—but speakers cautioned that projects on federal land would likely require environmental reviews and NEPA compliance and that the Forest Service currently lacks project‑level construction funding without outside grants or partners.
Land‑use and timing constraints
Multiple participants warned that available land near the town is limited and in some cases actively being negotiated or sold to developers. A commissioner summarized the meeting’s procedural takeaway: “I don’t in my opinion, I don’t think we need to make the decision today, but we should put it on looking forward to it another time,” reflecting a desire to continue planning rather than approve an immediate allocation of land.
Other planning points raised included: - Locating courses where they do not create traffic hazards (avoid surrounding roads and high‑traffic parcels). - Balancing RDA goals (which generally aim to monetize land) with a park designation if the county or town were to permanently hold acreage for recreation. - Exploring Forest Service or state park partnerships to place courses on non‑developable public ground and using grants to fund design and installation.
Next steps and outstanding questions
No motion or vote was taken. Commissioners asked for maps showing which parcels are currently encumbered or available (a GIS update was suggested) so organizers and designers can identify practical candidate sites. Organizers said they would pursue preliminary designs and potential grant opportunities and that they have local supporters willing to help with volunteer labor and sponsorship.
The item closed with participants agreeing to continue the discussion and investigate specific parcels and funding sources before returning to the commission for further direction.
