Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Conservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges Willard planners to oppose expanded gravel pit near Cooks Canyon; cites new state law and federal bill
Summary
A resident told the planning commission that a gravel pit owner has declined to sell land conservation partners, that new Utah law expands local limitations on stopping mining, and that a federal bill could help protect the Bonneville Shoreline Trail.
During general public comment at the June 5 Willard City Planning Commission meeting, Clyde Westwood urged the commission to pay attention to recent activity at a gravel pit bordering Cooks Canyon and the Bonneville Shoreline Trail.
"For the past 3 years, I've been working with the Trust for Public Lands on Cooks Canyon's future," Westwood said. He told commissioners that the U.S. Forest Service and the Division of Wildlife Resources have expressed interest in the property and that the Division of Outdoor Recreation highlights the area as significant for the Bonneville Shoreline Trail.
Westwood told the commission he had recently been informed by the gravel pit company's representative that "the land is not for sale," and he said activity at the pit appears to be more than temporary staging tied to highway work. He said that the recent passage of Utah House Bill 355 "fundamentally shifts power, allowing expanded mining operations without local approvals," and urged the commission to consider active steps to protect the canyon and the trail.
Westwood also cited a bill introduced in the U.S. Senate by Sen. John Curtis and Sen. Mike Lee, referenced in the meeting as the "Bonneville Shoreline Trail Feasibility Act," which he said would authorize a federal assessment of whether the trail qualifies for national scenic trail designation.
Commissioners did not take formal action during the public comment period. Staff and commissioners acknowledged the information and said community concerns would be noted for council and planning consideration.
Why it matters: The comments highlight a local conservation dispute involving private land use, potential mining activity, and a long‑running regional trail effort. The interplay of federal, state and local rules — plus private property decisions by the gravel company — shapes what municipal officials can do without additional authority or land acquisition.
