Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Dingle Act Rs2477 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PLIPCO urges BLM cooperative agreement under Dingle Act; RS2477 ruling cited as new county precedent
Summary
PLIPCO told the council it will press the BLM to offer a cooperative‑management agreement for the rec area modeled on Bears Ears and summarized a recent Kane County RS2477 decision that counties interpret as strengthening local title claims to historic roads.
PLIPCO representatives told the Emery County Public Lands Council they will ask the Bureau of Land Management to negotiate a cooperative‑management agreement for the county’s recreation area under the Dingle Act and highlighted a recent RS2477 court ruling they say strengthens county claims to historic roads.
A PLIPCO representative said the county’s formal ask to the BLM will mirror the cooperative agreement the BLM granted to tribes at Bears Ears, where tribes gained a formal role across grazing, roads, trails, fire and fuels projects. "Our ask is gonna be exactly what the BLM gave the tribes in the Bears Ears because they entered into a cooperative management agreement with the tribes," the representative said. PLIPCO said a letter has been sent and a meeting with BLM leadership (Greg Sheehan) was scheduled the next day to begin negotiations.
On RS2477 matters, the PLIPCO representative summarized a recent Kane County case in which the court ruled the state holds title to roads the county claimed and described downstream effects: counties have begun restoring roads (for example installing culverts) and BLM objections have not always prevented those actions. The representative warned the ruling is likely to be appealed but said it could change how counties manage claimed roads. He said the state attorney general’s office will issue guidance to counties on standards and that a special master may be needed to adjudicate hundreds of claimed roads.
PLIPCO also reported it is preparing an objection to the Grama Staircase plan and conducting a governor’s consistency review to flag inconsistencies between state and federal resource management plans; speakers noted similar federal proposals (for example in Wyoming) that could restrict surface disturbances for energy development.
Council members asked whether the BLM field officers have been informed; PLIPCO said they had sent letters to field offices describing the ruling and the state’s interpretation. PLIPCO said it asked the BLM to pause planning until the parties have had an opportunity to discuss cooperative‑management options.
PLIPCO’s presentation was informational; the transcript records discussion and follow‑up but no formal county actions or votes on cooperative‑management negotiations during this meeting.
