Daily Development for Wednesday, November 16,
by: Patrick A. Randolph, Jr.
Elmer F. Pierson Professor of Law
UMKC School of Law
Of Counsel: Blackwell Sanders Peper Martin
Kansas City, Missouri
ROAD CONSTRUCTION, PUBLIC LANDS, EASEMENTS: Counties must alert administrative agencies before undertaking anything but routine maintenance of roads on public land.
Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance v. Bureau of Land Management, 2005 WL 2160126 (10th Cir.(Utah)).
The case presents some extensive background that must be summarized. Before 1976, a statute known as R.S. 2477 had been in place for more than 100 years. R.S. 2477 encouraged local governments to build roads on public land, with a grant by the federal government of “the right of way for construction of highways over public lands, not reserved for public uses.” In 1976, Congress froze this right. Essentially, the new law granted no new rights of way, but allowed local governments to maintain rights of way in existence in 1976. Interpreting the rights created under R.S. 2477 has proved problematic, because the law did not provide guidance about the meaning of “right of way,” and local governments, over the course of the statute’s life, often failed to formally document the rights of way supposedly established pursuant to the statute.
This case arose when three counties in Utah sent workers onto Bureau of Land Management land to grade sixteen roads. None of the roads had been graded previously, but some of them showed signs of previous construction or maintenance activity. Arguing that the roads were actually unimproved trails not amounting to rights of way under R.S. 2477, a nature conservancy group sued the BLM to stop the grading, and the BLM in turn sued the counties. The counties claimed the roads were valid R.S. 2477 rights of way. In the trial court, the court decided the BLM should determine whether the roads were rights of way under the statute, or something less. After a BLM investigation, the BLM decided that the counties lacked valid rights of way for 15 of the 16 “roads.” The trial court then affirmed the BLM’s decision in its entirety.
The appellate court, after some lengthy procedural analysis dealing with whether the trial court should have reviewed the BLM’s decision de novo, remanded the case for the court to determine whether the roads were in fact rights of way established under R.S. 2477, and the appellate court provided substantial guidance regarding the standards the trial court should use in its determination.
Reporter’s Comment: Perhaps the most important point of the decision lies in the directive that counties proposing to work on roads over federal lands should check with the agency in charge (the BLM or National Forest Service) before performing any work beyond routine maintenance. Undocumented roads and trails crisscross the nation, particularly in the West. Whether the public has access to those paths is proving a very contentious issue, claimed by both sides in fights over public and private property rights, and preservation versus development.
The Reporter for the case was Rebecca Fisher of the Denver Bar.
Readers are encouraged to respond to or criticize this posting.
Items reported on DIRT and in the ABA publications related to it are for general information purposes only and should not be relied upon in the course of representation or in the forming of decisions in legal matters. The same is true of all commentary provided by contributors to the DIRT list. Accuracy of data provided and opinions expressed by the DIRT editor the sole responsibility of the DIRT editor and are in no sense the publication of the ABA.
Parties posting messages to DIRT are posting to
source that is readily accessible by members of
the general public, and should take that fact
into account in evaluating confidentiality
DIRT is an internet discussion group for serious
real estate professionals. Message volume varies,
but commonly runs 5 - 15 messages per work day.
Daily Developments are posted every work day.
subscribe, send the message
subscribe Dirt [your name]
To cancel your subscription, send the message
signoff DIRT to the address:
for information on other commands, send the
Help to the listserv address.
DIRT has an alternate, more extensive coverage that includes
commercial and general real estate matters but also focuses upon residential real estate matters. Because real estate brokers generally find this service more valuable, it is named “BrokerDIRT.” But residential specialist attorneys, title insurers, lenders and others interested in the residential market will want to subscribe to this alternative list. If you subscribe to BrokerDIRT, it is not necessary also to subscribe to DIRT, as BrokerDIRT carries all DIRT traffic in addition to the residential discussions.
To subscribe to BrokerDIRT, send the message
subscribe BrokerDIRT [your name]
To cancel your subscription to BrokerDIRT, send the
signoff BrokerDIRT to the address:
DIRT is a service of the American Bar
Section on Real Property, Probate & Trust Law and
the University of Missouri, Kansas City, School
of Law. Daily Developments are copyrighted by
Patrick A. Randolph, Jr., Professor of Law, UMKC
School of Law, but Professor Randolph grants
permission for copying or distribution of Daily
Developments for educational purposes, including
professional continuing education, provided that
no charge is imposed for such distribution and
that appropriate credit is given to Professor
Randolph, DIRT, and its sponsors.
DIRT has a WebPage at:
Members of the ABA Section on Real Property,
and Trust Law or of the National Association of Realtors can subscribe to a quarterly hardcopy report that includes all DIRT Daily Developments, many other cases, and periodic reviews of real estate oriented literature and state legislation by contacting Antonette Smith at (312) 988 5260 or firstname.lastname@example.org
Your e-mail address will only be used within the ABA and its entities. We do not sell or rent e-mail addresses to anyone outside the ABA.
To change your e-mail address or remove your name from any future general distribution e-mails you can call us at 1-800-285-2221, or write to: American Bar Association, Service Center, 321 N Clark Street, Floor 16, Chicago, IL 60610
If you are an ABA member, log in to the ABA Web site at https://e2k.exchange.umkc.edu/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.abanet.org/abanet/common/MyABA/home.cfm to edit your member profile. Otherwise, complete the form located at https://e2k.exchange.umkc.edu/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=https://www.abanet.org/members/join/coa2.html
To review our privacy statement, go to https://e2k.exchange.umkc.edu/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.abanet.org/privacy_statement.html.
If you have any problems, please contact the list owner