Frequently Asked Questions
Why is BLM conducting travel planning in these areas?
The BLM committed to travel management planning, including the Canyon Rims TMP, in a Settlement Agreement the District Court of Utah approved in May 2017. The approved settlement can be read here: https://on.doi.gov/2g3UOKm and is linked to on https://www.blm.gov/programs/recreation/recreation-programs/travel-and-transportation/utah.
Where is the Canyon Rims Travel Management Area?
The Settlement Agreement refers to this area as the “Indian Creek TMP”, however the name was changed to more accurately reflect its actual geographic location. The Canyon Rims Travel Management Area covers about 91,000 acres of high plateau in northern San Juan County, Utah. It lies west of U.S. Highway 191, south of Moab. The area, also referred to as Hatch Point, is primarily used for livestock grazing, recreation, and mineral and energy exploration. The northern end of the area accesses the Anticline Overlook near Hatch Point with expansive views of the Lockhart Basin and Colorado River, looking north towards Dead Horse State Park. The southern end includes Windwhistle campground, a quiet but popular campground in this less visited area of the Moab Field Office. The Canyon Rims Travel Management Area includes several scenic overlooks, two campgrounds, the Trough Springs Trailhead, and various off-highway recreation opportunities.
How does this planning effort relate to decisions made in the 2008 Moab Resource Management Plan? Does it reverse or change travel decisions made in that plan?
Planning level decisions include the designation of areas in each field office as open, closed or limited to off-highway vehicle use, and will not be altered in the new Canyon Rims TMP. The land use planning level decisions made in the 2008 RMP will remain in place. This travel planning effort is focused on implementation level decisions, such as actual route designations as suitable for motorized or non-motorized use. These designations may be updated on various routes analyzed through this travel planning effort. The existing travel management plan, based on decisions from the 2008 RMP and any minor adjustments since that time, will remain in effect until the new travel plan is completed and approved.
Is the BLM required to close roads or restrict OHV use under existing policy or the settlement agreement?
No. The settlement does not identify roads that the BLM would have to close and it also would not impose any new restrictions on OHV use. The BLM has an existing legal obligation to take appropriate management action—which could potentially involve road closures—only if motorized vehicle use is causing certain types of harm.
What types of uses are covered by a travel management plan?
Travel and transportation are an integral part of virtually every activity that occurs on public lands. The BLM conducts comprehensive travel and transportation planning to determine how to manage roads, trail systems and associated areas on public land to best meet transportation needs.
How are Revised Statute (R.S.) 2477 claims covered by a travel management plan?
R.S. 2477 claims will not be considered in the route evaluation process; that is to say, R.S. 2477 claims cannot be criteria for route evaluation for possible designation. Route designations do not signify a recognition or rejection of R.S. 2477 assertions.
R.S. 2477 rights are determined through a process entirely independent of the BLM's travel management planning process. This travel management plan is founded on an independently determined purpose and need based on resource uses and associated access to public lands and waters. This travel management plan is not intended to provide any evidence bearing on or addressing the validity of any R.S. 2477 assertions and does not adjudicate, analyze, or otherwise determine the validity of claimed rights-of-way. Nothing in this travel management plan extinguishes any valid right-of-way, or alters in any way the legal rights the state and counties have to assert and protect R.S. 2477 rights or to challenge in federal court or other appropriate venue any use restrictions imposed by the travel management plan that they believe are inconsistent with their rights. At such time as an administrative determination acknowledges a right-of-way or a binding judicial decision confirms a right-of-way, the BLM will adjust its travel management plan accordingly if necessary.
Are there other road related decisions/activities in this area?
The BLM issued a decision Feb. 21, 2018 authorizing the Federal Highways Administration to conduct road improvements on roads accessing the Hatch Point and Needles Scenic Overlooks. This decision is related to managing road rights-of-way rather than designating use as motorized or non-motorized routes, so it is considered a different type of implementation level decision than travel management planning.
The BLM committed to travel management planning, including the Canyon Rims TMP, in a Settlement Agreement the District Court of Utah approved in May 2017. The approved settlement can be read here: https://on.doi.gov/2g3UOKm and is linked to on https://www.blm.gov/programs/recreation/recreation-programs/travel-and-transportation/utah.
Where is the Canyon Rims Travel Management Area?
The Settlement Agreement refers to this area as the “Indian Creek TMP”, however the name was changed to more accurately reflect its actual geographic location. The Canyon Rims Travel Management Area covers about 91,000 acres of high plateau in northern San Juan County, Utah. It lies west of U.S. Highway 191, south of Moab. The area, also referred to as Hatch Point, is primarily used for livestock grazing, recreation, and mineral and energy exploration. The northern end of the area accesses the Anticline Overlook near Hatch Point with expansive views of the Lockhart Basin and Colorado River, looking north towards Dead Horse State Park. The southern end includes Windwhistle campground, a quiet but popular campground in this less visited area of the Moab Field Office. The Canyon Rims Travel Management Area includes several scenic overlooks, two campgrounds, the Trough Springs Trailhead, and various off-highway recreation opportunities.
How does this planning effort relate to decisions made in the 2008 Moab Resource Management Plan? Does it reverse or change travel decisions made in that plan?
Planning level decisions include the designation of areas in each field office as open, closed or limited to off-highway vehicle use, and will not be altered in the new Canyon Rims TMP. The land use planning level decisions made in the 2008 RMP will remain in place. This travel planning effort is focused on implementation level decisions, such as actual route designations as suitable for motorized or non-motorized use. These designations may be updated on various routes analyzed through this travel planning effort. The existing travel management plan, based on decisions from the 2008 RMP and any minor adjustments since that time, will remain in effect until the new travel plan is completed and approved.
Is the BLM required to close roads or restrict OHV use under existing policy or the settlement agreement?
No. The settlement does not identify roads that the BLM would have to close and it also would not impose any new restrictions on OHV use. The BLM has an existing legal obligation to take appropriate management action—which could potentially involve road closures—only if motorized vehicle use is causing certain types of harm.
What types of uses are covered by a travel management plan?
Travel and transportation are an integral part of virtually every activity that occurs on public lands. The BLM conducts comprehensive travel and transportation planning to determine how to manage roads, trail systems and associated areas on public land to best meet transportation needs.
How are Revised Statute (R.S.) 2477 claims covered by a travel management plan?
R.S. 2477 claims will not be considered in the route evaluation process; that is to say, R.S. 2477 claims cannot be criteria for route evaluation for possible designation. Route designations do not signify a recognition or rejection of R.S. 2477 assertions.
R.S. 2477 rights are determined through a process entirely independent of the BLM's travel management planning process. This travel management plan is founded on an independently determined purpose and need based on resource uses and associated access to public lands and waters. This travel management plan is not intended to provide any evidence bearing on or addressing the validity of any R.S. 2477 assertions and does not adjudicate, analyze, or otherwise determine the validity of claimed rights-of-way. Nothing in this travel management plan extinguishes any valid right-of-way, or alters in any way the legal rights the state and counties have to assert and protect R.S. 2477 rights or to challenge in federal court or other appropriate venue any use restrictions imposed by the travel management plan that they believe are inconsistent with their rights. At such time as an administrative determination acknowledges a right-of-way or a binding judicial decision confirms a right-of-way, the BLM will adjust its travel management plan accordingly if necessary.
Are there other road related decisions/activities in this area?
The BLM issued a decision Feb. 21, 2018 authorizing the Federal Highways Administration to conduct road improvements on roads accessing the Hatch Point and Needles Scenic Overlooks. This decision is related to managing road rights-of-way rather than designating use as motorized or non-motorized routes, so it is considered a different type of implementation level decision than travel management planning.