Frequently Asked Questions
Why is BLM conducting travel planning in the Trail Canyon Travel Management area?
The BLM committed to travel management planning, including the Trail Canyon Travel Management Plan (TMP), in a Settlement Agreement the District Court of Utah approved in May 2017.
Where is the Trail Canyon Travel Management Area?
The Trail Canyon Travel Management Area (TMA) is located in Kane County, Utah. It is bounded by the Dixie National Forest on the north, U.S. Hwy 89 on the east, the Utah-Arizona border on the south, and Zion National Park on the west. The area is on the western edge of the Colorado Plateau physiographic province and is part of the Colorado River Basin. The TMA is approximately 326,376 acres in size and is comprised of 182,760 acres of BLM-managed public lands, 33,766 acres of State lands, and 109,850 acres in private ownership.
How does this planning effort relate to decisions made in the approved 2008 Kanab Resource Management Plan? Does it reverse or change travel decisions made in that plan?
The 2008 Kanab Resource Management Plan (RMP) designated areas as Open, Closed, or Limited to off-highway vehicle (OHV) use, these are land use planning level decisions that will not be altered by the Trail Canyon TMP. For example, the 2008 Kanab RMP designated 1000 acres of BLM land adjacent to the Coral Pink Sand Dunes State Park as an OHV Open area, meaning the area is open to cross-county travel. Changes to land use area designations, such as the area mentioned above, would require an RMP amendment or an RMP revision. An appropriate level of environmental analysis and public input would be required to successfully revise or amend RMP decisions. Travel Management Plans are implementation level planning efforts that tier to Land Use Plans, such as the 2008 Kanab RMP. This TMP will focus on individual OHV route designations of routes that occur within the Trail Canyon Travel Management Area. The existing travel management plan and associated route network stemming from the 2008 Kanab RMP decision and any minor adjustments to the TMP since that decision, will remain in effect until the new travel plan is completed and approved. BLM lands outside of the settlement TMA boundaries will not be affected by this TMP and will continue to be governed by existing travel management plan.
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. Due to settlement obligations, the scope of this TMP has been narrowed to focus on motorized uses and OHV designation of existing routes.
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.
Would the settlement create new wilderness study areas or natural areas or require BLM to inventory lands for wilderness characteristics?
No. The settlement makes no designations or management decisions of any kind, including designating new wilderness study areas or natural areas, and does not otherwise affect the BLM’s obligations to maintain inventories under existing law. As provided by the BLM’s regulations, the BLM will consider whether OHV use is damaging public land resources, including BLM-inventoried wilderness characteristics, and if damage is found, BLM will take appropriate action to minimize the damage through the travel management process.