! The Capitol Complex is closed to the public due to COVID-19. All meetings will be held virtually online. View procedures and guidelines (PDF) for remote public comment and virtual meeting instructions (PDF).

Download Zipped Introduced WordPerfect SB0221S02.ZIP
[Status][Bill Documents][Fiscal Note][Bills Directory]

Second Substitute S.B. 221

Senator Ralph Okerlund proposes the following substitute bill:


             1     
STATE OF UTAH RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR

             2     
FEDERAL LANDS

             3     
2011 GENERAL SESSION

             4     
STATE OF UTAH

             5     
Chief Sponsor: Ralph Okerlund

             6     
House Sponsor: Michael E. Noel

             7      Cosponsors:
             8      David P. HinkinsDennis E. StowellKevin T. Van Tassell              9     
             10      LONG TITLE
             11      General Description:
             12          This bill establishes a state land use planning and management program.
             13      Highlighted Provisions:
             14          This bill:
             15          .    provides definitions, including the lands subject to the state land use planning and
             16      management program; and
             17          .    adopts a multiple use policy for the specified lands, including:
             18              .    opposing the federal designation, management, or treatment of specified lands
             19      in a manner that resembles wilderness or wilderness study areas, including the
             20      use of the non-impairment standard applicable to wilderness study areas;
             21              .    achieving and maintaining at the highest reasonably sustainable levels a
             22      continuing yield of energy, hard rock, and natural resources in specified lands;
             23              .    achieving and maintaining livestock grazing in the specified lands at the highest
             24      reasonably sustainable levels;
             25              .    managing the watershed in the specified lands to achieve and maintain water


             26      resources at the highest reasonably sustainable levels;
             27              .    achieving and maintaining traditional access to outdoor recreational
             28      opportunities in the specified lands;
             29              .    managing the specified lands so as to protect prehistoric rock art, artifacts, and
             30      other culturally important items found on the specified lands;
             31              .    managing the specified lands so as not to interfere with the property rights of
             32      adjacent property owners;
             33              .    managing the specified lands so as not to interfere with school trust lands; and
             34              .    discouraging a federal classification of specified lands as areas of critical
             35      environmental concern or areas with visual resource management class I or II
             36      rating.
             37      Money Appropriated in this Bill:
             38          None
             39      Other Special Clauses:
             40          This bill provides an immediate effective date.
             41      Utah Code Sections Affected:
             42      ENACTS:
             43          63J-8-101, Utah Code Annotated 1953
             44          63J-8-102, Utah Code Annotated 1953
             45          63J-8-103, Utah Code Annotated 1953
             46          63J-8-104, Utah Code Annotated 1953
             47          63J-8-105, Utah Code Annotated 1953
             48          63J-8-106, Utah Code Annotated 1953
             49     
             50      Be it enacted by the Legislature of the state of Utah:
             51          Section 1. Section 63J-8-101 is enacted to read:
             52     
CHAPTER 8. STATE OF UTAH RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR

             53     
FEDERAL LANDS

             54          63J-8-101. Title.
             55          This chapter is known as "State of Utah Resource Management Plan for Federal
             56      Lands."


             57          Section 2. Section 63J-8-102 is enacted to read:
             58          63J-8-102. Definitions.
             59          As used in this chapter:
             60          (1) "ACEC" means an area of critical environmental concern.
             61          (2) "AUM" means animal unit months, a unit of grazing forage.
             62          (3) "BLM" means the United States Bureau of Land Management.
             63          (4) "FLPMA" means the Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. Sec.
             64      1701 et seq.
             65          (5) "Forest service" means the United States Forest Service within the United States
             66      Department of Agriculture.
             67          (6) "Multiple use" means proper stewardship of the subject lands pursuant to Section
             68      1031(C) of FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. Sec. 170(C).
             69          (7) "OHV" means off-highway vehicle as defined in Section 41-22-2 .
             70          (8) "Settlement Agreement" means the written agreement between the state and the
             71      Department of the Interior in 2003 (revised in 2005) that resolved the case of State of Utah v.
             72      Gale Norton, Secretary of Interior (United States District Court, D. Utah, Case No.
             73      2:96cv0870).
             74          (9) "SITLA" means the School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration as created
             75      in Section 53C-1-201 .
             76          (10) (a) "Subject lands" means the following non-WSA BLM lands:
             77          (i) in Beaver County:
             78          (A) Mountain Home Range South, Jackson Wash, The Toad, North Wah Wah
             79      Mountains, Central Wah Wah Mountains, and San Francisco Mountains according to the
             80      region map entitled "Great Basin Central" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal
             81      for Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage
             82      existed on February 17, 2011; and
             83          (B) White Rock Range, South Wah Wah Mountains, and Granite Peak according to the
             84      region map entitled "Great Basin South" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for
             85      Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage
             86      existed on February 17, 2011;
             87          (ii) in Box Elder County: Little Goose Creek, Grouse Creek Mountains North, Grouse


             88      Creek Mountains South, Bald Eagle Mountain, Central Pilot Range, Pilot Peak, Crater Island
             89      West, Crater Island East, Newfoundland Mountains, and Grassy Mountains North according to
             90      the region map entitled "Great Basin North" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal
             91      for Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage
             92      existed on February 17, 2011;
             93          (iii) in Carbon County: Desbrough Canyon and Turtle Canyon according to the region
             94      map entitled "Book Cliffs" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in
             95      Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on
             96      February 17, 2011;
             97          (iv) in Daggett County: Goslin Mountain, Home Mountain, Red Creek Badlands,
             98      O-wi-yu-kuts, Lower Flaming Gorge, Crouse Canyon, and Diamond Breaks according to the
             99      region map entitled "Dinosaur" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for
             100      Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage
             101      existed on February 17, 2011;
             102          (v) in Duchesne County: Desbrough Canyon according to the region map entitled
             103      "Book Cliffs" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at
             104      http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February 17,
             105      2011;
             106          (vi) in Emery County:
             107          (A) San Rafael River and Sweetwater Reef, according to the region map entitled
             108      "Canyonlands Basin" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in
             109      Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on
             110      February 17, 2011;
             111          (B) Flat Tops according to the region map entitled "Glen Canyon", which is available
             112      by clicking the link entitled "Dirty Devil" at the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for
             113      Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage
             114      existed on February 17, 2011; and
             115          (C) Price River, Lost Spring Wash, Eagle Canyon, Upper Muddy Creek, Molen Reef,
             116      Rock Canyon, Mussentuchit Badland, and Muddy Creek, according to the region map entitled
             117      "San Rafael Swell" linked at the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in Utah"
             118      at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February 17,


             119      2011;
             120          (vii) in Garfield County:
             121          (A) Pole Canyon, according to the region map entitled "Great Basin South" linked in
             122      the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at
             123      http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February 17,
             124      2011;
             125          (B) Dirty Devil, Fiddler Butte, Little Rockies, Cane Spring Desert, and Cane Spring
             126      Desert Adjacents, according to the region map entitled "Glen Canyon", which is available by
             127      clicking the link entitled "Dirty Devil" at the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for
             128      Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage
             129      existed on February 17, 2011;
             130          (C) Lampstand, Wide Hollow, Steep Creek, Brinkerhof Flats, Little Valley Canyon,
             131      Death Hollow, Studhorse Peaks, Box Canyon, Heaps Canyon, North Escalante Canyon, Colt
             132      Mesa, East of Bryce, Slopes of Canaan Peak, Horse Spring Canyon, Muley Twist Flank,
             133      Pioneer Mesa, Slopes of Bryce, Blue Hills, Mud Springs Canyon, Carcass Canyon, Willis
             134      Creek North, Kodachrome Basin, and Kodachrome Headlands, according to the region map
             135      entitled "Grand Staircase Escalante" linked at the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for
             136      Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage
             137      existed on February 17, 2011; and
             138          (D) Notom Bench, Mount Ellen, Bull Mountain, Dogwater Creek, Ragged Mountain,
             139      Mount Pennell, Mount Hillers, Bullfrog Creek, and Long Canyon, according to the region map
             140      entitled "Henry Mountains" linked at the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness
             141      in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on
             142      February 17, 2011;
             143          (viii) in Iron County: Needle Mountains, Steamboat Mountain, Broken Ridge, Paradise
             144      Mountains, Crook Canyon, Hamlin, North Peaks, Mount Escalante, and Antelope Ridge,
             145      according to the region map entitled "Great Basin South" linked in the webpage entitled
             146      "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at
             147      http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February 17,
             148      2011;
             149          (ix) in Juab County: Deep Creek Mountains, Essex Canyon, Kern Mountains, Wild


             150      Horse Pass, Disappointment Hills, Granite Mountain, Middle Mountains, Tule Valley, Fish
             151      Springs Ridge, Thomas Range, Drum Mountains, Dugway Mountains, Keg Mountains West,
             152      Keg Mountains East, Lion Peak, and Rockwell Little Sahara, according to the region map
             153      entitled "Great Basin Central" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for
             154      Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage
             155      existed on February 17, 2011;
             156          (x) in Kane County:
             157          (A) Willis Creek North, Willis Creek, Kodachrome Badlands, Mud Springs Canyon,
             158      Carcass Canyon, Scorpion, Bryce Boot, Paria-Hackberry Canyons, Fiftymile Canyon,
             159      Hurricane Wash, Upper Kanab Creek, Timber Mountain, Nephi Point, Paradise Canyon,
             160      Wahweap Burning Hills, Fiftymile Bench, Forty Mile Gulch, Sooner Bench 1, 2, & 3, Rock
             161      Cove, Warm Bench, Andalex Not, Vermillion Cliffs, Ladder Canyon, The Cockscomb, Nipple
             162      Bench, Moquith Mountain, Bunting Point, Glass Eye Canyon, and Pine Hollow, according to
             163      the region map entitled "Grand Staircase Escalante" linked at the webpage entitled "Citizen's
             164      Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the
             165      webpage existed on February 17, 2011; and
             166          (B) Orderville Canyon, Jolley Gulch, and Parunuweap Canyon, according to the region
             167      map entitled "Zion/Mohave" linked at the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness
             168      in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on
             169      February 17, 2011;
             170          (xi) in Millard County: Kern Mountains, Wild Horse Pass, Disappointment Hills,
             171      Granite Mountain, Middle Mountains, Tule Valley, Swasey Mountain, Little Drum Mountains
             172      North, Little Drum Mountains South, Drum Mountains, Snake Valley, Coyote Knoll, Howell
             173      Peak, Tule Valley South, Ledger Canyon, Chalk Knolls, Orr Ridge, Notch View, Bullgrass
             174      Knoll, Notch Peak, Barn Hills, Cricket Mountains, Burbank Pass, Middle Burbank Hills, King
             175      Top, Barn Hills, Red Tops, Middle Burbank Hills, Juniper, Painted Rock Mountain, Black
             176      Hills, Tunnel Springs, Red Canyon, Sand Ridge, Little Sage Valley, Cat Canyon, Headlight
             177      Mountain, Black Hills, Mountain Range Home North, Tweedy Wash, North Wah Wah
             178      Mountains, Jackson Wash, and San Francisco Mountains, according to the region map entitled
             179      "Great Basin Central" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in
             180      Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on


             181      February 17, 2011;
             182          (xii) in Piute County: Kingston Ridge, Rocky Ford, and Phonolite Hill, according to
             183      the region map entitled "Great Basin South" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal
             184      for Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage
             185      existed on February 17, 2011;
             186          (xiii) in San Juan County:
             187          (A) Horseshoe Point, Deadhorse Cliffs, Gooseneck, Demon's Playground, Hatch
             188      Canyon, Lockhart Basin, Indian Creek, Hart's Point, Butler Wash, Bridger Jack Mesa, and Shay
             189      Mountain, according to the region map entitled "Canyonlands Basin" linked in the webpage
             190      entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at
             191      http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February 17,
             192      2011;
             193          (B) Dark Canyon, Copper Point, Fortknocker Canyon, White Canyon, The Needle, Red
             194      Rock Plateau, Upper Red Canyon, and Tuwa Canyon, according to the region map entitled
             195      "Glen Canyon", which is available by clicking the link entitled "Dirty Devil" at the webpage
             196      entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at
             197      http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February 17,
             198      2011;
             199          (C) Hunters Canyon, Behind the Rocks, Mill Creek, and Coyote Wash, according to
             200      the region map entitled "Moab/La Sal" linked at the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for
             201      Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage
             202      existed on February 17, 2011; and
             203          (D) Hammond Canyon, Allen Canyon, Mancos Jim Butte, Arch Canyon, Monument
             204      Canyon, Tin Cup Mesa, Cross Canyon, Nokai Dome, Grand Gulch, Fish and Owl Creek
             205      Canyons, Comb Ridge, Road Canyon, The Tabernacle, Lime Creek, San Juan River, and
             206      Valley of the Gods, according to the region map entitled "San Juan" linked at the webpage
             207      entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at
             208      http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February 17,
             209      2011;
             210          (xiv) in Sevier County: Rock Canyon, Mussentuchit Badland, Limestone Cliffs, and
             211      Jones' Bench, according to the region map entitled "San Rafael Swell" linked at the webpage


             212      entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at
             213      http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February 17,
             214      2011;
             215          (xv) in Tooele County:
             216          (A) Silver Island Mountains, Crater Island East, Grassy Mountains North, Grassy
             217      Mountains South, Stansbury Island, Cedar Mountains North, Cedar Mountains Central, Cedar
             218      Mountains South, North Stansbury Mountains, Qquirrh Mountains, and Big Hollow, according
             219      to the region map entitled "Great Basin North" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's
             220      Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the
             221      webpage existed on February 17, 2011, excluding the areas that Congress designated as
             222      wilderness under the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006; and
             223          (B) Ochre Mountain, Deep Creek Mountains, Dugway Mountains, Indian Peaks, and
             224      Lion Peak, according to the region map entitled "Great Basin Central' linked in the webpage
             225      entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at
             226      http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February 17,
             227      2011;
             228          (xvi) in Uintah County:
             229          (A) White River, Lower Bitter Creek, Sunday School Canyon, Dragon Canyon, Wolf
             230      Point, Winter Ridge, Seep Canyon, Bitter Creek, Hideout Canyon, Sweetwater Canyon, and
             231      Hell's Hole, according to the region map entitled "Book Cliffs" linked in the webpage entitled
             232      "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at
             233      http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February 17,
             234      2011; and
             235          (B) Lower Flaming Gorge, Crouse Canyon Stone Bridge Draw, Diamond Mountain,
             236      Wild Mountain, Split Mountain Benches, Vivas Cake Hill, Split Mountain Benches South,
             237      Beach Draw, Stuntz Draw, Moonshine Draw, Bourdette Draw, and Bull Canyon, according to
             238      the region map entitled "Dinosaur" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for
             239      Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage
             240      existed on February 17, 2011;
             241          (xvii) in Washington County: Couger Canyon, Docs Pass, Slaughter Creek, Butcher
             242      Knife Canyon, Square Top, Scarecrow Creek, Beaver Dam Wash, Beaver Dam Mountains


             243      North, Beaver Dam Mountains South, Joshua Tree, Beaver Dam Wilderness Expansion, Red
             244      Mountain, Cottonwood Canyon, Taylor Canyon, LaVerkin Creek, Beartrap Canyon, Deep
             245      Creek, Black Ridge, Red Butte, Kolob Creek, Goose Creek, Dry Creek, Zion National Park
             246      Adjacents, Crater Hill, The Watchman, and Canaan Mountain, according to the region map
             247      entitled "Zion/Mohave" linked at the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in
             248      Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on
             249      February 17, 2011, excluding the areas that Congress designated as wilderness and
             250      conservation areas under the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009; and
             251          (xviii) in Wayne County:
             252          (A) Sweetwater Reef, Upper Horseshoe Canyon, and Labyrinth Canyon, according to
             253      the region map entitled "Canyonlands Basin" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal
             254      for Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage
             255      existed on February 17, 2011;
             256          (B) Flat Tops and Dirty Devil, according to the region map entitled "Glen Canyon",
             257      which is available by clicking the link entitled "Dirty Devil" at the webpage entitled "Citizen's
             258      Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the
             259      webpage existed on February 17, 2011;
             260          (C) Fremont Gorge, Pleasant Creek Bench, Notom Bench, Mount Ellen, and Bull
             261      Mountain, according to the region map entitled "Henry Mountains" linked at the webpage
             262      entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at
             263      http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February 17,
             264      2011; and
             265          (D) Capital Reef Adjacents, Muddy Creek, Wild Horse Mesa, North Blue Flats, Red
             266      Desert, and Factory Butte, according to the region map entitled "San Rafael Swell" linked at
             267      the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at
             268      http://www.protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February 17,
             269      2011.
             270          (b) "Subject lands" also includes all BLM and Forest Service lands in the state that are
             271      not Wilderness Area or Wilderness Study Areas;
             272          (c) "Subject lands" does not include the following lands that are the subject of
             273      consideration for a possible federal lands bill and should be managed according to the 2008


             274      Price BLM Field Office Resource Management Plan until a federal lands bill provides
             275      otherwise:
             276          (i) Turtle Canyon and Desolation Canyon according to the region map entitled "Book
             277      Cliffs" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at
             278      http://protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February 17, 2011;
             279          (ii) Labyrinth Canyon, Duma Point, and Horseshoe Point, according to the region map
             280      entitled "Canyonlands Basin" linked in the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness
             281      in Utah" at http://protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February
             282      17, 2011; and
             283          (iii) Devil's Canyon, Sid's Mountain, Mexican Mountain, San Rafael Reef, Hondu
             284      Country, Cedar Mountain, and Wild Horse, according to the region map entitled "San Rafael
             285      Swell" linked at the webpage entitled "Citizen's Proposal for Wilderness in Utah" at
             286      http://protectwildutah.org/proposal/index.html as the webpage existed on February 17, 2011;
             287          (11) "Wilderness area" means those BLM and Forest Service lands added to the
             288      National Wilderness Preservation System by an act of Congress.
             289          (12) "WSA" and "Wilderness Study Area" mean the BLM lands in Utah that were
             290      identified as having the necessary wilderness character and were classified as wilderness study
             291      areas during the BLM wilderness review conducted between 1976 and 1993 by authority of
             292      Section 603 of FLPMA and labeled as Wilderness Study Areas within the final report of the
             293      President of the United States to the United States Congress in 1993.
             294          Section 3. Section 63J-8-103 is enacted to read:
             295          63J-8-103. State participation in managing public lands.
             296          In view of the requirement in FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. Sec. 1712, that BLM must work
             297      through a planning process that is coordinated with other federal, state, and local planning
             298      efforts before making decisions about the present and future uses of public lands, the
             299      requirement in FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. Sec.1714 that BLM may not withdraw or otherwise
             300      designate BLM lands for specific purposes without congressional approval, and the
             301      requirement in the Forest Service Multiple-Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960, 16 U.S.C.
             302      Sec.528, that lands within the national forests be managed according to the principles of
             303      multiple use, and in view of the right which FLPMA, the National Environmental Policy Act,
             304      42 U.S.C. Sec. 4321 et seq. and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix 2,


             305      give to state and local governments to participate in all BLM and Forest Service efforts to plan
             306      for the responsible use of BLM and Forest Service lands and the requirement that BLM and the
             307      Forest Service coordinate planning efforts with those of state and local government, the state
             308      adopts the following policy for the management of the subject lands:
             309          (1) Pursuant to the proper allocation of governmental authority between the several
             310      states and the federal government, the implementation of congressional acts concerning the
             311      subject lands must recognize the concurrent jurisdiction of the states and accord full
             312      recognition to state interpretation of congressional acts, as reflected in state law, plans,
             313      programs, and policies, insofar as the interpretation does not violate the Supremacy Clause,
             314      U.S. Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2.
             315          (2) Differences of opinion between the state's plans and policies on use of the subject
             316      lands and any proposed decision concerning the subject lands pursuant to federal planning or
             317      other federal decision making processes should be mutually resolved between the authorized
             318      federal official, including federal officials from other federal agencies advising the authorized
             319      federal official in any capacity, and the governor of Utah.
             320          (3) The subject lands managed by the BLM are to be managed to the basic standard of
             321      the prevention of undue and unnecessary degradation of the lands, as required by FLPMA. A
             322      more restrictive management standard should not apply except through duly adopted statutory
             323      or regulatory processes wherein each specific area is evaluated pursuant to the provisions of the
             324      BLM's planning process and those of the National Environmental Policy Act.
             325          (4) The subject lands should not be segregated into separate geographical areas for
             326      management that resembles the management of wilderness, wilderness study areas, wildlands,
             327      lands with wilderness characteristics, or the like.
             328          (5) The BLM and the Forest Service should make plans for the use of the subject lands
             329      and resources subject to their management pursuant to statutorily authorized processes, with
             330      due regard for the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, by:
             331          (a) recognizing that the duly adopted Resource Management Plan or Forest Service
             332      equivalent is the fundamental planning document, which may be revised or amended from time
             333      to time;
             334          (b) avoiding and eliminating any form of guidance or policy that has the effect of
             335      prescreening, segregating, or imposing any form of management requirements upon any of the


             336      subject lands and resources prior to any of the planning processes subject to Subsection (5)(a);
             337      and
             338          (c) avoiding and eliminating all forms of planning that parallel or duplicate the
             339      planning processes subject to Subsection (5)(a).
             340          Section 4. Section 63J-8-104 is enacted to read:
             341          63J-8-104. State land use planning and management program.
             342          The BLM and Forest Service land use plans should produce planning documents
             343      consistent with state and local land use plans to the maximum extent consistent with federal
             344      law and FLPMA's purposes, by incorporating the state's land use planning and management
             345      program for the subject lands that is as follows:
             346          (1) preserve traditional multiple use and sustained yield management on the subject
             347      lands to:
             348          (a) achieve and maintain in perpetuity a high-level annual or regular periodic output of
             349      agricultural, mineral, and various other resources from the subject lands;
             350          (b) support valid existing transportation, mineral, and grazing privileges in the subject
             351      lands at the highest reasonably sustainable levels;
             352          (c) produce and maintain the desired vegetation for watersheds, timber, food, fiber,
             353      livestock forage, wildlife forage, and minerals that are necessary to meet present needs and
             354      future economic growth and community expansion in each county where the subject lands are
             355      situated without permanent impairment of the productivity of the land;
             356          (d) meet the recreational needs and the personal and business-related transportation
             357      needs of the citizens of each county where the subject lands are situated by providing access
             358      throughout each such county;
             359          (e) meet the needs of wildlife, provided that the respective forage needs of wildlife and
             360      livestock are balanced according to the provisions of Subsection 63J-4-401 (6)(m);
             361          (f) protect against adverse effects to historic properties, as defined by 36 C.F.R. 800;
             362          (g) meet the needs of community economic growth and development;
             363          (h) provide for the protection of existing water rights and the reasonable development
             364      of additional water rights; and
             365          (i) provide for reasonable and responsible development of electrical transmission and
             366      energy pipeline infrastructure on the subject lands;


             367          (2) (a) do not designate, establish, manage, or treat any of the subject lands as an area
             368      with management prescriptions that parallel, duplicate, or resemble the management
             369      prescriptions established for wilderness areas or wilderness study areas, including the
             370      non-impairment standard applicable to WSAs or anything that parallels, duplicates, or
             371      resembles that nonimpairment standard; and
             372          (b) recognize, follow, and apply the agreement between the state and the Department of
             373      the Interior in the settlement agreement;
             374          (3) call upon the BLM to revoke and revise BLM Manuals H 6301, H 6302, and H
             375      6303, issued on or about February 25, 2011, in light of the settlement agreement and the
             376      following principles of this state plan:
             377          (a) BLM lacks congressional authority to manage subject lands, other than WSAs, as if
             378      they are or may become wilderness;
             379          (b) BLM lacks authority to designate geographic areas as lands with wilderness
             380      characteristics or designate management prescriptions for such areas other than to use specific
             381      geographic-based tools and prescriptions expressly identified in FLPMA;
             382          (c) BLM lacks authority to manage the subject lands in any manner other than to
             383      prevent unnecessary or undue degradation, unless the BLM uses geographic tools expressly
             384      identified in FLPMA and does so pursuant to a duly adopted provision of a resource
             385      management plan adopted under FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. Sec. 1712;
             386          (d) BLM inventories for the presence of wilderness characteristics must be closely
             387      coordinated with inventories for those characteristics conducted by state and local
             388      governments, and should reflect a consensus among those governmental agencies about the
             389      existence of wilderness characteristics, as follows:
             390          (i) any inventory of wilderness characteristics should reflect all of the criteria identified
             391      in the Wilderness Act of 1964, including:
             392          (A) a size of 5,000 acres or more, containing no visible roads; and
             393          (B) the presence of naturalness, the opportunity for primitive and unconfined
             394      recreation, and the opportunity for solitude;
             395          (ii) geographic areas found to contain the presence of naturalness must appear pristine
             396      to the average viewer, and not contain any of the implements, artifacts, or effects of human
             397      presence, including:


             398          (A) visible roads, whether maintained or not; and
             399          (B) human-made features such as vehicle bridges, fire breaks, fisheries, enhancement
             400      facilities, fire rings, historic mining and other properties, including tailings piles, commercial
             401      radio and communication repeater sites, fencing, spring developments, linear disturbances,
             402      stock ponds, visible drill pads, pipeline and transmission line rights-of-way, and other similar
             403      features;
             404          (iii) factors, such as the following, though not necessarily conclusive, should weigh
             405      against a determination that a land area has the presence of naturalness:
             406          (A) the area is or once was the subject of mining and drilling activities;
             407          (B) mineral and hard rock mining leases exist in the area; and
             408          (C) the area is in a grazing district with active grazing allotments and visible range
             409      improvements;
             410          (iv) geographic areas found to contain the presence of solitude should convey the sense
             411      of solitude within the entire geographic area identified, otherwise boundary adjustments should
             412      be performed in accordance with Subsection (3)(d)(vii);
             413          (v) geographic areas found to contain the presence of an opportunity for primitive and
             414      unconfined recreation must find these features within the entire area and provide analysis about
             415      the effect of the number of visitors to the geographic area upon the presence of primitive or
             416      unconfined recreation, otherwise boundary adjustments should be performed in accordance
             417      with Subsection (3)(d)(vii);
             418          (vi) in addition to the actions required by the review for roads pursuant to the
             419      definitions of roads contained in BLM Manual H-6301, or any similar authority, the BLM
             420      should, pursuant to its authority to inventory, identify and list all roads or routes identified as
             421      part of a local or state governmental transportation system, and consider those routes or roads
             422      as qualifying as roads within the definition of the Wilderness Act of 1964; and
             423          (vii) BLM should adjust the boundaries for a geographic area to exclude areas that do
             424      not meet the criteria of lacking roads, lacking solitude, and lacking primitive and unconfined
             425      recreation and the boundaries should be redrawn to reflect an area that clearly meets the criteria
             426      above, and which does not employ minor adjustments to simply exclude small areas with
             427      human intrusions, specifically:
             428          (A) the boundaries of a proposed geographic area containing lands with wilderness


             429      characteristics should not be drawn around roads, rights-of-way, and intrusions;
             430          (B) lands located between individual human impacts that do not meet the requirements
             431      for lands with wilderness characteristics should be excluded;
             432          (e) BLM should consider the responses of the United States Department of the Interior
             433      under cover of the letter dated May 20, 2009, clearly stating that BLM does not have the
             434      authority to apply the non-impairment management standard to the subject lands, or to manage
             435      the subject lands in any manner to preserve their suitability for designation as wilderness, when
             436      considering the proper management principles for areas that meet the full definition of lands
             437      with wilderness characteristics; and
             438          (f) even if the BLM were to properly inventory an area for the presence of wilderness
             439      characteristics, the BLM still lacks authority to make or alter project level decisions to
             440      automatically avoid impairment of any wilderness characteristics without express
             441      congressional authority to do so;
             442          (4) achieve and maintain at the highest reasonably sustainable levels a continuing yield
             443      of energy, hard rock, and nuclear resources in those subject lands with economically
             444      recoverable amounts of such resources as follows:
             445          (a) the development of the solid, fluid, and gaseous mineral resources in portions of the
             446      subject lands is an important part of the state's economy and the economies of the respective
             447      counties, and should be recognized that it is technically feasible to access mineral and energy
             448      resources in portions of the subject lands while preserving or, as necessary, restoring
             449      non-mineral and non-energy resources;
             450          (b) all available, recoverable solid, fluid, gaseous, and nuclear mineral resources in the
             451      subject lands should be seriously considered for contribution or potential contribution to the
             452      state's economy and the economies of the respective counties;
             453          (c) those portions of the subject lands shown to have reasonable mineral, energy, and
             454      nuclear potential should be open to leasing, drilling, and other access with reasonable
             455      stipulations and conditions, including mitigation, reclamation, and bonding measures where
             456      necessary, that will protect the lands against unnecessary and undue damage to other significant
             457      resource values;
             458          (d) federal oil and gas existing lease conditions and restrictions should not be modified,
             459      waived, or removed unless the lease conditions or restrictions are no longer necessary or


             460      effective;
             461          (e) any prior existing lease restrictions in the subject lands that are no longer necessary
             462      or effective should be modified, waived, or removed;
             463          (f) restrictions against surface occupancy should be eliminated, modified, or waived,
             464      where reasonable;
             465          (g) in the case of surface occupancy restrictions that cannot be reasonably eliminated,
             466      modified, or waived, directional drilling should be considered where the mineral and energy
             467      resources beneath the area can be reached employing available directional drilling technology;
             468          (h) applications for permission to drill in the subject lands that meet standard
             469      qualifications, including reasonable and effective mitigation and reclamation requirements,
             470      should be expeditiously processed and granted; and
             471          (i) any moratorium that may exist against the issuance of qualified mining patents and
             472      oil and gas leases in the subject lands, and any barriers that may exist against developing
             473      unpatented mining claims and filing for new claims, should be carefully evaluated for removal;
             474          (5) achieve and maintain livestock grazing in the subject lands at the highest
             475      reasonably sustainable levels by adhering to the policies, goals, and management practices set
             476      forth in Subsection 63J-4-401 (6)(m);
             477          (6) manage the watershed in the subject lands to achieve and maintain water resources
             478      at the highest reasonably sustainable levels as follows:
             479          (a) adhere to the policies, goals, and management practices set forth in Subsection
             480      63J-4-401 (6)(m);
             481          (b) deter unauthorized cross-country OHV use in the subject lands by establishing a
             482      reasonable system of roads and trails in the subject lands for the use of an OHV, as closing the
             483      subject lands to all OHV use will only spur increased and unauthorized use; and
             484          (c) keep open any road or trail in the subject lands that historically has been open to
             485      OHV use, as identified on respective county road maps;
             486          (7) achieve and maintain traditional access to outdoor recreational opportunities
             487      available in the subject lands as follows:
             488          (a) hunting, trapping, fishing, hiking, family and group parties, family and group
             489      campouts and campfires, rock hounding, OHV travel, geological exploring, pioneering,
             490      recreational vehicle parking, or just touring in personal vehicles are activities that are important


             491      to the traditions, customs, and character of the state and individual counties where the subject
             492      lands are located and should continue;
             493          (b) wildlife hunting, trapping, and fishing should continue at levels determined by the
             494      Wildlife Board and the Division of Wildlife Resources and traditional levels of group camping,
             495      group day use, and other traditional forms of outdoor recreation, both motorized and
             496      nonmotorized, should continue; and
             497          (c) the broad spectrum of outdoor recreational activities available on the subject lands
             498      should be available to citizens for whom a primitive, nonmotorized, outdoor experience is not
             499      preferred, affordable, or physically achievable;
             500          (8) (a) keep open to motorized travel, any road in the subject lands that is part of the
             501      respective counties' duly adopted transportation plan;
             502          (b) provide that R.S. 2477 rights-of-way should be recognized by the BLM;
             503          (c) provide that a county road may be temporarily closed or permanently abandoned
             504      only by statutorily authorized action of the county or state;
             505          (d) provide that the BLM and the Forest Service must recognize and not unduly
             506      interfere with a county's ability to maintain and repair roads and, where reasonably necessary,
             507      make improvements to the roads; and
             508          (e) recognize that additional roads and trails may be needed in the subject lands from
             509      time to time to facilitate reasonable access to a broad range of resources and opportunities
             510      throughout the subject lands, including livestock operations and improvements, solid, fluid,
             511      and gaseous mineral operations, recreational opportunities and operations, search and rescue
             512      needs, other public safety needs, access to public lands for people with disabilities and the
             513      elderly, and access to Utah school and institutional trust lands for the accomplishment of the
             514      purposes of those lands;
             515          (9) manage the subject lands so as to protect prehistoric rock art, three dimensional
             516      structures, and other artifacts and sites recognized as culturally important and significant by the
             517      state historic preservation officer or each respective county by imposing reasonable and
             518      effective stipulations and conditions reached by agreement between the federal agency and the
             519      state authorized officer pursuant to the authority granted by the National Historic Preservation
             520      Act, 16 U.S.C. Sec. 470 et seq.;
             521          (10) manage the subject lands so as to not interfere with the property rights of private


             522      landowners as follows:
             523          (a) the state recognizes that there are parcels of private fee land throughout the subject
             524      lands;
             525          (b) land management policies and standards in the subject lands should not interfere
             526      with the property rights of any private landowner to enjoy and engage in uses and activities on
             527      an individual's private property consistent with controlling county zoning and land use laws;
             528      and
             529          (c) a private landowner or a guest or client of a private landowner should not be denied
             530      the right of motorized access to the private landowner's property consistent with past uses of
             531      the private property;
             532          (11) manage the subject lands in a manner that supports the fiduciary agreement made
             533      between the state and the federal government concerning the school and institutional trust
             534      lands, as managed according to state law, by:
             535          (a) formally recognizing, by duly authorized federal proclamation, the duty of the
             536      federal government to support the purposes of the school and institutional trust lands owned by
             537      the state and administered by SITLA in trust for the benefit of public schools and other
             538      institutions as mandated in the Utah Constitution and the Utah Enabling Act of 1894, 28, Stat.
             539      107;
             540          (b) actively seeking to support SITLA's fiduciary responsibility to manage the school
             541      trust lands to optimize revenue by making the school trust lands available for sale and private
             542      development and for other multiple and consumptive use activities such as mineral
             543      development, grazing, recreation, timber, and agriculture;
             544          (c) not interfering with SITLA's ability to carry out its fiduciary responsibilities by the
             545      creation of geographical areas burdened with management restrictions that prohibit or
             546      discourage the optimization of revenue, without just compensation;
             547          (d) recognizing SITLA's right of economic access to the school trust lands to enable
             548      SITLA to put those sections to use in its fiduciary responsibilities; and
             549          (e) recognizing any management plan enacted by SITLA pursuant to Section
             550      53C-2-201 ;
             551          (12) oppose the designation of BLM lands as areas of critical environmental concern
             552      (ACEC), as the BLM lands are generally not compatible with the state's plan and policy for


             553      managing the subject lands, but special cases may exist where such a designation is appropriate
             554      if compliance with FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. Sec. 1702(a) is clearly demonstrated and where the
             555      proposed designation and protection:
             556          (a) is limited to the geographic size to the minimum necessary to meet the standards
             557      required by Section 63J-4-401 ;
             558          (b) is necessary to protect not just a temporary change in ground conditions or visual
             559      resources that can be reclaimed or reversed naturally, but is clearly shown as necessary to
             560      protect against visible damage on the ground that will persist on a time scale beyond that which
             561      would effectively disqualify the land for a later inventory of wilderness characteristics;
             562          (c) will not be applied in a geographic area already protected by other protective
             563      designations available pursuant to law; and
             564          (d) is not a substitute for the non-impairment management requirements of wilderness
             565      study areas; and
             566          (13) recognize that a BLM visual resource management class I or II rating is generally
             567      not compatible with the state's plan and policy for managing the subject lands, but special cases
             568      may exist where such a rating is appropriate if jointly considered and created by state, local,
             569      and federal authorities as part of an economic development plan for a region of the state, with
             570      due regard for school trust lands and private lands within the area.
             571          (14) All BLM and Forest Service decision documents should be accompanied with an
             572      analysis of the social and economic impact of the decision. Such analysis should:
             573          (a) consider all facets of the decision in light of valuation techniques for the potential
             574      costs and benefits of the decision;
             575          (b) clarify whether the costs and benefits employ monetized or non-monetized
             576      techniques;
             577          (c) compare the accuracy, completeness and viability of monetized and non-monetized
             578      valuation techniques used as part of the analysis, including all caveats on use of the techniques;
             579      and
             580          (d) compare the valuation techniques employed in the analysis to the federal standards
             581      for valuation employed by the U.S. Department of Justice in court actions.
             582          Section 5. Section 63J-8-105 is enacted to read:
             583          63J-8-105. Maps available for public review.


             584          A printed copy of the maps referenced in Subsection 63J-8-102 (9) shall be available for
             585      inspection by the public at the offices of the Utah Association of Counties.
             586          Section 6. Section 63J-8-106 is enacted to read:
             587          63J-8-106. Miscellaneous provisions.
             588          (1) Notwithstanding the provisions in the previous sections of this chapter, the state
             589      believes that some WSAs and other BLM or Forest Service lands may be considered for
             590      permanent inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System as part of county specific
             591      proposals for Congress to consider if driven by a local process that includes all interested
             592      stakeholders.
             593          (2) Nothing in the chapter shall be interpreted to alter, affect, or diminish the authority
             594      of the governor.
             595          Section 7. Effective date.
             596          If approved by two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, this bill takes effect
             597      upon approval by the governor, or the day following the constitutional time limit of Utah
             598      Constitution Article VII, Section 8, without the governor's signature, or in the case of a veto,
             599      the date of veto override.


[Bill Documents][Bills Directory]