The Tribune (Our View, "Rights of way," Sept. 14) characterizes the recent 10th Circuit Court decision on county roads in rural Utah as a "limited victory" for Utah counties, the state and public-access defenders, while, in fact, this decision emphatically corrects the myths, misrepresentations, misinterpretations and wishful thinking about these R.S. 2477 roads that some, including The Tribune and environmental activists, have been spinning for more than a decade.

At the same time, this unanimous decision validates the charge leveled by the counties, the state and major public recreation advocacy groups that the Bureau of Land Management's R.S. 2477 road policy violates the law.

The Tribune still appears to be trying to perpetuate the myth that the current physical appearance of a county R.S. 2477 road somehow has a bearing on whether it is a valid road. In fact, what Congress actually conveyed directly to counties under R.S. 2477 was the right of way on which the road is located, bypassing the BLM entirely. This right of way is a legitimate property right and carries with it a bundle of associated rights.

As The Tribune correctly observed, wilderness areas must be "roadless." These rights of way and the roads on them, no matter how they physically appear now or how frequently they are used, disqualify federal land from wilderness designation based on this roadless requirement, so said Congress.

The bottom line is that this decision protects the public's access to thousands of miles of county roads across federally managed lands in Utah which are owned by the public.

It certainly will require the BLM to radically change its roads policy and bring it into compliance with the law. Also, at least within the states in the 10th Circuit, it will require the BLM to stop arbitrarily closing county roads that it finds inconvenient or simply wishes were not there.

And that is a huge victory for the public who own these lands.

---

Mark O. Walsh is executive director of the Western Counties Alliance.