Given the host of economic issues facing rural communities in southeastern Utah, it’s unfortunate that instead of addressing those problems, time and attention is being given to defending a San Juan County commissioner convicted of violating federal law by leading a protest ride on ATVs in Recapture Canyon.
We understand the prosecution of Commissioner Phil Lyman is of symbolic importance to those who believe federal land policies are heavy-handed and a contributing source of economic decay in the region. But the disposition of Lyman’s case through sentencing and appeal will have zero impact on the larger issues of appropriate resource management. It may be a rallying point upon which frustrations may be vented, but it is little more than that.
In the meantime, residents of many rural communities are grappling with the effects of transitions in local economies that have made it difficult for local governments to sustain vital operations. Earlier this summer, the Garfield County Commission declared a state of emergency tied to a deteriorating tax base and revenue shortages that are making it harder to sustain local schools. The exoneration of Phil Lyman won’t reverse those forces.
But we have the governor assigning the attorney general to devote resources to investigate whether federal land managers broke the law when they restricted access to a pipeline trail in Recapture Canyon where Lyman and others staged a protest ride. We have a Garfield County commissioner formally asking the governor to intervene in support of a petition to have the judge who presided over Lyman’s trial recused — and Lyman’s conviction overturned — because the judge happens to be a friend of a lawyer for a prominent pro-wilderness group.
These efforts will come to naught, as likely will the state’s mission to wrestle ownership of federal lands away from Washington. The involvement of state government at its highest levels suggests state leaders believe the Lyman case carries the potential of setting some kind of precedent that will somehow dilute the state’s authority in regional land and resources issues. It does not.
Nor does an underlying concern in the case — whether people can ride ATVs wherever they like — rise to the level of a civil rights issue, despite the notion that Lyman’s protest ride is somehow akin to a noble act of civil disobedience.
By playing into the theatrics surrounding the Recapture Canyon incident, state leaders are contributing to a mythology that all social and economic problems arise from the tyranny of Washington. That is not a productive posture, and clinging to it will not serve state interests in bringing balance and compromise to the disposition of federal lands within Utah borders