Wilkenson v. Dept. of Interior of United States
| Decision Date | 02 May 1986 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 81-M-1825,82-M-2171. |
| Citation | 634 F. Supp. 1265 |
| Parties | John R. WILKENSON, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR OF the UNITED STATES, et al., Defendants. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MESA COUNTY, COLORADO, et al., Plaintiffs, v. James WATT, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Colorado |
John R. Wilkenson, pro se.
Eric Damian Kelly, Pueblo, Colo., Maurice Lyle Dechant, Mesa Co. Atty., Grand Junction, Colo., for plaintiffs Board of County Com'rs of Mesa County, Colo., et al.
Bruce Black, Asst. U.S. Atty., Denver, Colo., for defendants.
These two lawsuits challenge the authority of the National Park Service ("NPS" or "Park Service") to control access to a portion of a roadway within the boundaries of the Colorado National Monument ("Monument"). Jurisdiction over the controversy is provided by 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because the pivotal legal issues involve interpretation of pertinent federal statutes. John Wilkenson is a resident of a rural area of Mesa County, Colorado, commonly called Glade Park. It lies southwest of that portion of the Monument which is traversed by the subject segment of road. Mr. Wilkenson sued the Department of the Interior, the Secretary of the Interior, the Director of the National Park Service, the acting Deputy Director of the National Park Service, the Regional Director of the National Park Service, the Superintendent of the Colorado National Monument, and the Chief Ranger of the Monument, in the District Court, Mesa County, Colorado. The defendants removed that action to this court because of federal question jurisdiction. The Board of County Commissioners of Mesa County brought a separate action in this court, raising substantially the same issues. The cases were consolidated for trial and are now considered together in this opinion.
The trial of these cases was most unusual in that the parties cooperated in a common effort to put before the court all of the historical facts which could be relevant to the legal questions presented. Much of that evidence is documentary, and some of it is anecdotal. The primary subject of the extensive record is the history of the creation and development of the Colorado National Monument, an area of scenic canyons with interesting geological formations and marked with primitive beauty.
At present, the NPS maintains two controlled entrances to the Monument from the valley floor. The west entrance is near Fruita, Colorado, and can be reached by Colorado Highway 340. A visitor center providing pertinent information concerning recreational use of the Monument is located on the roadway inside the Monument several miles from this entrance. The park headquarters is at this visitor center. A visitor may travel by motor vehicle on a paved road from the west entrance through Fruita Canyon, past the visitor center and up along the rim of a high mesa, descend to the east entrance, exit there, and proceed on a county road called Monument Road for about 3 miles to Colorado Highway 340 near the Colorado River, and then on to Grand Junction, Colorado, a few miles distance. The trip may also be made in the reverse order from the east entrance with an exit at the west entrance, traveling then on the state highway to Fruita. This road through the Monument is commonly known as "Rim Rock Drive", and its primary purpose is to give park visitors an opportunity to view the canyons and geological formations from the comfort of an automobile. The road may be used by persons on bicycles, and there are hiking trails, campgrounds and picnic areas within the Monument.
These cases concern a portion of Rim Rock Drive extending 3.3 miles from the east entrance to a location above "Cold Shivers Point", where Rim Rock Drive intersects with a separate roadway called the "Glade Park Cut-Off", which runs southwesterly 0.6 miles, crossing the boundary of the Monument and proceeding along the edge of "No Thoroughfare Canyon" to the Glade Park Store. Attached as Appendix A is a map of the entire Monument, and Appendix B is an enlargement showing the disputed portion of Rim Rock Drive and the Glade Park Cut-Off. The road from the Monument boundary to the Glade Park Store is a Mesa County road. The 3.9 miles consisting of the 3.3 miles of Rim Rock Drive and the 0.6 miles of Glade Park Cut-Off have long been used by the public in going between the Glade Park area and Grand Junction. There is another county road which connects Glade Park and Grand Junction without entering the boundaries of the monument. That is the "Little Park Road", running to the south of the monument area. It is largely a gravel road, and parts of it are impassable in wet weather.
The conflict has followed the progress of development of the Monument as a recreational facility and the residential growth in Glade Park and the Grand Junction community. It is a classic Western quarrel over the use of public land in which the early years were characterized by cooperation in pursuit of common interests and where now the parties have sharply conflicting interests and claims. The government's policy has gone from indulgence, through tolerance, to rigid regulation. The dispute came into this forum after attempts to enforce current regulations were met with resistance and criminal charges were filed.
Grand Junction, Colorado was named because it is located at the junction of the Gunnison River with the Colorado River (formerly the Grand River). The Colorado River Valley runs between the Little Book Cliffs to the north, and the Uncompahgre Plateau on the south. On the northern edge of the Uncompahgre Plateau to the southwest of Grand Junction is the canyon-land area which came to be the Monument. Developing public access to and appreciation for the rugged beauty of this area became the life-long commitment of a somewhat legendary man, John Otto. He began living in the canyons in 1906. Almost immediately, he began the work of building trails to provide access to the several canyons, which came to be called No Thoroughfare Canyon, Columbus Canyon, Red Canyon, Ute Canyon, Gold Star Canyon, Monument Canyon, Lizard Canyon and Fruita Canyon.
John Otto publicized his work in the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel newspaper, and gained some support from that paper and the community. On May 24, 1911, under the authority of the Antiquities Act of 1906, President William H. Taft issued a proclamation, creating the Colorado National Monument, and specifying the original boundaries of it. Those original boundaries did not include most of No Thoroughfare Canyon.
In June, 1911, John Otto was appointed as superintendent and caretaker of the Monument. Shortly thereafter, the newspaper reported that he intended to build a road from near the mouth of No Thoroughfare Canyon going up the right side of that canyon to the rim rocks, across the high plateau portion of the monument, and on to Moab, Utah. In the early publicity about that plan, the newspaper also stressed the importance of providing access to Glade Park from Grand Junction because the Little Park Road, which had been constructed by the county in 1884, was almost impassable. Representatives of Glade Park citizens appeared before the Mesa County Commissioners in April, 1912, requesting construction of a new road from the Main Street Bridge over the Grand River, up through No Thoroughfare Canyon, following a route which had been surveyed by the County Surveyor. No action was taken on that petition.
In December, 1912, John Otto and others formed the Colorado River Auto Transportation and Toll Road Company to construct, operate and maintain a toll road from that Main Street Bridge to the top of Pinon Mesa, and then southwest to the eastern edge of Glade Park. That appears to be the same route that was contemplated for part of the highway to Utah. In a report to the Commissioner of the General Land Office in Washington, D.C. in January, 1913, John Otto wrote that he had begun building a road to be called the Colorado River Rim Rock Route to go to the Grand Canyon of the Colorado River, and from there into Southern California. Under date of June 17, 1915, the Mineral Examiner of the General Land Office wrote of his visit to the Monument, and included the following description in his report to the Commissioner of the General Land Office:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sierra Club v. Hodel
...Under R.S. 2477, a right-of-way could be established by public use under terms provided by state law. Wilkenson v. U.S. Department of Interior, 634 F.Supp. 1265, 1272 (D.Colo.1986). United States v. 9,947.71 Acres of Land, 220 F.Supp. 328, 335 (D.Nev.1963). No action by public authorities w......
-
So. Utah Wilderness v. Bureau of Land Management, No. 04-4071.
...work is necessary, and it would be a mistake to hold that action by any governmental authority is required. In Wilkenson v. Dep't of Interior, 634 F.Supp. 1265, 1272 (D.Colo.1986), the federal district court The defendants cite the rule of statutory construction that all words in a statute ......
-
Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance v. Bureau of Land Management, No. 04-4071 (Fed. 10th Cir. 1/6/2006)
...is necessary, and it would be a mistake to hold that action by any governmental authority is required. In Wilkenson v. Dep't of Interior, 634 F. Supp. 1265, 1272 (D. Colo. 1986), the federal district court The defendants cite the rule of statutory construction that all words in a statute mu......
-
The Wilderness Soc'y v. Kane County
...courts in our own circuit. See United States v. Garfield Cnty., 122 F.Supp.2d 1201, 1240–41 (D.Utah 2000); Wilkenson v. Dep't of Interior, 634 F.Supp. 1265, 1280 (D.Colo.1986). The fact that the United States may regulate even valid rights-of-way further undermines the majority's recasting ......
-
Questioning the rule of capture metaphor for nineteenth century public land law: a look at R.S. 2477.
...of federal law, other federal courts have suggested that the standard is a matter of state law. See Wilkenson v. Dept. of Interior, 634 F. Supp. 1265 (D. Colo. 1986); Barker v. Board of County Comm'rs, 49 F. Supp. 2d 1203, 1214 (D. Colo. 1999); United States v. Jenks, 804 F. Supp. 232, 235 ......
-
The R.S. 2477 right of way dispute: constructing a solution.
...state law to R.S. 2477 in light of statutory silence and federal regulation favoring state law); Wilkenson v. Department of Interior, 634 F. Supp. 1265, 1272 (D. Colo. 1986) (accepting that state law determines whether there was acceptance of a right of way offer under statute); United Stat......
-
Rs 2477: the Battle Over Rights-of-way on Federal Land
...htm. 60. May 2002 Draft Policy, supra, note 36. 61. See, e.g., 16 U.S.C. §§ 1131-33; Wilkenson v. Dept. of Interior, 634 F.Supp. 1265, 1280 (D.Colo. 62. 16 U.S.C. §§ 1131(c) and 1132(c). 63. 16 U.S.C. §§ 1131(c) and 1133(c) and (d); Coggins et al., supra, note 3 at 1012. 64. 43 U.S.C. § 178......
-
PL 106-353, HR 4275 – To establish the Colorado Canyons National Conservation Area and the Black Ridge Canyons Wilderness, and for other purposes.
...commercial vehicles, to Glade Park, Colorado, in accordance with the decision in Board of County Commissioners of Mesa County v. Watt (634 F. Supp. 1265 (D.Colo.; May 2, Approved October 24, 2000. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 4275: --------------------------------------------------------------......
-
16 U.S.C. § 460mmm-7 Public Access
...commercial vehicles, to Glade Park, Colorado, in accordance with the decision in Board of County Commissioners of Mesa County v. Watt (634 F. Supp. 1265 (D.Colo.; May 2, 1986)).Notes:Source: Pub. L. 106-353, §9, Oct. 24, 2000, 114 Stat....