DOCSLIB.ORG

The Transfer of Public Lands Movement: Taking “Back” Lands That Were Never Theirs and Other Examples of Legal Falsehoods and Revisionist History

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Transfer of Public Lands Movement: Taking “Back” Lands That Were Never Theirs and Other Examples of Legal Falsehoods and Revisionist History SJ Quinney College of Law, University of Utah Utah Law Digital Commons Utah Law Faculty Scholarship Utah Law Scholarship 1-11-2017 The rT ansfer of Public Lands Movement: Taking “Back” Lands that were Never Theirs nda other Examples of Legal Falsehoods and Revisionist History John C. Ruple S.J. Quinney College of Law, University of Utah, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://dc.law.utah.edu/scholarship Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Ruple, John C., "The rT ansfer of Public Lands Movement: Taking “Back” Lands that were Never Theirs and other Examples of Legal Falsehoods and Revisionist History" (2017). Utah Law Faculty Scholarship. 8. http://dc.law.utah.edu/scholarship/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Utah Law Scholarship at Utah Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Utah Law Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Utah Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ** DRAFT ** 1 The Transfer of Public Lands Movement: Taking “Back” Lands that were Never Theirs and other Examples of Legal Falsehoods and Revisionist History John C. Ruple* I. Sagebrush Rebellion Revisited — The Public Lands Transfer Movement ..................................... 4 A. Utah’s Transfer of Public Lands Act ................................................................................................. 4 B. Why the Transfer of Public Lands Act Matters .............................................................................. 7 1. The Proliferation of Bad Ideas ...................................................................................................... 7 2. Transfer Rhetoric Fuels Revolt ................................................................................................... 10 II. A Brief History of the Public Lands .................................................................................................... 15 A. Acquisition of the Public Domain ................................................................................................... 15 B. Federal Land Ownership ................................................................................................................... 19 C. Federal Authority Over Land Pursuant to the Property Clause ................................................. 21 D. Federal Disposal of the Public Domain ......................................................................................... 25 E. Federal Retention of the Public Domain ....................................................................................... 26 III. Legal Arguments for Public Land Disposal ................................................................................... 30 A. Equal Footing / Equal Sovereignty ................................................................................................. 31 B. Enclave Clause Claims ....................................................................................................................... 36 C. The Extinguish Provision ................................................................................................................. 37 D. Denial of the Benefit of the Bargain ............................................................................................... 43 E. A Disposal Obligation, if it Exists, Does Not Require Gifts to States ...................................... 47 F. “Shall” and the Promise to Sell the Public Domain? .................................................................... 48 G. Statute of Limitations ........................................................................................................................ 50 IV. Policy Considerations and Unintended Consequences ................................................................ 54 A. Policy and Economics ....................................................................................................................... 55 1. The Cost of Managing the Targeted Lands ............................................................................... 56 2. Covering Management Costs ....................................................................................................... 58 3. Wildfire Cost and Policy ............................................................................................................... 65 4. Federal Mineral Reservations ....................................................................................................... 67 B. Unintended Consequences ............................................................................................................... 70 1. ESA Compliance ............................................................................................................................ 70 2. Public Access .................................................................................................................................. 74 3. Public Input .................................................................................................................................... 77 C. The Hollow Sound of Victory .......................................................................................................... 78 1. Surveying the Public Domain and the Minerals they Contain ................................................ 78 V. Understanding the Roots of Frustration and Exploring Alternatives to Land Transfers ........... 82 A. Policy and Demographic Evolution — And the Challenges They Wrought ........................... 82 B. Evolutionary Pain & Western Discontent ...................................................................................... 85 1. Fragmented Landscape; Divergent Objectives ......................................................................... 85 2. Perceived Lack of Voice in Public Land Management ............................................................ 89 3. Economic Instability ..................................................................................................................... 92 4. Bellicose State Rhetoric ................................................................................................................ 94 C. Alternatives to Land Transfers ......................................................................................................... 96 1. Comprehensive Review and Revision of Public Land Laws .................................................. 96 2. Adequate Agency Funding ........................................................................................................... 97 3. Collaboration .................................................................................................................................. 99 last updated: January 10, 2017 Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2897115 ** DRAFT ** 2 4. Rationalizing the Landscape ....................................................................................................... 101 5. Transition Assistance .................................................................................................................. 102 VI. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 104 Figure 1 -- Public Land Survey and Land Grants ....................................................................................... 79 Table 1 -- Federal Land Grants to States ..................................................................................................... 26 Table 2 -- Payments from Federal Lands and State Severance Taxes FY 2014 ..................................... 46 Table 3 -- Recreation on BLM Lands (FY 2014) (in thousands) .............................................................. 75 last updated: January 10, 2017 Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2897115 ** DRAFT ** 3 Long a hotbed of discontent over federal public land management, Utah rekindled the smoldering “sagebrush rebellion” in 2012 when it passed the Transfer of Public Lands Act (TPLA),1 demanding that the federal government turn millions of acres of public land2 over to the state. Backed by a multi-million-dollar litigation budget, Utah’s efforts became a model for legislation that sprang up across much of the West, and transfer theories were adopted as part of the Republican National Committee Platform. A growing minority are also seizing on Utah’s legal theories to justify wresting public lands from the federal government, too often in violent ways. While unlikely to succeed in the courts, the transfer movement taps into a long history of Western antagonism towards what some characterize as an overbearing federal absentee landlord. This broad discontent, when combined with the threat of litigation, could lead to federal legislation devolving the public domain to the states — and that could forever reshape our nation. Part I summarizes the TPLA and the movement that the Act has spawned. Part II puts current demands into historical context, summarizing the acquisition and disposal of the public domain, federal authority over the public domain, and evolution of public land management policies. Part III explains and critiques the legal and policy arguments favoring compulsory public land disposal. Part IV summarizes the policy arguments behind, and the unintended consequences that would flow from, a public land transfer. Part V proceeds from the premise that it is not enough
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ELECTION PREVIEW 2006 1 Introduction/ Executive Summary 55783 Tabs 10/10/06 8:52 PM Page 1 Page PM 8:52 10/10/06 55783 Tabs 55783 Textx2 10/19/06 11:00 PM Page 3
    55783_Covers 10/10/06 9:22 PM Page 2 ElectionElection previewpreview What’sWhat’s Changed,Changed, 20062006WhatWhat Hasn’tHasn’t andand WhyWhy 55783_Covers 10/10/06 9:22 PM Page 3 55783_TextX 10/19/06 5:56 AM Page 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS contents of Table Director’s Message . 3 Executive Summary . 5 TableStates to Watch. of. 7 Voting Systems: Widespread Changes, Problems . 12 Voting System Usage by State . 15 contentsVoter ID: Activity in the States and on the Hill . 19 Voter Verification Requirements by State . 22 Voter Registration Databases: A New Election Stumbling Block?. 23 Status of Statewide Voter Registration Databases. 28 Absentee Voting, Pre-election Voting and Provisional Voting Rules in the States. 30 State by State. 33 Methodology/Endnotes . 63 ELECTION PREVIEW 2006 1 Introduction/ Executive Summary 55783_Tabs 10/10/06 8:52 PM Page 1 55783_TextX2 10/19/06 11:00 PM Page 3 his was the year that election reform was finally supposed The election process changed more in 2006 than in any year message from the director Tto come together. since the disputed 2000 Presidential election. Consequently, on the eve of a national election in which control of Congress This was the year that the various deadlines embodied in the is in play — and two years from an open seat election for Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) took effect: the White House — it is vitally important to understand What’s computerized statewide voter lists, new voting technology, Changed, What Hasn’t and Why. improved accessibility for voters with disabilities and a host Messageof other procedural and legal requirements mandated as part As always, we have enjoyed preparing this report.
    [Show full text]
  • 5315 Annualreport2007.Pdf
    ~~ ?/(J Dillon Swenson Kabree Briggs Abigail Roberts Cecelia Roden Ahearn Rianne Rylie Cerino Tara Dailey Cole Woodley Andrew Fellows Tao Henning Matthew Guess Emily Corral Valencia Audrey Coffey Payton Sauer Jeremy Rowe Markie Montes Brent Russell Olivia Swank Marisa Carreno Matthew Crockett Baby Black Kylynn Fitzgerald Gavin Bailey Caylor Bird Ian Pearson Michael "Travis" Ewell PJoah Wyman , Baby Newman ~ustin Morgan r;, CU4 ~~ cT ~~ 1Ic~ ~o/~ ?~~ My family and I recently had an opportunity to share a little bit of the burden of these families with very prepare and serve dinner to the families staying at sick children so that they can focus their time, attention the Ronald McDonald House here in Salt Lake City. and energy on helping their children get well. It's important It was a Sunday evening, and after the initial scurrying work, and it's work the Ronald McDonald House of the about to get organized and set the food out, we Intermountain Area does very well. had a chance to interact with some of the families. There was the woman from Montana with her two In 2007, our Ronald McDonald House provided a "home daughters, ages two and four. The two-year-old is away from home" for approximately 1,728 families, who receiving treatment for a congenital heart defect, came to us from Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Nevada, and the four-year-old was concerned that her sister and Utah. These families stayed with us for an average might not be drinking enough milk. There was the of seven days and, thanks to our board and hundreds of single mother from Nevada, whose premature baby volunteers, meals were waiting for them each evening.
    [Show full text]
  • Rr714 Sk.Indd
    Research Report Report Number 714, June 2013 Sagebrush Rebellion Part II Analysis of the public lands debate in utah HIGHLIGHTS The federal government owns around 635 million acres, 1 Nearly 67% of the land in Utah is owned by the or 28% of the land comprising the United States. Within federal government, the fourth highest among all 50 states. Utah, nearly 67% of the state’s total acreage, or 35 million The Legislature passed the Transfer of Public Lands Act (TPLA) in 2012, which demands the acres, is owned by the federal government. Throughout the federal government transfer nearly 20 million acres of land by 2015. nation’s history, groups have debated who should control Supporters of the TPLA argue that when Utah became a state, the federal government this land and how it should be managed. In 2012, the promised to “extinguish title” to all federal lands within a timely manner. Because it hasn’t, it has Utah State Legislature passed H.B. 148, which demands put the state at an economic disadvantage, has hurt education funding, and manages the land the United States transfer their title to public lands to the ineffi ciently. State of Utah before December 31, 2014. Opponents of the TPLA argue that Utah agreed to “forever disclaim” all public lands when it Th is research report will explain the history of public lands in the U.S. and Utah, past became a state. They posit that the state was brought into the union under equal footing, there eff orts to transfer the land to state control, the arguments for and against keeping the are economic benefi ts to federal control of the lands under federal ownership, and assess the merits and faults of each argument.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Report Report Number 704, November 2011 Nominating Candidates the Politics and Process of Utah’S Unique Convention and Primary System
    Research Report Report Number 704, November 2011 Nominating Candidates The Politics and Process of Utah’s Unique Convention and Primary System HIGHLIGHTS For most of its history, Utah has used a convention- g Utah is one of only seven states that still uses a primary system to nominate candidates for elected office. convention, and the only one that allows political parties to preclude a primary election for major In the spring of election years, citizens in small caucus offices if candidates receive enough delegate votes. g Utah adopted a direct primary in 1937, a system meetings held throughout the state elect delegates to which lasted 10 years. represent them at county and state conventions. County g In 1947, the Legislature re-established a caucus- convention system. If a candidate obtained 70% or conventions nominate candidates for races solely within more of the delegates’ votes in the convention, he or she was declared the nominee without a primary. the county boundaries, while the state convention is used g In the 1990s, the Legislature granted more power to the parties to manage their conventions. In 1996, to nominate candidates for statewide offices or those the 70% threshold to avoid a primary was lowered to 60% by the Democratic Party. The Republican that serve districts that span multiple counties. At these Party made the same change in 1999. conventions, delegates nominate candidates to compete g Utah’s historically high voter turnout rates have consistently declined in recent decades. In 1960, for their party’s nomination in the primary election, or, 78.3% of the voting age population voted in the general election.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah State University Commencement, 1960 – Main Campus
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU Commencement Programs Students 6-3-1960 Utah State University Commencement, 1960 – Main Campus Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/commencement Recommended Citation Utah State University, "Utah State University Commencement, 1960 – Main Campus" (1960). Commencement Programs. 2. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/commencement/2 This Commencement Program - Main Campus is brought to you for free and open access by the Students at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Commencement Programs by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. /3. 2) 1'1 &o 6 17U7'-i4'-L<...--nut-,..::1 ..___ fro 9 r(L.,.-y.._ Annual Commencement Logan GEORGE NELSON FIELDHOUSE FRIDAY, J.UNE THIRD SATURDAY, JuNE FouRTH NINETEEN HUNDRED SIXTY THE ACADEMIC PROCESSION President and Board of Trustees 0 fficial Guests University Administrative Officers Faculties of the Various Colleges Candidates for Graduate Degrees Candidates for Baccalaureate Degrees DRESS The wearing of academic costume by faculty arc of a circle near the bottom. The arm extends and student participants at the time of Commence­ through the slit, giving the appearance of short ment Exercises has become traditional among sleeves. The hood consists of material similar universities. The color and pageantry of these to the gown and lined with the official academic occasions are designed to indicate the degree of color of the institution conferring the degree. I£ academic achievement of those who actively par­ the institution has more than one color, the chev­ ticipate in such exercises. In order for the ron is used to display the second color.
    [Show full text]
  • Participation
    PARTICIPATION A LOOK BACK AT 2007 Hinckley Institute Holds 2000th Hinckley Forum “OUR YOUNG, BEST MINDS MUST BE ENCOURAGED TO ENTER POLITICS.” Robert H. Hinckley 2 In This Issue Dr. J.D. Williams Page 3 Hinckley News Page 4 Internship Programs Page 8 Outstanding Interns Page 16 Scholarships Page 18 PARTICIPATION Hinckley Forums Page 20 Alumni Spotlights Page 25 Hinckley Staff Page 26 Donors Page 28 Hinckley Institute Holds 2000th Hinckley Forum Since 1965, the Hinckley Institute has held more than 2,000 Hinckley Forums (previously known as “Coffee & Politics”) featuring local, national, and international political leaders. Hinckley Forums provide University of Utah students and the surrounding community intimate access to and interaction with our nation’s leaders. Under the direction of Hinck- ley Institute assistant director Jayne Nelson, the Hinckley Institute hosts 65-75 forums each year in the newly renovated Hinckley Caucus Room. Partnerships with supporting Univer- sity of Utah colleges and departments, local radio and news stations, our generous donors, and the Sam Rich Program in International Politics ensure the continued success of the Hinckley Forums program. University of Utah students can now receive credit for attend- ing Hinckley Forums by enrolling in the Political Forum Series course (Political Science 3910). All Hinckley Forums are free and open to the public. For a detailed listing of 2007 Hinckley Forums, refer to pages 20 – 24. Past Hinckley Forum Guests Prince Turki Al-Faisal Archibald Cox Edward Kennedy Frank Moss Karl Rove Al Saud Russ Feingold William Lawrence Ralph Nader Larry Sabato Norman Bangerter Gerald Ford Michael Leavitt Richard Neustadt Brian Schweitzer Robert Bennett Jake Garn Richard Lugar Dallin H.
    [Show full text]
  • The Malheur Occupations and the Hyper-Masculine Drive for Control
    The Patriarch and the Sovereign: The Malheur Occupations and the Hyper-Masculine Drive for Control COURTNEY IRONS* On January 2, 2016, a group of armed protestors seized control of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. The occupation followed a long tradition of resistance in western states of federal land management policy, but the members took a stricter approach to federalism than most. The group fully rejected federal sovereignty over the land, and in doing so demonstrated a particularly gendered approach to power and government. The purpose of this Note is to explore how the occupier‟s understanding of federalism relates to theories on masculinity. Drawing on statements made during the course of the occupation, news reports, and testimony during the subsequent legal proceedings, this Note will argue the occupiers‟ patriarchal beliefs about masculinity influenced and informed their understanding of federalism with the belief that doing so may help us understand the growing nationalist and extremist views in conservative movements today. * Executive Notes Editor, Colum. J.L. & Soc. Probs., 2017–2018. J.D. Candidate 2018, Columbia Law School. The author would like to thank her advisor Professor Chris- tina Duffy Ponsa for her guidance and feedback, and the staff of the Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems for all of their helpful comments and hard work. 480 Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems [51:3 I. INTRODUCTION For forty days in 2016, a group of anti-government protesters occupied the Malheur Wildlife Refuge in Southeastern
    [Show full text]
  • 3-18-14 Transcript Bulletin
    FRONT PAGE A1 Dr. Rich is here to help your child grow up Pediatrician Dr. Steven Rich strong and healthy. Yay! will help you feel comfortable and confident every step of the way.Same-day appointments are usually available. Call 435-882-9035.TOOELE RANSCRIPT 196 E. 2000 North, SuiteTooele 100 T SERVING TOOELE COUNTY BULLETIN SINCE 1894 Steven Rich, D.O. TUESDAY March 18, 2014 www.TooeleOnline.com Vol. 120 No. 83 $1.00 2/6/14 12:45 PM 75208_MOUN_Yay_4x3c.indd 1 Roadside walk ends man’s life by Lisa Christensen STAFF WRITER A Tooele man was killed Monday morning when he was struck by a car while walking on an area roadway. James Wilson, 41, was struck and killed by a car near the intersection of Lodestone Way and Utah Avenue by Ninigret Industrial Depot at about 7 a.m. Chief Ron Kirby of the Tooele City Police Department said Wilson was wearing dark clothing and was difficult to see in the early, pre-dawn hour. The driver, also a local man, was report- edly on his way to Grantsville. Utah Avenue, between state Route 112 and the depot turn- off, was closed for more than two hours while officers attended to the scene and investi- SEE ROADSIDE PAGE A9 ➤ FRANCIE AUFDEMORTE/TTB PHOTO County’s Lory Crofts and Carol LaForge give a reader’s theater performance with the LaForge Encore Group as part of the festivities at the Luck of the Library community celebration held Monday. The celebration marked the extended library hours, which now includes Monday as well as the new self-checkout kiosks available for use by patrons.
    [Show full text]
  • 05357 HIP Newsltr Press.Indd
    PARTICIPATION WINTER 2005 40th Anniversary for Hinckley Institute of Politics The Hinckley Institute of Politics will celebrate IN THIS ISSUE its 40th anniversary and announce the new director of the Hinckley Institute at an event in September. Institute History Page 2 The gathering will feature a prominent guest Scholarships Page 3 speaker and a program about the history of the Outstanding Interns Page 4 Institute. All former interns and students, commu- Congressional Interns Page 5 nity members, friends of the Institute, and elected Former Interns Page 5 officials are invited to attend. Further details will Featured Internships Page 6 be released in the coming months. We hope to see Hinckley News Page 6 you there! Semester Abroad Page 8 Hinckley Staff Page 9 Hinckley Forums Page 10 From top to bottom: Hinckley interns with newly elected 2003-2004 Interns Page 12 Utah Governor Jon Huntsman, Jr.; 1966 Hinckley Summer interns; intern Lieu Tran with Sen. Arlen Specter and Gov. Donors Page 15 Arnold Schwarzenegger; Pres. Ronald Reagan greeting Capital Encounter Page 16 interns; and Hinckley interns campaign for Scott Matheson, Jr. 1 HINCKLEY INSTITUTE OF POLITICS PARTICIPATION History of Hinckley Institute of Politics Scholarship Award Winners Anne Bergstedt Receives John Micah Elggren Receives Robert H. Hinckley founded the Hinckley Institute of Politics in 1965 with the vision to “teach students and Anne Hinckley Scholarship Robert H. Hinckley respect for practical politics and the principle of citizen involvement in government.” Forty years later, Mr. Hinckley’s dream is a reality. Countless students, schoolteachers, and the general public have participated in Graduate Scholarship programs he made possible through the Hinckley Institute.
    [Show full text]
  • Lehi Historic Archive File Categories
    Lehi Historic Archive File Categories Achievements of Lehi Citizens Adobe-Lehi Plant Advertisement-Baby Food Advertisement-Bells Advertisement-Bicycles Advertisement-Cameras Advertisement-Childrens Books Advertisement-China/Dishes/Table Settings Advertisement-Cook Ware Advertisement-Dolls Advertisement-Farm Equipment Advertisement-Flags Advertisement-Gardens/Tools/Equipment Advertisement-Groceries/Food Advertisement-Harps Advertisement-Horse and Buggies Advertisement-Kitchen Appliances Advertisement-Meats Advertisement-Medical Conditions Advertisement-Medical Hygiene Products Advertisement-Mens Clothing/Style Advertisement-Musical Instruments Advertisement-Pest Control Advertisement-Pianos Advertisement-Poems about Children Advertisement-Poultry-Chickens/Turkeys Advertisement-Railroads Advertisement-Rugs/Flooring Advertisement-Sewing Machines Advertisement-Silverware Advertisement-Socks/Hose Advertisement-Shoes Advertisement-Tiffanys Advertisement-Tires/Car Parts Advertisement-Travel Advertisement-Women’s Clothing/Style Airplane Flights in Lehi Airplanes-D4s Alex Christofferson-Champion Wrestler Alcohol All About Food and Fuel/Sinclair All Hallows College-Salt Lake Allred Park Alma Peterson Construction/Kent Peterson Alpine Draper Tunnel Alpine Fireplaces Alpine School Board-Andrew Fjeld Alpine School Board-Donna Barnes Alpine School Board-Kenneth Whimpey Alpine School Board-Thomas Powers Alpine School Board-William Samuel Evans Alpine School District Alpine Soil/Water Conservation District Alpine Stake Alpine Stake Tabernacle Alpine,
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutional Authority and the History of Acquisition, Disposal, and Retention
    Order Code RL34267 Federal Land Ownership: Constitutional Authority and the History of Acquisition, Disposal, and Retention December 3, 2007 Kristina Alexander Legislative Attorney American Law Division Ross W. Gorte Specialist in Natural Resources Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division Federal Land Ownership: Constitutional Authority and the History of Acquisition, Disposal, and Retention Summary Federal land ownership began when the original 13 states ceded their “western” lands (between the Appalachian Mountains and the Mississippi River) to the central government between 1781 and 1802. Substantial land acquisition in North America via treaties and purchases began with the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 and culminated with the purchase of Alaska in 1867. In total, the federal government acquired 1.8 billion acres in North America. The U.S. Constitution addresses the relationship of the federal government to lands. Article IV, § 3, Clause 2 — the Property Clause — gives Congress authority over federal property generally, and the Supreme Court has described Congress’s power to legislate under this Clause as “without limitation.” The equal footing doctrine (based on language within Article IV, § 3, Clause 1), and found in state enabling acts, provides new states with equality to the original states in terms of constitutional rights, but has not been used successfully to force the divestment of federal lands. The policy question of whether to acquire more, or to dispose of any or all, federal lands is left to Congress to decide. The initial federal policy generally was to transfer ownership of many federal lands to private and state ownership. Congress enacted many laws granting lands and authorizing or directing sales or transfers, ultimately disposing of 1.275 billion acres.
    [Show full text]
  • Mar Apr 2019 FINAL.Pdf
    WONDERING WHAT ALL THE EXCITEMENT IS ABOUT? See our big announcement on page 33 801.366.9100 eckolaw.com The Utah Bar Journal Published by the Utah State Bar | 645 South 200 East, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 | 801-531-9077 | www.utahbar.org BAR JOURNAL EDITORIAL BOARD Editor Utah Law Developments Editor Young Lawyer Representative William D. Holyoak LaShel Shaw Grace S. Pusavat Managing Editor Judicial Advisor Paralegal Representative Alisha Giles Judge Gregory K. Orme Greg Wayment Articles Editors Copy Editors Bar Staff Liaison Nicole G. Farrell Hal Armstrong Christine Critchley Lee Killian Paul Justensen Andrea Valenti Arthur Advertising/Design Manager Victoria Luman Editor at Large Laniece Roberts Todd Zagorec Departments Editor Judge Catherine E. Roberts (Ret.) MISSION & VISION OF THE BAR: The lawyers of the Utah State Bar serve the public and legal profession with excellence, civility, and integrity. We envision a just legal system that is understood, valued, and accessible to all. Cover Photo Turret Arch, by Utah State Bar member Lane Erickson. LANE ERICKSON is a partner at Racine Olson PLLP. Asked about his photo, Lane said, “I captured this image of the Turret Arch in Arches National Park a few years ago while on Spring Break with my family in Moab, Utah. The contrast of warm and cool colors between the red rock and the blue sky were striking, but what really caught my eye was the silhouette of the boy standing in the shadow of the Arch, because it provided scale showing how massive this incredible rock formation really is.” SUBMIT A COVER PHOTO Members of the Utah State Bar or Paralegal Division of the Bar who are interested in having photographs they have taken of Utah scenes published on the cover of the Utah Bar Journal should send their photographs (compact disk or print), along with a description of where the photographs were taken, to Utah Bar Journal, 645 South 200 East, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111, or by e-mail .jpg attachment to [email protected].
    [Show full text]