## Facts

- Salt Creek Canyon in Canyonlands National Park contains a perennial stream, riparian habitat, and sensitive natural and cultural resources.
- Salt Creek Road is an unpaved route that repeatedly enters and crosses the Salt Creek streambed and historically allowed motor-vehicle travel in the canyon.
- The National Park Service (NPS) managed the area under the National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, which requires conservation and public enjoyment “in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.”
- In 2001, NPS revised its Management Policies and defined “impairment” (as used in the Organic Act) as an impact that would harm the integrity of park resources or values, including opportunities for enjoyment of those resources or values.
- Under the 2001 policies, whether an impact constitutes impairment depends on the timing, severity, and duration of impacts and their effects on park resources and values.
- In 2002, NPS prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) evaluating impacts of vehicle travel in Salt Creek Canyon and considering alternatives, including continued motorized access, limits on use, and a prohibition on motor vehicles.
- NPS selected a preferred alternative that prohibited all motor-vehicle travel on Salt Creek Road above the Peekaboo campsite.
- In 2004, NPS issued a final rule amending Canyonlands regulations to prohibit motor vehicles on Salt Creek Road above the Peekaboo campsite; non-motorized access (e.g., hiking) remained available.
- Utah Shared Access Alliance and other motorized-access groups challenged (1) the 2001 Management Policies’ impairment definition and (2) the 2004 final rule, pursuing an administrative appeal and then judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
- The case was decided on cross-motions for summary judgment.

## Issues

1. Whether NPS’s 2001 Management Policies definition of “impairment” is consistent with the National Park Service Organic Act.
2. Whether the 2004 final rule closing Salt Creek Road to motor vehicles above the Peekaboo campsite is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law under the APA and the Organic Act.

## Decision

- The court granted summary judgment for NPS and denied the plaintiffs’ motion.
- The court held NPS’s 2001 definition of “impairment” was a reasonable interpretation of the Organic Act and did not authorize impairment.
- The court upheld the 2004 final rule closing Salt Creek Road above the Peekaboo campsite to motor vehicles.
- Applying APA review, the court found NPS considered the relevant factors, evaluated alternatives in the EA, and explained the connection between the record and the decision to prohibit motor vehicles in the upper canyon.
- The court rejected the claim that the Organic Act required NPS to preserve motor-vehicle access to allow public enjoyment of the area.

## Legal Principles

- The Organic Act directs NPS to conserve park resources and provide for public enjoyment only by means that leave resources unimpaired for future generations.
- When conservation and visitor use conflict, the Organic Act gives priority to resource protection over unrestricted use.
- Because the Organic Act does not define “impairment,” NPS may give the term operational meaning through policy so long as the interpretation is reasonable and consistent with the statute.
- Under APA arbitrary-and-capricious review, courts do not substitute their judgment for the agency’s; they ask whether the agency considered important aspects of the problem and reasonably explained its decision based on the record.
- The Organic Act does not guarantee access by any particular mode of travel; NPS may restrict motorized use to protect park resources and values.

## Conclusion

The district court upheld NPS’s 2001 impairment definition and its 2004 rule closing the upper portion of Salt Creek Road to motor vehicles, concluding that NPS reasonably interpreted the Organic Act and, under the APA, supported the closure with a reasoned, record-based explanation focused on preventing harm to park resources and values.


Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance v. National Park Service, 387 F. Supp. 2d 1178 (2005)