Service and the County. Id. at 1246. In United States v. Emery County, No. 92-C-1069S, ¶ 6 (D. Utah, consent decree entered Dec. 15, 1992), litigation between a Utah county and the BLM was resolved by entry of a consent decree providing for advance notice to the BLM of any improvements beyond routine maintenance “so that both the County and the BLM may be satisfied that the proposed work on the R.S. 2477 highway is reasonable and necessary and that no unnecessary or undue degradation to the public lands would occur thereby.” These decisions are consistent with holdings of circuit courts that changes in roads on R.S. 2477 rights of way across federal lands are subject to regulation by the relevant federal land management agencies. See Clouser v. Espy, 42 F.3d 1522, 1538 (9th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Vogler, 859 F.2d 638, 642
holding under basic principles of property law that easement rights are subject to regulation by the forest service as the owner of the servient estate holding that regardless whether the trails in question are public highways under rs  2477 they are nonetheless subject to the forest service regulations holding in suit under the administrative procedure act challenging us forest service approval of forest development plan that injury to aesthetic conservational or recreational interests is sufficient to confer standing holding that national forest service had authority to forbid opening rs 2477 routes to motorized travel holding that when regulations are intended to have different purposes and are not dependent on each other they are not intertwined