Printable View
Last week the Utah Supreme Court ruled that all public waters that may flow through sections of private land, are now open (including the stream bed) to law abiding recreational users!
http://www.utcourts.gov/opinions/sup...tser071808.pdf
This might be one of the biggest recreational laws passed in the history of the state.
YES!! i can fish on private land now... as long as i stay in the water. :2thumbs: wow that rancher is going to be pissed when i show up next year...
i read the whole doc. and i think what i said in now legal... i'm going to read it again.
i have seen places where you could float through private land to fish but you could not anchor in midstream or go out on the bank. this law looks like you can wade your way throgh private land and as long as you do no damage its perfectly legal.
I went on a guided fishing trip in Montana several years ago and we floated through an indian reservation. The tour guide told me access to the river had been fought all the way to the surpreme court, the ruling opened access. We could not go ashore but we could wade, float, anchor and fish. :2thumbs: I like this new ruling.
It's been like that here for as long as I can remember. Good thing I wasn't out there prior to this :haha:
Don't want to throw a spur into this but my family has property on a very popular river in Utah. Last week my 68 year father had a run in with a guide. The guide was rather rude and kind of bullied my father out of the fishing hole behind our property :frustrated: . Our property runs to the river. We have put the fence 5 ft. into our property to allow fishermen to walk the bank. I don't mind respectful fishermen, but if I see a guide on the river behind my property, it is going to be on. I will show no respect for them or thier client. I will probably take my dog out and start with water retrieves out of the river. This new law has made things bad. This has never happened before. And some guides have really over stepped thier boudries at this point. Game on!
..Quote:
Governor signs contentious stream access bill
By Robert Gehrke
The Salt Lake Tribune
Gov. Gary Herbert signed a bitterly contested bill Wednesday that could restrict fishing and recreation access to some streams that cross private land, saying he believed it will foster negotiations in a clash over public water rights and private property.
"I am signing HB141 because we need to begin the process of addressing the unfortunate gulf between outdoor recreationalists and private property owners," Herbert said in a statement. "Today, I pledge my commitment to work with both sides over the coming year to improve opportunities and arrive at a workable solution."
HB141, sponsored by Rep. Kay McIff, R-Richfield, was one of the most tenaciously fought battles on Capitol Hill, pitting private property owners against anglers and other river recreationists. The measure essentially seeks to undo a 2008 Utah Supreme Court decision that found that the waterways in the state are publicly owned, and have been for generations. The court ruled that the public has a right to use those waterways for fishing, boating and other recreation, even if that means they have to cross private property or walk across the privately owned stream bed or bank.
Private landowners cried foul, arguing the ruling eroded their constitutionally guaranteed rights to control their private property.
After fighting to an impasse last year, this year the Legislature passed HB141, which would allow landowners to close access to waterways unless it can be proven that they have been open to public use for 10 consecutive years since 1982. Hundreds of residents called the governor's office and sent e-mails, weighing in on the legislation.
Chris Barkey, a fisherman who supported a bill sponsored by Rep. Lorie Fowlke, R-Orem, said the months of effort put into Fowlke's bill was tossed aside in favor of a measure that favors property owners. "It was disgusting to watch." "The stuff they've utilized to cram this bill through has all been far from the truth," he said. "I fish these waters more than 99.99 percent of people and I know where the stretches of water are private, I know where they're public and I know what we're going to lose and it's a drastic number of fisheries we are going to lose to this bill."
McIff said he hopes fishers don't lose access to streams and he has encouraged land owners to be generous in allowing access, but the constitutional protections for private property are so strong that they cannot be negotiated away. "I tried to find some theory under the law where we could defend giving fishermen access on private land in the face of constitutional restraints ... but it's not easy," said McIff, who is a retired state judge. "There are some times when you can negotiate and compromise and find common ground. It's harder when you're working within a constitutional framework, because sometimes you can't compromise."
A meeting is scheduled next week with a number of attorneys interested in going to court and challenging the law on behalf of the anglers. "We're not going to quit. We're not going to disregard our children's rights," Barkey said.
The governor also signed SB281, sponsored by Sen. Dennis Stowell, R-Parowan, which creates a task force that will meet in the coming year to try to hammer out an amicable solution, although Barkey said he fears it will merely be a forum for land owners to try to squeeze out compensation for fishing rights.
"He's very optimistic about [a resolution]," said Herbert's environmental advisor, Ted Wilson. "He thinks there is a way to work it out and he thinks the executive branch ought to now play a role. It's been a legislative fight up until now."
To work out that solution, Wilson said, the property rights and fishing rights have to be on the same footing in negotiations. The Supreme Court's ruling elevated the fishing rights, Wilson said, and the legislation levels the field. McIff said he is also hopeful that the discussion continues through the task force.
The Outdoor Industry Association, the trade association for the outdoor industry that sponsors a massive trade show each year, said it is disappointed that Herbert signed the law that "severely restricts access for recreationists, anglers and outdoor sportsmen."
The association said in a statement that the bill harms Utah's reputation as a recreation destination and penalizes the businesses that contribute $4 billion in annual sales and 65,000 jobs. "The Governor's action is a disservice to an outdoor business community still struggling to recover from the recession," the association said.
Herbert's likely Democratic opponent for governor, Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon, said Utahns cherish their "fundamental right" to use waterways, which is severely limited by HB141 and would drive fishing business away from the state, harming hotels, retailers and lodges.
"I acknowledge it is important to strike a balance between the rights and privileges of private property owners and the basic rights and privileges of Utah anglers and sportsmen. This bill does not strike that balance," Corroon said. "I'm glad the governor sees that this bill is not a final solution, although I wish he had shown basic leadership and vetoed it until a solution can be found that does not harm our local economy or our outdoor enthusiasts."
Herbert's sister and brother-in-law, Connie and Steve Ault, own about a mile-and-a-half stretch of the lower Provo River, some of the premier fishing waters in the country, and were actively involved in lobbying the Legislature to pass HB141.
Ault said the number of anglers and floaters coming down the river has increased so dramatically and the filth and waste they left behind has been so foul that he felt something needed to be done.
But, he said, the bill won't change access to the waterway: Anglers can still walk up the train tracks on the other side of the river and access the waterway from there. And, Ault said, he never pressured his brother-in-law to sign the bill into law.
That's great news. Shouldn't this be posted in the fishing forum, unless you use a bow or rifle to fish. Thanks for the info.
Actually, Gov. Herbert signing this bill isn't great news, it's terrible news. Basically, recreation users that use rivers (anglers, hunters, boaters, etc.) are now screwed out of using a public resource unless they can document at least a decade of use. Land developers win with the passage of that bill. Does the governor honestly believe that developers are going to come back to the table to negotiate with the public????Quote:
Originally Posted by StudChild
This was definitely not a representation of the people.