+- Fishing Forum (https://bigfishtackle.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Utah Fishing Forum (https://bigfishtackle.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=386)
+--- Forum: Utah Fly Fishing (https://bigfishtackle.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=140)
+--- Thread: Panel votes Utah stream-access (/showthread.php?tid=624805)
Panel votes Utah stream-access - sinergy - 11-20-2010
The Legislature’s stream-access task force recommended Thursday that the state Division of Wildlife Resources allocate $300,000 a year in reserved license fees to a program paying owners for walk-in access. The panel also backs accepting $1 million a year in federal grants for the same purpose during the next two years.
http://tinyurl.com/25uzq84
I guess this is a start Im wondering how or if this will effect the lawsuit against HB141
[signature]
Re: [sinergy] Panel votes Utah stream-access - riverdog - 11-20-2010
This won't effect the lawsuit at all. Paying landowners to allow you walk in access will open up fishing. You will be able to cross private property at designated places to do so if the landowner accept payment. Crossing private property to access waterways has never been allowed if the landowner is against. That is trespassing. Waterways are public despite the nonsense of the recent Utah legislature (unless Utah secedes from the Union anyway). However you have to use public access points and not cross private property to get to the waterway.
[signature]
Re: [sinergy] Panel votes Utah stream-access - GP - 11-20-2010
Farm Bureau wins again.
[signature]
Re: [GP] Panel votes Utah stream-access - Big_n_smallie - 11-21-2010
exactly
[signature]
Re: [GP] Panel votes Utah stream-access - TS30 - 11-21-2010
[quote GP]Farm Bureau wins again.[/quote]
Yes, and no. I think the expansion of the WIA program is a win for everyone. Director Karpowitz fully acknowledges that this is not the answer to the stream access issue, and they would have been fighting for an increase in the WIA program regardless of if HB 141 would have passed or if Conatser was still the prevailing law.
I think it's a loss that this is the ONLY issue this worthless task force would even talk about over the last 6 months. I think it's a loss that some legislators convinced themselves that now they have voted to expand the WIA they have done their job to appease anglers. But if perspective is kept, and when it really matters we realize that this is not the answer to the larger issue at hand, this is definitely a good thing for sportsmen and landowners alike.
[signature]
Re: [sinergy] Panel votes Utah stream-access - HFT - 11-23-2010
Band aid for a slit throat. Taking $300,000 from DNR for an access that should already exist. Land owners really winning at our expense. Hopefully Stream Access Coallition can get this suit through in a timely fashion. I hope they seek damages from the state too $$$$$
[signature]
Re: [HFT] Panel votes Utah stream-access - TS30 - 11-23-2010
HFT, with all due respect, the access that the WIA program provides actually should not already exist. Even under Conatser you couldn't walk across private property to get to a river. The WIA isn't intended to provide the ability to use the stream, it is to access the stream. Something that is completely independent of the lawsuit.
Like I said, as long as people keep the perspective that the WIA program is not a fix to the larger issue at hand, they will realize that an increase in the program is a benefit for all parties involved.
[signature]
Re: [TS30] Panel votes Utah stream-access - HFT - 11-24-2010
I can see your point TS30, but not completely independent. This issue would not be raised if not for the illeagle legislation. High water mark takes care of 3/4's the accesses needed. All the accesses to the Weber and Provo. These funds could be used for unnavicable waters.
Looking forward to the new suit!!!!
[signature]