River Access/Private Prop Warning

[rgreenland]

I know this can be an ugly topic and its not meant to stir the pot etc....Just wanted to warn ppl and save them from a ticket/trouble.  And, step up on the soap box for just a sec.  Just an opinion....don't crucify me for it.

The law right now as I understand it (reading it from the DWR website) is that you cannot access streams/rivers on private property unless you are floating.  If you are standing on the ground in the river you are trespassing.  If I like it or not, it seems pretty clear what the law is.  Yes, of course there are access points where property owners provide access, etc.  Not here to needle the fine points just the basics.

On the Weber River from "about" the train bridge west of the Mt. Green exit, upstream to Peterson....maybe farther up I'm not sure....many of you are aware of the purchase of that mountain by Wasatch Peaks Ranch and the planned community, ski resort, golf course, etc. going up there.  
Over the past several months I have seen more "patrols" of that area of the river and more people getting into trouble for trespassing than I have seen over the past 25 years.  Cops, DWR, and others keeping an eye on the place.
I have spoken with individuals associated with Wasatch Peaks Ranch who have confirmed they are starting to keep a close eye on the area and will be increasing their own patrols of the area as the building of that area continues.  They know the law and are not very forgiving to anyone breaking it.  As that community grows, more efforts will take place to make sure that current laws are followed.  It's my understanding that only residents of that community will have access to that section of the river as well as their own hand picked guide service.

I guess I post this because I have run into an astonishing number of anglers who 1) don't know the stream access laws OR 2) know the law but still decide to walk up the river anyway because they have never been caught before and/or don't believe that they will get caught and/or if they are they will just be told to leave.
I've shared this info with several anglers....pulled it up on my phone and read it to them word for word....and yet they still say its not the law and they continue on up the river.
I've even been told "I've been fishing this stretch for x number of years"....as if that somehow makes it okay to break the law. 
I get the feeling that when the law was changed several years ago allowing access to rivers - many people thought it was done and over with.  They have no idea that shortly after it was made legal...it was made illegal again.
It just seems unbelievable to me that some people can be like this.  Law is law and if you agree with it or don't agree with it there is still an expectation that you should know and follow the law.  Same for hunting, driving, boating, etc.  If you are going to do it you should know what the laws are that govern it and expect to follow them.

And, if you disagree with the law, you should find ways to be active in supporting those individuals and organizations who are working to change the law.  Do not show your distain or dislike of the law by breaking or ignoring it as if it does not pertain to you.  It just makes it worse for those who don't break it and makes it harder to get laws changed.

Off the soap box.

I just know there are people out there who just want to access the river and have a great day.  I've seen a few people have their day ruined so far and just wanted to throw this out there so you can avoid having your day ruined if you are in that area.
There have been several land owners over the years along that area who may have not been too concerned about someone walking up the river on their private property.  I'm just tossing out a "heads-up" about the people who own it know....They Care...A Lot.

[danbnz]

You can fish the entire section as long as you remain within the high water mark, or need to portage around an obstruction. Thanks for trying to dissuade the public from accessing a public river. I will continue to fish there as I please.

Access corridor width — Recreational access is limited to the bed of the Weber River within the ordinary highwater mark. The permanent vegetative line along the river will serve as both the ordinary highwater mark and the access boundary.
Activities allowed — Use is limited to water-based recreational activities.
Trespass — Access rights on the river do not allow recreational users to trespass on properly posted, private property above the river's permanent vegetative line. Access to and from the river is limited to the following:
Public access points (i.e., public land, highway right-of-ways, private property that is not posted, etc.)
Properly posted, private property with landowner permission
Portage — A person may leave the riverbed to travel (or portage) around a dangerous obstruction in the river, as long as that person takes the most direct route that is closest to the water.

---

This is for the section above echo, below you are correct you can only float and fish.

[rgreenland]

You can fish the entire section as long as you remain within the high water mark, or need to portage around an obstruction.  Thanks for trying to dissuade the public from accessing a public river.  I will continue to fish there as I please. 

Access corridor width — Recreational access is limited to the bed of the Weber River within the ordinary highwater mark. The permanent vegetative line along the river will serve as both the ordinary highwater mark and the access boundary.
Activities allowed — Use is limited to water-based recreational activities.
Trespass — Access rights on the river do not allow recreational users to trespass on properly posted, private property above the river's permanent vegetative line. Access to and from the river is limited to the following:
Public access points (i.e., public land, highway right-of-ways, private property that is not posted, etc.)
Properly posted, private property with landowner permission
Portage — A person may leave the riverbed to travel (or portage) around a dangerous obstruction in the river, as long as that person takes the most direct route that is closest to the water.

---

This is for the section above echo, below you are correct you can only float and fish.

Your comments validated everything I said and points I was making.  Thanks!

[Riverdogs]

I know this can be an ugly topic and its not meant to stir the pot etc....Just wanted to warn ppl and save them from a ticket/trouble.  And, step up on the soap box for just a sec.  Just an opinion....don't crucify me for it.

The law right now as I understand it (reading it from the DWR website) is that you cannot access streams/rivers on private property unless you are floating.  If you are standing on the ground in the river you are trespassing.  If I like it or not, it seems pretty clear what the law is.  Yes, of course there are access points where property owners provide access, etc.  Not here to needle the fine points just the basics.

On the Weber River from "about" the train bridge west of the Mt. Green exit, upstream to Peterson....maybe farther up I'm not sure....many of you are aware of the purchase of that mountain by Wasatch Peaks Ranch and the planned community, ski resort, golf course, etc. going up there.  
Over the past several months I have seen more "patrols" of that area of the river and more people getting into trouble for trespassing than I have seen over the past 25 years.  Cops, DWR, and others keeping an eye on the place.
I have spoken with individuals associated with Wasatch Peaks Ranch who have confirmed they are starting to keep a close eye on the area and will be increasing their own patrols of the area as the building of that area continues.  They know the law and are not very forgiving to anyone breaking it.  As that community grows, more efforts will take place to make sure that current laws are followed.  It's my understanding that only residents of that community will have access to that section of the river as well as their own hand picked guide service.

I guess I post this because I have run into an astonishing number of anglers who 1) don't know the stream access laws OR 2) know the law but still decide to walk up the river anyway because they have never been caught before and/or don't believe that they will get caught and/or if they are they will just be told to leave.
I've shared this info with several anglers....pulled it up on my phone and read it to them word for word....and yet they still say its not the law and they continue on up the river.
I've even been told "I've been fishing this stretch for x number of years"....as if that somehow makes it okay to break the law. 
I get the feeling that when the law was changed several years ago allowing access to rivers - many people thought it was done and over with.  They have no idea that shortly after it was made legal...it was made illegal again.
It just seems unbelievable to me that some people can be like this.  Law is law and if you agree with it or don't agree with it there is still an expectation that you should know and follow the law.  Same for hunting, driving, boating, etc.  If you are going to do it you should know what the laws are that govern it and expect to follow them.

And, if you disagree with the law, you should find ways to be active in supporting those individuals and organizations who are working to change the law.  Do not show your distain or dislike of the law by breaking or ignoring it as if it does not pertain to you.  It just makes it worse for those who don't break it and makes it harder to get laws changed.

Off the soap box.

I just know there are people out there who just want to access the river and have a great day.  I've seen a few people have their day ruined so far and just wanted to throw this out there so you can avoid having your day ruined if you are in that area.
There have been several land owners over the years along that area who may have not been too concerned about someone walking up the river on their private property.  I'm just tossing out a "heads-up" about the people who own it know....They Care...A Lot.

I think you summarize current Utah law reasonable well. It however doesn’t usurp Federal Law and/or Precedent. I personally will follow the current law even if it’s been corrupted from what the founders of Utah as well as the founders of our country intended. It’s just fishing and not worth my time to rectify these greedy seizures of rights. We all have to decide which injustices rise to the level of fighting. One party states seem to have more than their share of corruption no matter which party is in control and on the take.

[MrShane]

You think that is bad?
Get this, the Park Manager at Deer Creek is trying to shut down BOAT fishing after 10 pm and prior to 6 am.
Deer Creek is a public water, a public ramp, and a public park.
And, boats float!

[castnshoot]

And, if you disagree with the law, you should find ways to be active in supporting those individuals and organizations who are working to change the law.

Rgreenland, you forgot one important option,, one can alway buy their own section of water there by being able to enjoy one of our greatest rights found in the ownership of “privet” property.

Stream Access shot themselves in the foot years ago by including the word stream in their name so be careful who you give your money to.

[fishskibum]

oh really
what would you have called it?
our mission statement is

To promote and assist in all aspects of securing and maintaining public access to, and lawful use of, Utah’s public waters and streambeds.

not just riverbeds
these are our goal

1)    To restore and enforce the right of the public to access public waters as recognized and protected by the Utah Constitution, the Public Trust doctrine, and long-standing Utah Supreme Court jurisprudence; and

2)    To seek recognition of the public ownership of the beds of navigable waterways in the State of Utah.

and we are attempting to do it in this manner

We seek to accomplish these goals though legal, political and negotiated means.

 Seems pretty straight forward to me
Every non profit there is exists and asks for donations
personally i only give time, effort ,and use my voice to attempt to achieve our goals
 Its been 2 decades now since the og weber river incident that brought about the need to protect our rights to recreate on our publiic waterways
We will continue this fight for what we believe is our sportsman and outdoor recreationalists rights
and feel free to support us in any manner you see fit
maybe see you in peace on our capital steps as it brings me pride to stand with and see such support

fret not my young friend

  we gots your back and our hopes for a just and fair future of our waterways covered 
like the op says

vote em out if they dont  represent your cares

[castnshoot]

“Navigable Rivers Access”

[Therapist]

This is an ongoing process. The original lawsuit was decided in favor of the sportsman. The Utah Supreme Court ruled that sportsman had access to all rivers and streams between the high water mark. Then some Ag interests got hold of a couple of the State reps. and Senators and they passed a bastarized bill that pretty much shut everything down in favor of private land owners. The bill went back to the Supreme Court who stated, "we already ruled on this, what's going on!". It continues to work it's way through the lower courts now, in the meantime, anglers are subjected to all kinds of BS from land owners and private companies that are restricting access. Hopefully it will be resolved shortly. Stream Access did not do anything wrong, the Legislature screwed things up after the Court ruled in Sportsman 's favor. I would recommend that we support them in the continued fight.

[castnshoot]

The 19 month window to trespass was legally shut by the legislature because of one judge’s extreme over reach.

Now the historical navigation of each stretch of water is being reviewed upon request as it should be.

I enjoy my right to fish, but I am not willing to walk over someone else’s rights to make that happen.

[Therapist]

So Castnshoot, please explain to me why each water needs to be "evaluated upon request?". That says nothing. Take for instance the Dushane River or the Sevier river. Both were historically open to fishing. Now, both are closed to the public as the land owners have sold the rights to private concerns so they can have total access to some of the best water in the state. Same with the upper Provo. Private concerns with lots of money are buying up access and pretty soon the only thing left for the public will be stretches like the Provo below Jordanelle, Weber below Rockport to Echo, and the Lower Provo. I am not much of a stream fishman, but I did some in the day. I used to fish the Provo from the University Parkway bridge, up to the 2230 North Bridge. This section of the river runs through the Riverside Golf Course. Some of the people on the course used to come and try and run you off, I even had them call the police several times. I was always in the stream bed, never on their property and eventually they quit trying to run me off. Now, that stretch of the river, from the mouth of the Canyon downstream to the bridge on 500 West is totally closed. TOTAL BOVINE SCATOLOGY !!! Just like the rest of this compost they are flinging at us. No one at DNR or DWR wants to take on the Ag interests and put them in their place. The public needs to step up and force the state to recognize the original court ruling and make them enforce it. Then, sportsman need to police the water and report the jerks that ruin it for everyone else !!!

[castnshoot]

“So Castnshoot, please explain to me why each water needs to be "evaluated upon request?". That says nothing“

Like to OP said “ this subject can get ugly”. That does not change the fact that through out most of this country,, navigability has long been the standard as it has to do with ones right to trespass on the high water mark or stream bed.

Utah is now resolving this issue the same way the majority of states have done long ago..

[Riverdogs]

Let’s be honest Utah’sextremely corrupt Lawmakers are being paid off by Real Estate and other interests. There is a long history of what constitutes a navigable water. The process should be the other way around. Determine a water isn’t navigable and then shut down the access otherwise it’s extreme government overreach.
Just a little FYI in dealing with lawyers for State of Utah and their related agencies. Utah is a 1 party consent state for taping conversations. As long as 1 party involved (you) are involved in the conversation you can tape the conversation without the knowledge of anyone else participating in the conversation. A lawyer formerly with the largest law firm in Utah let me know this years ago. It was good advice as it allowed me to call the bluff on an attorney almost certainly bribed by a Berkshire Hathaway conglomerate corporation (Energy pipleines). Corruption runs rampant in this state. My old neighbor who runs a whole host of businesses in Utah always explained the Governors of Utah were like mushrooms- Kept in the dark and fed bull manure.

[Gone Forever]

The property maybe private but the fish in the water are public property. Not being able to fish for those fish while others can is a violation of my rights as outlined in the Utah Constitution to fish and hunt for fish and game in the state that is held in trust for all of the public, not just land owners adjacent to the protected wildlife of the state.
If I had it my way there would be a rotenone drip at the upstream edge of all private property that is not open to public fishing. If I can't get to our fish, no one should be able to get to our fish.

[castnshoot]

The property maybe private but the fish in the water are public property.  Not being able to fish for those fish while others can is a violation of my rights as outlined in the Utah Constitution to fish and hunt for fish and game in the state that is held in trust for all of the public, not just land owners adjacent to the protected wildlife of the state.
If I had it my way there would be a rotenone drip at the upstream edge of all private property that is not open to public fishing.  If I can't get to our fish, no one should be able to get to our fish.

Gone Forever, all the native fish and wild life are regulated by the DWR which in a way does make them public property, on that we agree.

So under your analogy if I own a 100 acres of alfalfa, and there is a big buck standing in the middle
of it you should be able to go out there and shoot it just because you have a tag in your pocket?

i hope the mentality of someone who would poison a stream just because he does not have permission to fish it is not the same mentality of those backing these socialist trespass sceems. 

Start dumping poison in “our” water ways and fishing will be “gone forever”.

[Cowboypirate]

I think this thread has had ample opportunity for both sides to comment. Thank you to all for adding insight for us to ponder. However, it feels like the thread has ran its course so I am going to lock it. If you feel strongly that doing so is a mistake please PM me, I make mistakes all the time, it is what I am best at.