HB 80 now SB 267

[TS30]

Here is the latest update on HB 80. HB 80 has been moved from the House to the Senate, and is now SB 267. The House Natural Resources Committee (the committee it would have to go through before getting to the House floor) is really stacked against the public in this realm. 10 of the 14 members voted for HB 187 last year. Due to the fact that it was not believed that the House Natural Resources Committee would not allow HB 80 to the floor for a vote, the bill was pulled and will be put through the Senate first now.

Nothing really changes on our part. We just start working on the Senate instead of the House for now. It will be the same bill, but the sponsor is no longer Rep Fowlke in the House, but Senator Bramble in the Senate. If you have any questions, post them up here or PM me if you would rather.
[signature]

[Fly_Flicker]

Not knowing the finer points of how politics and legal wrangling works this move of the bill raises a question for me. What happens with Senator Webbs bill (HB290). I presume this moving of HB80 clears the way and makes passage of HB290 easier? Should we be paying as much time and effort to defeating HB290 as we do to passing HB80/SB26?
[signature]

[TS30]

It does not clear the way any more than if HB 80 stayed in the House. Any bill that is passed has to go through the House and the Senate and be passed by both before it can go to the Governor. It is just a more clear path to getting to the floor this way.

In answer to your next question, YES! We need to spend just as much time fighting against Webb's and McKiff's bills as we do fighting for SB 267. So still contact your representative and ask them to oppose those bills. When it comes back to the House we'll ask them to support SB 267.

Thanks for the question...that is an important aspect that was probably falling by the way side!
[signature]

[cje04]

Thanks for the update.

All,
Every email and call to your representative and senator counts! Please don't assume that your fellow anglers are making the calls. It only takes 5-10 minutes. Take ownership and stand for your rights to access public waters!
[signature]

[mojorizing]

This way, with it going to the Senate and sponsored by Senator Curt Bramble, the weasel from up north named Ferry can't hide it, shovel it under the rug, or any of the low down dirty tricks the good ole boys use since Ferry's the character that is the chair of the
House Rules Committee.
There are two other bills out there that the GOB's have. One by Mel Brown and another by Webb . Both bill against the anglers/water recreationalists. HB80/SB267 was written with both private property owners and anglers/ rec water users input. The other two were written behind closed doors with no angler input.
Now that's American politics.
[signature]

[SirAngler]

Many fishing advocates support HB 80 and SB 267. Utah Water Guardians is telling everybody to email their representative and ask them to pass the bill. Fish Tech supports it too. I think they are wrong. Here is why:

I’ve read HB 80 and HB 290. SB 267 is supposed to be SIMILAR to HB 80, but the text has not been placed in the bill as of this morning (2/9/10). There are supposedly a couple of other bills being introduced too.

HB 290 is bad. I don't think HB 80 is that much better. I see a big problem with the way HB 80 differentiates between man-made obstacles and natural obstacles. This creates confusion. It should not matter if an obstacle is man-made or natural. A user should be able to go around any obstacle in order to continue navigating the stream.

Have you ever tried to walk down a stream without stepping out and onto the river bank above? It very hard to do. Users who float may have little problem drifting down stream, but fishermen will have a very difficult time walking in the natural stream bed all of the time, even if they are walking downstream. Going upstream is even more difficult. Can you imagine the damage to fish spawning beds if everybody had to stay in the natural stream bed?

This bill is still too restrictive. I urge you to ask your representatives to make fishing access more reasonable. We must have the ability to walk along the stream bank. Fishermen often walk just far enough away from the bank so that only their head is visible to the fish. Nobody want to bushwhack through the tall grass and bush. Mostly they stay on trails that already exist. Sometimes those trails are 100 feet from the stream. Floaters and Fishermen alike should not have to risk their lives trying to get through one type of obstacle, while legally allowed to go around another type. And remember, it will almost always be the landowner with a gun who decides if an obstacle is man-made or natural.

Last year there were four gunshots fired. None of the shots were fired by floaters or fishermen. Last year there was no law restricting access. If any bill passes, it will restrict access to a lessor or greater degree. How many shots do you think will be fired then?

If no bill passes, it will be better than passing a bill that does not fully protect water users rights.

Don't support this bill just because it is the best one so far, or because opposition claims we are really good at always saying 'no' but never agreeing to anything. Remember, they lost in the Supreme Court when they tried to take away river user's rights entirely. There is no reason we should settle for anything less than full unrestricted easement along rivers.

Fo goodness sake don't contact your representative until you have read the bill yourself and know what it says.
[signature]