02-25-2009, 05:22 PM
Let me agree that Jack Draxler is not against us.
I think he is practicing politics as "the art of
the possible" and trying to give anglers as much as
he can, given the leanings of our legislature.
Like it or not, many reps have "Limbaugh-tomies"
which is brain operation where all decision-making
ability not based solely on ideology is removed.
We saw enough in the committee of reps beating
the "private property" drum. That will be hard
to overcome (not that we shouldn't try).
An email I got from Rep. Draxler:
Bob,
Thank you again for following up with me on HB 187.
You need to know that I have prepared four floor amendments that will
significantly improve the bill. These amendments would eliminate what is
now the 150’ provision, which is arbitrary, unwieldy, and
un-enforceable. Other amendments deal with the composition and functions
of the Recreational Access Board. The board would have a “public”
neutral member and would have rule making authority, not just advisory
function. Hence, in my opinion, rivers could be added in a much more
realistic and timely manner.
There is no doubt that the Conatser decision left room for legislative
action. Therefore we must be realistic and realize that if Rep.
Ferry’s bill passes we want it to be balanced and fair for both
property owners (private property rights) and recreationists (stream
access easement rights).
I hope this clarifies my goals and intentions. From the beginning I
have been determined to be a voice in behalf of the fishing and other
recreational uses that a 5 to 0 Supreme Court decision decreed that we
have.
Sincerely,
Rep. Jack Draxler
jdraxler@utah.gov
[signature]
I think he is practicing politics as "the art of
the possible" and trying to give anglers as much as
he can, given the leanings of our legislature.
Like it or not, many reps have "Limbaugh-tomies"
which is brain operation where all decision-making
ability not based solely on ideology is removed.
We saw enough in the committee of reps beating
the "private property" drum. That will be hard
to overcome (not that we shouldn't try).
An email I got from Rep. Draxler:
Bob,
Thank you again for following up with me on HB 187.
You need to know that I have prepared four floor amendments that will
significantly improve the bill. These amendments would eliminate what is
now the 150’ provision, which is arbitrary, unwieldy, and
un-enforceable. Other amendments deal with the composition and functions
of the Recreational Access Board. The board would have a “public”
neutral member and would have rule making authority, not just advisory
function. Hence, in my opinion, rivers could be added in a much more
realistic and timely manner.
There is no doubt that the Conatser decision left room for legislative
action. Therefore we must be realistic and realize that if Rep.
Ferry’s bill passes we want it to be balanced and fair for both
property owners (private property rights) and recreationists (stream
access easement rights).
I hope this clarifies my goals and intentions. From the beginning I
have been determined to be a voice in behalf of the fishing and other
recreational uses that a 5 to 0 Supreme Court decision decreed that we
have.
Sincerely,
Rep. Jack Draxler
jdraxler@utah.gov
[signature]