Posts: 2,727
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation:
0
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]
Posts: 171
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2007
Reputation:
0
Farm Bureau wins again.
[signature]
Posts: 409
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2007
Reputation:
0
[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]
Posts: 2,320
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation:
0
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]
Posts: 409
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2007
Reputation:
0
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]
Posts: 2,320
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation:
0
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]
