Originally Posted by Marco
The third reading & vote was laid over today, not sure when it was rescheduled, but I hear they are pretty busy up on the hill.
Matt- That amendment is discouraging, but I do not know where it came from- my guess would be the landowners rather than outfitters. It can be changed to read "every commercial vessel" which would mean that private boaters would not need such registration.
FlyRod- The 'Title' issue is a sticky wicket, but I have been told that it has been worked around before. Folks who have been around the legislative process for a while believe that this bill can be amended to include private boaters.
Last Monday, my attendance at the Capitol went for 11 hours. Of those 11 hours, 5 of them were in attendance at the House Judiciary Committee meeting. While there, I talked to about 19 people, both private and public interests. During the hearing, there were several testimonies and committee member questions concerning additional interest inclusion.
Last Friday, my attendance at the Capitol heard and saw the Second Reading House vote and and also resulted in talking to about 5 people.
Today, my attendance at the Capitol for the Third Reading vote learned that it was laid off until tomorrow. I am going to the Capitol tomorrow to watch the vote in person and maybe talk to some more people to advocate for the public (ALL
water users such as boaters AND fishermen), generally, and fishermen, specifically.
I have been posting to and starting threads here and elsewhere.
My online forum posts and threads' participation and originations have been made on this forum and elsewhere. This thread and post is one of them.
Here's my present take on HB 1188:
IT'S TIME TO FOCUS.
1 The Senate Judiciary Committee members
2 The Substance
3 The Procedure
4 The Time Frame
The Senate Judiciary Committee members. The House Third Reading will likely pass tomorrow morning without amendments about which we have been discussing. Therefore, the next stop is, likely, the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Therefore, our efforts need to focus on the Senate committee.
Substantively, the bill should be re-titled and amended to include the public interest.
Procedurally as to the bill itself, as mentioned by Marco (Mark Robbins, Conservation Director of Colorado Whitewater), the title and bill amendments would need to be re-titled and amended, which is tough but possible.
Advocating for the public/fishermen interest, I have directly and previously asked Representive Curry and others, just as Mark and Nathan of CW/AW have, for the private boater interest, to more broadly re-title and amend the bill.
We, as ALL water users, should do so again... united, directly and in person... together. There is strength in numbers.
Water users, fishermen and boaters alike and together, should meet with Senate Judiciary committee members NOW, well prior to their Senate Judiciary committee hearing, to slow the pace of the procedural time frame and to get to a bill substance that serves ALL water user interests.
Anyone who'd like to attend such a meeting, speak up. I will attend together
with Mark of CW and/or Nathan of AW and all other water users who would also like to participate.
Anyone who'd like to email and/or call the Senate committee members to support this meeting and/or the premise for the meeting, do your thing.