Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 03-05-2009   #11
Kjirsten
 
TakemetotheRiver's Avatar
 
Durango, Colorado
Paddling Since: 05
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,477
From Jeremy Christensen on UtahRafters:

Quote:
I may have spoken too soon. I apologize for spreading the word of victory before its time, but unfortunately HB 187 was brought back for reconsideration this afternoon, and remains very much alive.

Acting on a motion by Rep. Jack Draxler, R-North Logan, the Utah House recalled the bill late in the afternoon session Wednesday and put it back on the third reading calendar meaning that the proposed law remains alive. Though the exact vote was not available, Division of Wildlife Resources' legislative specialist Robin Thomas said it was close.

She expects the bill to come back to a vote quickly, perhaps as early as Thursday, because in order for it to pass it still would have to pass the House and then go through the Senate process.

If you can, please consider making another round of calls to your representatives and to the governor on this. We are not out of the woods yet. Again, I apologize for sounding the call to celebration a little early.
And the number again:

Governor Huntsman 1-801-538-1000
__________________

TakemetotheRiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2009   #12
 
Park City, Utah
Paddling Since: 1985
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 700
Anyone with the facts. I thought this thing was dead yesterday. The news articles about 1/3 - 1/2 of the representtives being property owners affected were damning.
__________________

__________________
Peace,
Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2009   #13
 
Arvada (Denver), Colorado
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 250
Utah's Waterusers Need Your Voice NOW!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canada View Post
Anyone with the facts. I thought this thing was dead yesterday. The news articles about 1/3 - 1/2 of the representtives being property owners affected were damning.
Hmmm... just thought I'd check this forum as I haven't been back for a while only to find there's a thread about Utah HB 187, "Recreational Use of Public Waters" going on...

I have been involved heavily in the Utah HB 187 "Recreational Use of Public Waters" pretty much 24/7 since the end of January with the main wateruser/waterowner advocates that are mightily and persistently determined in opposing this bill.

Presently, it is about to be voted on again in the Utah House of Representatives on Monday, March 9, 2009, as the 3rd Substitute Bill 187, including all passed amendments made to date.

You can find the bill at http://le.utah.gov/~2009/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0187S03.htm

To listen or watch live streaming video Monday *when the House is in session* go to http://www.le.state.ut.us/ and scroll down to the House session info. The A/V buttons will come on to click when the House is in session. You'll need RealPlayer installed to watch the live streaming video. The House is in session 9am-12pm and then 2-4pm.

To view the House Calendar, go to http://www.le.state.ut.us/jsp/jdisplay/default.html . Notice that HB 187 is at the very top of the schedule and MAY be the first bill up for consideration, but not guaranteed as it is presently "circled", which means it's "on deck" rather than automatically first up.

For background as to the July 18, 2008 Conatser v Johnson Utah SCt ruling, go to http://www.utcourts.gov/opinions/sup...tser071808.pdf

There has been tremendous drama on the House floor when the bill has been brought to the floor and Monday will be no different. Gazillions of emails have been sent and face to face meetings between waterusers and legislators have taken place multiple times daily.

187 lost (we won) last week 34 yes and 41 no and wild jubilation took place by the waterusers afterwards, yours truly included. The next day, Ben Ferry, the House Sponsor, made the opportunity to "reconsider" the bill after House Rep Draxler made a motion to amend, which was defeated. Yesterday, Friday, the bill was brought back to the floor and an amendment, based on a single word change, from "and" to "or" on line 387 was moved and subsequently defeated. Some other changes were made to the bill, such as making the proposed Access Board a "rulemaking" rather than an "advisory" board and the addition of 11 more rivers (there's thousands in Utah plus the USCt ruled recreational use on "all waters of the state") to a list of "allowable" public waters on private streambeds to use with all sorts of restrictions. This is one toad of a bill.

Essentially, the bill is poorly formatted and poorly written, substance wise, and is riddled with amendments.

The bill came about as a result of the Conatser USCt ruling which clarified the waterowner/wateruser *USE of* public waters incidental to recreational activities. The bill should have been written to further clarify the clarifying ruling. The bill, however, was written and is controlled by the landowner property rights interests and defines the issue as one of landuser/landowner *ACCESS to/from* public waters incidental to land use.

Should it pass the House, it will go on to the Utah Senate. The Utah Legislative session is over and done next Friday, March 13, 2009. If you want to have a say, NOW, NOW, NOW is the time to express yourself by way of any type of contact with the legislators and also, for that matter, American Whitewater, Colorado Whitewater, Utah boaters forums and groups and etc.

There's been a whole bunch of posting over on utahonthefly.com if you want to ramp up quickly. I am "rstrouts" over there.

You can also go to http://utahwaterguardians.wordpress.com/ for info, especially, for legislator contact info.

This is a classic private property owner vs public waterowner/wateruser Battle of the Titans. It's in Utah now, but it can easily make its way to Colorado and elsewhere. That's why I'm on it, from the wading flyfisher pov, and will continue fighting against this bill's passage from the Utah House to the Senate and to the Governor's office if necessary!

I would like to see a balanced legislation and/or court ruling here in Colorado so that we can clarify our river rights to everyone's benefit from the confusing mess there is presently between the enforcement of the Federal laws and Colorado state laws.

Clarification is the key word.

Any other questions or comments, fire away and I'll do my best to answer them!

My view is to: Kill it, Chill it and New bill it!

Now get those legislator email contacts and start a tappin'!!!
Ole Rivers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2009   #14
 
Logan, Utah
Paddling Since: 2008
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5
Now if we could only make a bill that got rid of barbed wire running accross the rivers..
TY_USU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2009   #15
 
Arvada (Denver), Colorado
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 250
Water Users/Water Owners Win... Again!

Legislative floor procedures being what they are, the bill was "reconsidered" last week and then brought up for a vote again today.

Once again, HB 187, "Recreational Use of Public Waters" Failed, 31 yes-43 NO! Water Users Win Again! This time, there will be no more reconsiderations because the Legislative session ends Thursday and there just isn't time to move it back for a House vote, get it over to the Senate and maybe back to the House.

Utah waterowners/water users, as per the unanimous Conatser Utah Supremes ruling have the dominant, yet coexisting, right to USE the servient private streambed landowner's right to own on "all waters of the state"!!!

There will likely be another bill next year in Utah that will clarify what needs to be clarified in the ruling, like "high watermark", "streambed", etc and I plan on involving my time to help craft it with the friends I have made during this battle as I'd like to see the Colorado situation clarify as well.

Water users win and clarify our rights to the USE of (as opposed to ACCESS to/from) public waters incidental to recreational activities (touch the streambed)!!!
Ole Rivers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2009   #16
Kjirsten
 
TakemetotheRiver's Avatar
 
Durango, Colorado
Paddling Since: 05
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,477
Whoohoo!!!! Hopefully this will set precedent for Colorado.
TakemetotheRiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2009   #17
 
rivermanryan's Avatar
 
Durango, Colorado
Paddling Since: 1999
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 580
I'm not sure if I know Utah Bill, but he should stay away from this site!
rivermanryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2009   #18
Kjirsten
 
TakemetotheRiver's Avatar
 
Durango, Colorado
Paddling Since: 05
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,477
It just keeps getting better. Those guys are going crazy over there:

Durango Herald News, Utah bars to open to public
TakemetotheRiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2009   #19
 
Park City, Utah
Paddling Since: 1985
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 700
Crazy

Yes, the access bill that came out last year is huge and from a boaters, or water user perspective, it is a huge win. I do not think you could get in done in Colorado. Too many private waters providing too much of a revenue stream.

The liquor thing is pretty good too. The down side is anytime you go into a bar, they will scan your ID and have it on file for 48 hours (pulling that from memory). Now watch a paper trail made very easy for DUI arrest being traced to Bar owners where the drinking took place. The unintended consequences make me nervous. Still, better than the silly club garbage. Come ski our Powder and drink our beer. Mid thigh yesterday and really light!!
__________________

__________________
Peace,
Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Tags
access

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Topic Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Utah river access clarified Canada Whitewater Kayaking 48 09-13-2009 09:33 AM
First Utah River Trip lhowemt Whitewater Kayaking 3 01-01-2008 07:47 AM
Utah river companions needed. scotticus80 Whitewater Kayaking 1 11-03-2007 09:54 AM
Green River Utah questions heliodorus04 Whitewater Kayaking 4 01-17-2007 11:41 AM
Bill in congress could threaten access to filter plant run benpetri Whitewater Kayaking 2 03-23-2006 03:19 PM

» Classified Ads
WRSI Moment Full Face...

posted by annafischer

WRSI Moment Fullface Helmet Size: S/M This helmet is...

NRS Triton Drysuit, Size...

posted by elnewmano

Used NRS Triton Drysuit, Size Large. Needs a little TLC. ...

Pair of 10 foot Smoker...

posted by czar

Smoker White water oars $500 for pair 300 each I haven't...

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.