Posts: 3,536
Threads: 1
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
0
Check out this article in the Daily Herald today:
[url "http://www.harktheherald.com/article.php?sid=90076&mode=thread&order=0"]http://www.harktheherald.com/article.php?sid=90076&mode=thread&order=0[/url]
Hey everyone that enjoys fishing Utah Lake, take a look at this article in the Daily Herald. They had a piece on Fox News last night about it too. Provo Bay is just South of the Provo Airport, and is also known as Mud Lake. We need to do something to let the State of Utah know that this is unacceptable! I for one have had some excellent largemouth bass fishing in Mud Lake when the water is much higher. This is just one of many areas that could possibly be shut off to us for good if we don't do something. I'm going to write letters to the Utah Legislature, the DWR, and anyone else that has a part in this. Hopefully there are more who will do the same so we can be heard.
[signature]
Posts: 2,011
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2003
Reputation:
0
Definitely a disturbing article.
[signature]
Posts: 5,856
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2003
Reputation:
0
I'm no attorney, but the state owns the water, so if you do not touch the land, these moronic landowners cannot do squat about you sitting there in your boat. Just like you can float down a river, cross as many property lines as you'd like, just don't touch the bottom and you can't get a ticket. I think these putzes are just a bunch of money grubbing fools. Just my 2 cents anyways.
[signature]
Posts: 504
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
0
If they close any more water at Utah Lake, I think I'm gonna sue the owners. It is a bunch of bull. My dad used to fish off of the West side, and in Serra Toga, and now we can't get in to them! It really is a shame, that they are doing this to the fisherman.
[signature]
Posts: 3,536
Threads: 1
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
0
I think that a lawsuit would probably help. Especially if you bring in the June Sucker factor. Personally, I couldn't care less if the June suckers completely go extinct. There are a lot of restrictions put in place because of them that limit what the DWR can do to manage the fishery at Utah Lake. However, I bet we could use the June Sucker and the Endangered Species Act to counter these greedy landowners. The Provo Bay is near where the Provo River enters Utah Lake, the only place where the June Suckers spawn. It could very well be habitat that they use throughout the year. If a landowner were allowed to dike off part of the bay, it could harm the June Suckers even more. I'm not sure if my idea is accurate or not, but it seems logical to me. What I don't understand in the article is that they quote the Mayor of Vineyard City (Geneva Steel is part of Vineyard to give you an idea of its location, but it only extends south as far as 400 South in Orem) Rulon Gammon, who I know owns land in Vineyard on the lakeshore, but I'm almost positive he does NOT own land in Provo Bay, which is several miles farther south. That tells me that this problem is with landowners all around the lake, not just in Provo Bay. As you can tell, I'm particularly passionate about this topic, as I've fished Utah Lake since I was 10 years old.
I'd really be interested to verify if what theekillerbee said is accurate...that if you are in a boat in the water, that can't do anything about it. Wouldn't help though if they diked it off.
[signature]
Posts: 943
Threads: 1
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation:
2
Theekillerbee is partially correct about the boat in the water. They would have to properly post their property boundary to keep you off their land/water. It states in the proclaimation that property must be posted at all stream crossings and that would have to extend to the lake property too. This will be an interesting battle I'm sure, but I respect the private property rights of the landowner if they infact own it. It sounds like the state pulled a fast one and will be fighting this screw up for several years to come. More of our tax dollars wasted in stupid litigation that probably didn't have to happen.
[signature]
Posts: 3,536
Threads: 1
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
0
I'd be willing even to submit to an increase in licence fees if it would pay for the state to buy the land from the landowners. I'm sure many others would scream about that one though. The state really screwed up on this one. They should have had public input before making a decision that would have such wide ranging effects.
[signature]
Posts: 1,596
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation:
0
Property laws state that no ownership of land includes water. So this is completley correct if a boat is not touching land underneath or around the lake you can sit there all you want. Landowners do not own the water. Just the land underneath and around it.
[signature]
