Posts: 66
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation:
0
This touches a little on my post earlier. Why can a cow stand in the weber in morgan and summit county and piss and crap. Does anybody see anything wrong with that. Is land ownership a ticket to treat the river anyway they want. I promise I wont take a dump in your river. Ill even put youre precious fish back mister farmer. I dont chase cows or eat hay. So what you problem. If you care so much about you river take care of it. And why doesnt the DWR require more standards there. We all fish and live down stream. How do you own a steam bed. In that case beware of were you anchor at strawberry or many lakes of that matter for you just might be anchored on sombodys old land. lol
Easment for all fisheries!
[signature]
Posts: 1,762
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2003
Reputation:
0
First off i dont think that a cow really would understand if you told it to stay out of the water, they are out under the sun all day long in a leather jacket, they stand in the water to cool off, also if the cow wants to turn his drinking water supply into his own restroom that is the cows provocative, the farmers want to keep you off of the water because to get to the water you are going to have to climb over a fence, i dont know if you have ever strung a fence but it is a lot of hard work to build a quality fence and one careless person that doesnt know how to climb a fence can ruin it completly. the farmers arnt worried about the fishes, they are more worried about their cows and calfs, their lively hoods, they would just as soon turn away all tresspassers beacause some of them may bring harm to the animals even if the fisher people have the best of intentions
[signature]
Posts: 66
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation:
0
I wouldnt leave it to the cow to decide. Sure It convenient, But so is dumping your motor oil in a river. Not all cows have access to rivers and they seem to get by. Im sure any land owner that granted access to their portion of a river would have no problem strumin up support for to manage fisherman dasterly fence distruction. I have access to several properties on the weber and stoddard. I see on a daily bassis the effects this has. The only possitive I can think of is they make a nice trail along the river.
[signature]
Posts: 296
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2003
Reputation:
0
I would like to meet a cow that knows how to read a sign that says, "No cows allowed on Weber..."[shocked]
[signature]
Posts: 66
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation:
0
I would like to meet a cow that can climb a fence!
We dont contain cattle with signs. silly
[signature]
Posts: 192
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation:
0
I also take issue with Utahs law about the property owner owning the stream bed. From what I understand the laws are different in other states. I belive that a person should be allowed to wade in a river through private land. Since he who has the gold makes the rules, and also owns a lot of riverfront property, I doubt we could ever change the law.
[signature]
Posts: 1,762
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2003
Reputation:
0
so are you saying that you would like to see the farmer build a fence on both sides of the river with a bridge over it so the cows can get to both sides therefor keeping from their water source so that the fish people can have unrstricted access to the river?
im sure that you dont want people comming into your work to play with all the neat things there, same goes for the farmer.
Its just one of those things where the best things are always just out of reach
[signature]
Posts: 1,013
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation:
0
The DWR has been working with land owners on the Weber to gain access to some private land along the river. Service projects install bridges ]ladders] over the fences to allow for foot traffic. So far it seems to be working. I talked to a property owner in this section last year and he was happy with the way anglers were treating his land. Little impact as far as garbage and fence damage was occurring where the ladders have been installed. After many years of careless people leaving their waist behind and breaking down fences some of the land owners are giving us a second chance. I hope that we will police after ourselves and turn in violators and do our part to make these land owners see that we are willing to cooperate with them in order to gain access to their land. It will take a long time to gain this trust back but it can work and other land owners will join in if it works.It is up to us folks, lets make it work!
[signature]
Posts: 227
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation:
0
Quite frankly, when I see all the garbage that is along the public sections of that river, I can't blame any landowner for locking up their property. I know it is the minority of anglers and we should police each other, but how many times have you actually seen someone polluting an area compared to the amount of garbage you actually see in a day's fishing?
[  ]Another thing is why is it that I almost always find an empty worm container closely associated with Keystone Light cans? Does drinking Keystone result in lower intelligence?[cool]
Posts: 192
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation:
0
I am not sure if it is drinking keystone or fishing with worms that does it.
[signature]
Posts: 1,002
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2002
Reputation:
0
I THINK ITS A MIX OF KEYSTONE AND THE INABILITY TO CATCH ANYTHING WITH A WORM....UNLESS.....MAYBE.....THEY ARE CATCHING KEYSTONE LIGHT CANS AND NOT GETTING ENOUGH TO MAKE A 12'ER OUT OF IT, SO THEY LEAVE EM TO ROT LIKE A CARP......SILLY IF THEY WOULD JUST USE POWERBAIT MAYBE THEY WOULD CATCH EM SOME BUDWISER OR SOMETHING......UNLESS THEY BOUGHT WORMS AT THE WRONG PLACE AND THEY COST SO MUCH ALL THEY COULD GET WAS THE 2 DOLLAR SIX PACK OF KEYSTONE....WHAT A HORRIBLE THOUGHT.....BEING FORCED TO BUY KEYSTONE CAUSE IT IS ALL YOU HAVE.......AAUUGGH.. THATS LIKE A BAD DREAM.
I DONT BLAME THE LAND OWNERS, BUT I THINK EVEN IF THEY CHARGED A DOLLAR JUST TO MAKE SURE YOU PACKED OUT YOUR OWN CRAP...ITS A DOLLAR WELL SPENT. OF COURSE THERE IS THAT WHOLE THING ABOUT ITS MINE AND NOT YOURS SO DEAL WITH IT KIND OF ATTITUDE....THOSE GUYS FRUSTRATE YOU..SURE...BUT YOU SHOULD SEE THE LOOK ON THEIR FACES WHEN YOU "FLOAT" BY ON THEIR RIVER, AND YOU CAN LAUGH IM NOT TOUCHING THE GROUUUUNNNDD....LIKE THE KIDS DO TO EACH OTHER...I AM HAPPY TO SAY I HAVE HAD THAT CONVERSATION...AND WON...WHEN THE FISH COP SIDED WITH ME AGAINSTS LAND OWNER...I FLOATED THROUGH SOME GUYS YARD ON THE PROVO.....GOING DOWN TO DEER CREEK.....IT WAS GRAND!
LATERS,
[signature]
Posts: 66
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation:
0
My point is they may own the river bed but they dont own the water in it. We do! I wonder what a farmer does to water his cows if he dont live on a river. Im a little shocked at the ignorance in many people at BFT.com. Oh its the land owners property so I guess Its his perogative. As land owners we have a responsibility to steward. Im sure from a DWR stand point. Private lands are great. Hunting or fishing. If you got a land owner who wants to hoard what he gots great. Just less they have to manage. 5 miles of non accessible river get few complaints about conditions. (cows rarly complain) As far a CWMU units what a great deal for the DWR. We'll do nothin and the land owner will take care of the rest. Exept we want 180 buck to process your application. Agian it the fish with all the clout (fish rarly complian) so we need to. Im not on my way out! Ive got atleast 50 more yrs of fishing. So lets quit being selfish and look for LONG term solutions. Im sure my boy would agree he has 70 yr of fishing left.
[signature]
Posts: 935
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2003
Reputation:
0
I agree that water quality problems from agriculture is a problem in Utah. However, you can go onto every National Forest and Bureau of Land Management piece of ground in Utah and see the exact same thing. I believe in personal property rights and if a guy owns the land he can pretty much do what he wants. When it happens on public land it's inexcusable. Who do you blame, the rancher who has a government issued grazing permit and is legally making a living or the public officials who are supposed to protect our natural resources and hold them in trust for all of us. I personally blame the Forest Service and BLM for not doing their job and protecting our streams. This is what we are paying them for. This is land that belongs to each and every one of us as U.S. citizens. It would be nice if there were still pristine trout streams around for my grandkids to fish. I'll stop my rant now.
Ticked Off, Kayote
[signature]
Posts: 1,428
Threads: 19
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
15
The DWR cannot do much in managing wildlife on private property...gaining access is about it. To complain about the job the DWR is doing on private land is pretty stupid...what else can they do? They can't tell landowners what they can or cannot do on their own land...do you want them to start managing the property your home is on because it exists in potential wildlife habitat?
[signature]
Posts: 296
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2003
Reputation:
0
[reply]I would like to meet a cow that can climb a fence!
We dont contain cattle with signs. silly[/reply]
I was being sarcastic, not silly because, cows... while you can't do anything about it because our hands are tied behind governmental red tape in accordance in agreement with those cattle ranchers on government lands... however they (cows) do stray unto some public lands as well as private lands. There are problems with cattle ripping up someone else's private property... can't do much to keep them out, short of fence and barbed wires... so they do encounter fences and barbed wires, they simply go around it into the stream or some river to access the other side... You see where I'm coming from with that joke about cows can't read... but they are smart to bypass any stupid signs whereas they are required to read...
What do you call a cattle with no legs?
Ground beef!
[signature]
Posts: 58
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation:
0
[font "Arial"][size 2]Fishing with worms does it? Let us all worship the mighty artificial only angler! All bow and repeat "bait is bad".[/size][/font]
[signature]
Posts: 2,011
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2003
Reputation:
0
IceRod: SO true in some places in Texas the land owner can own the land up to the historical stream bed but not the river bed itself. In other places states have purchases rights of the riverbed from the land owner.
[signature]
Posts: 574
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2003
Reputation:
0
I know for a fact that the DWR is buying up stream access in Utah. My dad owns some property in Duschene that he had title to the middle of the river. The DWR approached him about selling part of the land for fisherman access. He agreed and so did most other land owners in the area. I also fish a section of the Strawwbwrry River below Strawberry Res that the DWR aquired stream access to. But with their budget they can only do so much at a time.
John
[signature]
Posts: 66
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation:
0
There is a couple ducks and coots out in farmington that are stopping 2 million people from driving 2 miles west of I 15. The fish have the power for change. If I owned a factory on the weber then it would be ok to just spill my waste into the river? Dont factories have land owner rights? Its our water!
[signature]
Posts: 3,088
Threads: 22
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
13
"[size 1]My point is they may own the river bed but they dont own the water in it. We do!"[/size]
[size 1]Do you really own the water rights? Or does the farmer? I seriously dought that YOU, or WE (as fishermen) own the water.[/size]
[size 1]The DWR is always trying to get streamside easements. But that doesn't mean that they always get them. Landowners don't always want people on their land, and they don't necessarily want additional fencing put up to keep their cows from watering where, and when they want. What can the DWR do? Why, if a river or stream runs through the middle of your cow pasture would you want to use something different for watering?[/size]
[size 1]I hate cows on streams more than anyone. But, the fight is not with private land owners. The fight is with the BLM and Forest Service. We need to be pressuring these agencies to keep the cattle off OUR streams. Nothing is more aggrevating than seeing a sign that says "land of many uses" only to find out that it is actually "land of cattle use". I understand your gripe 100%. Cattle should not be allowed free access to streams. Limited access at certain spots would be a comfortable compromise. Once again, we need to focus the fight to something that is attainable...public lands. Not private. There isn't anything you can do with the private land.[/size]
[signature]
|
