Now we know whose side he is on (rich and powerful), no point arguing about it,
we now just all know who we need to vote for in the next election.
and lost my vote.
What's the point of private property if you can't keep it private. I agree with
the governor and the legislature %100 on this one.
Nepotism is thicker than stream water. Too bad.
The rich have our big game blocked from us for the most part. Now they want
our fish and rafting. Wonder how much they will want to charge us, to fish, and
raft in our public waters. When I was a kid, hunting with my family. It
was the way of the land, going through fences, to get after our game. Now you
get a ticket, or go to jail. I was born in Provo, a native, this is my
birthplace. It's sad to leave, because of the greedy few, that deprive the
many. One thing is for sure. When the greedy leave this world, the land
won't go with them, but their actions will, good luck with that.
If fishermen can't access streams on private land then why should ranchers be
allowed to graze cattle on public land, poluting the streams there with cattle
feces and detroying the native vegetation?
Waits until the last minute to "decide" on something so then there is less
publicity about it. This can't guy decide anything on his own! He has also lost
my vote! Go Caroon!
What a stupid piece of legislation. You can't leave the water? Is allowing
fisherman and boaters the ability to use the first few feet of riverbank really
such a huge imposition? This is an intimidating tactic intended to stop access
to these waters AT ALL, and the governor should be ashamed of himself for
signing such a piece of nonsense.
Howzabout I come and light a campfire on your front lawns and roast weenies?
Oh, you just think it's okay to go on someone elses propoerty, not yours?
That's what I thought.
Finally, someone that cares about private property owner's rights. I am not rich
or powerful, but I do own property. What is mine is mine and what is yours is
yours. Stay off mine!!!!
Anon @ 2:10, if my front lawn was maintained, stocked, and improved by your tax
dollars, then you'd be welcome to roast weenies on my doorstep.
Hey, no problem chris, just promise to keep your cattle off of my public land so
they quit destroying the public stream where I fish, and have the DWR put stream
barriers where our rivers enter and exit your land so our public paid for fish
stay in the public section of our state's streams and rivers.
Thanks Governor. My land that borders the Weber River deserves to be just as
private as someone's land that borders State Street or any street. Just because
I have a river on my property, should anyone, at any time, be allowed to
trespass? No, private property rights are the same.
So, is the Supreme Court a non-issue in Utah now? Its rulings no longer mean a
thing?This ruling hurts relationships between land owners and river
users. When are you Weber River owners near Rockport/Echo going to
finally clean up the rusted cars on the river? Actually, who cares. Since we
probably won't be able to access that river anymore.See what I mean?
But the water is public. Now we can't use it. Also, the easement defined is no
longer accessible.What is ours can't be used. Unanimous
Supreme Court overruled. Unbelievable.
Just became a Democrat.
Try putting up no trespassing signs and barricades on the sidewalk public
easement on your private property and see how long that lasts. That
is the same thing this law does to the rivers.
He just lost my vote! Money and power rule our country and state! Why do my Tax
dollars go to stock and reclimate these streams/ rivers that I dont have access
to. It's a shame! Only thing we can do is vote them out! HB 141 is a slap in the
face to the tax payer and The Utah Supreme Court
Utah is not getting more new rivers and streams every year...but the ones we do
have are being sold to developers and land owners at record pace. There will be
no where to go fishing in 10 years. There is nothing wrong with Idaho's approach
to public water that crosses private land....stay in the river to high water
mark and no problem. It should be the same in Utah!! Period!!
Last time I vote for a republican in this State.
Anglers for Peter Corroon!!
Archie Bunker Herbert looks out for his own. Go Coroon!
If you don't like this type of legislation then STOP electing the same people.
It is that simple.
What a joke, you have take my rights! Down with Governor Herbert!
A problem with this bill is that private lands that have been allowed public
access by agreements with the DWR can now be private and the public shut out if
it has been less than 10 years for that access.So, how do you all
feel about public money being used to fund private property? I think
I am going to be sick.
On Sunday July 25, 1847, one day after entering the Salt Lake Valley, Brigham
Young said:"There is to be no private ownership of streams of
water... Walk faithfully in the light of these laws and you will be a
prosperous people."Brigham Young certainly believed in private
property rights, but understood that Utah's streams are the lifeblood of the
community and should thereby be publicly owned, which is the way it has been
since then (whether the realtor who sold you your property understood this not).
The Utah Supreme Court will overturn this new bill at their first
opportunity, probably unanimously like the last time they considered this.So nice job, Herbert! You've made Utah's first governor roll over in
"I am signing HB141 because we need to begin the process of addressing the
unfortunate gulf between outdoor recreationists and private property owners."Good thinking, Governor Herbert. Because that's definitely what this
will do, and without signing this law that would never have been possible!This is the logic of the guy who's supposed to be running our state?!
Uhh let me get this straight...the governer believes supports taking national
public lands through emminent domain (OK) yet views stream access as a taking of
private land (not OK)?
...anyone to explain your statement back to you?Yes, the Governor
believes in private property rights, and also believes that the federal
government should have no rights in our state to lands, as the charter between
the federal and state government was never intended to to take state lands and
lock them up away from the state.In other words, he believes in
state property rights, keeping the feds out of our property, and private
property rights, keeping trespassers off of private property.It's
the same thing, yet you can't seem to wrap your head around it.
"In other words, he believes in state property rights, keeping the feds out of
our property"Sorry but "our" property belongs to the USA not the state of
Utah--wrap your brain around that.Giftid
As I understand Brigham Young, the Utah Constitution, and the Utah Supreme
Court, it's the private property owners who are trying to trespass on OUR public
Another trip to the courts. This has already been ruled on, why is
our Governor wasting the courts time? This legislature will go down
Property owners rights exceed recreational desires. If he didn't sign this bill
then no body would have a right to protect their property from trespass, not
even a homeowner.Recreation should respect the rights of property
owners. These visitors do not have the right to trespass or interfere with
farmers, ranchers, lively hood or other property. We already have problems with
hunters who cross property and kill a ranchers cattle and herd animals, for
fun.Recreationist who have no respect for others do not have my
respect either. Rivers do not start or end on private property and there are
many other places with public access for their use.To bring up the
issue of money is a blatant and outrageous excuse to violate ones property
rights. Some things just don't have a price, and individual rights and
protecting their property is one of them. It teaches other visitors to respect
our state as well and will have a positive affect on tourism and tourist. These property owners make their lively hood off their land, and having
fun does not have precedence.Approving this bill only reinforces
individuals rights and respecting others rights mean something.
this whole bill smells like dead fish....thanks gary, thanks to your family and
thanks to the special interests....guess I need to just float down the provo to
fish....but not stand on the bank.Corroon has my vote. Anglers for
Don't forget to VOTE, send him packing, along with his other Repub's who don't
care about the people of the state. VOTE HIM OUT!!!!!!!
It's already against the law to TRESPASS!!! It always has been...The Supreme
Court ruling never authorized people to trespass on private property. They only
allowed the public to use public water and recognized an easement that has
always been there when OUR public water crosses private land. Stay on that
easement in the stream and there should be no problem. If anglers are
trespassing across your field or yard to access the water...have them cited!!
Thats against the law and always has been!! Vote Herbert and all these clowns in
the legislature OUT!!
This has nothing to do with the private property rights of homeowners. Unless a
stream runs across their property (about 2% of landowners), and as the state
supreme court has said, the UTAH CONSTITUTION provided that part of their land
has always belonged to the public and could never have been sold to them in the
The arrogance is overwhelming. Corroon for governor!!!
The fishermen are incensed by this, you fishermen have no clue what this bill
will do. Your comments like "I'll never vote for a republican again" and "I was
a republican until today" are absolute stupidity. You lost the fight now, move
on a figure out a way to keep doing your sport and shut your weak mouths. I can
only assume they are weak because they got NOTHING done on this. Do you realize
that no one but you over-zealous fishermen and RICH retailers even cares about
this. Move on. Everyone else has. Just because you have the same 15 people
emailing talk shows and commenting on these boards doesn't mean that this is a
Here are a few tidbits of information regarding water rights. These come right
from law books in Utah.1st- UT uses an appropration system for water
rights. Under this doctrine, the right to use any water with the exception of
limited domestic use, is controlled by the state rather than by the landowner
adjacent to the water.There are two types of water rights, riparian and
littoral. Riparian rights refers to streams and rivers. This means: an
owner of land that border a non navigable waterway owns the land under the water
to the exact center of the waterway. Land adjoining navigable waters is owned to
the waters edge with the state holding title to the submerged land. Navigable
waters are considered public highways in which the public has an easment or
right to travel.Littoral rights refers to land that borders navigabe lakes
etc. Owners with littoral rights enjoy unrestricted use of waters but own the
land adjacent to the water only up th the mean high water mark. All land below
this point is owned by the government.I wish our current government would
learn our laws rather than change them for the benefit of the rich!
I'm a Republican but Gov. Herbert's logic is not logical. He said he would sign
the bill so "we could begin to address the gulf between recreationists and
landowners." So he signs a bill that takes away the access that recreationists
have had for a hundred years? Huh? That's like saying we should throw everyone
in jail until we can decide why some folks violate the law.Property owners
with a river on thier land are no different than landowners with any type of
public easement. Are my property rights being violated because I have a sidewalk
on my property? Or an irrigation ditch? Or a street or road? According to
Herbert they are. Obviously this is a political decision, not a logical one.
For the first time in a long time, I'm hoping a Republican (Herbert) looses the
upcoming election. Amazing.
The point I was trying to make is that landowners DO NOT OWN THE WATER. Under
any right. The water belongs to the people. I have every respect for personal
property rights but any piece of land that has a body of water on it comes with
an easement. Just as any piece of property comes with a utility and city
easment for sidewalks etc. That means the right to access such easment. PERIOD
Weak mouth? Few people?We'll see about that, deutsche bank.How do your hands smell and feel? Like you've had them in coins?People like you who think you can put a price on everything make me
sick.Herbie's a puppet.Vote for Corroon!!
Let just divert the water then to public property. Put up dams, and cut off any
water, that leads to private property.When the property is bought, they
can see that there is a river running through it.They did not buy the
water, do not let them have it.Also stop ranchers from using public
Salloius - Nice attack on anglers.Do you really think it's just a
handful?Weak mouth? Over-zealous? What is that?This is
an important issue.People who think everything has a price are
disgusting.You developers won this round with your money-grubbing,
nepotistic, governor-wanna-be. Why rub it in?Go run along and guard
your land from the weak-mouthed fisherman.VOTE CORROON
... I may be voting for Democrats this election!!
Time for a change to the one party monopoly of Utah politics. Utah Republicans
have got to be the most arrogant and aloof politicians in the country! Time to
remind them who is really in charge... THE PEOPLE!
More giveaway to special interests all the while shouting freedom and taking it
away. This governor needs to be sent packing along with anyone who voted for
this idiotic bill. signed, another FORMER republican.
Why is it that whenever there is something idiotic done in our legislature, mike
noels name is always attached to it? Who votes for this clown? Is Kanab that
devoid of brains? Is he the best you have? Little hint, next time it rains dont
look up, you might drown.