Utah Lake making a comeback

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Rawhide Kid Sevier County, UT
    March 5, 2012 10:17 a.m.

    it's great that Utah Lake is improving, but a bridge would be a disaster. They wouldn't allaw a bridge over Lake Tahoe. Don't be stupid Utah.

  • My2Cents Taylorsville, UT
    March 5, 2012 4:42 a.m.

    I too am against the bridge idea, it would devastate the lake and undo any attempts to make it usable for recreation or even living fish.

    In my youth my family would drive to Utah lake east side for picnic's and fishing or row boating that could be rented from shore line shops. There was a lot of small perch then and you could fish them by the bucket, and no fishing licenses were required. They came along in the 1950's to supplement government spending habits. Then the Saratoga Springs really wasn't associated with lake use, it's main attraction was swimming in public pools made of cement adjoining the lake front and picnicking among the trees around that corner of the lake.

    What are the plans with lake front property owners when the program gets deeper in to the reconstruction process? Will the lake front be declared state property and how much of the beach will get swallowed by RDA reclamation theft?

    Then if the state declares war on the US government for property rights and shut down all funding from the EPA and BLM how will Utah complete the cleanup and restoration process? Surely the state doesn't hope to keep getting funds from the Feds if they are banned from the state?

    I am for the restoration but what will it cost those families who bought the shoreline property for its aesthetic appearance? Once the government financial empire collapses Utah legislators should keep in mind the trillions of dollars Utah will lose in funding for everything they are spending. The carnage that lake has suffered will take 50 years to restore it to use for recreation.

  • BYU, Always #1 Saratoga Springs, UT
    March 4, 2012 10:59 p.m.

    I am not against a bridge because it does cut the time that cars are on Interstate 15 and that in turn reduces emissions. I"m pretty sure they have done a study and the conclusion was that the bridge would actually reduce pollution. I have a better Idea though... an underground tunnel. just like the huge ones in the New York area. that way everybody is happy, no ugly bridge and less traffic!

  • Canyontreker TAYLORSVILLE, UT
    March 4, 2012 8:24 p.m.

    The reason we want to restore the June Sucker is because it's on the endangered species list. This means we get free federal money to restore the lake, wink wink.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    March 4, 2012 6:27 p.m.

    If they really want a nice lake, they need to split it in two with a double causeway that goes from Provo Center street over to Pelican Point. Each causeway needs to have two lanes and the two causeways need to be a few hundred feet apart. Between the two causeways, they need to build a mound filled in with dirt extracted from the lake using dredging techniques.

    This will create two lakes, the North Lake and the South Lake and each one can be about 5 feet deeper than the water currently is. This would create nice clear blue water that everyone could enjoy. They would need three or four bridges that would allow easy access for boats between the lakes and they could create a couple good marinas out in the middle of the lake along those causeways.

    Environmentalists will hate this idea, but the lake would be better used than it is now.

  • Allen Salt Lake valley, UT
    March 4, 2012 3:28 p.m.

    As I understand the situation with the suckers, the biologists are focusing on the suckers because they are native to the area, while the carp are imported. I go running along the Jordan River Parkway in southern SL county, and everywhere I look I see bushes with red ribbons tied to them. I asked a man who was cleaning out dead bushes, and he said the county will be spraying bushes to remove those that aren't native. The red ribbons are tied to the bushes that are native so they won't be sprayed. Suckers have no value as a game fish, but they have one advantage: they are native to the lake.

  • Max Charlotte, NC
    March 4, 2012 3:08 p.m.

    If the west side of the lake keeps increasing in population, a bridge is inevitable. Many lakes and bays have bridges. The San Francisco Bay has several and it doesn't hurt the view at all. The Florida Keys are connected by bridges. Bridges can be a good thing.

  • WillTheWolf SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    March 4, 2012 2:46 p.m.

    Just say "NO" to any bridge across Utah Lake. That would pretty much ruin the scenery of the lake and would only benefit those property owners on the west side of the lake at the expense of the entire population of the state. The few should not benefit financially from the sacrifice of the many.

  • What in Tucket? Provo, UT
    March 4, 2012 2:19 p.m.

    Carp is a fine edible fish, but needs grain for a couple weeks. They can be used as dog and cat food, but people like them too. Absolutely net them out on a regular basis. You won't eliminate them, but they can be significantly reduced. I sort of liked the idea of a bridge, but I see many do not.

  • Veracity Morgan, UT
    March 4, 2012 10:46 a.m.

    Humm...it sounds like a bridge to "no-where" is not wanted...

  • H2OSKI Alpine, UT
    March 4, 2012 10:16 a.m.

    Our family uses Utah lake almost every Saturday all summer long for boating.

    I guess I don't understand why we want the June Sucker back? It really does not sound much different than carp. Maybe someone could enlighten me on the benefits of the June Sucker (other than the simple fact it is endangered). If you told me mosquitoes were endangered I would say good...maybe it is the same with this sucker.

    What is going to be the advertising moniker for the lake "come ski/swim with the suckers"! Not to enticing.

    I wish they would double the speed of unloading the carp though.

  • USAlover Salt Lake City, UT
    March 4, 2012 10:04 a.m.

    When it come to pollution control, I think it's hilarious we're worried about carp stirring up organic sediment but excited about building a bridge across the lake and developing the shoreline.

  • USAlover Salt Lake City, UT
    March 4, 2012 10:02 a.m.

    "Call some place 'Paradise"....kiss it goodbye" - Don Henley, The Eagles

    How come every good place needs to be developed? Answer: Mulah!

  • scotchipman Lehi, UT
    March 4, 2012 9:49 a.m.

    The proposed bridge location does little to save time or increase access with the now finished Pioneer Crossing! If a bridge is built it needs to go from Pelican Point to Center Street in Provo which will save significant time for current and future residents on the west side of the lake.

    The lake has amazing potential as a water sports destination. The government needs to work with established groups like the Utah Water Ski Club that has been around since 1976. The Utah Water Ski Club has tried without success to increased access and develop permanent places for water skiing that can be used in low water years without success.

  • Razzle2 Bluffdale, UT
    March 4, 2012 9:26 a.m.

    Look at Washington Lake. When Mercer Island and Bellevue thrived, we built floating bridges over it's shallow lake with soft bottom. The first bridge seemed like a environmental success with the additional water parks, canoe trails, etc.

    Now, there are three expensive floating bridges with traffic gridlock, high tolls, high maintenance, and a terrible disaster in 1990.

    A bridge may be good, but I caution, too much of a good thing may quickly go sour.

  • Allen Salt Lake valley, UT
    March 4, 2012 8:07 a.m.

    I live in the SL valley not Utah valley, so I have no economic or other interests in the lake or a bridge across the lake. I am concerned, though, about an increase of pollutants from automobiles falling into the lake from a bridge. I would be interested to hear the pros and cons about all effects of a bridge on the lake.

  • xert Santa Monica, CA
    March 4, 2012 7:46 a.m.

    I want that brown water and my June Suckers left alone! Just because it doesn't taste good and makes the water brown wherever it goes doesn't make it any lesser than any other of Gods creatures. Heck, human beings don't taste very good and look at what our bathtubs look like when we get out of them! June Suckers just need a better name. Let's start calling them May French Kissers.

  • donburi South Jordan, UT
    March 3, 2012 11:30 p.m.

    Build the bridge. It isn't just for the current west side residents. It's also for future expansion, which won't happen as quick without the bridge. Provo/Orem is running out of space, so west side development is needed.

    What is the benefit of the June sucker? Quit spending money trying to save it. Made efforts to allow trout to thrive instead.

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    March 3, 2012 7:53 p.m.

    Organic material from all the surrounding canyons have emptied into the lake for thousands of years. Old timers will tell you the algae bloom has always been there in the summer. The shallow lake will never be pristine.

    With all the chemicals from auto traffic emptying into it from a bridge, we will wish the carp were back.

    Get it as clean as we can and don't let developers mess it up again.

  • Theeng2 Holladay, UT
    March 3, 2012 7:46 p.m.

    Both Utah Lake and Great Salt Lake have a lot of unused potential. It would be nice if they could figure out how to make both lakes more inviting to locals. The old Saltair was amazing.

  • BigSkies Issaquah, WA
    March 3, 2012 6:03 p.m.

    Those who decry the prospect of putting a bridge across the lake are maddening. You want all the improvements (carp removal, shoreline reclaimed, Geneva removed, etc.), but to heck with a bridge that will benefit untold others. Your selfish, bleeding heart environmentalist stance makes me sick.

  • DEW Cougars Sandy, UT
    March 3, 2012 3:20 p.m.

    would it make sense to put a bridge across the Bear Lake and you will ruin the beauty. NO BRIDGE please1

  • Timp South Jordan, UT
    March 3, 2012 2:19 p.m.

    Another one hoping there is no bridge.

    Also, it is a very underrated pure waterskiing lake. Great calm water and relatively warm. Since it's shallow it can get bumpy quick if the winds pick up but overall is very underrated.. Though when we want to get more than just skiing out of the boating experience, we usually go to Deer Creek or elsewhere.

  • Dave D Pocatello, ID
    March 3, 2012 2:02 p.m.

    This is a great piece. I am so happy that Utah Lake has come this far. Please don't ruin the progress by building a bridge across the lake. Think of the environmental and aesthetic considerations, please! People who live in new developments along the West side of the lake knew what they were getting into when they moved there.

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    March 3, 2012 1:41 p.m.

    Oh, for George's sake, don't built a bleedin' *bridge* across the lake. You want to revive the lake as an aesthetic and natural resource, and then you build a commuter bridge across it? FAIL.

  • Orem Parent Orem, UT
    March 3, 2012 1:26 p.m.

    We are out there all summer long. It is a great lake for waterskiing. It is big enough that it isn't choppy from other boats and you can get out to where you don't have to worry about some drunk crashing into you like on Deer Creek. I'd love to see all of the carp gone but I would hate to see a bridge go across the lake. It isn't necessary.