My understanding is that public access to waters does not permit walking on the
private land over which the water flows. So if someone can fish from a canoe or
other watercraft with no more than occasional, incidental contact with the
private land beneath the water, fair game. But they don't get to turn
every seasonal run off into a wet sidewalk.Rather than funding
lawyers to win such limited access to what few stretches of water in Utah are
truly "navigable", the urban, welfare fishermen would be bettwe off
asking the legislature to raise the price of fishing licenses and imposing a
sales tax on fishing equipment and then using the proceeds to pay fair market
value for full and usable access to those areas most desired for fishing.
Eminent domain, with just compensation might be appropriate in some cases.Simply coveting what rural landowners--whether wealthy or of more modest
means--have purchased, and taking it without compensation is not just.
Awesome. A huge win for the public and the outdoorsmen. Sorry 1%, you don't
get to own our rivers.
Big win for the public!Waterways and beachfronts should all be
A blow to the 1% and a victory to the general public.
It is the people's waters.