Let’s get involved

one4fishing said:

What our lake needs is more water. Not 500,000 people living on it.

Click to expand...

If that spoon was shot there in the 2021 season, you did incredible! That’s a banner shoot as far as im concerned for how last year went!

as for the rest of your post, if you’ve been following the news and the local hunting related news lately, it’s been made pretty obvious that those elected by the people, like the rest of the government, campaign with fake promises of public representation. In the end, no matter how many letters, emails, phone calls or actual conversations you have about a topic you are passionate about, their agenda is to look out for their best interest first. Not the people they are in office to represent. Look how things have been going with the GSL fight to save it. Sure we have small wins here and there, but every year, we lose more than we win. Doesn’t matter how many are involved.

I love utah lake. I’ve grown up on it. I dare bet I’ve spent more hours hunting, fishing and exploring that lake than anyone on this forum. In my highschool years, I think from October to January, I spent more time at the lake than I did in school. How I ended up graduating with honors is still a giant mystery to everyone who knows me, especially my mother. I’m very fearful of what will become of it in the future. Seems like every year the public is getting locked out of places more and more. There’s a lot of posted areas now that are established public access points or public lands. The developed man made islands, the bike path all the way around it and many other “great ideas” only put money in the pockets of those in charge and the rest of us get hosed again. The public never wins in these situations. I hope I’m wrong and smarter people who know how to fight these things get involved to stop this from happening. But I’m afraid it’ll be a 1 step forward 2 steps back scenario for everyone who isn’t benefiting from the private agenda of our representatives

I served on a committee organized by the DWR and Utah Lake commission about 10 years ago. It was an enjoyable and eye opening experience. The committee ultimately disbanded but I still hear regularly from the commission. The truth is that many stakeholders ARE trying to improve and increase access and opportunities for sportsmen and other recreationalists. Sometimes things don't work out and other times users are their own worst enemies and screw it up for the rest of us. (The Knolls) However, we had some success then in procuring/improving access and it looks like more secure access at Lincoln point is now assured. The point is that not all politicians or bureaucrats are out to get us at least regarding UL but O4F is right, involvement is important.

As the open letter states, basic parameters in water quality have improved over the past few years. There is still a ways to go, but it isn't as polluted as its reputation. That doesn't mean its perfect either, and money and effort towards better water quality is a good investment.

With regards to the island project, I think it is a horrible idea. However, opponents have an ace up their sleeve in preventing it. As long as the June sucker is endangered and in the lake, I don't see major environment altering activities like this island project seeing the light of day. June sucker recovery also has stimulated a lot of money to come in for the various cleanup efforts and habitat improvements. Yet, on fishing and hunting forums like this one, there is an endless stream of bellyaching and whining about the June sucker recovery program. Maybe it is time that we appreciate the effort, both as a vehicle to clean up the lake as well as a protection against idiotic development plans like the island project.

one4fishing said:

Moose,
I’m glad you chimed in. You’re kind of the Utah lake “guy” in my mind. I was hoping for a less pessimistic view and more rage though honestly.
I agree that we’ll probably be railroaded here but I can’t help but hope that maybe some kind of movement could be started to at least slow down this train coming our way.
Once this commission gets the powers they’re looking to gain there’ll be no stopping them. Then you might see me on the news like the hippies trying to fight the inland port.

Oh, and that bird was from 2020. That’s all dry this year. Kind of sad to see.

Click to expand...

There’s plenty of rage in me on this topic, don’t worry about that. My comment comes from 2 perspectives. 1. When has any form of the government done anything purely for the purpose of benefiting the people? They sell us a great story on every topic under the sun, then, if we are lucky, turn around and do something kind of like what they said they would do, but tweak it to benefit themselves or their buddies more than it does the public. The other perspective is 2. There are so many hoops they have to jump through to get these project proposals the funding to even get started. As much as I hate the june suckers and think saving them is a lost cause and a waste of money and time, they might be the reason that will prevent a lot of these proposals from ever getting any traction. It’s been made pretty clear that the feds, state and DWR will do anything they can to ‘help’ grow their numbers to a higher level. I know that fish was the reason they wouldn’t turn mudlake into a WMA. It also halted a few other ideas they had for the same area.

I just don’t see it happening in the big picture of things. But I’ve been wrong many times before. Regardless, I’ve sent my emails to those in charge and encourage everyone else to do the same.

I've been in contact with my Rep and Senator. They haven't expressed which way they are leaning. This is one of the issues that anyone in Utah County should be weighing in on. We either speak up for or against or our silence will be taken as For. I think HB 232 creates an entity which will be detrimental to the public and the Lake. A couple examples-

-Line 187 gives full authority of use to the proposed Lake Authority. There are other State agencies who could/would be supplanted thru such a sweeping measure. Such as the UDWR and their WMAs which are managed for both wildlife and recreation.
-Lines 166/167 supplants and replaces the Utah Lake Commission, established by interlocal agreement. Are we supplanting "Interlocal Agreements" with "Non-Local" management? Who stands to benefit from such control?
-Line 257/258 May sell.... dispose of any interest in real property. Do we want an "Authority" to be able to sell our State's real property?
There are many more concerning examples (such as the use of the word "May" found throughout the bill).

It really isn't that hard to send an email to our Reps and Senators voicing our feelings on the subject. You can make a difference, if you choose. Go here, click on where you live and email your Reps.

..

HB-240 is currently in a legislative committee being studied before sending it on to the legislature for a vote. It basically allows a new "Authority" to have the power to sell-off our sovereign lands around and UNDER the Utah Lake in order to create islands that will be huge housing developments. The scary part, besides watching our public lands get sold out from under us, is that if this goes though, it will be a working model to start selling off the sovereign lands of the GSL. That should be frightening to any waterfowler! While it may be true that most of our legislators are pro-development, I feel that there is also a good chance to stop this nonsense before it gets it's roots too far into public policy. It is now time to contact your representative (you can just google Utah legislative lookup to easily find your legislator). Send a very short text to him/her...it is easy and it may truly help steer the course of our wetlands in the future.
R

one4fishing said:

Catherder,
Thanks for your perspective and thanks for being involved.
I’m not sure the June Sucker will be enough to stop this. These guys claim they can eradicate phragmites, solve world hunger and guarantee open camping spots within 30 minutes of home, on the beach.

Click to expand...

Remember, that making claims on a prospectus is a lot different than proving claims under scrutiny and executing the plans. As for the ESA, remember, that ESA litigation would be settled in the Federal court system, so the "home court advantage" of Utah's avaricious and pro development politicians will be neutralized. The ESA (for both good and bad) has been potent in stopping both idiotic and useful development. I realize that for many conservatives, the ESA is not looked upon favorably. Be that as it may, sometimes conservation issues produce strange bedfellows.

I can also tell you that the current Utah Lake Commission, (not the proposed entity) is quite skeptical, as are a number of stakeholders. Now, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't fight this, but I don't think that smooth sailing is assured. I will post a couple more papers on it when I get home from work.

Obviously, we DO want to let our opinions known with our Reps. Thanks for starting the thread.