This is one that fascinates me, actually. Let's just assume, for the sake of argument, this company could actually do all the things they claim they can do. (For the record, I don't think they can...but for sake of this post, we're assuming they can.) I would actually be in favor of this proposal. Yes, it would change the dynamic of the lake, but with the positives it would bring, that change would be welcomed by me in a big way.
Now, back to reality. I don't think they can do what they claim they can, and therefore, believe this plan should be opposed. It is troubling the lengths that the legislature has gone to clear the way for this. Aside from the environmental issues involved, I think they would receive legal challenges based upon the navigable nature of Utah Lake. I do not believe the state can divest ownership of the beds, or even portions of beds, of navigable waters.
