Let’s get involved

4485 Views 62 Replies 16 Participants Last post by one4fishing, 10 mo ago

one4fishing

Discussion Starter · Jan 11, 2022

www.fox13now.com

Utah Lake's future the focus of summit

The health and future of Utah Lake is the focus of a summit, bringing scientists and policy makers together.

www.fox13now.com

41 - 60 of 63 Posts

Vanilla

· #41 · Feb 7, 2022

MooseMeat said:
Phrag isn’t as big of an enemy to waterfowl or hunters on that lake as they want everyone to believe. It isn’t choking out the feed for birds like it does on other water bodies. Birds use it for refuge from the elements and hunters. It also creates incredible hunting pockets of you are willing to work to get to them. I’d be sad to see it disappear. I think others would too once they saw the impact it would have. And those island wont improve hunting opportunities for anyone. It’ll restrict hunting opportunities even more.

I’m aware of the opportunities phrag presents for hunting, but phrag is bad, no matter how you slice it. Phrag needs to be eliminated for about 57 different reasons. Even if that means people’s hiding spots from birds are reduced.

I don’t know that I ever stated that islands would increase hunting opportunities, and I think I’ve been MORE than clear that I don’t believe the claims made by the developer are possible. Not sure what else I can say more.

middlefork

· #42 · Feb 7, 2022

I want to say that the last time I recreated around or on Utah Lake was oh .....maybe 60 years ago.
But the only possible way I could support the idea of dredging if any island created was a designated green space. Any development would be a hands down no. Everything I've read about it amounts to trying to justify the expense by development.

And just for fun Utah Lake is a tributary to the GS not to mention aquifers to the west and south.

MooseMeat

· #43 · Feb 7, 2022 (Edited)

Vanilla said:
The islands for bird nesting, refuges, and general habitat could be really cool and in theory could really increase fishing and hunting opportunities.

maybe im misunderstanding what you’re trying to say here then…

ain’t no way they are going to allow any kind of hunting anywhere near those islands. I can even see the layout boat guys being told to get phucked hunting near them. It’ll just be another city refuge the birds (mostly geese) will use to stay safe, adding to the city goose problems we have right now.

the bike path around the lake is another terrible idea. We don’t need it. It’ll create way more problems than it will solve. It’ll shut down hunting in many places it’s currently allowed. Much of the land they would use is, DWR, blm and state. Then there’s the private land issue that many will throw their lawyers at, creating more road blocks. The places we could still hunt, would be one good duck beat down witnessing away from the bunny humpers rioting over to end that from happening ever again. That would be a huge mess.

either way, phrag isn’t the worst thing to happen to utah lake. It doesn’t do well in deeper water and the ice shreds it at year end on low water years and when the water gets high again, the old root systems don’t take off like they do on the GSL for instance, where the fresh water levels stay relatively the same all year, every year. The south end of utah lake is a great example of what I’m describing. There is (was) phrag right now, where a year from now (hopefully) will be nothing but open water. The larger cattail areas haven’t been over grown by it for as long as I’ve been there (25+ years). I firmly believe phrag on the lake is hated as bad as it is because it makes the carp removal process impossible. And that’s a whole other issue. I don’t care what they say on the progress they’ve made on carp eradication from that pond. They haven’t even made a dent in the numbers.

See less See more

Reactions: 1

Vanilla

· #44 · Feb 7, 2022

I don’t mean increased hunting opportunities on the islands themselves (which would have residents on them) but in general.

A healthier ecosystem, in theory, equals more birds, animals and fish. More birds, animals and fish…in theory, equal more hunting and fishing opportunities.

All in theory, because I don’t think they can do what they claim, and won’t get the approval to try. The second part of that mostly because I’m banking on people being willing to comment where it actually counts as freely as they do on this forum. Scary assumption, I know.

Reactions: 1

MooseMeat

· #45 · Feb 7, 2022

Gotcha.

there’s not much other hunting on the lake aside from waterfowl, maybe pheasants on the shoreline. Ducks are literally here one day, gone the next. Our resident birds that actually live on the lake is very small compared to what migrates through the rest of the year. Hunting and waterfowl benefits from the islands? I see zero impact personally. Even with the supposed ecological improvements the islands might have, that won’t be a deciding factor on birds choosing to stay at or leave the lake. Water level is what is #1 on the priority list when it comes to attraction and retention for waterfowl. Hunting opportunity will naturally follow that trend. Fishing I could see improving over time with the project, but I have zero care about that topic and no dogs in that fight.

But I do agree 100% on your opinion on the matter. It’s got a snowballs chance in he11 at happening. But, the fact the discussion has made it even this far with the people in charge is very scary for what might be headed down the pipe in the future.

See less See more

Packout

· #46 · Feb 7, 2022

Back in the 1990s there was a push at the County level to dredge the lake and put the sediment in the middle to create an island which would have been used as a park and was to remain public. The cost of the dredging was estimated at $18-20 million and would have increased the depth by 4-10 feet. I thought it was a good idea and would still support something like that, although the cost has probably increased 20 times.... The idea of cleaning up the Lake has been around for decades. The current proposal is a mess.

Reactions: 2

MWScott72

· #47 · Feb 7, 2022

Never in my life has increased development equaled more hunting opportunity. On the contrary, it has ALWAYS been less.

one4fishing

Discussion Starter · #48 · Feb 8, 2022

Sooo… We’re not the only ones talking about this.
Good

www.fox13now.com

Demonstrators rally at Capitol Hill to protest plans for Utah Lake restoration project

Hundreds of people stood on the steps of Utah’s Capitol Hill on Monday to rally against dredging Utah Lake and creating islands and development around it.

www.fox13now.com

I meant to make it to the capitol for this but thought it was tomorrow.

one4fishing

Discussion Starter · #49 · Feb 8, 2022

Here’s a more critical look

Artificial islands as real estate? The murky finances behind the Utah Lake Restoration Project

Documents obtained by The Salt Lake Tribune shed some light on the Utah Lake Restoration Project’s murky financing.

www.sltrib.com

There’s whispers of a municipality helping to back this hair-brained scheme. Any citizens of Vinyard here? Go to you council meetings and be heard.

Vanilla

· #50 · Feb 17, 2022

This group pushing this initiative just comes across so shady!

Listened to a radio ad on my way home and “Mike” who has been boating in Utah Lake since he was 4 years old claims nobody will launch their boat there anymore and nobody will swim there. This is why we have to clean it up.

I challenge him to sit on the corner of my street and count boats headed to the lake each day here in a few months. I don’t have a boat but my family recreates often on the lake with kayaks, swimming, etc. If you have to lie to convince people of your position, then your position is wrong.

Reactions: 2

one4fishing

Discussion Starter · #51 · Feb 17, 2022

I heard that ad yesterday morning and got all worked up again.
We have to shuttle into the job and all the guys in the van w/ me were like WTF? Who shat in your Cheerios? Most of them are from Utah county and are very much against building islands on the lake.
It’s funny, I read something that someone from the “restoration”(development) company said. He was complaining about how his project was being brought to light by nothing but negative opinions and neigh sayers. And then here they are pushing lies on us with expensive ad campaigns.

I seen on Fakebook that HB232 was brought in front of committee today. Anybody hear how that went?

MooseMeat

· #52 · Feb 17, 2022

Vanilla said:
This group pushing this initiative just comes across so shady!

Listened to a radio ad on my way home and “Mike” who has been boating in Utah Lake since he was 4 years old claims nobody will launch their boat there anymore and nobody will swim there. This is why we have to clean it up.

I challenge him to sit on the corner of my street and count boats headed to the lake each day here in a few months. I don’t have a boat but my family recreates often on the lake with kayaks, swimming, etc. If you have to lie to convince people of your position, then your position is wrong.

Not just in the summer months. Go look at mill race any day of the week from October to January. The lake gets recreated every day by all user types. “Mike” is a lying dirtbag!

Reactions: 2

altarip55

· #53 · Mar 4, 2022

MrShane said:
You ever seen Lake of The Woods on the Canadian border?
Are you sure this is such a bad thing?
If UL was dredged to 30’ and 40 lb. Stripers accidentally grew in there I don’t think it would hurt my feelings much.

Yup, spent a lot of time on Lake of the Woods and I have no idea what you mean. There are a lot of islands but nothing else is even remotely the same.

one4fishing

Discussion Starter · #54 · Mar 4, 2022

I seen on FB that HB 232 was passed. What a shame. If this commission is anything like The Inland Port well….. here come the dozers.

lifesshort

· #55 · Mar 4, 2022

Vanilla said:
Fair question. I’m talking about their claims to dredge it fully, making it a deeper, cooler, cleaner lake that could support native species again like the cutthroat. The islands for bird nesting, refuges, and general habitat could be really cool and in theory could really increase fishing and hunting opportunities. And as you said, phrag eradication would be incredible!

Now these are all their claims, and again, I don’t believe personally that they could pull all this off, so overall am against the project. But in my hypothetical where they are able to do it, I’d be all for it.

If everything they claimed to be able to do is true. They should be willing to post a bond with the state for enough money to return the lake back to the condition it is before they start. A deeper lake does not help with algae blooms. Reducing excess nutrients does. If the dredging does not accomplish everything they claim they should have the money set aside to return the lake to what it is now. If they believe all they say is true this should be no problem for them. The following was posted on another forum. Read this study and decide if all the dredgers claims are true or not.
Fishing Forum

rjefre

· #56 · Mar 16, 2022

FYI-- When this bill went to the senate for a vote, there was an amendment offered that would protect wetlands in certain areas of Utah Lake. The amendment was voted down and the bill was passed without the requested wetland protections. We get what we vote for. Yay us!
R

one4fishing

Discussion Starter · #57 · Mar 30, 2022

Man, I’ve tried to get over this and move on. It seems set in stone to me after 232 passed. I can’t help but get pissed off though every time I learn more.
Here’s a page contesting a lot of the b.s. LRS spews. Click on the link to see the fundraising brochure they’ve put out, that says even if they do zero reclamation phase 1 will still provide returns to billionaire investors.

Fundraising materials show primary objective of islands is for revenue generation, not restoration | Conserve Utah Valley

conserveutahvalley.org

conserveutahvalley.org

See less See more

DallanC

· #58 · 10 mo ago

The proposal is dead.

Utah Lake proposed dredging plan stopped in its tracks

-DallanC

Catherder

· #59 · 10 mo ago

DallanC said:
The proposal is dead.

Utah Lake proposed dredging plan stopped in its tracks

-DallanC

Nice! Although bad ideas where dollar signs and avarice are involved tend to have more lives than an alley cat.

The spokesperson mentioned the project presented significant legal challenges. I do bet the June Sucker/ESA was one. (thank you Junies) I also wonder if the legal questions pointed out by Nilla earlier about lake bed ownership and navigability also shot this thing down?

Vanilla

· #60 · 10 mo ago

Catherder said:
I also wonder if the legal questions pointed out by Nilla earlier about lake bed ownership and navigability also shot this thing down?

This is exactly what they’re talking about. When they mention “unconstitutional” and “public trust” they are referring to that question I raised. Which is interesting to me, I’m not a water law expert and that is the first thing I thought of when I heard about this. I would think those experts involved should have raised that question a lot earlier. I guess all those days in the stream access fights weren’t a waste of time! #LongliveUSAC #UtahWaterguardians

kutv.com

Utah Lake islands plan 'unconstitutional' and legally unsound, official tells lawmakers

KUTV CBS 2 provides local news, weather forecasts, traffic updates, notices of events and items of interest in the community, sports and entertainment programming for Salt Lake City and nearby towns and communities in the Great Salt Lake area, including Jordan Meadows, Millcreek, Murray...

kutv.com

Reactions: 2

41 - 60 of 63 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.