Man that would suck, only get to go there 3 times a year.That would be a bummer-O,-
Prison relocation duck clubs beware
Prison west of the lake on the north site will extend utilities into the area making development likely. Which will surely result into annexation by the city which could equal no more hunting even on private property.
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
I always assumed the ground out there was unstable and had a high water table, and that was the reason for no development up to this point. :?
I have wondered what will happen to the clubs, if anything.
I have wondered what will happen to the clubs, if anything.
If the land is determined and classified as wetland the state will have to delineate the acreage that they disturbed. Their is a whole host of permits the state will have to go through with the army corps. The legal challenges will also be interesting. I think it will be another legacy hwy again. Tie it up in court and let the lawyers make some money.
Here's a look at the exact areas they are considering:
http://www.sltrib.com/home/2835913-155/great-salt-lake-or-salt-lake
Seems to me they picked a very difficult and stupid spot for it. I would hope for the east locations farther from the lake.
http://www.sltrib.com/home/2835913-155/great-salt-lake-or-salt-lake
Seems to me they picked a very difficult and stupid spot for it. I would hope for the east locations farther from the lake.
It's official. Let the games begin.
The Utah Waterfowl Association and representatives of several clubs have been engaged on this issue for months. We have met with the relocation consultants, politicians, and representatives of other groups. No development would be ideal but unlikely in the long term. Putting the prison there will no doubt speed development far faster than anyone would like; however, we and others have been working towards a solution that will buffer the wetlands in the area. The Audubon Society, as a landowner in the area, has been heavily engaged as well. So have The Nature Conservancy and Friends of the GSL. We and the clubs have put in considerable effort on this and will continue to do so. The effort really extends back several years to when the Church owned the land and was planning a large development. We spent countless hours behind the scenes working on a conservation buffer at that time. The Church then sold the land. That effort was revitalized when it became apparent some months ago that this area was the front runner to get the prison. We will continue to push for thisbuffer and other protections.
Thanks for the work, a buffer is absolutely needed, around the entire lake really. Development isn't getting any better and areas important to the waterfowl and hunting need to be protected.The Utah Waterfowl Association and representatives of several clubs have been engaged on this issue for months. We have met with the relocation consultants, politicians, and representatives of other groups. No development would be ideal but unlikely in the long term. Putting the prison there will no doubt speed development far faster than anyone would like; however, we and others have been working towards a solution that will buffer the wetlands in the area. The Audubon Society, as a landowner in the area, has been heavily engaged as well. So have The Nature Conservancy and Friends of the GSL. We and the clubs have put in considerable effort on this and will continue to do so. The effort really extends back several years to when the Church owned the land and was planning a large development. We spent countless hours behind the scenes working on a conservation buffer at that time. The Church then sold the land. That effort was revitalized when it became apparent some months ago that this area was the front runner to get the prison. We will continue to push for thisbuffer and other protections.
When Politicians and big money guys see $$$$ in their eyes not much matters as far as the environment or outdoor activities go. Just look around and see the developments up the sides of the mountains, in what used to be marshlands along the lakeshore and in the resort and ski areas.
Let me add to this, it doesn't matter whether there is a (R) or (D) behind their name, they all bow to the $$$ someone is willing to put in front of them for their votes or political favors...When Politicians and big money guys see $$$$ in their eyes not much matters as far as the environment or outdoor activities go. Just look around and see the developments up the sides of the mountains, in what used to be marshlands along the lakeshore and in the resort and ski areas.
Unfortunately, that land is private. Utah legislature is big-time into private property rights and not at all into protecting our natural environmental resources. It's just the way it is. That area would have become a massive subdivision if the church would have continued along their plan. Either way, it was going to be bulldozed. It seems that the best we can hope for is mitigation along the lines of berms, buffer zones, low level lighting, sound barriers, etc. The legislature is elected by you and me...they make these decisions...it is not rocket science to figure out how to stop them from continually destroying our natural resources like our GSL wetlands---Its simple-VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE.
R
R
This quote from the article perfectly shows our states disregard the the thought that areas are worth more than development and cash sometimes. The east side is being looked at closer and I would hope they end up building it on the east portion that has been chosen. The fact the west portion is being looked at because it would make further development easier, is the last thing you want to hear.The west location is about 1.5 miles closer to the Great Salt Lake and is owned by members of the Pedroncelli family, who operate a winery in California's Sonoma Valley. On the plus side, extending utilities closer to the lake would make it easier to develop the rest of this area. But this more-remote site sits at a lower elevation, and that could be a big problem. Any construction below 4,217 feet could be covered in water if the lake rises in the coming decades. Parts of this site are at 4,215 feet, meaning crews would have to bring in enough fill - Nardi put the estimate at 2.2 million tons - to raise the site above the flood plain.
1 - 13 of 13 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.
Utah Wildlife Forum
A forum community dedicated to hunting and fishing enthusiasts in the Utah area. Come join the discussion about safety, gear, tackle, tips, tricks, optics, hunting, gunsmithing, reviews, reports, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Top Contributors this Month
View All
Vanilla
118 Replies
backcountry
118 Replies
johnnycake
89 Replies
Recommended Communities
