This was bad news to receive last night. Very unfortunate. However, the fight goes on! A very different strategy moving forward, most likely. Navigability will make folks upset!
Utah Supreme Court ruling on PWAA challenge
The Utah Stream Access Coalition sent out some bad news this morning.
Utah Supreme Court Decision Update - Utah Stream Access Coalition
Utah Supreme Court Decision Update - Utah Stream Access Coalition
Utah Supreme Court Allows Public Waters Access Act to Stand
Yesterday, the Utah Supreme Court issued a decision ending a thirteen-year effort by the Utah Stream Access Coalition to overturn the Public Waters Access Act of 2010 (the “PWAA”) and restore public access to Utah’s non-navigable rivers and streams.
The Court ruled that the public’s access to these waterways, which the PWAA took away, is not rooted in or protected by the Utah State Constitution. Accordingly, the PWAA will stand.
While we are disappointed in the decision, we remain steadfast and measured in our mission. The decision ends only one of several avenues by which we aim to restore public access to Utah’s rivers and streams. See our press release we distributed yesterday.
We will continue our efforts to have the State identify navigable streams and declare them open to public recreational use, as it did successfully on the upper Weber River in 2017. We will continue to advocate for the repeal and/or amendment of the PWAA, which, contrary to its name, restricts the public’s ability to recreate on over 2,700 miles of non-navigable rivers and streams within the state that comprise some 43% of Utah’s fishable waterways.
We strongly encourage all USAC members, and members of the public who are troubled by this turn of events, to contact their Utah State Legislators (Representative and Senator) to explain what the loss of public recreational access to Utah’s public natural resources means to them, and to voice their disapproval of the wholesale privatization of such public natural resources, as made possible the PWAA.
You can easily find the name, address and telephone numbers of your Legislators by entering your address in the Utah Legislature’s Who represents me? – Legislative Map webpage. Please let your voice be heard.
Stay tuned for more information. Thank you, as always, for your continued support.
Sincerely,
Board of Directors
Utah Stream Access Coalition
[email protected]
www.utahstreamaccess.org
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
I think I understand and agree with what you mean but could clarify that last bit? Just want to make sure I'm getting it right.Navigability will make folks upset!
Yep, and it will be more expensive too. (Reminder to self to send a donation in.)However, the fight goes on! A very different strategy moving forward, most likely. Navigability will make folks upset!
BC,
Basically, the strategy now is to declare (through litigation) parcels of river navigable where we can, one by one in a piecemeal manner. Besides being expensive for all, the potential exists for the landowner to be more displeased with the eventual outcome than would be a negotiated settlement.
Thx, Catheter. I was in line with that but my misreading of a post yesterday has me being extra cautious.
Not an ideal situation for anyone.
Not an ideal situation for anyone.
I think the landowners and the Republican Party have pretty much spoken, and the word is "NO TRESPASSING". There is NO room for negotiations, NOTHING landowners will give up, NO mister nice guys.
If you guys know of or have a better, or even alternative road to allow access other than through the "Navigable water" route, I'd like to hear it. Could you name one proposal or idea, no matter how small , that the major corporate and large individual land owners might entertain, let's hear it.
These people control the state. They control the legislature, the courts and the Governors office. Just one call, that's all it takes to shut down any investigation by any state bureaucracy or department into expanding the "Navigable Waters List" here in Utah.
Only thought the force of law will there be any change.
If you guys know of or have a better, or even alternative road to allow access other than through the "Navigable water" route, I'd like to hear it. Could you name one proposal or idea, no matter how small , that the major corporate and large individual land owners might entertain, let's hear it.
These people control the state. They control the legislature, the courts and the Governors office. Just one call, that's all it takes to shut down any investigation by any state bureaucracy or department into expanding the "Navigable Waters List" here in Utah.
Only thought the force of law will there be any change.
Aside from lawsuits on bodies of water (many are sure fire navigable, with many others likely navigable), there is always the very unlikely option to convince the legislature to change the law.
Expanding the walk-in access program is something we tried a decade ago. I think it’s still a nice win-win for everyone involved if everyone wants to play nice and come to a good resolution outside the legislature or courts.
Expanding the walk-in access program is something we tried a decade ago. I think it’s still a nice win-win for everyone involved if everyone wants to play nice and come to a good resolution outside the legislature or courts.
Having the legislature specify which rivers/streams are navigable would solve this, right? I believe that's been discussed before. Is that a possibility, or is the legislature too deep in private pockets?
The legislature certainly could do that. I’m guessing that they will not, however. The lawsuits that would happen immediately if the legislature passed a statute saying what specific waters were navigable would be undesirable. I think they will try to hide behind the courts entirely on this one.
I'm willing to wager that this will end up in the US Supreme Court.
Colorado is going through a similar problem. For years now you couldn't wade a stream to fish it or anything else if it went through private property. Technically you were trespassing if you fell off of a raft and touched the ground under the water.
I just read about this law suit that is going on right now to allow access.
Colorado is going through a similar problem. For years now you couldn't wade a stream to fish it or anything else if it went through private property. Technically you were trespassing if you fell off of a raft and touched the ground under the water.
I just read about this law suit that is going on right now to allow access.
Utah’s case is definitely not going to the SCOTUS.
I seriously doubt SCOTUS would take it if they tried.
I seriously doubt SCOTUS would take it if they tried.
You don't think so? Issues around public access and navigable waters are grounded in federal law, so it seems it would fall under their jurisdiction to issue a ruling. At least forcing states to define navigability would be a step in one direction or the other.
Vanilla can correct me but I don't think there is a clear conflict between what Utah is doing and federal law or precedent this point. And SCOTUS has discretion beyond that to choose cases and with the current structure it's not likely they are in favor of flexing federal muscle to override a state's choices regarding resource access. The current zeitgeist of the court just doesn't align with that approach.
I don’t think the SCOTUS is interested in taking one of its precious few cases taken to resolve whether an Utah statute violates the Utah constitution. Usually you need a much more broad issue of federal relevance to even get them to consider granting cert. I would be shocked if it was heard by the SCOTUS.You don't think so? Issues around public access and navigable waters are grounded in federal law, so it seems it would fall under their jurisdiction to issue a ruling. At least forcing states to define navigability would be a step in one direction or the other.
I'm sure you're right, but.... rather than just focus on the Utah case, there are multiple states here with laws that poorly apply a federal statute. Both Utah and Colorado (and maybe others, I don't know enough about how other states deal with navigability) have refused to define navigable waters to the detriment of public access. As opposed to Idaho, which has fairly clearly defined navigability. I'm no lawyer, but could there be a way to get the SCOTUS to force the states to define navigability?
If you’re talking federal navigability, we already have that definition. That has been litigated and defined in federal courts and was the basis for the Weber River ruling a few years ago stating the section in question was navigable.
We don’t really need a definition, we need determinations. I assume the state is hesitant to do this at risk of being sued over and over again. Once a water way is termed federally navigable, the bed of the stream may not be privately owned. Under federal law it is public property to be held in the public trust. If the state makes a list of navigable waters, the owners that have believed up until that time they owned the stream bed will lose title to those beds. I’m certainly not saying this should not happen, as I think it should. Just articulating what may be on giant concern for the powers that be in doing so.
That’s why I said I think the state will hide behind the courts. Let lawsuits declare navigability and the courts will be the ones to decide. Long, expensive, wasteful process, for sure.
We don’t really need a definition, we need determinations. I assume the state is hesitant to do this at risk of being sued over and over again. Once a water way is termed federally navigable, the bed of the stream may not be privately owned. Under federal law it is public property to be held in the public trust. If the state makes a list of navigable waters, the owners that have believed up until that time they owned the stream bed will lose title to those beds. I’m certainly not saying this should not happen, as I think it should. Just articulating what may be on giant concern for the powers that be in doing so.
That’s why I said I think the state will hide behind the courts. Let lawsuits declare navigability and the courts will be the ones to decide. Long, expensive, wasteful process, for sure.
And herein lies the rub.....If the state makes a list of navigable waters, the owners that have believed up until that time they owned the stream bed will lose title to those beds. I’m certainly not saying this should not happen, as I think it should. Just articulating what may be on giant concern for the powers that be in doing so.
That’s why I said I think the state will hide behind the courts. Let lawsuits declare navigability and the courts will be the ones to decide. Long, expensive, wasteful process, for sure.
State to tap rainy day funds for continued flood relief, Cox says
Utah Gov. Spencer Cox asked the Legislature for $5 million in funds for flood mitigation last October.
Private land owners directly, or indirectly benefiting from public tax dollars to mitigate flood impacts/damage while still not allowing public access. "Let them eat cake."
Absolutely true, Daisy. This has been an issue for a long, long time. They want public money to mitigate, and then want to exclude the public.
Fair enough. Reword my previous statement like this:If you’re talking federal navigability, we already have that definition. That has been litigated and defined in federal courts and was the basis for the Weber River ruling a few years ago stating the section in question was navigable.
We don’t really need a definition, we need determinations.
could there be a way to get the SCOTUS to force the states to set determinations for navigable rivers/streams?
Unfortunate news out of Colorado that's inline with this issue:
coloradosun.com
I don't know the legal details of this particular case but it seems another blow to accessing waterways.
Colorado Supreme Court ends long river access dispute by ruling fisherman has no standing in right-to-wade argument
The Colorado Supreme Court ruled an angler has no standing to sue for river access by arguing the state's rivers were navigable at statehood
coloradosun.com
I don't know the legal details of this particular case but it seems another blow to accessing waterways.
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
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
132 Replies
backcountry
129 Replies
johnnycake
116 Replies
Recommended Communities
