With a little more background than a headline and a few words from a newspaper article, this issue is not nearly as cut and dry as some may think. Please understand I'm in favor of private property rights as much as anyone. Private property rights is the loudest and most effective drum to pound, so that's the angle it was played. But understand just as there are private rights there are public rights. The Utah constitution clearly identifies rivers and streams as public property, repeat PUBLIC, regardless if the water crosses private land or public land, the water is PUBLIC. That fact was never in question or disputed by either side, its understood, that's the way it is.
What was questioned was whether the PUBLIC should have access to PUBLIC water when it crosses private land. Again this is about the WATER only. No question what so ever about the land.
So a couple years ago a guy gets a ticket for trespassing while standing in public water (Weber River) that runs across private land. The guy fights it, and the issue goes all the way to the supreme court. The Utah supreme court looks at the case, looks at the constitution and rules UNANIMOUSLY that the public has a RIGHT to recreate in THEIR PUBLIC water. Mind you this is the Utah supreme court, arguably the most conservative court in the nation, that ruled unanimously that there is a public right to recreate in the public rivers and to do so they do have the right to touch the private streambed under the water.
So along comes two bills this legislative session, both to add some needed clarity to what the courts ruled as public rights. One bill was drafted with all parties at the table with open public meetings and a transparency you'd expect from elected officials. The other bill was drafted in secrecy with backroom deals and was backed by big $$$ from land owners. Money talks in politics and bill one failed and bill two passed. Not surprisingly tight to party lines.
Sad deal now. So we have the constitution that says this public right exists, and the supreme court who says this public right exists. But now we have a poor bill that contradicts and WILL ABSOLUTELY strike a legal battle to clarify what the legislature just muddied up. A legal battle that will cost all of us tax dollars.
There is a middle ground, its NOT this bill, and its NOT as simple as shouting private property rights.
