new stream access bill

[onpoint]

PLWA sent out an email today concerning a hearing on SB 405 (tomorrow), sponsored by Anders Blewett (D), introduced 3/12/11. This bill if passed as is, will allow portage around obstacles ABOVE THE HIGH WATER MARK. Many of us have vehemently protested HB 309, stating that we do not now have, nor want access to private land abutting waterways more than we already have. Now this Blewett character is pushing this questionable bill -expanding stream access language - at the same time we are asking a bunch, already hostile to stream access, to not alter our stream access law as it is. PLWA requested that we flood the legislative hotline with call to legislators asking that they consider HB309 on it's own, not making any connection between HB 309 and this bill, SB 405. Like has been stted over and over - neither party has a corner on the "pain in the ass" market.

***See mdunc8's correction below. I misinformed about the content of this bill. Sorry. Still has bad timing in light of the consideration of HB 309. Again, apologies for misinformation...need to read this stuff closer.

 

[Big Fin]

Bonehead of the year award should be handed out to that person. What are they thinking?

 

[onpoint]

SB 405 is being heard in the Senate Ag, Livestock and Irrigation committee tomorrow.

 

[onpoint]

Bonehead of the year award should be handed out to that person. What are they thinking?

The competition for that award is stiff. I swear all these people need to jump back in the mothership and go back to planet Dude WTF.

 

[mdunc8]

We already have the right to portage around barriers.

23-2-311. Right to portage -- establishment of portage route. (1) A member of the public making recreational use of surface waters may, above the ordinary high-water mark, portage around barriers in the least intrusive manner possible, avoiding damage to the landowner's land and violation of the landowner's rights.
(2) A landowner may create barriers across streams for purposes of land or water management or to establish land ownership as otherwise provided by law. If a landowner erects a structure that does not interfere with the public's use of the surface waters, the public may not go above the ordinary high-water mark to portage around the structure.
(3) (a) A portage route around or over a barrier may be established to avoid damage to the landowner's land and violation of the landowner's rights, as well as to provide a reasonable and safe route for the recreational user of the surface waters.
(b) A portage route may be established when either a landowner or a member of the recreating public submits a request to the supervisors that a route be established.


The bill adds language that a landowner may not construct a barrier. If they do, they can be fined.

 

[onpoint]

mdunc8, your'e right. It amends that statute to make any type of fence across the creek unlawful. I DID NOT READ FULLY. Nonetheless, this little addition still comes at a very inopportune time, with 309 still hanging out there. I still understand fully PLWA's request to ask for calls to teh hotline asking the committee to consider 405 with no due or consequences to 309. My bad, but Blewett still has bad timing.

 

[mdunc8]

Not trying to pick. Either way, I'm pretty sure he has better things he could be spending his time on.

 

[onpoint]

Not trying to pick. Either way, I'm pretty sure he has better things he could be spending his time on.

More than glad you caught my lack of "basic adult level reading comprehension skills". I should have.

 

[Horn Seeker]

Either way, I'm pretty sure he has better things he could be spending his time on

uh huh, thats a fact.