Minivan
09-03-2008, 04:47 AM
Forty seven days ago the Utah Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision that opened to the public hundreds of miles of Blue Ribbon trout streams and rivers. The ink wasn’t quite dry on Chief Justice Durant’s published opinion when various media outlets, such as the Salt Lake Tribune, immediately heralded the Supreme Court ruling as a windfall for public anglers. For the first time in decades private sections of trout streams were opened to the citizens of Utah.
But curiously enough the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources has been strangely absent in this joyous celebration. One would assume that if Ed (The mayor of Committeeville) Kent was euphoric enough to proclaim “the angling community will do back flips” over this decision, the DWR would find some time in their four day work week to weigh in on a ruling of this magnitude. Wouldn’t you think a brief press release, possibly an announcement on their website, or maybe even a short quote in the newspaper or on television from SOMEBODY within the DWR would be appropriate? This is especially true if you have listened to the DWR whine and preach their bureaucratic buzzwords such as they need to “simplify fishing rules” or they need to “increase angling opportunities” for the last ten years or so. My God wouldn’t you assume the high Court’s interpretation on a law that suddenly opened up one hell of a lot of opportunity would be cheered by the DWR? I would have truly thought once the DWR caught wind of the Court’s decision, they would have gotten an erection faster than Dick Cheney after reading Halliburton’s 2nd quarter earnings report. But strangely enough, there hasn’t been as much as a peep from the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. It is as if they wished this whole thing would have never happened. It is not like the public affairs office of the DWR hasn’t burped out other news releases since this decision was rendered. Since July 18, 2008, the DWR’s public affairs office has had no problem informing the public about earth shattering news such as a spring of 2009 goose hunt, an update on quagga mussels in Lake Foul (Powell) or that dove season has started.
The problem I have with the DWR’s intentional silence on this matter is simple. The Division had no problem when the shoe was on the other foot. The DWR sure felt it was their place to inform and educate public anglers about the ramifications and evils of “trespassing”. I can hear the DWR cheerleader/chamber of commerce types such as the Heppy’s point out that this is a private property matter and it is not the DWR’s place to get involved. That argument is pure horseshit. For the last few decades the DWR has been relentless in badgering the public to “Ask First”, “obtain permission”, “be respectful of private landowners”, etc, etc. In fact look on your combination license; in bold it states “this permit does not authorize you to trespass on private property”. Look at their website, their fishing reports, even current postings are downright misleading and negligent and clearly run contrary to the Utah Supreme Court’s decision. As an example; the most recent fishing report from the southern region erroneously states, when reporting on the East Fork of the Sevier, that “some private property is closed to trespass, so watch for signs” Or this classic fraudulent lie; “most of the remainder of the canyon (Kingston) is private and posted, so ask permission first”. That is direct from the DWR website and it is downright b.s. That is not the law. The Utah Supreme Court ruled that I can march my ass right up the East Fork of the Sevier River through so-called posted property if I want to recreate as long as I enter the stream at a public access point. The DWR knows damn good and well there are plenty of places in both Black Canyon on the E.F. of the Sevier and in Kingston Canyon where an angler can enter the stream via a public access point. The DWR owns land in both canyons that border this so-called “posted property”! All an angler has to do is enter at a DWR access point. The Division knows this. Why lie and be deceitful to the angling public on a taxpayer funded Utah state government website?
Most taxpaying citizens merely want government and its civil servants to be open and honest. Is the Division being open and honest about this whole stream access issue? Hell no! As public servants don’t they have some sort of fiduciary duty to at least mention this ruling now exists?? No one is expecting them to provide a legal interpretation or binding legal opinion on the matter. Just an acknowledgment that such a ruling now exists would suffice. As I mention above, they pretend (‘er wish) this decision never would have happened. And the reason is simple. It boils down to money. Most people in the know have realized long ago that the higher ups (read: Karpowitz) within the DWR are in bed spooning with private ranchers and landowners. Private land and large ranches means big game hunting, not fishing. And big game hunting is where the dollars are. It doesn’t take a mathematic genius to figure out that in the next 20 years if I continue to pay $30 annually for a fishing license, the DWR will only collect $600 in revenue. ONE premium big game elk permit garners the DWR $1,500.00. That one permit generates more cash than most anglers put into the Division’s coffers in their lifetime. Big game is big money and the DWR knows that. They do not like this equation: public fish + private land= public access. That is what the Utah Supreme Court determined. But it pisses private land owners off and the DWR doesn’t want to piss that group off. So they have to be careful not to appear excited or giddy about the July 18th decision. The DWR doesn’t want to ruin its partnership with large private landowners over a piddly decision that only impacts minimal revenue producing anglers.
The DWR knows the more people it keeps in the dark about this new ruling the less public resistance/public outcry there will be when some hayseed legislator (example: Mike Noel) tries to write legislation reversing the impact of the court ruling. I can see it now; in 2009 during the legislative session Noel will come up with something like the “Private Property Protection Act of 2009”. Typical uninformed sheep-like Utah voters will think it protects ranchers from having their cows stuck with arrows or something like that and they will sincerely think such legislation is a good thing. And from the DWR’s perspective the less the public knows, the better, which explains the prolonged silence. So in the end who does the DWR work for? Who pays their salaries? But more importantly who are they really serving by keeping hush hush about this?
But curiously enough the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources has been strangely absent in this joyous celebration. One would assume that if Ed (The mayor of Committeeville) Kent was euphoric enough to proclaim “the angling community will do back flips” over this decision, the DWR would find some time in their four day work week to weigh in on a ruling of this magnitude. Wouldn’t you think a brief press release, possibly an announcement on their website, or maybe even a short quote in the newspaper or on television from SOMEBODY within the DWR would be appropriate? This is especially true if you have listened to the DWR whine and preach their bureaucratic buzzwords such as they need to “simplify fishing rules” or they need to “increase angling opportunities” for the last ten years or so. My God wouldn’t you assume the high Court’s interpretation on a law that suddenly opened up one hell of a lot of opportunity would be cheered by the DWR? I would have truly thought once the DWR caught wind of the Court’s decision, they would have gotten an erection faster than Dick Cheney after reading Halliburton’s 2nd quarter earnings report. But strangely enough, there hasn’t been as much as a peep from the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. It is as if they wished this whole thing would have never happened. It is not like the public affairs office of the DWR hasn’t burped out other news releases since this decision was rendered. Since July 18, 2008, the DWR’s public affairs office has had no problem informing the public about earth shattering news such as a spring of 2009 goose hunt, an update on quagga mussels in Lake Foul (Powell) or that dove season has started.
The problem I have with the DWR’s intentional silence on this matter is simple. The Division had no problem when the shoe was on the other foot. The DWR sure felt it was their place to inform and educate public anglers about the ramifications and evils of “trespassing”. I can hear the DWR cheerleader/chamber of commerce types such as the Heppy’s point out that this is a private property matter and it is not the DWR’s place to get involved. That argument is pure horseshit. For the last few decades the DWR has been relentless in badgering the public to “Ask First”, “obtain permission”, “be respectful of private landowners”, etc, etc. In fact look on your combination license; in bold it states “this permit does not authorize you to trespass on private property”. Look at their website, their fishing reports, even current postings are downright misleading and negligent and clearly run contrary to the Utah Supreme Court’s decision. As an example; the most recent fishing report from the southern region erroneously states, when reporting on the East Fork of the Sevier, that “some private property is closed to trespass, so watch for signs” Or this classic fraudulent lie; “most of the remainder of the canyon (Kingston) is private and posted, so ask permission first”. That is direct from the DWR website and it is downright b.s. That is not the law. The Utah Supreme Court ruled that I can march my ass right up the East Fork of the Sevier River through so-called posted property if I want to recreate as long as I enter the stream at a public access point. The DWR knows damn good and well there are plenty of places in both Black Canyon on the E.F. of the Sevier and in Kingston Canyon where an angler can enter the stream via a public access point. The DWR owns land in both canyons that border this so-called “posted property”! All an angler has to do is enter at a DWR access point. The Division knows this. Why lie and be deceitful to the angling public on a taxpayer funded Utah state government website?
Most taxpaying citizens merely want government and its civil servants to be open and honest. Is the Division being open and honest about this whole stream access issue? Hell no! As public servants don’t they have some sort of fiduciary duty to at least mention this ruling now exists?? No one is expecting them to provide a legal interpretation or binding legal opinion on the matter. Just an acknowledgment that such a ruling now exists would suffice. As I mention above, they pretend (‘er wish) this decision never would have happened. And the reason is simple. It boils down to money. Most people in the know have realized long ago that the higher ups (read: Karpowitz) within the DWR are in bed spooning with private ranchers and landowners. Private land and large ranches means big game hunting, not fishing. And big game hunting is where the dollars are. It doesn’t take a mathematic genius to figure out that in the next 20 years if I continue to pay $30 annually for a fishing license, the DWR will only collect $600 in revenue. ONE premium big game elk permit garners the DWR $1,500.00. That one permit generates more cash than most anglers put into the Division’s coffers in their lifetime. Big game is big money and the DWR knows that. They do not like this equation: public fish + private land= public access. That is what the Utah Supreme Court determined. But it pisses private land owners off and the DWR doesn’t want to piss that group off. So they have to be careful not to appear excited or giddy about the July 18th decision. The DWR doesn’t want to ruin its partnership with large private landowners over a piddly decision that only impacts minimal revenue producing anglers.
The DWR knows the more people it keeps in the dark about this new ruling the less public resistance/public outcry there will be when some hayseed legislator (example: Mike Noel) tries to write legislation reversing the impact of the court ruling. I can see it now; in 2009 during the legislative session Noel will come up with something like the “Private Property Protection Act of 2009”. Typical uninformed sheep-like Utah voters will think it protects ranchers from having their cows stuck with arrows or something like that and they will sincerely think such legislation is a good thing. And from the DWR’s perspective the less the public knows, the better, which explains the prolonged silence. So in the end who does the DWR work for? Who pays their salaries? But more importantly who are they really serving by keeping hush hush about this?