Kevin and Jodi Conatser of Roy were cited for trespassing in 2000 during a float trip down the Weber River. Where the river crosses private property in Morgan County, the couple left their raft to fish.
With more than 70 percent of our state in government ownership, the vast majority of the land and stream beds were already open and accessible to the public.
State law had already granted broad recreational rights to all navigable waters. Recreational floating of smaller streams allowed incidental touching of the bed as recreational users floated across private lands.
Eight years of legal wrangling ended with the Utah Supreme Court expanding recreational rights, ruling that "the public [has] the right to float, hunt, fish and participate in all lawful activities that utilize the water . . . so long as they do so reasonably and cause no unnecessary injury to the landowner."
This is a reckless decision that only muddies the legal waters and will cost millions in property devaluation both in rural Utah and in exclusive urban neighborhoods which should be viewed as a government taking.
The greatest concern is that public safety has now been compromised. Livestock fences are now being taken down for recreational access. Fences not only defined private property lines, but for more than 100 years kept cattle, horses, sheep or other animals from walking up or downstream and onto Utah's public transportation corridors. Now public safety has been put at risk.
Those traveling U.S. 84 though Morgan County at 70 miles per hour or traveling anywhere else across the state want well-maintained livestock fences, even across "public waters." Does liability now lie with the court or with the fishing public?
The court was silent in defining the scope of this expanded recreation right. The impact will be broader than just the stream beds owned by Utah farmers and ranchers. For those who live in secluded neighborhoods where a brook or stream makes its way through your backyard, you need to worry, too.
The court did not define size of stream or where the stream bed begins or ends, only that recreational users must access the stream bed via public property - state or federal land, a street, a bike trail or even a sidewalk. If it has a trickle, it is now open to recreation for those who want to fish, hunt, wade or lawfully take photographs.
Are the state's best fisheries those that previously had limited access or where private dollars are being invested to enhance fish habitat? Miles of stream beds, heretofore privately owned and managed, have received millions of dollars of private investment.
Those investments were being paid for by anglers willing to pay a fee for fishing in areas with limited access. Some objected! Private property restrictions and capitalism must offend some folks.
It's important to note the court took away the market incentive for private landowners to invest in stream health, fisheries and riparian habitat. Now all stream beds are public domain, to be accessed by anyone.
There are sportsmen who understand conservation, resource management and providing protected areas for reproductive health, genetic stability and diversity of fish and animal species. The closed stream reaches of private ownership provided protection from the full impacts of the recreating public.
The Farm Bureau filed an amicus brief with the court detailing these legal concerns, but was dismissed by the justices.
How many legal battles will be waged to define "cause no unnecessary injury to landowners?" Are recreational users and fishermen who leave garbage and cut or trample fences causing injury?
With all the legal loose ends and unanswered questions, one is left to wonder if the Utah Supreme Court meant this to be the lawyer's full-employment ruling.
---
* RANDY PARKER is CEO of the Utah Farm Bureau Federation.
