Anglers and landowners can work together when it comes to streams, rivers
Text 
No comments [ Add Comment ]By WES JOHNSON
Guest commentary
At long last, anglers and other recreationist know where they stand and what the law is regarding touching stream and river bottoms. The recent ruling by the Supreme Court of the State of Utah (Conatser, et al. vs Johnson, et al.) that grants access to anglers and other recreational users to the bottoms of natural rivers and streams that flow through privately owned property is monumental in scope. The Supreme Court ruled that the recreational user must be participating in lawful activities that utilize the water and they must not cause unnecessary injury to the landowner -- or their property.
However, with this new access comes new responsibilities to the angler and the property owner. In the past, many landowners have denied access to waters flowing through their property because of many issues: litter, broken fences, harassment of livestock and other questionable activities. Many landowners may now feel that these undesirable issues are being forced upon them by a Supreme Court ruling.
But this need not be. In states like Montana where the majority of the stream and river fisheries are managed for their quality experience, landowners have little problems with those issues stated above. Why? The anglers in Montana respect the landowners property and the quality of the angling experience.
In Utah we see less respect for the landowner, and the fishery, as evident by the trash and waste deposited along public stream sections. There are few public waters in Utah where we do not see empty beverage containers, trash, bait containers, and human refuse strewn along our streams. Many landowners are selective in granting access to certain groups of anglers because they respected the property of the landowners. These same landowners would not grant access to the general angling public.
Now the angler and other recreationist must accept the responsibilities to protect the private property of the landowners where they now have an easement to trespass through. They must pack out all of their trash, not harass livestock, and report those who do not respect the rights of the landowner. It is time to mend broken fences.
A new opportunity is approaching for the angler and the landowner to work together to benefit our aquatic and riparian resources throughout Utah. To ensure quality management of our sport fisheries the landowner and the angler now can have a joint voice in what angling activities may take place on those waters that flow through their property.
The Governor's Blue Ribbon Fisher Advisory Council (BRFAC) has identified many miles of rivers and streams as "potential blue-ribbon waters," but the lack of public access has prevented those waters from being given "blue-ribbon" status. Now landowners with "potential blue-ribbon" streams and rivers flowing through their property can request their portion of those waters be included in "blue-ribbon" program. With this status, the landowner must be given a say in what angling regulations are implemented on waters flowing through their property.
Another beneficial outcome of this Supreme Court ruling would be the potential restoration of degraded river and stream channels. Through historic flood-control measures we have seen many rivers and streams degraded to the point that they will support only limited fisheries. With the cooperation of landowners, DWR and concerned anglers, stream restoration projects can now be undertaken that would benefit the fishery, the angling experience, and would reduce erosion of the landowner's property.
In the past the Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR) would not undertake stream restoration projects unless angler access was included as part of the project. With angler access now obligated by the Supreme Court, DWR has the opportunity to begin working with landowners and anglers to improve stream and river aquatic habitats and fisheries on private lands.
The Walk-In-Access program administered by DWR is an excellent program that leases access from private landowners to allow angler and hunter access across private lands. More landowners may now want to consider participating in this program to see some form of monetary gain from the Supreme Court ruling. Through this program and the Landowner Liability Act the private landowner will be protected from frivolous lawsuits that may be brought on by discourteous individuals. The landowner should be given a say in what type of angling they prefer to take place in waters adjacent to their property.
In conclusion I feel that this Supreme Court ruling can be a win-win solution for both the private landowner and the angler. Working together we can improve the quality of our fisheries, improve riparian and aquatic ecosystems, reduce litter and crime, and become cooperators in protecting our valuable natural resources.
Wes Johnson is vice president, operations with the Utah Council of Trout Unlimited.
