# Utah - Fishermen are set to clash with ranchers



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

Fishermen are set to clash with ranchers
Supreme Court ruling could heighten tensions

Anglers are catching 20-inch trout where they haven't fished in a decade since the Utah Supreme Court decided they could walk on riverbeds on private land.

Where the beds are considered private property, "the public has the right to touch privately owned beds of state waters in ways incidental to all recreational rights provided for in the easement," the 10-page Supreme Court opinion issued July 18 states. 

The decision stems from a case that involved a group of rafters in Morgan County who were charged with trespassing for standing in the Weber River near the Summit County line. The Conatser family was fishing when they encountered a fence stretched across the river by landowners trying to keep people out. 

The ruling could heighten the tension between ranchers and fishermen.

http://www.parkrecord.com/ci_9962185?source=most_viewed


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

Judge weighs stream-access arguments

http://www.greatfallstribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080725/NEWS01/80725020/1002

07/25/08

VIRGINIA CITY  A state judge weighing one of Montanas leading property issues  public access to streams for recreation  said Friday that he has some sense of how this probably ought to be resolved, but he stopped short of disclosing what will guide his decisionmaking.

District Judge Loren Tucker heard arguments for several hours in a case the Public Lands Access Association Inc. filed against Madison County.

The association is challenging how fences are configured at three Madison County roads with bridge crossings over the Ruby River, a popular stream for trout fishing. 

The association says private landowners fencing that parallels the roads is attached to bridge guardrails in a way that impedes access to the streams by anglers who want to use bridge areas and their public rights of way to reach the water. The association charges that tying the fences to bridge guardrails is unauthorized encroachment on a public right of way and notes that in some places, electrified fencing was installed. 

If there is encroachment by a fence, it must be removed, said lawyer Jim Goetz, representing the association. State law, the Montana Constitution and common sense support his clients position, he said. 

Madison County and the landowners dispute the claim of encroachment. They say the fencing is necessary to control livestock in some areas and the configuration at the bridge crossings is part of road management. 

Those fences are protecting the traveling public from livestock wandering (onto) those roadways, said lawyer John Bloomquist. He represented the Montana Stockgrowers Association, which intervened in the case and is on the side of Madison County. 

Critics contend livestock control sometimes is merely an excuse for keeping anglers away from the Ruby River in places where landowners, misconstruing their private-property rights, would rather not have anglers around. 

This is the very kind of case, the kind of issue, that creates strong emotions, and sometimes it creates hot tempers, said Tucker, the judge, who complimented lawyers for controlling their tempers Friday. 

Besides the Montana Stockgrowers Association, the case includes James Cox Kennedy, a Madison Valley landowner who also intervened on the side of the county. Kennedy, represented at the hearing by lawyer Lance Lovell of Billings, is the chairman and chief executive of Cox Enterprises, whose newspapers include The Atlanta Journal Constitution. Kennedy has been criticized for fencing in stream areas. 

Tucker indicated a trial will be necessary to address issues involving one of the three roads in the case filed by the Public Lands Access Association. As he considers the other two, he wants more briefs from lawyers in the next few weeks.


----------

