# Sandbaggers Tickets



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

So are the volunteer sanbaggers being ticketed for trespassing on BCC and other creeks that are flooding private property?


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Nice try. :roll: -^|^-


----------



## riptheirlips (Jun 30, 2008)

So if the creek is on private property why are the good citizens of Utah sand bagging? Isn't this now the land owners responsibility? All these good people get out and save the private land owners but, but they can't fish the creek. Great law we now have. I say the hell with the land owner let it flood them. The state should not be spending a dime sand bagging if the creek is on private land.


----------



## Troll (Oct 21, 2008)

If you were sandbagging and stopped long enough to ask for permission to fish the river you were sandbagging on the land you were sandbaging, I would bet the answer would be "yes, you may fish these waters anytime"
If the answer was no, then you would be right to drop that bag and walk away.


----------



## Bhilly81 (Oct 18, 2009)

it all boils down to "looking out for number one" the land owners wont share there land for recreational use but when they need your help they are standing on there porch screaming for help and then they will kick you off as soon as your done (yes it has happened to me)


----------



## sparky00045 (Apr 1, 2008)

This samething happened back in the 80s when we had all the flooding going on, then land owner were screaming that the pubic waterways were flooding and damaging there lands, and if i rememeber right, alot of them got money from the state, and the feds, 

So these are private waters untill they flood, then they become pubic waters.

And they want handouts, i agree if we can't fish there lands then i sure wouldn't help to save there lands.


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

We could show up in T-shirts that read "I'll help sandbag if I can fish in your basement when I'm done."

or "Fisherman Helping Hands"


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

So--another question: should these selfish private landowners with streams and creeks in their backyards get government (state or federal or both) money to help them fix and repair the damage done to "their" land and property?


----------



## lunkerhunter2 (Nov 3, 2007)

HighNDry said:


> So--another question: should these selfish private landowners with streams and creeks in their backyards get government (state or federal or both) money to help them fix and repair the damage done to "their" land and property?


Hell no. We shouldn't be helping protect their property at all either. "Not so cool to say no now huh bitches?" :twisted:


----------



## ACHY (Oct 18, 2007)

HighNDry said:


> So--another question: should these selfish private landowners with streams and creeks in their backyards get government (state or federal or both) money to help them fix and repair the damage done to "their" land and property?


Here are a few more questions to consider:
Should selfish private landowners get government money or volunteer help to fix and repair damage done to their land and property if it were hit with a tornado?

Should selfish private landowners get government money or volunteer help to fix and repair damage done to their land and property if it were hit with a mud slide?

Should selfish private landowners get government money or volunteer help to fix and repair damage done to their land and property if it were burned as a result of a wild fire?

Should the government and charity groups have stayed out of New Orleans after hurricane Katrina?


----------



## lunkerhunter2 (Nov 3, 2007)

ACHY said:


> HighNDry said:
> 
> 
> > So--another question: should these selfish private landowners with streams and creeks in their backyards get government (state or federal or both) money to help them fix and repair the damage done to "their" land and property?
> ...


Population control... o-||


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

Wow.... really guys? Way to show the landowners what a bunch of good folks we can be by putting conditions on whether or not we help our neighbors..... you guys are pretty ridiculous with your "butthurt over a fish" attitude. I don't fish private waters but I'll be damned if I'm going to stand by and watch my neighbors property get ruined because of a flood over him not letting me fish his property. *Whether he, she or they let me fish their land or not, its about doing the right thing*.... if I had the time or Easton would let me off, I'd spend all day filling sandbags for those guys even though i don't know them from Adam and it has nothing to do with a stupid fishing bill or "Not so cool to say no now huh bitches?" stuff that I jump on the bandwagon for on the internet. Why not be proactive in changing a landowners mind about fishermen instead of sitting back, oooing and aaahhhing over the destruction, taking enjoyment out of somebody else's personal misfortune and furthering the resentment? :?


----------



## STEVO (Sep 13, 2007)

You gotta look at it this way tho Riley. We can now boat right up to their door steps and as long as we dont touch the ground were not trespassing. Wooo hoooo. And they say we are losing public waters!!!! I think this is gods way of telling the state to give MORE PUBLIC ACCESS!!!!!


----------



## lunkerhunter2 (Nov 3, 2007)

Riverrat77 said:


> Wow.... really guys? Way to show the landowners what a bunch of good folks we can be by putting conditions on whether or not we help our neighbors..... you guys are pretty ridiculous with your "butthurt over a fish" attitude. I don't fish private waters but I'll be damned if I'm going to stand by and watch my neighbors property get ruined because of a flood over him not letting me fish his property. *Whether he, she or they let me fish their land or not, its about doing the right thing*.... if I had the time or Easton would let me off, I'd spend all day filling sandbags for those guys even though i don't know them from Adam and it has nothing to do with a stupid fishing bill or "Not so cool to say no now huh bitches?" stuff that I jump on the bandwagon for on the internet. Why not be proactive in changing a landowners mind about fishermen instead of sitting back, oooing and aaahhhing over the destruction, taking enjoyment out of somebody else's personal misfortune and furthering the resentment? :?


You said it yourself Rat. You never fish private property. I have offered help and assistance to landowners several dozen times in exchange for permission to fish a private stretch. Some of the times it has been services in excess of $500 and 99% of them have said no still. You cannont change their minds. I have tried. 
I am the first person to jump in and help when it is needed but to be honest i could care less if their river banks erode the entire length of their property. Kind of like you scratch my back i'll scratch yours. They do everything they can to keep us away from what we should have access to but a little river gets an attitude and plead for help from the people they treat like ****.
Also, this is america in 2010, the "right thing" doesn't exist anymore.  Your a cop aren't you? Do you see the "right thing" done all the time or even some of the time?


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

STEVO said:


> You gotta look at it this way tho Riley. We can now boat right up to their door steps and as long as we dont touch the ground were not trespassing. Wooo hoooo. And they say we are losing public waters!!!! I think this is gods way of telling the state to give MORE PUBLIC ACCESS!!!!!


Just don't get upset if you see me there and i tell you to row that **** boat over so I can fill it with sand bags for you to go place for me. Just don't let Orvis row it... it'll tip over or take out some volunteers or something. :lol:


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

LH2, I think you're right that "doing the right thing" is becoming more rare these days.... perhaps that has also lead to the abundance of the "I'm going to get mine and screw everyone else" or "if you don't let me do what I want, then I want nothing to do with you" attitude that seems so prevalent among today's sportsmen (if some even still qualify as such). It seems to be a lot more common to just give up like you say and not try to change the status quo than it is to do the right thing, regardless of the benefit in the end. No, I'm not a law enforecement officer... wish that I was, but I'm didn't take advantage of opportunities presented and they passed me by. I think given the privilege, I would do my best to assist those in need, regardless of the outcome, going back to doing the right thing because its right, not because somebody could hook me up if I helped them out. 8)


----------



## lunkerhunter2 (Nov 3, 2007)

See, we agree on something. Like i said, i'm all about helping out when there is a need but if you are the only one with that mindset it really works against your drive to do anything.
That river that is flooding is worthless anyway. No fishing to be had so i guess it would be alright to help there. :twisted:


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

lunkerhunter2 said:


> See, we agree on something. Like i said, i'm all about helping out when there is a need but if you are the only one with that mindset it really works against your drive to do anything.
> That river that is flooding is worthless anyway. No fishing to be had so i guess it would be alright to help there. :twisted:


True... the urge to just give up is a pretty hard thing to get past. I think it would be awesome if a bunch of fishermen showed up with shirts saying "fisherman pitching in" on the front, and on the back it says "despite the outcome" or something like that.... nothing like bringing a positive light to your cause. Public support or being positive in the public eye would go a long way. FWIW, there are some pretty nice trout that hide in those creeks but its a pretty trashy area to try and fish. I almost got bonked on the head fishing BCC because some little girl ran up to the ege of the her apartment complex property and tossed a half full coke can over the edge.... to spite her, I caught a couple pretty nice little browns before moving on. 8)


----------



## Packfish (Oct 30, 2007)

Riverrat77 said:


> [quote="i guess it would be alright to help there. :twisted:


 I think it would be awesome if a bunch of fishermen showed up with shirts saying "fisherman pitching in" on the front, and on the back it says "despite the outcome" or something like that.... nothing like bringing a positive light to your cause.  Public support or being positive in the public eye would go a long way.

That would be a very good approach.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

I detest HB141 as much as anyone and did my fair share to try and defeat it, but we do have to be careful here. The overwhelming majority of people who are affected by the flooding don't have any clue about HB141 or have any prime fishing areas. (The first place I heard about needing to be sandbagged was a nursing home on Little Cottonwood creek). It seems that these (and most) people should be helped without reservation. Suggesting otherwise is not a good way to further our cause.

Now if Victory Ranch or Mr. Ault were whining for help...........that may be another matter altogether.


----------



## kochanut (Jan 10, 2010)

Catherder said:


> I detest HB141 as much as anyone and did my fair share to try and defeat it, but we do have to be careful here. The overwhelming majority of people who are affected by the flooding don't have any clue about HB141 or have any prime fishing areas. (The first place I heard about needing to be sandbagged was a nursing home on Little Cottonwood creek). It seems that these (and most) people should be helped without reservation. Suggesting otherwise is not a good way to further our cause.
> 
> Now if Victory Ranch or Mr. Ault were whining for help...........that may be another matter altogether.


oh SNAP!!!


----------



## sparky00045 (Apr 1, 2008)

But one other thing that has noth been mentioned, we fisher that are decent and honest, are being lumped in, and treated the same as the 1% that are scum bags, that tar down fences litter, harrasse live stock, and treat the land with no concearn if is better now cleaner now, then how i found it.

Thats the sad part, we all have to pay the price for the few idiots out there.


----------



## luv2fsh&hnt (Sep 22, 2007)

ACHY said:


> HighNDry said:
> 
> 
> > So--another question: should these selfish private landowners with streams and creeks in their backyards get government (state or federal or both) money to help them fix and repair the damage done to "their" land and property?
> ...


The government should have not paid for anything other than public property. The charity groups can help whoever they want.


----------



## luv2fsh&hnt (Sep 22, 2007)

There are certain rights that come with private landownership but with every right also comes resposibility. It is not the taxpayers responsibility to repair damage to private property regardless of the cause it is the responsibility of the landowner. I just love how people get all worked up over access issues and the perception of their private property rights being eroded but when something happens they all think they are entitled to handouts from the public coffers and it is the gov'ts resposibility to make them whole again. Hypocrisy at it's finest.


----------



## STEVO (Sep 13, 2007)

luv2fsh&hnt said:


> ACHY said:
> 
> 
> > HighNDry said:
> ...


+1

IMO thats why these people have INSURANCE.... If they dont have insurance, thats their problem, Not mine. Cmone, we all know this river comes close to overflowing EVERY **** YEAR. it does usually crest every about 5 years. If you live near something like that, or live in a place that will possibly be flooded... BUY THE **** INSURANCE. If I dont pay for auto insurance and I get in a car wreck, does the gov help me?????


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

I only posted this question as a tongue-in-cheek thing. I would help anyone in need. In fact, through the whole battle of HB141, it would have been nice to hear of the "GOOD" things anglers do. There really are groups and individuals who pick up trash and carefully use waters in private land. And I bet there are fishermen over there sandbagging.

I wondered what would happen when the floods came. I wonder if the lady who made such a big deal about a couple of fly fishermen wading up behind her house during a party (which I still don't agree is a good thing) would love to have a few of those boys in their hip waders tossing a few sandbags?


----------



## EmptyNet (Mar 17, 2008)

Riverrat77 said:


> Wow.... really guys? Way to show the landowners what a bunch of good folks we can be by putting conditions on whether or not we help our neighbors..... you guys are pretty ridiculous with your "butthurt over a fish" attitude. I don't fish private waters but I'll be damned if I'm going to stand by and watch my neighbors property get ruined because of a flood over him not letting me fish his property. *Whether he, she or they let me fish their land or not, its about doing the right thing*.... if I had the time or Easton would let me off, I'd spend all day filling sandbags for those guys even though i don't know them from Adam and it has nothing to do with a stupid fishing bill or "Not so cool to say no now huh bitches?" stuff that I jump on the bandwagon for on the internet. Why not be proactive in changing a landowners mind about fishermen instead of sitting back, oooing and aaahhhing over the destruction, taking enjoyment out of somebody else's personal misfortune and furthering the resentment? :?


Amen Riverrat77, if I didn't live in St. George I would hold the bag for you to shovel sand in.


----------



## KennyC (Apr 28, 2010)

In this whole private land situation I have tried and tried to figure out how this may be correct. Now with the flood water I am getting very pissed off. Although I have never got to Fly fish a river or stream this is a great American past time that is being pull right out from under us. We have been talking about this very thing here at work because now there is the possibility of us National Guard Soldiers being called up to help sand bag. I said I'll be ****! I don't think it is going to happen unless it gets so bad we are using boats to get down State st. but this is rediculous. 

You live below a spill way, down river, the water that naturally flows through your back yard starts to erode and you want help? With what? Its private property remember. I think we should all stand along the banks with our fishing gear and watch as the water destroys their land and when their house begins to float down stream we tell them. Make it public and fishable and I think we could help slow or stop the water. Or we can just wait it out and when the land has been eroded so bad that it can't maintain a home then we go back and fish it. 

I look at this the same as the concept of it being illegal to collect rain water. Essentually they are collecting rain water and snow run off. Because if they own the rocks down to wherever the hell and I can't fish it from the bank then that is the same thing right?

Whatever, this is just another way to push to sportsman out of the wilderness and into their livingrooms. By the time my son is old enough to hunt and fish we will have to do it on a game system in our house while I tell him about the good 'ole days.


----------



## willfish4food (Jul 14, 2009)

I'm with you RiverRat et al. You wouldn't go up to a 90 year old widow at the grocery store and tell her, "I'll help you load your grocery's in your car if you'll share some with me." The mentality of I will only help when there's something for me in return is what brings this country down not what makes it great. Sure the decent thing for a land owner to do is to allow access to people willing to help. But if they don't, that's their right under the law. The sad part is that most of the private land people don't want to allow access because of the jerks out there who treat their land like their own personal landfill. Yet, we get mad at the landowners and sometimes fail to put the blame where it belongs. We'll make a lot more progress in gaining access to those lands in the future if we do the right thing now without demanding immediate reciprocation.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

willfish4food said:


> I'm with you RiverRat et al. You wouldn't go up to a 90 year old widow at the grocery store and tell her, "I'll help you load your grocery's in your car if you'll share some with me." The mentality of I will only help when there's something for me in return is what brings this country down not what makes it great. Sure the decent thing for a land owner to do is to allow access to people willing to help. But if they don't, that's their right under the law. The sad part is that most of the private land people don't want to allow access because of the jerks out there who treat their land like their own personal landfill. Yet, we get mad at the landowners and sometimes fail to put the blame where it belongs. We'll make a lot more progress in gaining access to those lands in the future if we do the right thing now without demanding immediate reciprocation.


Great post.


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

*IMPORTANT LESSON #1*

In ancient times, a King had a boulder placed on a
roadway. Then he hid himself and watched to see if
anyone would remove the huge rock. Some of the
king's' wealthiest merchants and courtiers came by 
and simply walked around it. Many loudly blamed the
king for not keeping the roads clear, but none did
anything about getting the stone out of the way.
Then a peasant came along carrying a load of 
vegetables. Upon approaching the boulder, the
peasant laid down his burden and tried to move the
stone to the side of the road. After much pushing
and straining, he finally succeeded. After the 
peasant picked up his load of vegetables, he noticed
a purse lying in the road where the boulder had
been. The purse contained many gold coins and a note
from the King indicating that the gold was for the 
person who removed the boulder from the roadway. The
peasant learned what many of us never understand!
Every obstacle presents an opportunity to improve
our condition.

*2. - Second Important Lesson* - Pickup in the Rain 
One night, at 11:30 P.M., an older African American
Woman was standing on the side of an Alabama highway
trying to endure a lashing rain storm.. Her car had
broken down and she desperately needed a ride.
soaking wet, she decided to flag down the next car. 
A young white man stopped to help her, generally
unheard of in those conflict-filled 1960's. The man
took her to safety, helped her get assistance and
put her into a taxicab.

She seemed to be in a big hurry, but wrote down his
address and thanked him. Seven days went by and a
knock came on the man's door. To his surprise, a
giant console color TV was delivered to his home. A 
special note was attached.
It read:

"Thank you so much for assisting me on the highway
the other night. The rain drenched not only my
clothes, but also my spirits. Then you came along. 
because of you, I was able to make it to my dying
husband's' bedside just before he passed away... God
Bless you for helping me and unselfishly serving
others."

Sincerely,

Mrs. Nat King Cole.

Don't know if the stories are true, but there is a lesson to be learned.


----------



## KennyC (Apr 28, 2010)

FEMA Website:
After the President's action, Brown designated the following jurisdictions eligible for federal funding to pay the state and affected local governments and certain private non-profit organizations 75 percent of the approved costs for emergency work and the restoration of damaged facilities: the counties of Beaver, Box Elder, Iron, Kane, Sevier, Tooele, Uintah and Wasatch, and the Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation.

Since 1983 The Utah Disaster History posted by the U.S. Government has had 7 different years where aid was requested and used. Out of the 7, 6 were Floods/Landslides/Mudslides. Only 1 has been to an unforseen, uncontrollable natural disaster in 1999 (Tornado). There were in fact several fires and 2 Droughts noted in the study. One could argue that all natural disasters are unforseen, and I do agree. However if a farmers field burns due to drought he is compensated (very little) for the crop lost, but if you own a MOBILE HOME in Tornado alley that is your fualt. Same principal as living next to a river on the flood plains.

Utah Department of Public Safety
Flooding is a natural phenomenon. Periodically, rain and melting snow cause rivers to rise and streams and lakes to overflow their banks onto adjacent land. Floods have carved these areas, known as floodplains, out for the specific purpose of carrying excess floodwaters. 

As settlements and communities formed, little regard was given to the purpose and function of floodplains. Homes, businesses, and even whole communities have been built in floodplain areas. The development of these floodplains has resulted in continual and oftentimes severe social and economical loss. 

Traditionally, planning for flood control has focused on protecting existing development(s) through structural works such as dams, diversions, or levees, and providing emergency relief and recovery assistance to flood victims following a disaster. 

These approaches are expensive, and have been totally effective in reducing flood damages. Despite considerable expenditure on flood control works, annual damages due to flooding continue to rise. It is apparent that another alternative is needed, one that gets to the root of the problem: man's insistence to use and occupy flood hazard areas.

This brings me back to why is it a Good Samaritan thing to do? They fought so hard to have this land once public made private, and with just 5 minutes of research I found many reasons I wouldn’t want to live there. Fish yeah, live NO! It is not so much the fact that they live there, live where you like. But the river is not theirs. Could you imagine if this happened along the Mighty Mississippi. Our trade would be shot. This is why I WILL NOT be out there helping till there is a change in our LAWS.


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

Open rivers
Open hearts
No need to worry
When the floodwater starts


----------

