# Fly Shop Support



## Dead Drifter (Nov 22, 2008)

I was impressed with the shop owners who attended the rally yesterday. They were willing to close their shops to support us (anglers). The company I work for would never do such a thing, and so I was very impressed. I live north of SLC, but I am going to make it a point to buy from these shops when I have a fishing related purchase.

I also took note, as well as I could, which shops and box stores did not have representation.

I would encourage all those at the rally (and those who could not attend) to patronize these two great shops as best you can.

Again, thanks you!


----------



## Grandpa D (Sep 7, 2007)

I agree that it was great to have to owners and employees of the Fly Shops at the Rally.
Even though they have a vested interest in the Bill, it was still nice to see them and hear their point of view.

Fish Tec is a great shop and they have donated a lot of money and equipment in support of youth anglers in my local area.


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

Grandpa D said:


> Even though they have a vested interest in the Bill,


Here's my thought on this... Their appearance was good, but its not like closing their doors on a mid weekday for a couple hours for a rally killed their business. Its not enough to make me an exclusive customer and if anything, I'd consider it a pretty smooth marketing ploy because folks will get caught up in the "these guys are all for us" emotion. It was in their best interest to be there, not because they made some huge sacrifice. :? Something else that has been bugging me lately about this.... where were all the kayakers, bird watchers, hikers, nature lovers, butterfly collectors and all the other folks that supposedly are getting burned by this bill? All I saw was a bunch of chanting anglers there.... which is fine, but if thats the only people against this bill, lets keep this straight instead of feeding misinformation for appearances sake. If all these other folks are as upset as anglers, why are we not seeing rallies in canoes, or folks walking around with "let us enjoy our nature freely" signs? I'm not for the bill, I don't like Ben Ferry or any of that, but there just seems to be a lot of collateral inclusion of other supposedly upset groups without much substance to it. I know I don't like the bill itself but the lack of visible support from anyone but anglers in the fight against the bill kinda makes me wonder who is really the upset party here and who is really standing together to challenge this bill. Just a thought provoking situation here and yet another aspect of this fight for water user rights that gives me pause.


----------



## Dead Drifter (Nov 22, 2008)

There was at least one bird watcher there at the rally. The guy with the binoculars who made a statement at the end of the rally. And at the committee meeting today, I saw Bill Fennemore who is somehow involved with Audubon Society in Utah. Hopefully, he was there to voice concern against the bill. Also at the meeting was a kayaker who said the floaters felt like they were not in the loop with the legislation.

None of that really made a difference as the bill will be moved to the floor and voted on.


----------



## flyguy7 (Sep 16, 2007)

It is good to see all the local shops get out and support. The only one that didn't show either day was that one up in PC.


----------



## Troll (Oct 21, 2008)

Jan's, Trout Bum or the little one below the dam at Jordonelle?

We need to stop tip-toeing around people. Either name names or don't say anything at all.

This is a fight, your either with us, or against us. We need to know who stands where.

I have some good connections at TB2. If we know who is being refered to there is a good possibility that someone on here knows them on a more personal level and may be able to do some convincing.


----------



## Nueces (Jul 22, 2008)

Everyone has made some great points. It would be good to see the support of other outdoor people that will be impacted by this.

I personally can say I have been on some streams that I have seen far more rafters and tubers go by than anglers. Without this board, I may not have been aware of the proposed bill. So with that in mind, how much of the public really knows what is being proposed?

I am sure there are a lot of bills out there that are proposed, but who really does the daily research to find out about new bills? Unless in this situation where it strikes a nerve and brought to everyone's attention.

Rep. Ferry indicated he could not find any groups that are represented such as camping and others (not speaking about anglers). I personally am not aware of any groups myself, but I know there seems to be far more that participate in the outdoors than just anglers.

Maybe there would be more public support if they knew about it, or maybe they are content on what they have now?


----------



## Troll (Oct 21, 2008)

That's because Fairy was top much of a coward, to come outside. UT rivers Council brought a Canoe to the rally. It was right there to see.

I didn't see anyone from that tube rental company on the Provo though, and this will 187 effectivly shut them down.


----------



## flyguy7 (Sep 16, 2007)

I think people from all the shops where there, just not some of the owners. Everyone should be there. This is a big issue and should be fought tooth and nail.


----------



## Dead Drifter (Nov 22, 2008)

March 12-15 is the International Sportsmen's Expo. Depending on how the voting goes on the floor and in the senate, perhaps some type of flyers can be passed out to all the outdoorsmen who attend that show. This fight might go well beyond the legislative session.

I'm getting the feeling that this is trying to be pushed as an angler only thing by the legislature. This thing can have wide ramifications. If they are able to lock-up streams, then it will be possible to lock-up, trail, ATV roads, mountaineering climbing areas, lake access, public hunting areas and who knows what else. This has the potential to give anti-hunting and fishing groups the potential to buy up stretches of land and lock us out. This is plain and simple a big foot right on top of our rights to recreate. Everyone who enjoys any outdoor activity in the long run could be affected!

Want to fly a kite with your kid at the pubic park? Well, get a permit and written permission from the city and homeowners because the kite is violating someone's air space over a house.


----------



## lunkerhunter2 (Nov 3, 2007)

Nueces said:


> Everyone has made some great points. It would be good to see the support of other outdoor people that will be impacted by this.
> 
> I personally can say I have been on some streams that I have seen far more rafters and tubers go by than anglers. Without this board, I may not have been aware of the proposed bill. So with that in mind, how much of the public really knows what is being proposed?
> 
> ...


There were persons from several different groups at the Rally. Ducks Unlimited, Kayaker groups, bird watchers, waterfowlers, Duck boat companies, Fly anglers, spin fisherman, there was even a guy there with a dog that he walks along the rivers. I think there were more representatives of different groups than most people think. :wink:


----------



## Troll (Oct 21, 2008)

Dead Drifter said:


> March 12-15 is the International Sportsmen's Expo. Depending on how the voting goes on the floor and in the senate, perhaps some type of flyers can be passed out to all the outdoorsmen who attend that show. This fight might go well beyond the legislative session.
> 
> I'm getting the feeling that this is trying to be pushed as an angler only thing by the legislature. This thing can have wide ramifications. If they are able to lock-up streams, then it will be possible to lock-up, trail, ATV roads, mountaineering climbing areas, lake access, public hunting areas and who knows what else. This has the potential to give anti-hunting and fishing groups the potential to buy up stretches of land and lock us out. This is plain and simple a big foot right on top of our rights to recreate. Everyone who enjoys any outdoor activity in the long run could be affected!
> 
> Want to fly a kite with your kid at the pubic park? Well, get a permit and written permission from the city and homeowners because the kite is violating someone's air space over a house.


Absolutly. Do you realise that if this goes through, you won't be able to walk in Cottonwood creek where it flows through a public park if there is a residential house within 150 ft?

Meadow creek, Willow, Salem, Community ponds could be closed because of the houses there?

If the water is not named, and there is a house within 150 ft, CLOSED. HB 153 on tresspass changed the law about tresspass to it doesn't even have to be posted, just fenced, irrigated or agricultural. That includes residential fencing and irrigation.


----------



## flyguy7 (Sep 16, 2007)

I was thinking about that yesterday. I cannot believe the issue with community fisheries has not been brought up. This will shut down the community fisheries program altogether.


----------

