Relevance
Nova -
There was quite a discussion here on the BB of the Utah Supreme Court decision back in '08. That decision was based on the Utah Constitution and centered on the word "utilize" as used in the Constitution as it applies to the public waters flowing through private land in Utah.
The law that you are asking for us to support, with or without our dollars, doesn't seem necessary. Those who want to change the law ( as stated in the Utah Supreme Court decision ) have failed in the State Legislature. And even if they passed a law, it would almost certainly be held unconstitutional because a simple act of the legislature can not amend the State Constitution. It seems to me that your opponents have to attack by trying to amend the Constitution, and that the bill you are asking us to support won't change the ultimate outcome one way or the other.
Also, since the use of public water over private property is different in different states because of their different Constitutions and State Laws, what Utah ultimately does has little bearing on what Wyoming or California, or any other state might decide to do.
Please don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to discourage anyone from lending support to your cause - just trying to understand why you are pursuing it when it seems unnecessary ?? Also, is there a prospect that this effort could backfire ??
John
The fish are always right.