A dispute over who has the right to the Arkansas River bed in Southern Colorado could have far-reaching consequences

Is it authorized to wade or raft on a river that runs via personal property in Colorado?

That query is on the heart of a dispute making its means via the state courtroom system. Journalist Ben Ryder Howe wrote about it for the New York Instances.

He spoke with KRCC’s Shanna Lewis about it. Listed below are highlights from their dialog which have been edited for readability.

Shanna Lewis: This case received began when a Colorado Springs fisherman filed a lawsuit so he may maintain fishing in his favourite spot on the Arkansas River, which runs via Southeastern Colorado. What triggered this lawsuit?

Ben Ryder Howe: So the fisherman, his identify is Roger Hill, is a retired nuclear physicist and longtime resident of Colorado Springs. He was fishing in part of the Arkansas River the place he has been fishing for a lot of, a few years. Nonetheless, one of many native landowners was sad about it. There was an incident involving, based on Mr. Hill, rocks being thrown. This occurred once more at a later date, Mr. Hill, at that time, needed to seek out out, you already know, whether or not or not this was one thing that he was allowed to do or not. It is considerably imprecise and unclear the principles for fishing in a river like this. What occurred subsequent was that there was an incident by which some fishermen had a gun fired at them. No one was injured. Nonetheless, the end result was that the one that fired the gun went to jail and Roger Hill, the fisherman, filed a lawsuit, each in opposition to the landowner and in opposition to the state. What he’s attempting to do is to proceed fishing in that space and in addition decide, was this authorized or not for him to be fishing there. That is what this case is all about.

Lewis: Inform me somewhat bit about what the property proprietor’s aspect of this story is.

Howe: The property proprietor lives in a condominium advanced overlooking the Arkansas River. Their argument is that they personal the mattress of the river out to the center of the river, and so they can management who has entry there, it does not matter whether or not they come onto the river by way of public land. It does not matter whether or not they entry it someplace else. Their argument is the property proprietor in Colorado owns the land out to the center of the river. They really feel that they’ve that proper to regulate the entry and the fisherman does not.

Lewis: So at concern is the entry truly to the river mattress itself. The fishermen imagine that they wade in from public property and go previous personal property and so they’re in the proper. The property house owners say that these folks, who’re wading in there, are trespassing.

Howe: Sure, the difficulty is what are the legal guidelines right here governing entry to the river. Each state within the nation has completely different legal guidelines governing entry to rivers. It relies on the navigability of the river. Colorado has traditionally not been as clear as different states concerning the navigability of rivers. That is left this type of entry concern, type of grey and ambiguous, however it’s a part of a a lot bigger battle over personal property versus public entry to the pure assets of Colorado.

Lewis: So if you had been out speaking to completely different folks about this battle and this lawsuit, what had been your impressions of what they thought?

Howe: Lots of people, after they actually look laborious at these points, or in the event that they’ve skilled them firsthand, they’ll really feel some battle as a result of Colorado’s a personal property state and it has residents who really feel very passionately concerning the sacredness of personal property. And plenty of those self same folks additionally really feel very, very strongly that this can be a state whose pure assets are its best treasure and that these are to be shared and that we’ve got a really robust custom on this nation of stewarding these ourselves, as a public. It is a matter that I feel actually does drive folks to make robust selections. And the conflicts are actual. All people has actually compelling arguments on their aspect. Public entry versus personal property is the type of battle the place you will have people who find themselves un-ambivalent and have very clear black-and-white emotions about it on the margins. However my sense from speaking to folks in Colorado is that this can be a story that basically, actually leaves them conflicted. They see each side. Within the meantime, it is no secret that Colorado has nice public assets and possibly too many individuals who need to entry them. That is a part of a rising battle over that and it is only one means by which that battle is being fought.

Lewis: Rafters, sportsmen and different leisure teams are supporting Roger Hill, the fisherman who introduced the lawsuit, why they assist him and  what this Courtroom case means for them.

Howe: Sportsmen’s teams have been considerably ambivalent about Roger Hill’s case. Nonetheless, there may be one group, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers which is saying that this can be a clear case of public entry. That the place on a regular basis fishermen are having their capacity to entry issues that they’ve lengthy been in a position to entry, lowered dramatically. Different sportsmen’s teams have been much less vocal of their assist to various levels and that is a part of what makes this an fascinating story.