Senate committee declines to advance bill to study Gooseberry Narrows state park after split testimony
Loading...
Summary
After hours of testimony from anglers, water districts and environmental groups, the Senate Natural Resources committee voted not to advance a substitute for SB 209, which would have allowed State Parks to study Gooseberry Narrows for a possible high-elevation reservoir and state park.
The Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment Standing Committee voted against advancing a substitute to Senate Bill 209, which would have authorized State Parks to study the feasibility of creating Gooseberry Narrows State Park and the potential for high-elevation water storage.
Supporters told the committee the measure was limited to studying recreational and storage options, not immediate construction. Jay Olson, chair of the Sanpete Water Conservancy District, said Sanpete County has been unable to use its water rights for decades and asked the committee to "let us do the studies and let us move forward" to determine whether building a reservoir is feasible and how it might serve local needs.
Opponents said the bill masks a water-storage proposal that would primarily benefit one county and could harm downstream fisheries and water quality. Jeff Salt, secretary of the Utah Anglers Coalition, told the committee he was in "strong opposition" and argued, "we don't believe that having state parks be the front for this project when it's actually a storage project for a water district." Salt also referenced a previous Army Corps denial and criticized what he said was a large fiscal exposure.
A range of local voices added to the division. Herbert Lay described two decades of fishing in Gooseberry Creek and urged the committee not to set the project "on a course that would destroy the very resources" that provide outdoor recreation and solace. Attorneys and officials representing Sanpete County and the Sanpete Water Conservancy District argued litigation over water rights has been resolved and that the bill simply enables State Parks to examine options.
Committee action produced a first substitute and an amendment, both adopted by voice vote, but the final motion to favorably recommend the substitute as amended failed. The sponsor summarized that the bill would only "give authority for the park to look at it" and reiterated that no dam construction was being authorized at this stage. The committee, however, recorded that "The bill fails." The transcript does not record a roll-call tally for the final failed motion.
What happens next: With the committee declining to advance the measure, SB 209 will not be reported favorably to the full Senate from this committee at this time. Supporters said they may continue to pursue study or legislative action in the future; opponents urged that any trans-basin or diversion concerns and prior federal permit history be considered before further steps.
Sources: Committee testimony from Jeff Salt (Utah Anglers Coalition), Herbert Lay (public commenter), Jay Olson (Sanpete Water Conservancy District), Nate Broadhurst (attorney for Sanpete County Water Conservancy District), and committee proceedings.
