The state Senate’s decision to delay action on a whitewater rafting bill for another year is a risky move that leaves the door open for someone to propose a less-than-perfect ballot measure.
The legislature is the right forum to hash out the details and forge a moderate bill that gives rafters the right to float while also protecting the rights of those who own riverbank property.
By deciding to study the issue, with a report due in October, the Senate has left a vacuum that we wouldn’t be surprised to see rafting interests fill with a ballot question crafted to serve their needs.
We have supported rafters as they’ve sought legislative protection to enjoy the state’s rivers. But we think that right ought to be reasonably couched so property owners have protections as well.
House Bill 1188 was an attempt to bring clarity to a long-unsettled legal question of whether whitewater rafters have the right to float through private property. The bill was also crafted to tightly limit the circumstances under which rafters could touch the shoreline — for instance, when there is a dangerous obstruction on the river. It would have allowed only incidental contact with the river bottom as rafters were going downstream.
It was, we thought, an acceptable compromise that was the result of listening to both sides of the issue.
If rafting interests were to put a question on the ballot — and we’ve heard talk about that — we wouldn’t expect them to spend a whole lot of time defining property-rights protection.
If they were to petition to put a question on the ballot in November, it would be in their best interests not to propose anything outlandish, because it wouldn’t resonate well with voters. Depending on how it’s written, we think such a proposal would have a decent chance of succeeding with voters.
However, with a constitutional amendment or even a statutory change, there isn’t the same opportunity for a public process to modify the measure and work out its kinks the way that bills often are handled in the General Assembly.
We understand that some legislators are uncomfortable with being pressured from both sides — the rafters who want a clear right to float, and property owners who don’t want to see that happen.
Deciding to punt on the issue may seem like an easy way to avoid aggravating half the interested parties on the issue. But it’s gutless, and not why we elect legislators. We elect them to make difficult decisions.
Now, some might argue that we also elect them to study issues and gather information. We think the issue has been studied exhaustively, and if there remains a need for more homework, certainly that could be done before the legislature is scheduled to adjourn in May.
Rep. Kathleen Curry, an unaffiliated lawmaker from Gunnison, said she’ll try to resurrect the bill. We hope she is successful.
It is disappointing to see lawmakers backpedal from the issue when there is a need for a thoughtful and timely legislative process.
