Here we go again....

Page: 12345.. > >> Showing page 1 of 6
Author
cbeagler
Pro Angler
  • Total Posts : 1811
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2008/11/08 16:03:28
  • Location: Fairview, PA
  • Status: offline
2014/08/14 21:14:53 (permalink)

Here we go again....

http://www.flyfisherman.c...on/#comment-1543196656
 
Game-Changing Pennsylvania Legislationby Ross Purnell, Editor   |  August 14th, 2014 0
  •  
  • A new house bill would open all areas “where stocked fish may migrate into” to the angling public.

    Trouble has been brewing along Pennsylvania’s Lake Erie shoreline as more and more landowners are closing their properties to public fishing, but at the same time allowing paid, private access to affluent customers who want to enjoy the bounty of Lake Erie’s “Steelhead Alley”—in solitude.
    The problem is that this “bounty” is 99% stocked steelhead, paid for by the state and ostensibly by the angling public. What the landowners have created—in alliance with outfitters who lease the water—is a series of private fishing preserves stocked by the state of Pennsylvania.
    The solution this problem may be Pennsylvania House Bill 2357 recently introduced by Representative Dan Moul which states that “Any water in this Commonwealth stocked with fish furnished by the commission, including water areas where stocked fish may migrate into, shall be open to the public for the purpose of free, lawful fishing.”
    The intention of the law is to give the angling public access to the entire length of Twentymile Creek, Elk Creek, Walnut Creek, and many other Lake Erie tributaries along Pennsylvania’s short Lake Erie coast. The bill was co-sponsored by reps Gregory Lucas, Thomas Caltagirone, William Kortz, Garth Everett, Thomas Murt, Gordon Denlinger, and Mark Cohen; a mix of republicans and democrats from both urban and rural areas. The bill was referred to the Game & Fisheries Committee which will reconvene in September 2014.
    While the proposed bill is a good sign that state lawmakers are standing by the angling public, the reality is that a law giving public access to private property won’t stand up in court.
    A more successful tactic may be for the PA Fish & Boat Commission to declare all private property as “nursery waters” in the fishing regulations, and close it to all fishing. They can do that. If the public can’t fish there, no one fishes there. Then use the Erie Access Improvement Grant Program to purchase longterm fishing easements on these properties, and re-open them to all fishermen.
  • #1

    156 Replies Related Threads

      wirenut45
      Avid Angler
      • Total Posts : 152
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2011/01/29 10:22:43
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 07:03:14 (permalink)
      not to be a horses ****, but what prevents the landowners from telling the comm. to get bent?most l.o. aren,t stupid, they will see this as a back door aproach to "take" their property rights. comm. may wind up with egg on their face: no fishing rights or easements at all on erie tribs. i wonder if closing streams to ALL fishing ,n, making them nursery waters would void the easements now in place ? i,m sure comm. would need to close waters for several years to avoid lawsuits from l.o., courts would maybe see this as unlawful attack on prop. rights,. after the backlash up in New Haven, when govt. took prop., not to mention john q. public, s reaction. i,d think long ,n, hard before i embraced this plan, if i was the comm. JMHO
      #2
      DarDys
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 4891
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
      • Location: Duncansville, PA
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 07:31:06 (permalink)
      Just a thought -- most trout, not just steelhead, migrate. So, if trout are stocked in a stream, especially a marginal one, does that mean that all the tributaries to that stream and all the tributaries to the tributaries and so on and so forth to where water bubbles out if the ground would be open to the public because some hold over stocked trout might have migrated there?

      The poster formally known as Duncsdad

      Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
      #3
      FishinGuy
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 2074
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2007/05/16 12:41:21
      • Location: westmoreland county
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 07:46:42 (permalink)
      DarDys
      Just a thought -- most trout, not just steelhead, migrate. So, if trout are stocked in a stream, especially a marginal one, does that mean that all the tributaries to that stream and all the tributaries to the tributaries and so on and so forth to where water bubbles out if the ground would be open to the public because some hold over stocked trout might have migrated there?
      that's exactly what I was thinking.
      #4
      woodnickle
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 8500
      • Reward points: 0
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 08:16:00 (permalink)
      It says"Lake Erie shoreline"....so inland does not apply.
      Make them nursery waters and watch Ohio license sales go up.

      #5
      FishinGuy
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 2074
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2007/05/16 12:41:21
      • Location: westmoreland county
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 09:01:14 (permalink)
      Mikastorm
      It says"Lake Erie shoreline"....so inland does not apply.Make them nursery waters and watch Ohio license sales go up.
      did you read the article posted above? “Any water in this Commonwealth stocked with fish furnished by the commission, including water areas where stocked fish may migrate into, shall be open to the public for the purpose of free, lawful fishing.”
      The intention of the law is to give the angling public access to the entire length of Twentymile Creek, Elk Creek, Walnut Creek, and many other Lake Erie tributaries along Pennsylvania’s short Lake Erie coast.
      #6
      wayneo73
      Novice Angler
      • Total Posts : 77
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2012/02/25 11:33:40
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 10:01:07 (permalink)
      i haven't followed this debate too closely... except for reading an occasional discussion on here. i really don't have a dog in this fight... i don't own land on any stream and visit erie 1-2(max) times/yr for steelhead.  so from an outsiders viewpoint, i see this as a real pickle for all parties involved.
       
      generally speaking i tend to lean heavily towards conservative political views.  that would/should put me squarely on the side of the landowner.  who's the government to tell me what i can and can't do with my land?  but in this case i definitely see the "government's" side.  it would be a different story if these weren't stocked fish.  but since they are stocked with angler money, then the anglers should have access to the waters they're in, period.  these landowners shouldn't be able to profit off of angler funded fish... but what if they recently purchased the land and paid a premium because they could lease the land to outfitters for big money??? who's going to pay them back for that premium they paid that's now worthless because of a regulation?  
       
      for every arguement you can give in favor of, there's an arguement against and vise versa.  
       
      i'm not sure what the right answer is here but there's no answer that's going to make everyone happy.
      #7
      BeenThereDoneThat.
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 11939
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2014/05/14 07:30:39
      • Location: A Field or A Float
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 11:37:06 (permalink)
      This is only the beginning folks and they will not stop. This scenario does not involve Erie waters and/or tributaries alone and, will not be the first time a landowner has lost the right to keep their land private. If the water(s) running through private lands are deemed navigable (and the water will be) then, they will be opened to use for/by the public. This same battle has been fought elsewhere in PA. and the land owner lost.

      Least you forget, the law of Eminent Domain. That's where your goverment can and will force you to sell your land in the interest of the public. The goverment can be nothing more then one of those township boards of supervisors consisting of three people.

      This law is wide open to interpretation that can be used by a governing body to twist the arm of the courts to force the sale of private property. Now, a land owner has their right to a day in court; good luck with that, hope they can afford the legal fees.

      Land owners trying to protect their waters from fishing will not be alone in this battle as those posting their lands to prevent hunting are in the sights of the game commission.

      To get what the fish and game commissions want will cost a lot of money and time. Time is on their side and as for money; keep buying those trout and Erie stamps.

      PS PA. hunters, keep buying those doe tags.

      PSS TIME will tell..........
      post edited by BeenThereDoneThat. - 2014/08/26 14:41:50
      #8
      eyesandgillz
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 4009
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2003/06/18 11:30:03
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 12:53:03 (permalink)
      Simple solution, stop stocking trout.  
       
      Let streams revert back to "natural states."  If current trout can holdover and reproduce, great.  If brookies can take back over, even better.  If not, oh well.  
       
      Is this the PAFBC pushing this or the legislators who introduced this bill?  
       
      Taking away private property rights is not the answer.  
       
       
      #9
      D-nymph
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 6701
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2001/09/19 08:37:37
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 13:14:07 (permalink)
      eyesandgillz
      Simple solution, stop stocking trout.  
       
      Let streams revert back to "natural states."  If current trout can holdover and reproduce, great.  If brookies can take back over, even better.  If not, oh well.  
       
      Is this the PAFBC pushing this or the legislators who introduced this bill?  
       
      Taking away private property rights is not the answer.  
       
       


      It's several legislators, not the PFBC, who introduced the bill.
       
      Then, as per usual, people here not being very good at reading and misunderstanfing the authors speculation, or, rather his idea, in the last paragraph, where he writes: 
      A more successful tactic may be for the PA Fish & Boat Commission to declare all private property as “nursery waters” in the fishing regulations, and close it to all fishing
      There is nothing at all in that article that says the PFBC is in favor of access change in Erie or the Commonwealth.
      #10
      Cold
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 7358
      • Reward points: 0
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 13:24:43 (permalink)
      C'mon, D-Nymph.  
       
      You want people to actually read the stuff they b!tch and moan about?  Even more, you want them to think about it?
       
      Jeez.
      #11
      wayneo73
      Novice Angler
      • Total Posts : 77
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2012/02/25 11:33:40
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 13:38:38 (permalink)
      i don't see any "simple" solutions.  erie depends on the steelhead fisherman coming up there spending money.  the fish commission needs the money spent on trout and erie stamps.  you take the stocked fish away, where do you replace that money?
      #12
      D-nymph
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 6701
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2001/09/19 08:37:37
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 14:08:34 (permalink)
      I know, Cold.  It's an awful lot to ask. 
      #13
      shmoe
      Avid Angler
      • Total Posts : 195
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2013/02/10 07:08:30
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 14:41:33 (permalink)
      honestly if i owned stream property ide post the crap out of it. thatd be a dream come true. 
      as for erie there are plenty of non posted areas to fish... lower the limit, catch and release would be nice. let some of them come back next year bigger.. now that would be fun
      #14
      DarDys
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 4891
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
      • Location: Duncansville, PA
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 14:51:13 (permalink)
      Cold
      C'mon, D-Nymph.   You want people to actually read the stuff they b!tch and moan about?  Even more, you want them to think about it? Jeez.


      Actually I did read it and do understand it. I now own a section of stream that is stocked more than a mile upstream from me and us a tributary to a stream that is stocked more than a mile from where the trib enters. The distance from that entry to my property is also over a mile.

      So is it your opinion that since my section of stream will be posted because I don't want hunters that close to my house nor fishermen leaving line and hooks that can injure my very expensive bird dogs, that i should not be able to fish for the wild trout on the property I bought almost specifically because of the stream simply because a stocked trout, which I also helped pay for through my license purchase, might migrate through there?

      Really?

      The poster formally known as Duncsdad

      Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
      #15
      Crookedbuthappy
      New Angler
      • Total Posts : 12
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2010/10/21 20:59:59
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 15:16:09 (permalink)
      I am a landowner on a small stream and love to fish for steelies. I've never profited from a single person since I've owned it. I've kept it open for several years and closed it last year due to property damage, littering, and people ****ing in sight of my wife and daughter. For the most part people have been pretty good sportsmen. Problem is that my house is right on the creek. My wife is a little uncomfortable when people are walking in the creek 20 feet from the house. I hate turning people away too. It's amazing what a friendly conversation will do to calm a landowner down but it is equally amazing what people will do for these fish. I have an entire side of the creek open for parking and they will still walk through my front yard then down the driveway and along my garage to fish. Things have got so crazy. I love access to fishing as much as the next guy but I don't know what would happen if this was implemented. I know people would say just sell it but this is my home. Not everyone is out for the almighty dollar. I love seeing beginners, kids, families, military, and if could get support I would make it accessible to the handicapped. These are my big plans of profiting= better access to those who deserve it the most. So I'm gonna be punished because a select few have money? So it's either let every single person have free domain on my property or no fishing at all? I would have to agree with the gentleman that said to just stop stocking then. I guess my answer is to make access for special groups of people or special regulation sections. Well who will enforce these areas? Well the same people I'll be calling every single day who have to respond to my calls that someone stepped an inch on my protected part of my property. Thank you.
      #16
      Ironhed
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 1892
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2001/11/07 19:10:08
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 15:22:28 (permalink)
      This is NOT a good idea.

      Blacktop Charters
      #17
      D-nymph
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 6701
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2001/09/19 08:37:37
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 15:30:36 (permalink)
      DarDys


      Actually I did read it and do understand it.



       
      Then you wouldn't be one of the ones I mentioned & Cold commented on.
      #18
      Accountant
      Expert Angler
      • Total Posts : 528
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2010/08/03 17:35:09
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 15:45:55 (permalink)
      Wouldn't that effectively open up pretty much any piece of property along any major river?

      I mean, they stock walleye, stripers, musky, whatever up and down the 3 rivers, the susky, juniata, etc. etc. etc. Does that mean anyone can just basically stroll into some yinzer's back yard on neville island and fish? 

      If so, sounds like a well thought out foolproof plan. 
      #19
      Cold
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 7358
      • Reward points: 0
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 15:55:26 (permalink)
      D-nymph
      DarDys


      Actually I did read it and do understand it.



       
      Then you wouldn't be one of the ones I mentioned & Cold commented on.





       
      This exactly.
       
      But for the record, since you're figuring it's okay to strawman me, I don't support this bill at all as written, specifically for the reasons you're talking about and generally because it's a big invasion of private property rights.  
       
      I think it's a generally crappy thing to do to run a pay to play fish circus over state stocked fish, but a bill like this isn't the solution.
      #20
      D-nymph
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 6701
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2001/09/19 08:37:37
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 15:59:39 (permalink)
      Accountant

      I mean, they stock walleye, stripers, musky, whatever up and down the 3 rivers, the susky, juniata, etc. etc. etc. Does that mean anyone can just basically stroll into some yinzer's back yard on neville island and fish? 
       


      The Ohio River is already a navigable river, and you can go anywhere below the high water mark.  You can not cross some yinzer's yard, without their permission, to access the Ohio River, however.
       
      Ohio, Mon, Allegheny, Susquehanna, Delaware, Juniata, Lehigh, Little Juniata are all navigable. 
      #21
      Accountant
      Expert Angler
      • Total Posts : 528
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2010/08/03 17:35:09
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 16:37:30 (permalink)
      Yes i knew there was some sort of hole in my logic.  With that in mind, i guess the high water mark would still remain a restriction even if they forced the landowners to keep the waters open to the public.
      #22
      DarDys
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 4891
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2009/11/13 08:46:21
      • Location: Duncansville, PA
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 16:44:14 (permalink)
      Cold
      D-nymph
      DarDys


      Actually I did read it and do understand it.


       Then you wouldn't be one of the ones I mentioned & Cold commented on.


       This exactly. But for the record, since you're figuring it's okay to strawman me, I don't support this bill at all as written, specifically for the reasons you're talking about and generally because it's a big invasion of private property rights.   I think it's a generally crappy thing to do to run a pay to play fish circus over state stocked fish, but a bill like this isn't the solution.


      Wasn't strawmanning you. Just wanted to clarify your position by asking?

      The poster formally known as Duncsdad

      Everything I say can be fully substantiated by my own opinion.
      #23
      johnthefisherman
      Expert Angler
      • Total Posts : 425
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2013/11/17 08:35:28
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 17:11:57 (permalink)
      Aand, it is safe to say that steelhead season is in the air...
      #24
      chartist
      Expert Angler
      • Total Posts : 925
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2008/10/18 13:01:54
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/15 18:23:41 (permalink)
      Don't bet money on the government not supporting the using or taking of private land for public use...It happened in Norwood Ohio where they took an entire neighborhood for public use...yes, some holdouts got more money in the end, but lost their homes nonetheless.  So, don't believe for a second that Elk and 20 mile creek access won't be granted for all by the courts.  And it should because the fishery has been crushed by private landowners.  If I lived in Erie, god forbid, I'd fish in New York only.
      #25
      wirenut45
      Avid Angler
      • Total Posts : 152
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2011/01/29 10:22:43
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/16 08:20:24 (permalink)
      2nd q. from me; you do know the comm. isnt getting this land for free, right?in those takings mentioned earlier, the gov,t was FORCED to pay for them. wheres the comm. coming up with the $? they have projects on hold now they can,t afford. this would be very expensive. don,t see legislature opening gen. fund to pay for this. that would open another can ,o, worms. JMHO.
      #26
      BeenThereDoneThat.
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 11939
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2014/05/14 07:30:39
      • Location: A Field or A Float
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/16 11:28:28 (permalink)
      The trout and Lake Erie stamps started out to be temporary (imagine that). The Lake Erie/Trout stamps were infact inacted into law for the purpose of buying land and stocking of trout in and around Lake Erie. Here's the neat part; Trout stamps purchased to fish any where else was (to be) designated to purchase trout for inland waters. Since the 'temporary' required stamp law expired and the new law put into effect, I hear the money goes into a 'general' fund.

      I don't think the PFBC will take 'no' for an answer when it comes to opening private land to allow fishing.

      Maybe a little too far out into left field at this time but, there is the law of Eminent Domain in the hip pocket of PFBC. Land owners can and, have been forced to sell their land (at fair market value) in the interest of the public. Also in PA. there exist a law whereby a land owner cannot 'landlock' other land and can be forced to allow right of ways across their private land.

      Keep in mind, a land owner has their right to a day in court, if they can afford it.

      Our legislators 'create laws' based on information provided by the 'experts' and our law agencies enforce those laws. The PBFC is both a law agency and recognized expert. When the PBFC speaks; the legislators listen.

      Tourism is the new 'industry' being promoted in PA. and all aspects of attracting (big) money spending tourist will be used. Hunting (especially elk) and fishing (the infamous trout) certainly hold a place in the top ten tourist attractions.

      Time will certainly tell.......
      post edited by BeenThereDoneThat. - 2014/09/08 12:04:16
      #27
      Loomis
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 2672
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2005/09/19 09:18:47
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/16 12:38:14 (permalink)
      I hope this bill passes i'm sick of paying trespassing fines.  
      #28
      CAPTAIN HOOK
      Pro Angler
      • Total Posts : 2384
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2002/09/28 22:31:08
      • Location: N.W. Pa.
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/17 06:54:39 (permalink)
      I bet people who live around lakes are sick of seeing fishermen everyday. It's a wonder anybody would buy land around such public used areas.
      #29
      wirenut45
      Avid Angler
      • Total Posts : 152
      • Reward points: 0
      • Joined: 2011/01/29 10:22:43
      • Status: offline
      Re: Here we go again.... 2014/08/17 08:50:28 (permalink)
      pa. has abt. 83,000 mi. of streams, so i wonder when they,ll get to me to pay for my land use? hope not too long, i,ll use the money to buy icefishing stuff. LOL
      #30
      Page: 12345.. > >> Showing page 1 of 6
      Jump to: