Beaver and SRC GAVE UP

Thats great for you guys that fish this water thats involved but it still is a fight for the next body of water that this happens to again. The ruling is for the J only and does not cover any other waterways. Those will get decided by a lengthly court case.

Chris, I like your idea of ethics, but my comment to that is you can't teach common sense to ignorant people.

ORIGINAL: chrisrowboat

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08039/855825-85.stm



Let us hope other SRC Lease areas will become available to public fishing.

Remember it takes only one slob fisherman to close down a stream.
I for one would like to see some form of fishing ethics supported by the PAF&BC. Placards, Written up in the fishing regulations booklet, or even given out at sportsmen shows. The real recourse is the access to healthy fish with.
Clean water, Healthy fish, Access to water, and ethical fishing that is the future.
Chris

But, it could be used in arguments about other streams in the Commonwealth. It just means you need historical evidence. Case law will still be given and used from this case in other suits on other drainages.
I feel it is because of the cost and the likely hood Judge Kurtz's decision would have been up held. I sure would like to see the Commonwealth courts comprehensive brief in response. On the day this week that Beaver et al. were to file their reply brief, they informed the other parties that they were instead withdrawing their appeal.

Gentlemen,
     I think the withdrawal had less to do with money and more to do with it affecting other stretches of water.  If a person wants to "make a case" and has sufficient historical evidence; then just about ANY creek in PA can be said to have been used for "commerce".  For example:  How did the trappers and early traders get their supplies and materials in and out of the "wilderness"?  By Canoe!  And what does a conoe travel in/on?  Water!  It doesn't matter if the canoe was paddled or drug along by a man on the bank pulling it with a rope.  The terrain surrounding most streams makes anything but a water route almost improbable.  Which explains why almost all our towns are located?  By bodies of water!.   Just for sh*ts and giggles go to your local library and read histories of PA circa 1730-1780.  The information is all there.   If it weren't for the dams in the Spruce Creek (whoops there aren't supposed to be any dams in approved trout waters, must be natural occuring land falls. LOL) how far do you think a canoe could go up stream?   Maybe to Harpsters? or beyond.  Did anyone else ever notice the very old footpath/road that follows the creeks in that area?  Towline path?
      My best assumption is that somebody informed Dee Beaver that he could lose a lot more leased land if the suit was appealed, and "others" applied a little outside pressure.  This is just an ASSUMPTION mind you.
 
Actually I wouldn't call it a loss;  More like a strategic withdrawal to consolidate forces in a more defensible position while preparing for a possible counterattack.

The precedent was set with the original ruling, dropping the appeal won't change that.