Silverbullet_11
 
I am from Wyoming, and the state would offer payments, tax breaks, etc. to landowners that open their property for public access.  I would like to see that, as it would be fair for everyone.

 
agree
I've said a dozen times everyone gets something good out of the circus  EXCEPT the land owner .
the tent makers,  trapeze artists    and elephant ear/sausage/french fry salesmen make money.
The ticket buyers get to enjoy the show..
 
the land owner gets   the traffic, noise and  cleaning up the elephant crap left behind ....for nothing
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

If the landowner refuses to open the stream bed, they are restricted to not profit through use of guides or trespassing fees.
 

 
I wouldn't be  opposed to that..or additional  fees based on the percentage of fish that hold there all season long.
example...if it costs $15 to raise a smolt, and a particular stretch averages 100 fish all season long, there'll be a $1500 charge
 
I don't want to see them declared "nursery waters"  as some have suggested .
 
 
 
 

my whole point is that it would be nice if something could be done to open up some of these areas and get money grubbin guides to get a real job

 
I'm not sure guides are the  problem, are they?
How much water is leased to guides only now?
I don't know, but  don't think it's a large  portion compared to all the posted water 
 
most all the posted water  was posted before any guides approached them.
Landowners got fed up with the circus clowns
even the "good anglers" are a HUGE footprint alone
 
 
 
..L.T.A.
 
 

silverbullet. good points, i am on board....

Money is king... They should start looking into these activities and verify they are posting it on their taxes as extra income.

Man, i don't know this is all a touchy subject in my opinion. I keep putting myself in a land owners shoes, imagine sitting in your kitchen helping your children do homework and theres some fishermen there walking past your window, or peeing on your tree.

Imagine sitting at your table drinking coffee at 5 a.m while your wife gets ready for work and a motorcade of cars is pulling up to your house or flashlights are going through your yard.

Im all for fishing access, but as a responsible homeowner, living on a quiet quiet quiet rural street... I'd have to oppose letting people come at free will. My road sees no more than a dozen cars a day, usually the same people, same times. Its quiet, its nice, and i hope it stays this way. If i had a steelhead creek coming through my property or on my road, imagine the chaos... 3-5 months out of the year is just insanity, trash, traffic, from 5am to 10 pm, 7 days a week. People upon people

I don't believe it is right for people to make money off their property without being taxed income... this is a screwed up loophole and i hope people get busted for it that do. poor richards cant sell skein from a fish it didn't pay for..

As for the whole ask for permission thing... again, 5am to 10 pm 7 days a week... your door bell would be ringing non stop!! Or, people would see 1 or 2 people fishing and take it upon them selves to assume its fair game. Lots of if and buts... but for me its no, its getting posted. Will i let guides on it and or profit from it... absolutely not. What i will do however is if i meet you at a bar, or on here etc.. and i know your a truly respectful person, you will be able to bring your young child or an elder... someone who is not capable of combat fishing with the masses. At your own will without permission.

Im very locked down when it comes to strangers and trusting random people... but if i come home from work and I see a good friend stopped by and was in my house or out on my property unexpectedly, I'd welcome them.
Im selective with socializing, if you had a minute to decide if someone that knocks on your door and wants to fish your property, can or cant..youd be hesitant to say yes. Unfortunately its all or nothing up there. Your either shut down to everyone or open to the masses.. there will be no in between..

Too me it's a loosing battle now and heading into the future. I'd say as of now 1/3 of Elk Creek is posted or private now.
 
Of the 2/3's water left to fish, I'd say at least 1/3 is not worth fishing, too shallow, or just doesn't hold staging fish .
 
That leaves about 1/3 water or ground to open public access fishing !
 
Divide that by all the fishermen crowding into that open 1/3 area and you have what is now Erie Steelhead Fishing.
For some it's still fun and worth it, to old timers like me, you can have the crowds.
 
"Turn out the lights the party's over"  !

it makes you wonder where all the fish are  in late December when there's not much in sterrettenia and nothing at the lower section or legion area.... wonder if they are like the deer in hunting season where they all just head to the propagation area bc they know there is no hunting pressure... 
 
either way you'd think mid elk is where most of the fish  hold... 

jat1007
i wonder how much that waterfall deters the fish.... later in the season there isn't much low on the nut.... either make it over or back to the lake? ... i doubt back to the lake..
 

They are on a freaking stringer.Pa is the fish roping capital.

DarDys
Your attorney is going to want to be paid by you, either upfront or at the trial's conclusion. Should you win and are awarded defense costs, how long will it take to recoup those if the person has no money or salable assets?

No doubt, attorneys want paid for their time, regardless of outcome.  In my case, a company was liable for work.  They knew it, and have since fessed up and have done 95% of the work.  I'm taking the remaining 5% as a loss, to go along with engineering, attorney and other professional witness fees that I have compiled.  None of that is recoverable by PA laws, written to benefit big businesses.  If this went to trial, it likely would have cost me 5-6 times as much, and not able to counter sue for the costs in PA.  My company benefits, have a legal program, to match funds to a certain amount for legal fees, which I was willing to drain my 401k for, if counter suit was an option.  It was getting close to the point of me going that route regardless.  So, the amount that I have paid is nothing compared to the amount I could have paid, for about the same outcome.  Every professional witness and attorney that I met with assured me, that if it went to trail, there were multiple violations that proved them liable, and basically was a "slam dunk" case.  If able, I would counter sue right now, for the fees.  I doubt my attorney would have any issues moving forward on a counter suit for this money.  He was invoicing me 2 weeks after any meeting or services rendered, during the process.  It is just more money for him.   The company in question, is financially sound with over $500M in assets.  It may have taken them time to pay me, but no issue with money or salable assets.  No issues at all paying the attorney, as that was through me.    

Sad to hear that there is more land posted.  That makes about 7.09 miles of posted water down stream of Folly's.  There is less then that below the posted properties.  Just saying...
 
I am not busting the owner that posted as I have witnessed many of the human behaviors that probably assisted in his/her decision to post the waters.

Just hope in the future the WPC will get involved and acquire the said areas or the FC ups the amount of money it is willing to pay for easements. Money will get land owners attention as taxes go up and farm income drops. Another recession would not hurt either as one is predicted to occur in the next few years. As these landowners retirement income falls an infusion of cash for easements could help them.

If I recall correctly, and I might not, when the easement deals were first offered, they were in perpetuity. Is that still the case?