That designation does NOT make it public.

ORIGINAL: S-10

Sooo-- after spending the bait fishermens money to fight Beaver and his special interest group for access to the stream some are suggesting we should replace his group with another special interest group. Some are using the logic that removing bait fishermen would lessen the mortality rate and make for a better C&R stream. Wellll--- Since the Erie tribs are a put and take fishery dependent on yearly stockings and not C&R I guess we should make them bait only to offset the streams some of the fly snobs want to take over for themselves. I carry both and use whatever is hot at the time because my objective is to catch fish not wash flies. I fish with a guy that won't use anything but a fly that he has tied himself even if I am standing beside him outfishing him 10 to one and offer him what I am using. He doesn't try to make me change  or go somewhere else and neither should you. Drake has the right attitude on this one. Next the vintage bamboo rodders will want their own section, don't forget an Orvis section, how about one for #20 and smaller hooks. We all pay for a license and what some are suggesting is exactly what Beaver is doing. My 2 cents

"an Orvis section"

Now that would be funny...a bunch of walking orvis catalogs with their own section of water, wearing the latest pastel colored orvis fishing shirts, getting their wonderline tangled in the trees.

I don't know the stream, but if it flows through private land, it can be posted. Only a navigability designation could change that.

The heritage designation ( as I understand it ) only qualifies it for CHP grants.

I actually own some older Orvis equipment but it is well used and shows it. I have seen and chuckle at some of the walking catalogs you speak of.

The Authority’s land use easement program is another noteworthy project. In granting a conservation easement the landowner agrees to place restrictions on his or her use of the land, and to limit activities to those that are compatible with conservation objectives.  In effect it provides a buffer zone between the stream and future development, and forbids depositing any potentially toxic or polluting materials in the easement area.  The land can not be plowed or stripped of grass, shrubs, trees, or plants, and no new buildings may be erected. The landowner retains full ownership of the easement area, and may specify whether or not public access will be granted.  At the end of 2000 the Authority held ten easements with a total of fifteen tracts of land, with several additional easements pending.
Zoning
The Authority pursues to attain federal, state and local government regulatory designations, zoning ordinances and similar protection to help preserve the LeTort and protect its watershed. As a result several measures are in place and several more are in progress.
In 1988, the entire stream was placed in the Pennsylvania Scenic Rivers System.  This program recognizes exceptional natural waterways, and guides state agencies in decisions affecting land management issues in the riparian corridor.  This corridor extends from the headwaters to the confluence with the Conodoguinet Creek, follows the 100 year flood plain and is about 1000 feet across at its widest.
In 1997, Pennsylvania designated the segment from the Route 34 bridge to the old railroad bridge in LeTort Park, in the Borough of Carlisle, as an Exceptional Value Stream. This provides additional protection from further development and discharges. With continued community participation and improved municipal storm water management it may be possible to upgrade the entire length of the LeTort Spring Run to Exceptional Value status.
 
 
"The landowner retains full ownership of the easement area, and may specify whether or not public access will be granted.  At the end of 2000 the Authority held ten easements with a total of fifteen tracts of land, with several additional easements pending."
 
This is from the LeTort conservation authority's website.
 

Those two lines are not referring to tackle restrictions. Please explain how, bait, or spoon chucking are contrary to conservation practices.
 
" and all of these easements are so you and I can walk the land and fish the water...as long as we"
 
Not true.

The landowner retains full ownership of the easement area, and may specify whether or not public access will be granted.

Actually I am not opposed to LIMITED sections of stream being designated DHALO, or FFO. I fact I kind of like it. Keeps the elitist, "my method is superior" fly Gods, congregated in one (away from me ) where they can all sniff each other's rose scented farts.
 
By the way I fly fish as much as I chuck spoons, or bait. 

"In effect it provides a buffer zone between the stream and future development, and forbids depositing any potentially toxic or polluting materials in the easement area.  The land can not be plowed or stripped of grass, shrubs, trees, or plants, and no new buildings may be erected."
 
This is what the activities that are compatible with conservation objectives refers to. Nothing to do with fishing, or fishing regulations.

If I did, I wouldn't harm any more fish than you would on the fly.

If regulations permitted, yes I might. Why not? Is the objective to preserve the stream, and fish, or to preserve the fish for a select group?