PA needs a stream access law similar to Montana, or at least something similar limited to streams that get stocked with publicly funded resources: 
 
"Under the Montana Stream Access Law (1985), the public may use rivers and streams for recreational purposes up to the ordinary high-water mark. Although the law gives recreationists the right to use rivers and streams for water-related recreation, it does not allow them to enter posted lands bordering those streams or to cross private lands to gain access to streams."
 
http://fwp.mt.gov/fishing/guide/access/streamAccess.html

This flat out sucks. Somehow this is Donnie Beaver's fault.

The only one to blame is the state...
 
Creating and marketing an Amusement park of an artificial fishery on private property.... this was bound to happen
 
all posted/private water = nursery water with no fishing
want privacy and tired of the unwashed masses.... there is your fix

gonna have to hit the powerball or just sit home gluing pretty colored macaroni's to tin cans

Maybe we can construct an artificial barrier at rt 5 preventing upstream passage of the artificial tax paid for fish so they cannot be privatized by someone seeking to generate income from our artificial fishery.

KJH807
The only one to blame is the state...
 
Creating and marketing an Amusement park of an artificial fishery on private property.... this was bound to happen
 
all posted/private water = nursery water with no fishing
want privacy and tired of the unwashed masses.... there is your fix

I like the Montana stream access law better.  If a land owner wants privacy and is tired of the masses, then they should sell their land and move somewhere near by a smaller stream that doesn't get stocked.  The land value increase due to the publicly funded resource put there would more than pay for the cost of relocating. 
 
It wouldn't be nearly as bad as the state coming in and putting a new highway next to their property, or a neighbor selling gas rights to a fracking company who sets up a well on the edge of their property.

SteelSlayer77

KJH807
The only one to blame is the state...
 
Creating and marketing an Amusement park of an artificial fishery on private property.... this was bound to happen
 
all posted/private water = nursery water with no fishing
want privacy and tired of the unwashed masses.... there is your fix

I like the Montana stream access law better.  If a land owner wants privacy and is tired of the masses, then they should sell their land and move somewhere near by a smaller stream that doesn't get stocked.  The land value increase due to the publicly funded resource put there would more than pay for the cost of relocating. 
 
It wouldn't be nearly as bad as the state coming in and putting a new highway next to their property, or a neighbor selling gas rights to a fracking company who sets up a well on the edge of their property.

KJH's idea is actually feasible, PFBC could declare nursery waters if they wished. 
 
SteelSlayer's idea would affect the entire state & it's just not possible. 

I believe at one time when we discussed the nursery water option. WCO said that would not be feasible. (can't remember why). PA does use and posts certain sections of certain streams in the ANF as " fish refuge area" with no fishing or wading during a set period of time.
 
waters have been so designated in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.

SteelSlayer77
 
 
I like the Montana stream access law better.  If a land owner wants privacy and is tired of the masses, then they should sell their land and move somewhere near by a smaller stream that doesn't get stocked.  The land value increase due to the publicly funded resource put there would more than pay for the cost of relocating. 
 

thanks for your entry in the "dumbest post of the year 2014" contest... you are the new front runner
congrats and good luck!

That would be awesome if these greedy jack****3$ paid a bunch of money to have people post their property to make money off fisher folks, then it got deemed nursery waters. THAT would be true justice.