The Future of Fly Fishing in America ?

wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
George Cleveland wrote:
nightmare scenario snipped
... So if you want to come to
WI and fish for small stream brookies you might want to make the
effort soon.

May God Damn the Republican Party.

Amen to that brother, Amen to that.

Um, I, for one, would love to hear the theory under which you and your
brother seem to:
a) feel the taxpayers of the US of A should subsidize you or anyone else
with free or essentially-free public fishing,

The laws concerning stream navigation don't have anything to do
with fishing per se but rather are founded on the commerce clause
in Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution. Basically, if a stream is
navigable it has to be open to the public, not necessarily for
fishing but for transporting goods.

In Wisconsin a stream is deemed navigable if you can float a
canoe on it during its highest water. By that standard most
Wisconsin streams are deemed navigable and are therefore public
waters. You can fish on public water so long as you stay in
the water (or below the high water mark, that changes from time
to time) and don't cross private land to get in the water.
This is not hard because every bridge on every public road in
Wisconsin has a public easement, so if you enter the water
at a bridge you're entering on public land.

What the GOP wants to do is change the definition of navigable
from canoe at highest water to six hundred foot tow barge full
of iron ore at lowest water. (Or something like that. ;-)

--
Ken Fortenberry

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 23:15:17 GMT, "Thomas Littleton"
wrote:


Well, I for one can't remember Cameron Dam, but here is my two cents on
Lefty's little Club. They are widely regarded in PA as elitist jerks who
laid claim to waters on the Little Junianta which have been considered
public(and, I might add, were stocked at public expense). Briefly
mentioned,
there is a lawsuit pending which will end the posting on the Little J(it
HAS
to be ruled navigable in the stretch in question). The posted water on
Penn's is a fish farm near the cave, upstream from where we have the
clave.
It is no more typical of the prime waters that make Penn's famous than
your
average state hatchery. Some of the stats cited in that article are
ludicrous(for instance, implying that anything other than industry and
logging are responsible for the decline in Brook Trout). It comes down to
a
sort of entitlement mentality among some well off types that they can be
the
torch-bearers of trout fishing, not trusting the upkeep to the unwashed
masses. Such a position never works, and is complete BS. The private
fisheries of the UK are a prime example, loaded with largely
hatchery-raised
trout. Spruce Creek has been similarly stocked for years, catering to
Presidents and industrialists. Nothing could be further from natural
sustenance. As someone noted in the thread, it is fools like these that
help
elevate local poachers to revered status in the rural communities of
central
PA.
Tom

Well, of course they're elitist jerks - they're morons, too. Anyone who
spends 75,000USD up front for the further duty to pay 5000.00 more to
pay to stay in a cabin and pay someone to cook ONLY for them when they
could fish nearby for the same fish free and pay 50.00 or less a day in
lodging and 25.00 or less for food is not only an elitist, but a stupid
one, too...

Lest anyone be confused about the nature of the beast, I think it's also
worth pointing out that having and spending too much money are sufficient
but not necessary conditions for inclusion in the ranks of stupid elitists.
Being an absolutely dependable, if largely inarticulate, apologist for other
stupid elitists will do as well.

Wolfgang
and being screamingly funny double-naught orator in the process doesn't hurt
either.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 23:15:17 GMT, "Thomas Littleton"
wrote:


Well, I for one can't remember Cameron Dam, but here is my two cents on
Lefty's little Club. They are widely regarded in PA as elitist jerks who
laid claim to waters on the Little Junianta which have been considered
public(and, I might add, were stocked at public expense). Briefly
mentioned,
there is a lawsuit pending which will end the posting on the Little J(it
HAS
to be ruled navigable in the stretch in question). The posted water on
Penn's is a fish farm near the cave, upstream from where we have the
clave.
It is no more typical of the prime waters that make Penn's famous than
your
average state hatchery. Some of the stats cited in that article are
ludicrous(for instance, implying that anything other than industry and
logging are responsible for the decline in Brook Trout). It comes down to
a
sort of entitlement mentality among some well off types that they can be
the
torch-bearers of trout fishing, not trusting the upkeep to the unwashed
masses. Such a position never works, and is complete BS. The private
fisheries of the UK are a prime example, loaded with largely
hatchery-raised
trout. Spruce Creek has been similarly stocked for years, catering to
Presidents and industrialists. Nothing could be further from natural
sustenance. As someone noted in the thread, it is fools like these that
help
elevate local poachers to revered status in the rural communities of
central
PA.
Tom

Well, of course they're elitist jerks - they're morons, too. Anyone who
spends 75,000USD up front for the further duty to pay 5000.00 more to
pay to stay in a cabin and pay someone to cook ONLY for them when they
could fish nearby for the same fish free and pay 50.00 or less a day in
lodging and 25.00 or less for food is not only an elitist, but a stupid
one, too...

Lest anyone be confused about the nature of the beast, I think it's also
worth pointing out that having and spending too much money are sufficient
but not necessary conditions for inclusion in the ranks of stupid elitists.
Being an absolutely dependable, if largely inarticulate, apologist for other
stupid elitists will do as well.

Wolfgang
and being screamingly funny double-naught orator in the process doesn't hurt
either.

Dave LaCourse wrote:

rw writes:


There is no difference whosoever.


There is a big difference.


BTW, there's nothing wrong with being rich. It's best not to brag about
it, though.


Look, Barnard, I was just returning your shot across my bow with your remark
about you could walk deeper into the woods, but I probably couldn't because of
my feet (and legs/hips). I can pay my way in. That's all. No bragging about
it.

Just how much "disposable" income do you have?

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

Dave LaCourse wrote:

rw writes:


There is no difference whosoever.


There is a big difference.


BTW, there's nothing wrong with being rich. It's best not to brag about
it, though.


Look, Barnard, I was just returning your shot across my bow with your remark
about you could walk deeper into the woods, but I probably couldn't because of
my feet (and legs/hips). I can pay my way in. That's all. No bragging about
it.

Just how much "disposable" income do you have?

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 14:15:47 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

What the GOP wants to do is change the definition of navigable
from canoe at highest water to six hundred foot tow barge full
of iron ore at lowest water. (Or something like that. ;-)

FWIW, that's basically the definition of navigable in GA - the water must be
able to handle heavy barge traffic to be deemed navigable.
--
Charlie...
http://bellsouthpwp.net/c/c/cchoc/

rw asks:

Just how much "disposable" income do you have?


You first. (?)

rw asks:

Just how much "disposable" income do you have?


You first. (?)

DAve LaCourse:
Like I've said, it isn't government that is the problem, but US, you, me,
and a
million others that want to fish.

And by extension, that create many of the problems facing the nation today,
education, health care, employment, immigration, transportation,

A generation that should have taken heed to the ZPG theory failed to listen.
We popped out kids on an assembly line basis and taught them to become far
more voracious consumers than we ever were. If one TV in the house was
adequate, one in every room was better. Any kid who did not receive a car
for his/her 16th birthday could almost sue for child abuse in some
communities. Now it is politically incorrect to question anyone's need or
right to reproduce; even at the extreme of requiring fertility clinics.

Malthus was correct.

--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
When the dawn came up like thunder

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/i...age92kword.htm

slenon wrote:
snip
Malthus was correct.

Malthus was a racist and his long since disproven crackpot notions
led inexorably to eugenics. You, of all people on roff, should be
among the first to be appalled and disgusted that anyone in their
right mind could, in the 21st century, declare in public that
"Malthus was correct."

--
Ken Fortenberry