Register now on PaFlyFish.com! Login
HOME FORUM BLOG PHOTOS LINKS


Sponsors

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



« 1 (2) 3 4 »


Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/11 8:26
From Chester County
Posts: 2116
Offline
Quote:

tomitrout wrote:
Quote:
And eventually landowners became tired of constant activity and closed down sections.


And is this necessarily a bad thing where the health of the stream is concerned?

Conservation of the stream itself vs conservation of your fishing access? Guess it probably depends on your view of the 'big picture.'


^Agree with TT.

There's conservation and there's protecting your fishin' hole. Sometimes the conservation effort helps your fishin'...and sometimes it doesn't.

But the fact remains, conserving a stream....conserves a stream.

There is a myriad of challenges to nearly every stream or river that conservation organizations try to keep in check > housing or commercial development of a crucial watershed, industrial or agricultural pollution, privatization of open areas, etc.

While all conservations efforts do not always end up "helping" from our own personal perspective, overall their role is essential, and most times their cause is admirable.

Join one....be part of the solution....make the organization better.

Posted on: 8/27 8:07


Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???

Joined:
2012/2/16 18:55
From Nowheresville, PA
Posts: 1333
Offline
Great.
How about we restore the Letort and close it down since it is one block from tomi. I'm sure he will be in favor.

hows that battle against development going for these groups? Any big wins here in the southeast part of state?

Posted on: 8/27 8:11
_________________
“USED TROUT STREAM FOR SALE.
MUST BE SEEN TO BE APPRECIATED.”


Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???

Joined:
2006/9/9 17:18
From lancaster county
Posts: 994
Offline
Actually conservation groups have done a lot to keep devolpment in check, as far as storm water management and to ensure best practices can are being used. The Letort is a prime example of that in the past and even present day, however it is taking its toll there. I'd imagine it would've been worse off presently had they not. Moreover how many conservation groups have bought large acres of land to make sure devolpment has not destroyed the forests? That number of acres is staggering in PA alone.

Your example stream, which I'm fairly certain which one you are discussing, is in really bad shape as far as sedimentary deposits go, which in turn is a huge factor on the bay. It's land use is wooded / agricultural and the agriculture is hurting it and the bay. As far as the access, that stretch was already private. Yes the attention it got had signs get put up.
Though I had no issues garnering access the 4 times I fished it since the project simply by talking to the landowner and his son. Really nice people and they don't like Sunday fishing and I'm fine with that.
Not sure what your point was here.
Just because it wasn't posted didn't mean it wasn't private. No public access was effected here.

Posted on: 8/27 8:32
_________________
http://cvtu.homestead.com/





Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???

Joined:
2013/12/7 0:10
From SE Pa
Posts: 314
Offline
Sorry sal, but go back and read your first post. The question is in the title but your opinion is a continuation and in depth explanation of the question.

You have successfully worded the question that the only way to answer is to answer the same way you would. Why would anybody discuss the other side of this just to be attacked and belittled by the Environmentally correct side. Personally I think there are bad groups out there but when you lump every group into the same group you take that stance away. I also think anglers need to be real careful in what they are supporting since some of these groups are nothing more than useful idiots to powerful people.

Your question about teaching, or not teaching, kids to fix what we broke is disturbing. Personally I'm not breaking the environment so nobody has to fix anything caused by me and I have never taught my kids they need to fix the environment because daddy drives a car, heats and cools the house and pays a lawn service to keep the weeds at bay.

I've said this a thousand times, but until you toss away all modern conveinances you cannot act as if your Doing more to save the environment than anybody else. All the environmental preaching without the action is nothing more than talk to fuel a higher feeling of purpose over those who have no intention of driving a smart car.

Posted on: 8/27 8:56


Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???

Joined:
2006/9/9 17:18
From lancaster county
Posts: 994
Offline
Don't be sorry, your entitled to your opinion too.

I lumped them together because foxtrapper lumped them together in another thread.
Read the question how ever you wish and I guess feel free to use MY expansion and thoughts but the question is right in the title.
That said we are now discussing it with the one who prompted the thread, debating the question is pointless.

To expand , and I know because I chart it, my family has dropped its carbon imprint, trash, electricity use, we grow our own food etc etc.
I think your comment is laughable if you think these things have no effect.
Certainly we can teach our kids and should but some are implying these actions are pointless, including yourself just now.

So do nothing? Yeah that will help

Edit: "Personally I'm not breaking the environment so nobody has to fix anything caused by me and I have never taught my kids they need to fix the environment because daddy drives a car, heats and cools the house and pays a lawn service to keep the weeds at bay."

Wait. Behold everyone. See the only person in the world that isn't homeless in a 3rd world country who doesn't drive, doesn't heat his house, make any trash, use electricity, use a computer or phone made from petroleum products. Erm wait....
Telepathic post.

Do you have a worm farm growing your own fly lines too?

Posted on: 8/27 9:02

Edited by salvelinusfontinalis on 2017/8/27 9:34:44
_________________
http://cvtu.homestead.com/





Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/11 8:26
From Chester County
Posts: 2116
Offline
Quote:

poopdeck wrote:
Sorry sal, but go back and read your first post. The question is in the title but your opinion is a continuation and in depth explanation of the question.

You have successfully worded the question that the only way to answer is to answer the same way you would. Why would anybody discuss the other side of this just to be attacked and belittled by the Environmentally correct side. Personally I think there are bad groups out there but when you lump every group into the same group you take that stance away. I also think anglers need to be real careful in what they are supporting since some of these groups are nothing more than useful idiots to powerful people.

Your question about teaching, or not teaching, kids to fix what we broke is disturbing. Personally I'm not breaking the environment so nobody has to fix anything caused by me and I have never taught my kids they need to fix the environment because daddy drives a car, heats and cools the house and pays a lawn service to keep the weeds at bay.

I've said this a thousand times, but until you toss away all modern conveinances you cannot act as if your Doing more to save the environment than anybody else. All the environmental preaching without the action is nothing more than talk to fuel a higher feeling of purpose over those who have no intention of driving a smart car.


^ I don't completely disagree at all. There are some valid points above.

Like in everything in this world, there are extremes and extremists on both sides.

Greenpeace boats ramming whaling ships, as well as extremists pounding in metal spikes in trees to injure workers cutting down trees are examples of "environmental" extremists that I abhore. And I agree, too abrupt of a turn from fossil fuels will turn our economy upside down, but we must make that turn as quickly as technology allows.

On the other end of the spectrum, industries or individuals with no regard for the environment, polluting our water or air just to make a buck are just as abhorrent.

Again, like everything in this world, do some research before you leap. Chose the groups you support very carefully. You are likely to find no group or cause is perfect and completely aligns with your point of view or perspective.

Sitting on the sidelines and doing nothing (but complaining) solves nothing. There are plenty of people out that care little about the environment and care only about their wallet.

Most (IMHO) conservation groups are working hard to preserve what we have, so consider joining a group with goals you agree with, and maybe help steer it in a direction that will make a difference.

Posted on: 8/27 9:44

Edited by afishinado on 2017/8/27 16:58:34
Edited by afishinado on 2017/8/28 12:22:42


Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???

Joined:
2013/1/27 10:24
From Sweet Valley
Posts: 143
Offline
To think that all conservation groups overall are a bad thing shows a complete lack of understanding of the history and current conservation efforts taken to give us the opportunities to pursue fishing, hunting or any other outdoor pursuit.

There is a long list of books I would suggest for those thinking the world would be better off without conservation groups but I highly doubt they would help because you would have to mighty thick headed to think that in the first place.

Can we go back to the good old gear envy threads?

Posted on: 8/27 10:03


Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???

Joined:
2006/11/10 8:32
Posts: 596
Offline
Big wins in SE Pa, but not necessarily by whatever groups you folks are referencing here...farmland preservation, which involves the purchase of development rights.

I have also seen a watershed association quietly, parcel by parcel, persuade landowners to establish conservation easements on their riparian lands along a Class A wild trout stream as well as got to bat for and achieve upgrades to EV status on a few streams.

Posted on: 8/27 10:12


Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/11 8:26
From Chester County
Posts: 2116
Offline
Quote:

Mike wrote:
Big wins in SE Pa, but not necessarily by whatever groups you folks are referencing here...farmland preservation, which involves the purchase of development rights.



^ No doubt, Mike. Just check out some of the conservancies in SE that have bought up lands for preservation that were to be developed.

SEPA Conservancies

Plus many other organizations too numerous to list.

Posted on: 8/27 10:27


Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???

Joined:
2012/2/16 18:55
From Nowheresville, PA
Posts: 1333
Offline
Mike- Pretty sure the whole "farmland preservation" thing is a crappy deal. We have quite a few farms here that originally signed on and when the right deal with developers came along were somehow able to then sell off the property. $$$$$

Posted on: 8/27 12:00
_________________
“USED TROUT STREAM FOR SALE.
MUST BE SEEN TO BE APPRECIATED.”


Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???

Joined:
2013/12/7 0:10
From SE Pa
Posts: 314
Offline
Not saying I'm the only who is not homeless. I'm saying I'm the only one who is not homeless but who also doesn't decry the effects on the environment the amenities that I, and I assume you, appreciate and work to have. You can reduce your carbon footprint all you want. You can grow all the food you want. You can reduce your electrical usage all you want. You are not making the world any better than I am. To say so is just making you feel better, more intellectual and caring than others who drive cars, eat food and use electricity.

My position is not advocating the return to the industrial revolution days. I'm simply advocating a honest conversation on the environment and our impact in realistic terms and not feel good banter about feel good measures that are absolutely meaningless, environmentally speaking.

I agree, as a whole, conservation groups have been a benefit but anymore the new environmentalists are simply pawns for those making millions of dollars on your emotions all the while harming the environment in totally new ways.

Posted on: 8/27 12:14


Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???

Joined:
2006/9/9 17:18
From lancaster county
Posts: 994
Offline
Quote:
Can we go back to the good old gear envy threads?


Unless your envious of vintage Hardy or Cummings glass rods, I might not be able to offer much up there for you.

Posted on: 8/27 13:05
_________________
http://cvtu.homestead.com/





Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???

Joined:
2006/9/9 17:18
From lancaster county
Posts: 994
Offline
Poopdeck,

That's the very point. See troutberts post on ending the cause of pollution so nature can then fix the issues in a Watershed.
This whole thing got started simpily because I started a Watershed group who's goals are pretty straightforward at the moment. Foxtrapper took it upon himself to then add all the unrealistic terms without even giving our group a chance. Sure some groups are better than others but attacking a group that is 2 days old seems pretty unrealistic to me. Doesn't it to you? Then to turn and attack environmental groups in general took it to the insane level.So now you have the conversation we are having rather than a more level headed one.

I disagree with you that reducing your impact is not making the world environmentally better. If everyone did, it certainly would but that's another topic and not what we are discussing,but I did add it in my commentaries when I mentioned teaching your kids. Yes I believe we should be teaching our children to reduce impact and help the environment when they can. I'm not teaching them to feel guilty, I'm teaching them to do more for it. Feel free to find this disturbing if you wish.

I don't disagree that nature would be better off without man and given time would fix itself. Fortunately and unfortunately, I don't see man going away, so do we just give up or attempt to reduce our impact and fight to fix places that need it? That's rhetorical, you already gave you answer.

Also this thread has nothing to do with belittling or attacking the other side, in fact it is quite the opposite that happened here. I have never once belittled anyone for not trying to be environmentally sound with what they do or believe. I expect the same in return, didn't get it so I posted the question to see if I'm just crazy. In a lot of ways Iam but in this regard, I'm sure I'm not.

Personally I find smart cars not so smart. Again another discussion. Drive what you wish.

Posted on: 8/27 13:22
_________________
http://cvtu.homestead.com/





Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???

Joined:
2015/6/1 16:22
From Burke VA
Posts: 1224
Offline
Well said afish. I'm torn on issues like these. I do see unitended consequences that come from the best of intentions. In turn I think the positives out weigh the negatives when it comes to most of these groups.

Posted on: 8/27 13:56


Re: Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???

Joined:
2012/2/16 18:55
From Nowheresville, PA
Posts: 1333
Offline
sal- I didn't attack you. I merely said I don't support certain actions on a certain stream and question motives. If you recall i also brought this up with you well over a year ago in a private message when you initially proposed something like this. you assured me I had nothing to worry about. Now all these groups are decending on this small creek and you and your group are all onboard. So be it.


popdeck is probably right about the big picture stuff. But if it feels good to do stream clean ups and plant a few trees I'm all for it.

Posted on: 8/27 15:28
_________________
“USED TROUT STREAM FOR SALE.
MUST BE SEEN TO BE APPRECIATED.”



« 1 (2) 3 4 »



You can view topic.
You cannot start a new topic.
You cannot reply to posts.
You cannot edit your posts.
You cannot delete your posts.
You cannot add new polls.
You cannot vote in polls.
You cannot attach files to posts.
You cannot post without approval.

[Advanced Search]





Site Content
Login
Sponsors
Stay Connected

twitterfeed.com facebook instagram RSS Feed

USGS Water Levels
Polls
Angling Trade E-Survey: How Many Outdoor Print Magazines Do You Subscribe To?
None. Nada. Zip. 50% (46)
One or two. 32% (30)
Three or four. 13% (12)
More than four. 3% (3)
_PL_TOTALVOTES
The poll closed at 2017/10/27 11:42
Comments?





Copyright 2017 by PaFlyFish.com | Privacy Policy| Provided by Kile Media Group | Design by 7dana.com