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


Sponsors

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



« 1 (2)


Re: Latest on the Little J case

Joined:
2006/9/11 15:34
From Blair County
Posts: 73
Offline
First off , I second the motion to acknowledge yourself . "Barney " to me that signifies a childrens TV character ..As far a Eric , you have things so upside down i cant even reply . Being that you must get your info from a cracker jack box !!!!! Also I would serve next to Eric in a second . You obviously dont know the meaning of friends . We stand by each other through thick and thin .. And its thick now , with all your BS>>>>>>>>>>>

Posted on: 2006/12/23 14:21


Re: Latest on the Little J case
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 9:29
From Monessen, PA
Posts: 22306
Offline
Let me first say, I am not a fan of privatized water, nor Donny Beaver, nor, frankly, the type of people that would be his clientel, but that's just my own personal prejudice. However, ask yourself what you would do if the legal title to land you own left a strip of about 100 feet by 800 feet in a legal limbo as between your ownership and that of another landowner. Further assume that under that strip of land there was a large vein of gold, silver or diamonds, worth millions of dollars. Suppose further that legal advice you received convinced you that the mineral deposit was a part of your property and you had every right to extract it for your own financial benefit.

Under these circumstances, how many of you would waive your potential profit because an adverse claimant existed? How many of you would attempt to prevent the adverse claimant from mining the land you believed was yours? How many of you would roll over and play dead if the adverse claimant took you to court to obtain a judicial ruling that denied your claim of ownership?

I really think the situation at the Espy property is not a whole lot different. We don't have to like the fact that some great trout water is in fact private. We don't have to agree that the Little J area in question is one such property. And we don't have to root for Donny Beaver, nor fail to root against him, nor even to refrain from celebrating our good fortune should the Judge decide in our favor. On the other hand, we should do our best to appreciate that when it comes down to things of great value, people tend to act in their own self-interests, including guides and fly shops, that may or may not have affiliations, relationships, or casual contacts with SRC.

Have a Merry Christmas and a Prosperous New Year!
Resized Image

Posted on: 2006/12/23 14:59
_________________
Peace, Tony


Re: Latest on the Little J case

Joined:
2006/9/9 20:09
From Harrisburg
Posts: 2191
Offline
Dear afishinado,

I don't mind you cutting and pasting what I wrote, Heck I'm just flattered to know somebody actually bothered to read it.

Regards,
Tim Murphy

Posted on: 2006/12/23 15:33


Re: Latest on the Little J case

Joined:
2006/12/23 15:37
Posts: 1
Offline
My opinion on the Little J case and on private water in general is this:

A very small part of our world is wild trout water. That being said, anyone who "owns" a section of wild trout steam should take very good care of that resource. The problem is, clubs like the Spring Ridge Club will take a section of water and do as they please with it. This includes over-stocking and pellet feeding the fish within the stream. Not only does this damage the fishery within the private sections, but the entire stream. Therefore, these clubs will not only damage their private sections, but all the public sections as well. This is the major problem with having private water. The irresponsability of these clubs overflows onto surrounding waters. This is why I will be very happy if the Little J is declared navigable. Its a shame to see all those non-wild bows stocked over wild browns.

In my opinion anyone who is a member of the SRC, should not be supported. The names Joe Humphies, Lefty Kreh, etc...will never have a place in my library of fly-fishing books. There are plenty of good writers in our sport that will keep me informed and entertained without me having to support a SRC member.

As far as all the nonsense posted earlier on this board, I wont get involved. However, after doing a little research, I will say that it looks like we should all thank Alan Bright at Spruce Creek Outfitters for his contributions to helping free the Little J. While everyone else is on message boards complaining about this subject, it seems he is actually doing something. That should be plain for all to see with a little research.

Marty

Posted on: 2006/12/23 16:07


Re: Latest on the Little J case

Joined:
2006/9/10 21:53
From Greensburg, PA
Posts: 13624
Offline
WOW, old board, new board...it doesn't matter. When the initials DB come up on the little J this place is entertaining. I have my own opinions on this but not a lot of legal knowledge or experience. I will follow this thread with the hopes of gaining some more knowledge and hopefully better insight to this issue. Membership must have doubled today...lots of posters who just joined today.

BTW Jack, did you practice that post in the coutroom you built in your basement for rehersals. Well done...you sound like a lawyer.

Posted on: 2006/12/23 16:43


Re: Latest on the Little J case

Joined:
2006/9/14 20:03
Posts: 260
Offline
I’m amused by the Google ad for SRC that keeps popping up on this site. Wonder if DB is getting much business from it. He certainly gets a lot of ‘hits’ around here.

Posted on: 2006/12/23 21:58


Re: Latest on the Little J case

Joined:
2006/9/21 0:02
From Pittsburgh
Posts: 4281
Offline
Having just watched my favorite Christmas movie - It's a Wonderfull Life - for the umpteenth time, I was struck by some similarities between it and the little juniata case.
In the movie, you have the evil, rich Mr. Potter trying to buy up everything he can in Bedford Falls for his own benefit.
And we all know who's doing that to our best streams.
And you have George Bailey making a stand against Mr. Potter for the good of the common folk.
In our case, it's the PFC, DEP, and Allan Bright filing the suit against DB for the good of the public.
Of course, the movie has a happy ending.
Let's hope we get the same results in this case

Merry Christmas to all!

Posted on: 2006/12/25 13:14



« 1 (2)



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
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!
Stay Connected

twitterfeed.com facebook instagram RSS Feed

Sponsors
Polls
Do you keep a fishing journal?
Yes 52% (85)
No 47% (78)
_PL_TOTALVOTES
The poll closed at 2014/8/22 12:38
2 Comments





Copyright 2014 by PaFlyFish.com | Privacy Policy| Provided by Kile Media Group | Design by 7dana.com