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


Sponsors

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



« 1 2 (3) 4 »


Re: Who owns the trout?

Joined:
2007/3/9 14:18
From Enola, PA
Posts: 444
Offline
No one owns the wild natural reproducing fish, they are free just like we are.

We as the people have agreed to give the government (state, local, commonwealth, federal) the ability to govern how the fish (and we) are treated.


Posted on: 2013/3/1 13:08
_________________
Joe


uhh...nevermind


Re: Who owns the trout?

Joined:
2008/2/24 8:45
From York
Posts: 42
Offline
You all never cease to challenge my opinions...I always seek the simplest answers but you muddy the waters

When it comes to personal liberty, I've got a bee in my bonnet. Yes, I hate that I must purchase permission to "fish". And that I face punishment for violating rules (most of which I agree with as suggestions) but which have never traditionally been considered crime. Just as I react to the idea that I must purchase "health insurance" or face prosecution, well I think you get the idea.

Now on to the track record of the state and conservation. My opinion is that the Commonwealth was created to facilitate commerce. I believe this is the primary purpose of all modern states(governments). They facilitated the destruction of our forests and streams because their main interest was expanding the money economy. They are the partners of mass coal mining, mass logging, mass farming etc. They are bought by the highest bidder and we are not them.

They seek to ameliorate our outrage by pretending to be the saviors of "the environment". It was a massive logging company who pioneered the purchase of ruined forests by the state. How thoughtful of them to find a buyer for their otherwise worthless land.

I have more but must go for now...





Posted on: 2013/3/1 14:06


Re: Who owns the trout?

Joined:
2008/1/31 17:19
From Pretty much everywhere at some point, Thorndale today.
Posts: 13492
Offline
Quote:
No one owns the wild natural reproducing fish, they are free just like we are.

We as the people have agreed to give the government (state, local, commonwealth, federal) the ability to govern how the fish (and we) are treated.


This doesn't make any sense whatsoever. If we don't own them, then we have no authority to annoint anyone the power to manage them.

In the U.S. and Canada, collective ownership by the public is the official, legal answer to this question. Thus, we, the people, DO have the authority to grant our government(s) the authority to manage wildlife.

In Europe, landowners typically own the wildlife on their land. This dates back to the middle ages. Landlords were the only ones with the right to manage wildlife (i.e. hunt), and they could set seasons, bag limits, etc. as they chose, and allow who they wanted to partake. In the new world, this couldn't work. We were a frontier. Animals were needed for survival. Food, clothing, etc. So we gave everybody ownership, and we had the right to hunt, fish and so forth as we needed, where we needed, and when we needed. At some point we realized the free for all wouldn't work. But since we owned the animals, we could collectively empower our government to manage them, and thus have seasons, bag limits, and so forth. And we did.

It's still the way it is today. But we have since allowed private property interests the right to control access (they still don't manage the wildlife, only access).

Posted on: 2013/3/1 14:16


Re: Who owns the trout?

Joined:
2006/9/13 10:18
From LV
Posts: 7648
Offline
If you were to take the Pennsylvania Constitution literally then no on eowns the surface waters on their land at all, it is the Commonwealth that owns the surface water therefore the people because we are the Commonwealth.
By extension, we give the right to manage the wildlife and fish to the Commonwealth to the benefit of all. This ain't rocket science. In every court case since we were ruled by Bristish Common Law, the Commonwealth has always held the surface waters in trust for all the people, and the Commonwealth CANNOT give up that ownership of the surface waters.

Posted on: 2013/3/1 14:29
_________________
There is always time to do more to protect wild trout.


Re: Who owns the trout?

Joined:
2007/3/9 14:18
From Enola, PA
Posts: 444
Offline
Quote:

pcray1231 wrote:
Quote:
No one owns the wild natural reproducing fish, they are free just like we are.

We as the people have agreed to give the government (state, local, commonwealth, federal) the ability to govern how the fish (and we) are treated.


This doesn't make any sense whatsoever. If we don't own them, then we have no authority to annoint anyone the power to manage them.


We arent giving government the power to manage them, we are giving the government the power to manage US.

No law that is ever written will change what a fish does in the water. it simply follows the rules of nature - it swims, it eats, it poops, it reproduces and it dies. We as "intelligent" social beings have created our own laws beyond that of nature. The law of nature says we have to eat, our law says we can't eat certain fish under a certain size in a certain time of the year from a certain body of water.

Why? because as a society we chose to be governed by a group of people to make decisions for us and we obey those decisions through choice or force.

The laws influence us, and we in turn influence the fish.


Posted on: 2013/3/1 14:45
_________________
Joe


uhh...nevermind


Re: Who owns the trout?

Joined:
2006/9/18 8:28
From Attitudinally, one mile south of Lake LeBoeuf
Posts: 862
Offline
I think for purposes of this discussion, it would be helpful if we were to see the term "ownership" and how it applies to fish as being interchangeable with the word "stewardship". A (wild, anyway..) fish cannot be "owned". As Crotalus points out, assignment by us to a state of being "owned" means nothing to the fish. They do what they do regardless. We may as well declare them all to be "carrots", "brunettes" "table lamps" or "trivets". It has the same impact on the fish.

So, "stewardship" is a far better word, I think. That at least has some meaning to one of the parties in the relationship (us).

Doing it this way also spares us the eventual discussion as to whether wild fish have 1st Amendment rights...

Posted on: 2013/3/1 16:54


Re: Who owns the trout?

Joined:
2009/5/7 14:38
From Collegeville, PA
Posts: 249
Offline
Pcray, based on that line of thinking, you would have to say that the government owns us. Don't they regulate and manage us?

Posted on: 2013/3/1 17:15


Re: Who owns the trout?

Joined:
2009/12/19 18:09
From S.E. PA
Posts: 501
Offline
God would have ownership of the wild trout. Man would have stewardship. We protect them by regulations and hopefully common sense.

Posted on: 2013/3/1 18:46
_________________
But they're all following you?!? No they aren't..... I'm just in front.


Re: Who owns the trout?

Joined:
2006/9/10 21:53
From Greensburg, PA
Posts: 13624
Offline
So if someone didn't believe in God would the trout even exist? God really doesn't have the time to micro manage such things.

The waters of the Commonwealth and its inhabitants belong to the people of the Commonwealth. The PFBC is an agency, designated by the representatives elected by the people the Commonwealth , charged with managing those resources for the good of the Commonwealth. If you don't like how they are being managed? Elect different representatives and get them to change it.

Just my spontaneous take.

Posted on: 2013/3/2 12:58


Re: Who owns the trout?

Joined:
2009/4/24 16:40
From South Jersey
Posts: 587
Offline
Wow. What a topic. I can actually smell the professorial pipe smoke. It reminds me of political science 101 at Rutgers. The range of political thought runs from John Birch to Karl Marx. I do believe Nietzsche might disagree on the God thing. I love the discussion on being governed vs. consent to be governed topic here. I detect some very strong Libertarian themes in some of the comments.
I feel that the people of the Commonwealth own the fish and have given the government of the Commonwealth the authority to regulate the fish and the streams they swim in. On private waters the land owners have the right to harvest the fish or license rights to others to do so. I believe the law would allow the land owner to prevent fish from escaping his waters.

I would prefer that the law limit property ownership to the stream or stream bed allowing access to the stream up to the mean high water line. I think exceptions could be made for streams that did not flow all twelve months of the year.

"God is dead" Nietzsche 1883
"Nietzsche is dead" God 1900

Posted on: 2013/3/2 18:06
_________________
“And if the angler catches the fish with difficulty, then there is no man merrier than he is in his spirits.”



Salmo


Re: Who owns the trout?

Joined:
2009/12/19 18:09
From S.E. PA
Posts: 501
Offline
Wow. I think cabin fever has a hold on many of us. Interesting topic and replies though.

Posted on: 2013/3/2 21:02
_________________
But they're all following you?!? No they aren't..... I'm just in front.


Re: Who owns the trout?

Joined:
2009/5/29 6:40
From harlansburg
Posts: 4444
Offline
the fish might wonder who owns us!

Posted on: 2013/3/2 21:11


Re: Who owns the trout?

Joined:
2008/2/24 8:45
From York
Posts: 42
Offline
Well, just in case anyone is still listening, I'll continue.

The state's track record...the state partnered with the loggers to turn trees into money. When they had finished creating the "Pennsylvania desert" they bought the land back from the loggers with money extorted from the people, er...I mean taxes collected from the residents. Who benefited? The LOGGERS! You and I didn't benefit until the fires went out and the trees grew back, which would have happened no matter who "owned" the land. And by the way, did the state remember to secure the mineral rights when they bought the land "for us"?

To appease the little people, they began stocking our streams with "invasive species". They failed massively to protect our native charr in the habitat where they best thrived. With their annual stocking of the streams, they created artificial fisheries and a host of childlike fisherman who find sport in capturing starved, farmed imitations of nature. How can we encourage conservation when large trout magically appear in degraded streams every spring? How can small wild trout compete with big, plentiful, government trout for the affection of the masses?

The state creates corporations. They grant "limited liability" so investors don't fear reprisal for the crimes of the corporation. The state exists for the benefit of the few, the moneyed class. That's why the trout weren't and aren't protected from the ravages of big mining, big logging, big farming, big highways, mass roads, mass access and so on.

Today we have relative stability in our wild fisheries, but this has more to do with nature than the artificial "state". But I feel little security wih the state as protector of wild trout. Indeed it could all be swept away far more quickly than in the past because of the more massive commercial infrastructure in place today.

I certainly feel no security with the state as protector of private rights. Indeed we have no "right to fish" in the eyes of the state. (Rights can't be taxed or regulated.) And sooner or later some who "love trout" more than we do, will persuade the public that "catch and release" is cruel and can no longer be tolerated in a progressive society. Then we may all come to regret our trust in this artifice we call "The Commonwealth"


Posted on: 2013/3/4 9:20


Re: Who owns the trout?
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/11 8:26
From Chester County
Posts: 9017
Offline

Quote:

SpottedCharr wrote:
Well, just in case anyone is still listening, I'll continue.

The state's track record...the state partnered with the loggers to turn trees into money. When they had finished creating the "Pennsylvania desert" they bought the land back from the loggers with money extorted from the people, er...I mean taxes collected from the residents. Who benefited? The LOGGERS! You and I didn't benefit until the fires went out and the trees grew back, which would have happened no matter who "owned" the land. And by the way, did the state remember to secure the mineral rights when they bought the land "for us"?

To appease the little people, they began stocking our streams with "invasive species". They failed massively to protect our native charr in the habitat where they best thrived. With their annual stocking of the streams, they created artificial fisheries and a host of childlike fisherman who find sport in capturing starved, farmed imitations of nature. How can we encourage conservation when large trout magically appear in degraded streams every spring? How can small wild trout compete with big, plentiful, government trout for the affection of the masses?

The state creates corporations. They grant "limited liability" so investors don't fear reprisal for the crimes of the corporation. The state exists for the benefit of the few, the moneyed class. That's why the trout weren't and aren't protected from the ravages of big mining, big logging, big farming, big highways, mass roads, mass access and so on.

Today we have relative stability in our wild fisheries, but this has more to do with nature than the artificial "state". But I feel little security wih the state as protector of wild trout. Indeed it could all be swept away far more quickly than in the past because of the more massive commercial infrastructure in place today.

I certainly feel no security with the state as protector of private rights. Indeed we have no "right to fish" in the eyes of the state. (Rights can't be taxed or regulated.) And sooner or later some who "love trout" more than we do, will persuade the public that "catch and release" is cruel and can no longer be tolerated in a progressive society. Then we may all come to regret our trust in this artifice we call "The Commonwealth"



It all comes down to the Almighty Dollar vs the preservation of Environment. This is still happening today with MS fracking for Natty gas. Unless and until WE THE PEOPLE say enough is enough, the almighty dollar will trump the preservation of the environment.

Posted on: 2013/3/4 9:38


Re: Who owns the trout?

Joined:
2012/3/22 8:26
From Couldn't Care Less
Posts: 5549
Offline
Quote:
TYoung wrote:

Pcray, based on that line of thinking, you would have to say that the government owns us. Don't they regulate and manage us?


They do!

Posted on: 2013/3/4 10:30
_________________
There are no evil thoughts except one, the refusal to think



« 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
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!
Stay Connected

twitterfeed.com facebook instagram RSS Feed

Sponsors
Polls
Will you be fly fishing this autumn?
Yes
No
Thinking about it
_PL_TOTALVOTES
The poll will close at 2014/10/31 17:56
Comments?





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