More poaching

All I know is I would post and talk to other landowners.
Money to be made if they want.
 
Great reality check, Jack.
 
Jack,

Your assuming again and you know what they say about that.

I told the man the regs and said nothing more to him.

When he said to F off he owns the land. I said "ok." I walked away and got on the phone.

How did i handle that wrong?

The stream is C&R. According to the PFBC or not the MAJORITY of the stream is owned by the Thompson Farm and the Hess Farm. Those Landowners requested C&R. Therefore someone fishing on thier land...........not being C&R is tresspassing.

Personally i hope he posts his land after how rude he was to me. Id rather he do that and not be part of the C&R section than get credit for being a gracious and nice landowner. My 2 cents.

P.S. Again never assume how i would handle any given situation Jack, youve never met me.
 
I only had this to go by: "He says to the guy that he can't be doing that down here and he replies back that he doesn't give a damn, he owns the land and is going to do it anyway."

If the guy was on his own property, a fact that I do assume you knew, and the state regulations on the water he was fishing allow harvest, then plain and simple, you were incorrect to tell him "he can't be doing that."
 
JackM wrote:

I honestly can't understand why people get so indignant about poaching, fish pictures, pinched barbs, and you name it-- it's like everyone is in competition to demonstrate how much they love the little fishies that they weekly trick with artificial food, impale with a wire dagger, drag through the water against a struggle (the greater the fight the better), then pat the thing on the tail and feel superior when they release it. Fishing is exploitation of the creature whether you are doing it for mere personal gratification or for food.
Click to expand...

That's a pretty interesting summary and when you get down to brass tacks, is not far off the mark.
 
salvelinusfontinalis wrote:

I told the man the regs and said nothing more to him.

When he said to F off he owns the land. I said "ok." I walked away and got on the phone.
Click to expand...

The original post and your version definitely have a different "feel" to them, at least in print. My reaction was the same as Jack's...there is some soon to be posted land.

This could certainly have been a volotile situation, and even slight inuendo could be the difference one way or the other. Going by the tone of the first post, the meeting felt like a hostile fishing environment. If Jack didn't make the assumption he did, it would have appeared that the situation could have been handled better. But since he did, you were given a forum to clarify.
 
I don't think I would put it as strongly as Jack did, but I had a similar reaction. I would be very careful about approaching a landowner about violating special regs on his own property, even when it is clear that is what is happening. Especially if his kids/grandkids are involved. And since these are privately imposed "regs" it appears he may not have been violating anything. Rightly or wrongly, there are landowners who feel like they're entitled to "let the kids keep a few fish" now and again in exchange for letting anglers tramp across their property day in and day out. I don't happen to agree with that, but I am not interested in risking new postings either. I wasn't there and I do not know exactly what was said, so I have to assume Sal was very polite and careful in his words. But saying the guy "can't be doing that down here" doesn't seem entirely accurate. In any case, I hope it all works out - the guy feels guilty about it and doesn't do it again, but also doesn't post his half of the creek.
 
I guess Jack is right....in a way. I was going to reply something to the effect that Brian and I are not alike in alot of ways. We see things differently on subjects from God and religion down to the way in which we fish and that assuming we are alike and would handle the situation the same way would be wrong. There was no provocation for that type of accusation. However, I guess in this situation he was right. That is how I would have handled it. Doesn't sound too indignant to me except on the part of the landowner and his reply and choice of words infront of kids. (who again, owns one side not both)

Although I still can't figure out how you can accrately predict someones mood on a typed internet forum.

"By now you should know not everyone here sees things the same way all the time. Especially those of us who weren't there."
Click to expand...
I know Tom. I should have expected it but sometimes I guess I expect to much. But still, is there no middle ground on here? One guy gets brow beat for not calling a WCO and asking once and another get the same beat down because he did call to ask.

"P.S. Again never assume how i would handle any given situation Jack, youve never met me."
Click to expand...
Now that's reality.



"All I know is I would post and talk to other landowners.
Money to be made if they want"
Click to expand...
Knowing the owners of the Hess farm as well as I do, the old man and I had a nice conversation on Friday for an hour or so, I know he wouldn't do that. Money where? Wasn't Trout Unlimited given state grants to rebuild the stream and a provision of that is that if public money is to be used it has to be kept open for public use or do I understand that wrong?
Sheep man can post his side 40 yards of stream bank if he so desires but as long the other side is open thanks to the other generous land owners it'll do him no good. 9 times out of 10 nobody would fish on his side as it was because of his ram.
I think his indignant reply to Brian and keeping fish was the result of him having to remove the ram because it hurt someone and was looking for some kind of payback.



Sorry I couldn't 100% accuratly post the mood and feel of the exchange of words during the situation being I was doing it 3rd party but I think I got the jist of it. I'm done with this post now. I think I've said all I can say on the subject.
 
Will wrote:
I don't think I would put it as strongly as Jack did....
Click to expand...

What can I say, I get lost in hyperbole occasionally.
 
Actually Jack i had no idea he was the landowner. Never met the guy. There you go assuming again ;-)
 
What i can tell you is......if now people are going to harvest on the hess and thompson farm properties because the PFBC wont regulate it.....then there will either be a lot of people getting tresspassing fines or the property will be posted. Im not the bad guy here . Pick a fight that should be fought, im not the target.

More over if the guy had told me he was the landowner and said he just wanted a few fish to fry for Memorial Day with the kids....then i would have said have fun. Again, im not a hardcase or a bad guy. Thought this guy should just know the regs.. he didnt need to talk to me like that. THAT and ONLY that is what pissed me off.
 
or those who stock it will stop stocking...does it have wild fish? I don't remember mention of them.
 
it has some. but not many. The stream is still making a comeback and there is talk of removing from a list of severely impaired streams. The sulphurs this year are getting to be more and more and the brown caddis hatch is stronger. In time maybe there will be a nice wild bow population. To date in the 15 some years fishing this stream i have only caught 6 wild bows and witness about as many being caught. It needs time.
 
Sorry if I offended anyone-grew up in a time when landowners controlled the fishing-some were jerks but all were treated respectfully.
Many is the time I trespassed,got caught but ended up being welcomed back because I acted the nice guy bit.lol
 
The alleged "regs" are not regs at all. They are a private landowner's stipulation for a conditional permission to use his land for access and wading. If you told the guy he "couldn't do that" without (a) being the landowner or (b) being the landowner's agent, then you made the assumption that caused the problem. You assumed the gentleman and family were not on their own land, that they lacked permission from the landowner to fish without restrictions placed upon others, or perhaps more egregiously, you presumed to act on behalf of a person or organization you thought was the landowner. Now, I'm sure you will tell me that I am assuming that you didn't have the landowner's permission to confront anyone who was disobeying his/it's private restrictions, and you would be right about that.

But let me clarify that I posted my reply after the thread, entitled interestingly "More Poaching," not only became more vehement toward the alleged poacher, but even did so AFTER Mike's post debunked the notion that the gentleman and his family were doing anything wrong.
 
Well sure they are regulations. They are regulations required by the landowner to use the land. If you arent doing what the signs say....you are breaking a tresspassing law. Breaking the law is just that. Be it the PFBC law or general state laws on tresspassing.

Sounds like regs to me ;-)

I never replied vehemently towards the allegied poacher. Not once at all but rather by the way he acted towards me.

being the landowner's agent, then you made the assumption that caused the problem.
Click to expand...

We as fisherman ,on a landowners land that is posted C&R barbless hooks only, are all agents of the landowner when we see or think we see a violation. Even if it is the landowner breaking the regulation and we dont know it is him doing it. The landowner cant be on the stream at all times. Therefore i should say something. I dont see why or what you are arguing. Maybe you just play devil's advocate again for the sake of agruement? < notice the question mark i dont want you to think im assuming :-D
 
Ah, the one time I have seen poaching (for netting spawning fish and once for keeping more fish thanm is allowed), was here in Ohio during steelhead season, I didn't confront the fisherman but instead called the WCO while on stream and discreetly took some pictures. It resulted in the WCO catching the perps.

This on-stream-vigilante-direct confrontation approach seems like it can only end badly in a number of ways to me.

My local TU stocks a section of a creek here in OH, where the regs are keeping two fish over 12". The TU posted signs to encourage catch and release fly fishing only. They get upset when people creel the big rainbows they put in. I advocated for three years to put in fingerling browns and two years ago they agreed with me and put some in.....now we have a bunch of 9-12" browns for the C and R types and the put-in-take rainbows. Everyone is happy. Putting in a bunch of easy to catch big stockies is just inviting creeling and/or poaching. There is no excuse for poaching, but sometimes stocking practices just make it a real temptation for some.
 
One word comes to mind reading this thread...on all accounts. BRUTAL! :roll:

Welcome to pafishexploitation.com
 
That farmer and his kids have kept trout in the past. Its a nice section of stream but not nearly as nice as it used to be. I have avoided it all together the past few times I fished because the ram finally chased me off a few months ago. IMO, he can keep a few here and there if he keeps his land open to fishing. I know that the kids (when they were younger) used to do it from time to time. I'm just shocked that the farmer said F U. I remember talking to him years ago when he was bait fishing and he seemed like a friendly guy. Unfortunately, the Lititz C&R is not devoid of nuisances. Last time I fished the stream a few weeks ago, I ended up leaving an hour earlier than I planned because the farmer upstream was using a weed-wacker and the cows were all jumping around and making mud in the cattle crossing. The water turned pretty muddy in a matter of minutes. I tried to go upstream of the cattle, but one of the farm kids was riding a raft through one of the best holes so I just left. I think its great that the Lititz landowners have been so open to allowing C&R fishing over the years, but private ownership always creates problems. I don't mean to offend anyone but I've noticed over the past year or two that the demographics of Lititz Run C&R fisherman has been changing. By this I mean that I think that many bait fisherman are trying Lititz Run as their first fly fishing destination with hopes of catching a monster trout. I certainly encourage taking up fly fishing and I am more than willing to give advice to newcomers; however, it takes time to develop a C&R mentality when someone is used to having few regulations while trout fishing. New C&R fisherman might forget to pinch a barb. They might squeeze the trout too tightly or keep it out of the water for over a minute while it thrashes in the mud. Those of us who have fished Lititz for years need to recognize this and offer advice without being condescending. Maybe I am just crazy and I have not fished Lititz enough over the past two years to understand the demographics. Has anyone else noticed a change? I can only imagine that a change in demographics will create conflict for the fishery in the future.
 
crs5942 wrote:
I think its great that the Lititz landowners have been so open to allowing C&R fishing over the years, but private ownership always creates problems. I don't mean to offend anyone but I've noticed over the past year or two that the demographics of Lititz Run C&R fisherman has been changing.
Click to expand...

I don't see how the last part could offend anyone, but I certainly object to the part I made bold. How does private ownership cause problems? You do realize this is USA and not USSR don't you? I'm not saying landowners never cause problems. Sometimes they do by polluting their own land. What I'm saying is that if more people had more respect for landowners rights, there would be a whole lot less problems and a whole lot less posted land.

You do realize that there is lots of public land that is off limits to the public too, don't you? Off limits to hunting, fishing, hiking, ... even off limits to access.

Landowner has the right to restrict the use and access of their own land. Fishing on the other hand is a privilege ... not a right... on any land.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top