dudemanspecial
Well-known member
That depends on why they are talking to you.
How to fish private portions of streams in poconos?
- Thread starter tnt05
- Start date
Absolutely right, which is why we have judges and a jury of our peers to determine the finial outcome of an arrest or citation versus the LEO being the judge, jury and executioner.
Our local WCOs have made some really iffy interpretations of the laws recently. The Tioga WCO was interpreting that ice fishing tip ups under your control meant that they could be no farther than 15 feet away. The new Potter WCO interpreted the DUI law to read that it didn’t apply to him. Glad he got caught before he killed someone.
jeffroey
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2019
- Messages
- 339
I posted my best answer to the OPs question here:
www.paflyfish.com
Regardless of if I'm allowed to walk in on private land from say, an SGL or SF, that's posted or not, to reach a stream that's designated a navigable or not navigable, doesn't really matter to me.
If I want to knowingly fish on private land that I've identified (in most cases sight unseen), the method I laid out in the post linked above is what I do.
If I'm working a stream up to the boundary of an SGL and I don't have permission to access the private tract adjacent to it, that boundary simply becomes my turn back point. If the water above the SGL/SF line looks promising, that might prompt me to seek permission before the next time I head back to that particular stream but truth is, I'm probably investing my time researching the next stream on public land I haven't fished yet.
I set a goal of 10-15 new streams every year (along with the handful I fish one or more times every year). Living outside of Philly, most of those new targets are in the Poconos. Some years I hit that goal and some years I don't. If I don't, it's certainly not because of a lack of public land streams.
Right or wrong, good or bad, that's just how I handle the situation.
What to do?
Again, speaking for my own code of ethics, If it’s private and there are no signs stating that use of the land is permitted in some way, i stay off it. Right. It's YOUR code of ethics, not the law. You don't need/have to like the laws, just obey them.
www.paflyfish.com
Regardless of if I'm allowed to walk in on private land from say, an SGL or SF, that's posted or not, to reach a stream that's designated a navigable or not navigable, doesn't really matter to me.
If I want to knowingly fish on private land that I've identified (in most cases sight unseen), the method I laid out in the post linked above is what I do.
If I'm working a stream up to the boundary of an SGL and I don't have permission to access the private tract adjacent to it, that boundary simply becomes my turn back point. If the water above the SGL/SF line looks promising, that might prompt me to seek permission before the next time I head back to that particular stream but truth is, I'm probably investing my time researching the next stream on public land I haven't fished yet.
I set a goal of 10-15 new streams every year (along with the handful I fish one or more times every year). Living outside of Philly, most of those new targets are in the Poconos. Some years I hit that goal and some years I don't. If I don't, it's certainly not because of a lack of public land streams.
Right or wrong, good or bad, that's just how I handle the situation.
JimKennedy
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2016
- Messages
- 306
I’ve been around some pretty dim cops in my time, and they (the dim ones) are very happy to fill out an application for statement of charges against anyone who challenges them.
MissingPotter
Member
I, too, felt the explanation for trespass offered up was pretty clear. I also have a pretty jaundiced view of reports of WCO perfidy thrown out on the Net. I mean, a person could write anything, like, for example, a guy made a mistake and crossed a posted property, and the farmer deliberately damaged his corn and called the police so that they could be arrested.
Obviously that's tongue in cheek.
Insofar as an officer getting a DUI, in my humble, prejudiced, biased opinion, that's a pretty personal thing to be aired here.
Obviously that's tongue in cheek.
Insofar as an officer getting a DUI, in my humble, prejudiced, biased opinion, that's a pretty personal thing to be aired here.
Perhaps they shouldn’t list the names of those arrested for DUI in the newspaper? Shouldn’t we be holding those who are sworn to uphold the law to the same standard as the rest of us? I’d argue that they should maybe even be held to a higher standard.
Does being a LEO award you with some type of “do as I say not as a do” privileges that I wasn’t aware of?
MissingPotter
Member
I agree with you that they should be held to a high standard of integrity. I don't disagree about the paper, either. Often there is an underlying mental health issue to those incidents that perhaps are not the best served by giving them more than the bare minimum of exposure. If that's the case I hope the young man is on the way to making healthier choices.
Acristickid
Well-known member
There is a guy Dwight Landis who wrote a book Trout Streams of Pennsylvania. Perhaps that could help.
Swattie87
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 6,117
I think I may know him.
MissingPotter
Member
Driving to work was thinking back to the WCO post-sounds like the Tioga WCO gave whoever it was pretty accurate info (whichever ice season that was-was there even any ice this year?) and a fair amount of leeway. I mean, I ice fish (or used to) too, and the law used to say that your device had to be under immediate control, and that's an arm's length. I believe the regs now say you can reasonable reach the device and that the person is nearby. Further, I'll bet whoever it was (if it was) didn't get a ticket.
I've seen just in my time back up there how many more people there are. I can well imagine how many people could spread out and cover the ice on those smaller lakes. Sounds like the WCO, if that even happened, treated whoever it was pretty well.
I've seen just in my time back up there how many more people there are. I can well imagine how many people could spread out and cover the ice on those smaller lakes. Sounds like the WCO, if that even happened, treated whoever it was pretty well.
redietz
Well-known member
He didn't even ask that. He just asked how to which sections are privately owned, presumably to avoid them.
DomR
Active member
It's easy to be critical of LEO's when you're not the one that's putting your life on the line every day. Every interaction they have, no matter how small and insignificant it seems, always has the potential to go badly. That's a lot to have weigh on you day in and day out.
Bottom line is unless you've lived that life (or have a family member that is/has) then commenting on being a LEO is basically armchair quarterbacking.
Bottom line is unless you've lived that life (or have a family member that is/has) then commenting on being a LEO is basically armchair quarterbacking.
It was multiple citations for numerous people over the course of the entire 2017-2018 winter ice fishing season.
Nowhere in the regulation book does it define a distance that tip ups may be set, only in the anglers immediate control.
What is the difference between a group of anglers only fishing tip ups, and having them 75-100 feet away, standing outside watching them constantly, versus someone like me who has a tip up 20 feet away but sits inside the hut with all their attention focused on the live scope?
I have every right to armchair quarterback anyone who endangers my family and myself by choosing to break the law and drive drunk on the very same roads that we use, while intoxicated at over twice the legal limit.
Career choice is no excuse to behave in that manner. Especially when the one breaking the law would have zero issue with hauling you or I off to jail for the exact same thing.
Bamboozle
Well-known member
Make sure you armchair quarterback politicians, athletes, celebrities & the children & siblings of US Presidents in addition to LEO's...
...just to be fair.
...just to be fair.
Absolutely, no one should be above the law, even though we see special treatment for some.
Swattie87
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 6,117
I always thought you were supposed to watch hockey while in the hut?
DomR
Active member
A DUI is a criminal act no matter who you are, in that moment your not a LEO or anything else but just someone braking the law.
My comment speaks to how LEO's act during interpersonal encounters while on duty. People may not like what they say or how they do it but they have to make the split second decisions that frankly not many other professions have to make.
tomgamber
Well-known member
As with any position of authority, I have a great respect for the responsibility they accept. I also have a great distain for those who abuse that power or use it for personal gain. Only a few of those positions allow for the use of arbitrary deadly force to enforce that authority. Those are the ones that must honor their oath or be condemned.
