More posted signs on Penns Creek!!

pcray1231 wrote:
I've always argued that by posting it to begin with, the landowner is likewise taking a calculated risk. It's illegal to trespass, but it's also illegal to post public property.
Click to expand...

I agree in principal Pat, with a catch…I suspect a landowner (or their attorney) would argue that posted signs on their bank (outside of the high water mark) are legal and valid no matter how you slice it as far as the navigability question. In that sense there’s a bit of an advantage to the landowner because they can always claim they didn’t post the potentially navigable/public water, just their land…which is theirs’ to post. In that sense, it’s not the posting itself that could potentially be illegal, just the attempted application of the posting by the landowner to someone in the streambed…which is a known gray area in the law. On the other hand, an angler fishing within the high water mark in front of a clearly posted stretch could never reasonably claim it wasn’t his intent to fish there. He could claim he has a legal right to based on the navigability argument, but again, this is the gray area on a stream that hasn’t been through the courts.

After thinking about it a little more, I’m wondering if the posting landowners are actually ok with folks walking and being in the streambed to fish, as long as they don’t access the streambed from their property and park on their property? If that’s the case, then yeah, a conversation with them about what the real issues are and just getting some public access to the stream from a parking lot may be enough to ease the tensions. As I mentioned earlier, if it were me, people fishing in the stream wouldn’t bother me a bit…cars parked all over my property and blocking my driveway would.

The landowners are anglers, and I suspect they know that if challenged, they will likely lose on navigability. So maybe their intent is just to keep people (and cars) off their property and make it a longer walk to get in to deter some of the crowds?
 
I suppose that's true, and different than say, the spring ridge club putting signs IN the water, lol.

But yeah, the key point is whether the landowners are upset about the parking and general angler carelessness while on land (in which case, I feel for them and support their decisions, and support anglers getting together to try to find a way to alleviate those valid concerns, or else there isn't much we can or should do).

Or whether they want less crowded conditions on the water (in which case, it is wrong, as they do not own the water anymore than all those other anglers do).

I've seen both reported on this forum, and of course, this is a just a forum whose members may or may not have a clue.

Again, I'd regard the streambed itself to be PUBLIC property and unable to be messed with by the landowners, and the streambank to be private and the landowners are free to do as they please.
 
My understanding is that if a water is not navigable, the property owner does own to the middle of the stream. If they own land on both sides, they own th entire bottom. If tey own both sides, putting a sign out in the middle of the creek is fine just like the property below Paradise is closed off. This is very similar to the EB of the Delaware which is a much, much larger piece of water. Not deemed navigable so wading is likely to get you a ticket in many areas. It's definitely navigable but nobody has challenged it in court. There may be literature dating back 200 years saying Penns is navigable but low summer flows make me think the landowners would win.

Unless somebody or group is willing to back the legal expenses, I'd assume the property owners will win by default. Secondly, bringing legal action will only create animosity. This probably won't end well. Anticipate spike in tickets or kayak sales.
 
krayfish2 wrote:
My understanding is that if a water is not navigable, the property owner does own to the middle of the stream. If they own land on both sides, they own th entire bottom. If tey own both sides, putting a sign out in the middle of the creek is fine just like the property below Paradise is closed off. This is very similar to the EB of the Delaware which is a much, much larger piece of water. Not deemed navigable so wading is likely to get you a ticket in many areas. It's definitely navigable but nobody has challenged it in court. There may be literature dating back 200 years saying Penns is navigable but low summer flows make me think the landowners would win.

Unless somebody or group is willing to back the legal expenses, I'd assume the property owners will win by default. Secondly, bringing legal action will only create animosity. This probably won't end well. Anticipate spike in tickets or kayak sales.
Click to expand...

Low summer flows may make the stream not navigable in the summer time, but that doesn't mean the stream isn't navigable.

"Non-navigable waterways are streams, creeks and some rivers that have not been proclaimed by a court to be navigable. Therefore, all bodies of water are non-navigable if they have never been taken before a court to be decided upon. However, once a body of water is declared navigable, it can never revert back to being non-navigable, even (sic?) reliction occurs. That is, the process of a water feature drying up, leaving land remaining as a result."

Source: http://www.psls.org/resources/Documents/newsletters/PAWaterBodies.pdf
 
franklin wrote:
geebee wrote:
i know some landowners that post their land but let anyone who asks fish it. they do it to keep the numbers down.

I too hope this doesn't end up in court.
Click to expand...

I used to post my land and on the fine print on the sign it said no hunting during certain dates. I really didn't care if someone archery hunted. I just didn't want someone interfering with the few days I was deer hunting. I'm not aware of anyone figuring that out or even calling me (number was on the sign) to ask.
Click to expand...

We've had property owners in our watershed put up the yellow posted signs and black out the word fishing...surprising how few people realized it was blacked out...You can have the place to yourself. :-D
 
krayfish said "I don't fish that section but I have a feeling that vehicle parking / disregard for the property owners rights was the motivation for the signs "

Nah.

I have a feeling that they bought it and now want to be the only ones who can use it. I've heard the littering and rude angler argument a million times and I don't really buy it. It is usually just that they want the land, the fish, the deer.... EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS.
Get used to it folks. Unless PA clarifies or changes the stream access laws you will lose a lot of quality water in the years to come.
 
By the way...There are several people who own large areas along the stream in that section who have been there for years and never posted. Wouldn't they have the same problems? Why is it that they have continued to allow access if all this littering and parking and obnoxious behavior is going on?
 
When we (our TU chapter) run into posted signs in our watershed that previously was unposted I or a delegate will approach the landowner and ask whats up, what are they willing to allow and what can we do in return to make things right...Usually its as simple as recognizing that they own the land and putting up the proper signage to keep the fisherpeople where they belong.

People are like cattle, without fences they run a muck. Instead of fences, signs can be used to keep them where they belong. And it put a buffer between the general public and the landowner. They can vent on us and we can try to appease them.

Now not all situations have a solution that includes fishing. But even if we help them to post no parking, or put the posters where the fisherpeople will most likely see them then they are satisfied and hopefully won't try to spread their convictions on the neighbors.
 
Famous waters have a way of attracting a lot of attention and successful / yuppy anglers with a pile of money. Don't be amazed if more and more of the private land along these streams starts to be gobbled up and posted by the wealthy looking for their own private slice of heaven. If it's within the laws to post the water, I really can't blame the owners for doing so.

This is where TU, other groups and anglers can build relationships with the property owners to help keep access open. PFBC can work to obtain additional land along the more popular / famous waters of the commonwealth.

Just as PA has the Spring Ridge Club, the Double Haul Club exists on the Delaware. It's a group of wealthy guys that finds private access and private ramps. You want to 'play'? Cough up $500-$600 peer year in dues. These scumbags even let a bunch of people donate money to rebuild the ramp at the 191 bridge and once complete, bought it and closed it off. They are on a mission to lock up every non state owned launch on the entire system so you'll have to pay. They only difference is the river is navigable so you can still wade. I used to think Coz was a decent guy but he's the one locking up the river for non-guided boats. Hope things pan out better here in PA.
 
It kind of reminds me of fishing creek, the head waters of pohopoco and a few others. I remember fishing water when I was a kid that now seems like it is guarded by private security now. LOL I guess since I make a few trips a year I notice the posted sections more. Honestly, from ten years ago when I moved to VA for my job to now, there are a lot of new areas posted on a lot of different streams.

It does **** me off. However, it is their land and they can do what they want with it. I commend trout unlimited for trying to work with the homeowners, but, there are going to be some that are going to be a no win situation.
 
If the parking lot is not posted, I don't know why you can't park there and walk down the road through the camps on the same side of the creek.

I have met the guy who owns the land the parking lot is on - and he's always seemed like a pretty decent fellow. And he had no beef with fishermen
He was however, pretty ticked off at the kids who come in there and party at night - making fires and drinking beer, leaving the rubbish behind. I've cleaned up their trash several times while fishing there.
And maybe that's the issue with the other postings
 
Kray, low summer flows are meaningless towards navigability. The test is whether it "is or ever was" navigable in its "ordinary high water state". Generally, that means typical springtime flows. You can't use blowout flows, but can at least use the highest daily AVERAGE cfs of the year.

And a history of commerce has been used of proof that other streams are. A lack of such isn't proof that it couldn't be used for commerce, but historical commerce is indeed proof that it could be used for commerce. I thinkPenns, Spring, and the EB of the D are actually all pretty clear cut cases. Some others on the DCNR list would be difficult sells, but those 3 I think "navigable" would be the heavily favored outcome. Of course, when its up to a random judge you never can be absolutely sure.

Fwiw, as foxtrapper says, I've seen parking/litter, etc. be used as an excuse plenty of times, when the real motive is private access for the landowner and/or guides who may pay them for it. From a landowners perspective, shifting blame is just more PC. Not saying that's the case here, as I don't know.
 
Anyone interested in kickstart campaign for legal defense fund? LOL.
 
If it comes to that, yeah, I am, and I say that with a straight face.

But I'd rather first be clear that they're trying to post water and not just land, know why, and if applicable try the honey approach first.
 
I agree. Try the "honey" approach. Find out what they want and if possible give them something in order to keep the section open. And whoever can make that happen will be a hero in my book.

If that doesn't work we might as well challenge it in court. We certainly could use some clarification statewide on this issue, not just on a stream by stream basis.

It just seems to me to be morally wrong to deny access to waterways in general.

I would also be curious about who owns what down there. Would not be surprised to find out some of the land is illegally posted.
 
the law in VA is very different from the law in PA, and has nothing to do with what happens in PA.
 
foxtrapper1972 wrote:
So these guys buy land along one of the most popular trout streams in the state and then are upset because they see a lot of fishermen and guides?

Can't find a spot to park during the Green Drakes....
That might be the worst time to fish the creek. Although even then you can find a place to fish if you are willing to walk.
If you have a camp there you will find times to have plenty of solitude on that stream.
Click to expand...

If they are prevented from accessing their own property, which it sounds like they are, then if it were me I'd do the same. I they have a right to say don't park in my space, and they also have the right to post their land, especially if a-holes litter or otherwise trash their land, or give them a hassle for wanting to park at their cabin. People also have a right to privacy.
I do believe that if the a case ends in court, Penns Creek will be found to be navigable. Do not walk across posted land, unless you have written permission. Always ask permission.
 
Hey Chaz- Exactly how were these guys denied access to their own land? I didn't see that anywhere. As far as being pissed that others are flocking to fish the drakes and have taken up the parking....well too bad for them. UNLESS they own the property, in which case they can put up NO PARKING signs.
Again....This is more about them wanting EXCLUSIVE rights on the land and more importantly the water and fish....

 
what Maurice wrote in #48 is the way to go. Many locations on the LJ were prevented from posting b/c the LJRA smoothed over landowner disputes/problems. One "promise" that help them secure fishing easements was that the LJRA will clean up any trash, dumping problems people in the easement programs face.
 
Read between the lines.
 
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