New Little Juniata Postings.

[John96]

This is quite a damper. The LJ is getting hit hard by posting.

That being said, I have questions about the legality of this. How can a private company exclude people from township road? Regardless of being closed, Limestone road is still public right of way correct? If so, you could easily just walk down the road until you get to a spot where the stream and road are close, hop in, and start fishing.

 

[poopdeck]

Contact your state rep. No company likes to have govt. regulator types crawling around their operations.

all kinds of reasons but some are due to our own doings. In bucks county there's a concrete company in a popular cove on the Delaware. They had it open for all to enjoy. You could even launch your boat right off the bank. They paid close to 200k each year cleaning the property. When times got tough they stopped paying for the clean up and erected a large fence around it. Can't blame them. That's 200K per year coming out of their pockets.

 

[nymphingmaniac]

they can do it because the township abandoned the road years ago and NE took control and maintained it after the hurricane floods.

The LJRA has cleaned this area for 12 years. In fact, the first clean up yielded 2 long dumpsters of trash from the limestone road area. People were dumping things back there. LJRA clean it up and continues to do so each year. NE does not clean the area. I strongly suspect liability concerns.

 

[dryflyguy]

So, does new enterprise also own the gravel lot just above the pemberton bridge. That is where most people park to fish the big hole up and down from the bridge.

And if you can still access at the bridge, you would be able to wade upstream - within the high water mark of course.

 

[Camp]

Good question. I also wonder if those signs could be amended for walk in fishing only and still help with liability insurance.

 

[nymphingmaniac]

the lot is owned by them. i would be surprised if they posted that, although I have seen people make truck access to the stream by parking in bad places. But that's rare. They were not happy when people starting driving back across the field so they placed the piles of stone along the road. they have been cooperative in the past, so i am interested to know their motivation.

 

[afishinado]

John96 wrote:
This is quite a damper. The LJ is getting hit hard by posting.

That being said, I have questions about the legality of this. How can a private company exclude people from township road? Regardless of being closed, Limestone road is still public right of way correct? If so, you could easily just walk down the road until you get to a spot where the stream and road are close, hop in, and start fishing.

New Sal did some research about Limestone Road back in the spring. He came up with this. The road was abandoned by the Township and ownership was reverted to the quarry owners.

 

[Camp]

That pretty well concludes New Enterprise has the prime ownership and public right of ways are not a factor.

If, as I have seen, hunting is the issue, then perhaps the LJRA can get walk in fishing only access restored and NE can have their liability limited with hunting restricted.

People will be on the water no matter with navigable status, so no liability exists on the water activity.

Walk in exists within the flood plane. Parking and access to the old road for fishing would remain a good public courtesy if NE can be convinced this is a benefit to them.

 

[NewSal]

dryflyguy wrote:
So, does new enterprise also own the gravel lot just above the pemberton bridge. That is where most people park to fish the big hole up and down from the bridge.

And if you can still access at the bridge, you would be able to wade upstream - within the high water mark of course.

The gravel area is also posted.
Looks like babe road and wade down, or junkyard and wade up.

The junkyard recently scrapped/wholesaled everything in there lot. In my mind they are probobly doing this to sell the property. IF they do sell the junkyard and someone buys it and posts it, we are in REAL trouble.

 

[salmonoid]

Why doesn't someone make a call to New Enterprise and find out what their motivation is, instead of speculating about hunting, liability, company ownership change, etc.?

 

[NewSal]

salmonoid wrote:
Why doesn't someone make a call to New Enterprise and find out what their motivation is, instead of speculating about hunting, liability, company ownership change, etc.?

The people I've talked to so far don't know, Im working on it

 

[afishinado]

salmonoid wrote:
Why doesn't someone make a call to New Enterprise and find out what their motivation is, instead of speculating about hunting, liability, company ownership change, etc.?

The LJRA has cleaned this area for 12 years. In fact, the first clean up yielded 2 long dumpsters of trash from the limestone road area. People were dumping things back there. LJRA clean it up and continues to do so each year.

The LJRA, the local conservation club, has a relationship with the Company. It may be best for them to contact New Era, rather than have random people calling and trying to gain access by questioning ownership rights and motivation for posting.

I'm sure that New Sal, as well as other locals and members of the LJRA organization will keep us informed.

 

[NewSal]

afishinado wrote:

salmonoid wrote:
Why doesn't someone make a call to New Enterprise and find out what their motivation is, instead of speculating about hunting, liability, company ownership change, etc.?

The LJRA has cleaned this area for 12 years. In fact, the first clean up yielded 2 long dumpsters of trash from the limestone road area. People were dumping things back there. LJRA clean it up and continues to do so each year.

The LJRA, the local conservation club, has a relationship with the Company. It may be best for them to contact New Era, rather than have random people calling and trying to gain access by questioning ownership rights and motivation for posting.

Bingo!

 

[dryflyguy]

Bad news for sure.
That's one of the most popular areas of the river for fishing.
I run into Bill Anderson there frequently.
I'm sure he's aware of this, and will be on it

 

[troutbert]

Camp wrote:

People will be on the water no matter with navigable status, so no liability exists on the water activity.

Walk in exists within the flood plane.

Navigability status does not provide a public right of access within the floodplain.

It provides a public right of access only within the channel.

Which is a very different thing.

 

[Camp]

You are more correct in terminology, though I do think it is high water mark, not water channel or flood plain.

Point being that the water will be able to used for recreation due to navigability status so liability impact for land owner is negligible if walk in fishing use is allowed or isn't.

Perhaps the people at NE can be convinced to follow the townships example (from the Limestone Road abandonment) and cede their water access "liability" back to a public entity like a land conservancy.

Would really like to know what has changed and what the options are moving forward.

 

[turkey]

NewSal wrote:

dryflyguy wrote:
So, does new enterprise also own the gravel lot just above the pemberton bridge. That is where most people park to fish the big hole up and down from the bridge.

And if you can still access at the bridge, you would be able to wade upstream - within the high water mark of course.

The gravel area is also posted.
Looks like babe road and wade down, or junkyard and wade up.

This is disappointing.

 

[TYoung]

Could the Fish Commission purchase an easement from the company? If they Don't use that land for anything, maybe they would be willing to sell.

 

[Sylvaneous]

I hate getting jerked-around by crap like this. A reason why I don't go to the Little J. much at all anymore. Access fatigue.

Syl

 

[Wetfly01]

Just seen the posts on Tuesday of New Enterprise posting some sections on the Little J. I was in disbelief and saddened to hear the news. Just so happened I was doing a guide trip on the J on Wednesday morning and when I finished for the day I decided to do a little investigating of my own. Drove around to the areas that NE owns and to my surprise there are new posted signs up in areas that have not been posted in the past. What I did notice that there were all new signs around all of there properties. I just spoke to Kevin Compton owner of Performance Flies in Spruce Creek a few minutes ago. He was unaware of the new no trespassing signs placed in those sections. He said he was going down to the NE office this morning to see if he could get some information on why the area's were being posted that had not been posted in the past. I am sure Bill Anderson has probably got the news by now too. Hopefully between the two of them they'll be able to shed some light on what's going on. Hopefully we won't loose another section of the J.