New Little Juniata Postings.

As newsal wrote- please, everyone, leave it to the LJRA to contact NE. News of this hit tuesday/wednesday and it will take a little time to get information due to the Thanksgiving holiday. LJRA's contacts are most likely not be in the office until next week.

Wetfly- good information about all of the properties being posted (saved me a drive today). This suggests to me that this is a broad decision made by the company, and not in response to angler behavior or specific misuse around the river. Whether this is good or not, IDK. I'm hoping if it is a blanket policy, there may be room for compromise at specific locations. For example, even allowing access at the parking lot at the pemberton bridge would be a positive development.
 
Anyone see a connection between the level of detail about access in books like Keystone and the new postings at the Frank, LJ, and so on? It's one thing to share info and another to publish access points that may or may not be public. What happened to asking and to exploring on your own?

I saw the same thing happen to a lesser extent when the PFBC interactive web sites went up with class A info. Places I could access all the sudden became posted....
 
access burning will cause hot contentious owners. Feel the same, explore on your own. Still lots of access is open just the "prime spots" will be closed down.Perhaps PAFB can acquire some access/easements.
 
Speaking as a landowner postings normally have nothing to due with advertisement of fishing locations. It has everything to do with people who don't respect the property or simply feel entitled to use it without first asking permission. Then there are those that have no regard for daily creel limits....

Ron
 
A quarry is a heavy industry site, with many dangers. There is blasting, huge machinery, and quarry trucks loaded with rocks.

Limestone Road was previously a public road. Now it's a private road owned by the quarry.

If they choose to allow the public to use their private road on an industrial site, they are taking on a lot of liability. If a quarry truck on that road hits a car or civilian, the lawsuits could go into the millions.

This probably came from their insurance company presenting them with two options:

Option A. Prohibit public access to your heavy industry site: Lower premiums.

Option B. Allow public access to your heavy industry site: Higher premiums.

This doesn't mean there is no possible solution. There may be possibilities where the public has parking and walk in access in certain places, and other areas will be off limits.

If they are using Limestone Road for quarry truck traffic, I wouldn't expect that they will open that up to the public to drive or walk back that road.

Some other option might be possible. But probably not that.

 
troutbert wrote:
If they are using Limestone Road for quarry truck traffic, I wouldn't expect that they will open that up to the public to drive or walk back that road.
Click to expand...

A big IF. There is immunity to landowners who permit public access for recreational purposes, but the landowner cannot permit an unknown hazard to exist. Perhaps there are unknown hazards as troutbert suggests. Be careful out there!
 
If you read the entire thread, the township vacated ownership of it 20 years ago and no vehicles were permitted to drive on it - walk-in access only. It has now been closed to walk-in traffic and the land adjacent to the bridge, where anglers parked, is now posted.

Again, the best we can do is wait for the LJRA to contact the owners and see if the road, and more important the land next to the bridge, can be reopened. If that fails, perhaps the PFBC can be asked to intercede.
 
An announcement was put up about this - just today - on the LJRA website.
The posting wasn't for anything specific to the little juniata river site.
New Enterprise - for whatever reason - just decided to post all of their properties in the state.

LJRA will be making contact with them to see if anything can be done to open access there again.
And are asking all fishermen to respect the signs
 
dryflyguy wrote:
An announcement was put up about this - just today - on the LJRA website.
The posting wasn't for anything specific to the little juniata river site.
New Enterprise - for whatever reason - just decided to post all of their properties in the state.

LJRA will be making contact with them to see if anything can be done to open access there again.
And are asking all fishermen to respect the signs
Click to expand...

^ Here is a link to the message on the LJRA site:

http://www.littlejuniata.org/
 
UPDATE:

I haven't read all the new posts, I dont have time.. But I will give an update. I did skim accross one post about the quarry using the road for truck traffic...no the quarry doesnt use the road..for anything..



HERES THE UPDATE:

The decision to post the property came from corporate HQ. It was NOT a local decision. The local property manager had no issue with the road being open, but unfortunately had no choice to post the property.

AS MENTIONED THE LAST THING WE NEED IS A BUNCH OF PEOPLE CALLING NE, JUST LEAVE IT TO THE INDIVIDUALS WITH CONNECTIONS.

I got this info from another invested business owner in the area who had contacts with NE, I didn't contact them myself.



Looks like the only thing possible is an easement. Time will tell
 
Bill will be meeting with New Enterprise next Tuesday to discuss possible alternatives to the posted property including a conservation easement, and a public fishing easement. Bill wants everyone to know that he and the LJRA are doing everything they can to regain access to the area.
 
Maybe those who fish it often ought to raise some cash to purchase the easement? Just thinking out loud here.
 
finding money for the easement is not the issue. There are three possibilities. Getting NE to agree is the obstacle. Chances are very good a compromise will be arrived at. How quickly is the question.
 
Great work by the LJRA working this through! NGO's on the ground can be highly effective in these situations.

The idea of an easement for that road for walk in fish, hike, or just in general a green-way makes a lot of sense. Grant money is everywhere for these types of initiatives. If it has no value to NE then its a gain to remove a liability from them. Might be worth while to find other recreational user groups of that river that would partner in the effort.
 
JackM wrote:
Maybe those who fish it often ought to raise some cash to purchase the easement? Just thinking out loud here.
Click to expand...

nymphing maniac is right, money is not really the issue.. But sense you brought it up, you could always get a membership to the LJRA if you want to help out Jack
 
NewSal's post can give LJR enthusiasts some hope. If anyone can get the section re-opened, it will be Bill A. and the LJRA.

Also, I agree that joining the LJRA would be a good way to support the effort to re-open the NE section and to support the LJRA in general.

For updates, you might want to keep your eye on the LJRA website.
 
I will address the innuendo:
I fish the Little J at most 4 times a year. Even in my heyday, it wasn't more than 6 times. I would no sooner join the LJRA than the Belgian Club, to which I have never been.

Don't get me wrong, I would donate to that club if I had money to spare, just because it does good work. All I am saying is, if you want to cry about private property owners denying access over their land, then pony up or access the navigable waters elsewhere.
 
That said, in other words, I could access the Little J in the state forest and walk all the way to the source or down to the Susquy and no land owner could do anything to stop me. If I want to walk over or park in someone's property, I ought to have permission, express or implied, even if I have to pay for it.
 
JackM wrote:
I will address the innuendo:
I fish the Little J at most 4 times a year. Even in my heyday, it wasn't more than 6 times. I would no sooner join the LJRA than the Belgian Club, to which I have never been.

Don't get me wrong, I would donate to that club if I had money to spare, just because it does good work. All I am saying is, if you want to cry about private property owners denying access over their land, then pony up or access the navigable waters elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Second paragraph is all you needed, don't need to start something in this thread that wasn't there. I fished the little J for the first time this year and had a blast. Good to know some forks are working hard to keep it that way.
 
You object to the Belgian Club reference?
 
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