Spring Ridge Club experience.

He described several conservation issues regarding Spring Creek and Penns Creek and other streams. But these have nothing at all to do with SRC. It’s just talk. They aren't doing anything about these issues.

And he didn't "bring them to light." These things are very well known among TU members and other conservationists in central PA and we have been fighting these battles for many years. Everyone who fishes this region regularly knows that Spring Creek is threatened by development. That is glaringly obvious. And SRC gets credit just for talking about it?

The same with the Penns Valley quarry. Some of us spent a lot of time and money trying to stop that quarry, and this was before SRC even existed. Anglers & conservationists from all over PA joined in that battle. What has SRC done about it?

Much of what he said is inaccurate. The PFBC is not the agency that issues or denies permits for things such as the Home Depot near the Letort. Everyone gripes about the PFBC shortcomings. It’s an easy thing to do. But that doesn’t change anything about SRC.

But the real issue is that they asked you to move. And they have NO RIGHT WHATEVER, legally or ethically, to do that. The judges ruling made that absolutely clear.

They are trying to re-assert control of “their” stretch river by use of clever tactics. This has been happening on the West Branch Delaware for years, so it's nothing new. They're using the old good cop, bad cop routine. Your previous bad experience was the bad cop part. They've been trying to intimidate people for a long time. They know the law is watching now, so they are trying some of the good cop routine.

They asked nicely and chatted you up. Every salesman learns to get on someone’s good side by talking about topics they are interested in. If it’s sports, they talk sports, if it’s conservation and the PFBC, they’ll talk that talk. It’s the old schmooze routine.

Good cop or bad cop tactics, the bottom line is the same. They wanted you to move, to get out of their way so they could conduct their activities on “their” river. And they succeeded.

I’m not attacking you at all. I appreciate your courage to fish there. The more people who fish there, the better, since that helps reinforce the judge's decision that is in fact a public river, not just in a formal, legal sense but for real, in practice.

And many people would have reacted the same in the same circumstances. I’m just trying to describe what I think is the reality of the situation, since I think the guy you talked to was trying to snow you.

Whether they or “nice” or “interested in conservation” or whether they are “bad people” is really irrelevant. None of this is personal. The issues would still be the same, even if all the people changed. It’s about the river.

They will try to continue controlling the use of that stretch of the river, either by co-option or coercion or whatever tactic works. The fact that they asked you to leave makes it clear that they still consider it “their” stretch of the river, that THEY are in control of what goes on in that stretch of the river.

It's a bit of a game going on here and I expect it to continue. They will try to control what goes on there, and get people to go along with that idea. And the public will just have to continue to assert that, no, it's not SRC's river, it's a public river, and our rights our precisely the same as SRC members.
 
Sight nymph:

I had a somewhat similar experience last fall on Yellow Creek.
I was fishing the short section that is open to the public between 2 sections leased by Beaver just below the catch and release area.
A fellow came out of the house by the small, one lane bridge there, and started feeding pellets to the fish. I stopped fishing, and moved down to the posted water to watch - out of curiosity - to see what kind of fish were in there. The guy struck up a conservation with me, and we proceded to talk for almost an hour.
He seemed like a pretty nice guy, and told me why he signed a lease with Beaver. He said that slob fisherman were keeping more than they're legal limit of fish, and leaving trash - i.e. bait containers - all over his property. When he asked them to quit being pigs, he said they used foul language in front of his wife and kids. Because of this rude behavior, he said that he was going to post his land anyways. Then Beaver comes along and offers $$$.
You really can't blame the guy for doing it.
But, I still can't stomach what Beaver and the SRC are doing.
Bottom line - they're buying up prime trout water so that only an exclusive few can fish there.

A few questions for you:

You stated that Beaver is done - you mean he is no longer affiliated with SCR?

Also, I'd like to know where that 6 miles of the Little J they leave open to the public is - did he tell you?
 
Holy hell. I really got you guys stirred up. So many questions or comments to reply to....

I fished that section all last summer and the only time there was an issue was during a 'Beaver sighting'. I fished along side members and guests. They were always very nice. I understood that section to be open unless the court ruled differently. I now see that I was actually trespassing. I fished that section 15-20 years ago and I'm glad to see it is accessible again.

My understanding from what Dave McMullen told me... Don has stepped down. He's working on fishing lodges in CO. The membership dues mean nothing to DB. I think his business nets him a smooth 7-figure salary. I he was a public relations nightmare for them though.

I'm not giving SRC credit for shedding light on issues with Penns or Spring Creek. I've been out of the fishing loop for a few years and since getting back into it, I don't think I've ever had a fellow fisherman ask me to help support anything other then a fishing rodeo for the children. I've seen the changes to Spring Creek over the last 20 years and thought it may have been my imagination since I don't get up there too often.

As far as the clubs financial records... I have no idea. I understand the lots to be over the hill, well away from Spruce and LJ. I'd guess that the money from the lots would be used to improve their lodging and maybe buy other properties.

6 miles of LJ that they own... I didn't ask because the judge decided navigable. I will say that if they do own 6 miles on both sides.... access would be a long ankle-breaking walk inside the high water mark. That would be enough to keep me out. My knees can't handle too much of that crap anymore.

I am definitely a have not. If I play golf on the local Muni, I don't resent the members at Augusta National. I guess with $$ comes some privileges.

I'm glad to hear the TU got that section on Falling Springs opened back up.

I'll be misunderstood for this but.... My position has always been that if a stream holds trout year round or supports natural reproduction.... It should be no harvest and fly-fishing only. If you're hungry for fish, head to long john silvers or the put and take waters. Fly anglers (in general) and more respectful, appreciative, courteous and interested in preserving the resource.
 
I would hate to see trout fishing in PA go the way of deer hunting in texas or salmon fishing in scotland.....a pay to play experience for a priveledged few. However, I think there is nothing unsportsmanlike in asserting property ownership rights. The "stick floats down the stream" defense wins for now. Civil law seems to be a very fluid entitity and as I have stated before should be only one prong of a more comprehensive stream access and conservation effort if we are to preserve our angling heritage over the long term.
 
That is very interesting - he told you that DB has stepped down.
But, it sure would make sense. DB has grown so notorious these last few years, that it would only help the SRC for him to get out.

As for wading down into the Espy property - I did it last month, and I'm with you on that being a little hard.
Going down in the daylight wasn't bad, but coming back up in the dark was kinda tough on the ankles. I lost my footing quite a few times in that rocky section in fron of the houses. They had these goofy poles along the stream edge then - to show you the wading limits. You pretty much had to stay in the water to stay legal, although I understand that they have been removed now.
 
dryfly,
I saw that the poles were still up in some areas. From the junction of Spruce down past the barn is one of the toughest walks around. I haven't gone down yet but I must look pretty damn funny slipping and tripping my way down the bank. I fished a first light and there wasn't much going on. Lots of craneflies and a few caddis here and there. I wished that I could have gone later in the day. What bugs did you see?
As for DB, he may be nice (or not), smart or a great businessman but his actions and reactions drew nothing but negative attention.
 
sightnymph:

I fished there the 2nd week of May. I went down about 1pm, and had some great fishing - sulphers mostly, and I ended up staying until dark.
I also used to fish there 20 years ago, when it was open to the public, and that was my first time back since it went private. It brought back some memories.
In the mid '80's, when I was still pretty new at fly fishing, I used to go to Penns and Spring Creek, and had a hard time catching fish in those streams. One day, I stopped at Espy's on my way to Penns, and I had instant success there - my first on limestone streams. So, I kept going back into it got posted in 1990.
That place is kinda special to me, and it was pretty neat to fish it again. Many thanks to all involved in winning the court case
 
I too would not have moved on.
As to DB,AKA "The Evil Emperor" I would not believe a word out of his mouth. I have spoken to him and he is full of it. Worse than a used car sales man. He'll tell you whatever he wants you to hear. Remember the "inter sanctum"? One must read through the bull. If I were a club owner with these problems,what would I be doing? Raising money for anther battle? Posture the property for a sale? Or operate under the status quo? How about I'll fix them I'll just close down other high quality waters?
 
Question. With all their miles of streams that truly ARE private, why did they pick the Little J for the non-profit fundraiser?
Perhaps because their premeire waters were earning money from members not attending the charity event?

Yeah, he asked you VERY nicely to move I'm sure.
 
Re: " I now see that I was actually trespassing."

No you weren't. The river was declared a public highway by the state legislature way back in the 1800s, and SRC's legal counsel surely must have known that. It was very actively used for commercial navigation back in the time. And the river has always been navigable in fact.

For these reasons, I knew from the beginning that Beaver would lose the court case and said so on here. Because it was just obvious that his effort to convert a public river to private would fail. It just had no legal backing. I couldn't figure out then, and still can't figure out, why he thought he could succeed in making that kind of grab. I think he's had so many successes in business that he just got arrogant, and thought he could do whatever he wanted. And found out that there are limits.

A great deal of what that guy told you just isn't true. You are buying into their story, even though they are very much against your interests, as their whole enterprise is converting previously publicly accessible waters to private posted waters for their financial gain.

Google the term "Stockholm syndrome" and you'll find some insight on the tendency of people to identify with their oppressors.
 
The point I was making in my post yesterday was that everyone is up in arms about the DB and the SRC, and rightfully so, yet even more of a threat to our streams and wild areas are the developers.

We should all fight to encourage more quality streams be designated Class A, exceptional value to impede development. With all development there should be green areas and buffer zones around the streams, stricter laws for storm drainage, septic systems, etc. As an example the Valley Forge TU has been and is fighting developers, township planners, the PA Turnpike Commission, and many more to help preserve Valley Creek and other local streams.

We should all support the PFBC with the CAP program, your local TU, the Nature Conservatory, and any other organization that help to preserve and/or lease or purchase wild areas – before it’s too late.

The SRC is small potatoes when compared to, for example, Toll Brothers developers. I just looked it up, Toll Brothers is based in PA and had 5.6 billion dollars of revenue last year. They control over 30,000 homes/units in nearly 400 communities. That’s just one developer. Compare that to the SRC. There’s bigger fish to fry out there, and fry they will, if we don’t wake up and begin to help in the fight.
 
Squaretail,
I guess they held the tournament at LJ because that's where it was last year. How would I know? I don't believe the fishermen were actually members but they had to donate at least $1,000 per man to CF to participate. As for your smart comment regarding the way I was asked to move.... I wasn't asked to move. Dave explained that the stream would be quite busy because of the event. I could stay and mingle with the others or he'd give me a lift to the lower section so that I could have some peace and less fisherman traffic. That's what he did and I was permitted to walk and fish anywhere I wished. Do I need a specific degree or a decoder ring to twist that into what you read?
 
Gentlemen, please keep the discussion civil. This does not refer only to the last post. Discussions of this nature have a tendency to become personal and then everyone loses the benefit of gaining insight when the thread has to be shut down or deleted. Thanks for your understanding.
 
troutbert,
I may be over 40 but I wasn't actually around in the 1800's when the river was being used for commercial transport of goods and materials. My comment "I was actually trespassing" was on the premise that the river wasn't deemed navigable until the ruling was handed down this year. You may be far better versed in what is navigable river or maybe you just have a list of all streams in PA that are navigable. The bottom line is the judge ruled and that's how it will be. Luckily it was in the public's favor... this time.
You claim that I was buying into their story, they are very much against my interests and they buy and post water for their financial gain. Could you please show me documented proof of your claims?
If they had 150 members at 100k per member, they purchase 20 mil in land and structures, add in upkeep of the buildings, land, supplemental fish stocking, feed, taxes, and salaries associated (administrative staff maybe), advertising etc. Where's the profit? I hope you do better calculations when balancing your checkbook. :)
I appreciate your suggestion to Google "Stockholm syndrome".
After reading some of the arguments posted on this thread, I may actually want to Google "Down syndrome". I just want to know what is going to be accomplished by hating SRC and for some of you... crying? afishinado has the right idea. Focus the energy in a positive direction. Without giving the landowner (seller) another option, they will always take the big money from developers or private clubs like SRC. Let's hope we can get a plan up and running before we've lost most class A streams in the state.
 
A river doesn't change its status because a Court recognizes its status with a decision. The river is and always was navigable; that is the import of the decision. It never was private property. You may take the position that the status was not immediately apparent and that it was subject to good faith dispute as to whether the streambed was public or private, but it is false to believe that it was private until it was declared public.

Troutbert makes a good point, though I think he overstates it a bit and makes it too personal -- hence my warning. And again I would ask that we steer away from that tendency. The gentleman you encountered was very skillful in finding a win-win solution to the "problem" of you being in an area they wished to have exclusive use of. He found you secluded fishing and found his organization privacy. But I think you are mistaken in believing his actions were solely for your benefit.
 
Maybe this is why Donny is out there, I am sure he is an expert on evading taxes as much as possible. http://www.couriergoldrush.com/site/tab3.cfm?newsid=18139973&BRD=2713&PAG=461&dept_id=559185&rfi=6
 
sight_nymph_17109 wrote:
troutbert,
I may be over 40 but I wasn't actually around in the 1800's when the river was being used for commercial transport of goods and materials. My comment "I was actually trespassing" was on the premise that the river wasn't deemed navigable until the ruling was handed down this year. You may be far better versed in what is navigable river or maybe you just have a list of all streams in PA that are navigable. The bottom line is the judge ruled and that's how it will be. Luckily it was in the public's favor... this time.
Click to expand...

Sight,

This is completely FALSE. The issue with the SRC and the Little J. is that SRC was shutting down access to the publicly held water flowing through its property. This waterway was deemed navigable over 100 years ago for the purpose of commerce. Therefor, it is was and continues to be a public waterway. The problem was that DB and the SRC closed down the access to the water by stringing cables across it, putting 4' x 8' signs up at the Spruce Creek bridge, etc. Prior to this the espy stretch being posted was respected by local fishermen as a private landowner wishing to not allow access along the property.

If I remember correctly, it was the F&BC, DCNR, and associated interests who filed a petition to the state to have DB allow access to the riverbed along the Espy stretch. Claiming the river was indeed navigable based on historical documents. He refused and the court case ensued. It was Donnie Beavers burden to prove the river non-navigable...which he could not.

You obviously have made up your mind on this issue so there is no point in discussing it anymore. I think we ALL agree that something needs to be done with the access issues to our blue ribbon streams. Thats a no brainer. But lleasing, purchasing, and closing them to the public is not the answer that satisfies those here. Therefor it is counter to our interests. You seem to believe it is the lesser of two evils. It is still an evil.

I think your proactive point of view is admirable. Even enviable, but when you pair it with an empathy toward the very thing you are trying to avoid, it sits sour in the stomach like three day old milk on a warm day.

Maurice
 
Squaretail: That is easy, they didn't want their money making waters to be used, or the fish educated or their streams trampled, let the poor dopes fish the public water on the Little J, in addition they want to use the Little J for publicity, that would throw small daggers at the judge for taking "their" river for the public.
 
It is so obvious that the Little J is navigable I don't know why the state even joined the case, look at the many small towns along the river, why were they there. I still say it would be fairly easy to declare Spruce Creek navigable, it drains a highly productive valley, there were forges and lumber to be shipped and crops and they certainly used Spruce to ship those goods East.
 
Maurice,

I didn't know the stream was classified as navigable prior to the huge stink that DB started. I remember fishing there when the Espy's had it. The only rule was no casting in front of the house. I hadn't been up there in years and wasn't even aware of the battle. Last June, after reading the letter from the state (posted on Spruce Creek Outfitters website), I figured it was fair game and I began an all out assault on the fish of that section. Again, the only issue I had last year was when they were holding a wedding in the front yard of the farm house along the river and I came strolling up the river. I'm 99% sure that it was DB that walked beside me and told me "Both feet in the stream or I'll call the police because you're trespassing". I responded with "Beautiful day for a wedding and by the way, I'm inside the high water line. I have a phone right here if you'd like me to call the police I can do that for you. What are the laws on harassment anyhow?" Other then that, everything's been just dandy up there. That section holds some big uns too.
 
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