Spruce Creek access

[Hackle]

not all the people are rich, but some are. Maybe it depends on the definition of wealthy. A significant concern is the loss of value of their property. My feeling is that was up to them to do due diligence before they paid a premium price (those who did not inherit). Their land will still be valuable, maybe not as much.

I'm not sure how a loss of value of your property is established because a fly fisherman is enjoying himself in front of a cottage/property. I'm sure it will be catch and release only. I'd love to fish it. I wouldn't destroy their property. I wouldn't wade across the stream and walk onto their property. I'd enjoy the beautiful stream, watching the rays of sun shine glimmering thru caddis wings on a good hatch. Setting the hook on a nice brown or rainbow will cure anyone's bad week. Lol.

 

[troutbert]

DCNR owns one side of the creek. So, the public has the right of access on that side. It's pretty simple.

Does anyone think there is any legal question or uncertainty? If so, what?

Don't get distracted by stuff like whether they are "wealthy" or not. That's totally irrelevant.

 

[jifigz]

OnX isn't perfect, but after reviewing their property maps on my phone, that section of Rothrock would open a fairly substantial stream length to public fishing. People could even easily trek through the woods past the small, 1 acre property owned by the Edward Karlik Trust and access another short stretch of water that would be owned by the state. That would be great.

 

[Bamboozle]

I'm not sure how a loss of value of your property is established because a fly fisherman is enjoying himself in front of a cottage/property. I'm sure it will be catch and release only. I'd love to fish it. I wouldn't destroy their property. I wouldn't wade across the stream and walk onto their property. I'd enjoy the beautiful stream, watching the rays of sun shine glimmering thru caddis wings on a good hatch. Setting the hook on a nice brown or rainbow will cure anyone's bad week. Lol.

• How do you know it will just be fly fishermen?
• If it is a DCNR fight for public water, should it be FFO?
• How do you know it will be catch & release?
• Could the non-public side be harvest while the public side isn't?
• How do you know other people won't destroy their property?

Therein lies just SOME the quandary of allowing access...

I fished ONE stream in my life (a Class A) where I had landowner permission but in a certain stretch the landowner only owned to the middle of the creek. Quite frankly it was a pain in the a$$ to stay on MY side and in a few other places it was about impossible to exit the stream on the side I was fishing.

I never went back...

 

[Hackle]

• How do you know it will just be fly fishermen?
• If it is a DCNR fight for public water, should it be FFO?
• How do you know it will be catch & release?
• Could the non-public side be harvest while the public side isn't?
• How do you know other people won't destroy their property?

Therein lies just SOME the quandary of allowing access...

I fished ONE stream in my life (a Class A) where I had landowner permission but in a certain stretch the landowner only owned to the middle of the creek. Quite frankly it was a pain in the a$$ to stay on MY side and in a few other places it was about impossible to exit the stream on the side I was fishing.

I never went back...

• How do you know it will just be fly fishermen?
• If it is a DCNR fight for public water, should it be FFO?
• How do you know it will be catch & release?
• Could the non-public side be harvest while the public side isn't?
• How do you know other people won't destroy their property?

Therein lies just SOME the quandary of allowing access...

I fished ONE stream in my life (a Class A) where I had landowner permission but in a certain stretch the landowner only owned to the middle of the creek. Quite frankly it was a pain in the a$$ to stay on MY side and in a few other places it was about impossible to exit the stream on the side I was fishing.

I never went back...

Lol, understand your point. Flyfishing only! Sorry miss spoke. Catch and release is a good compromise for anyone asking a property owner for some access to a good day of fishing. Being a pain in the a$$ to stay on one's side I think I understand. I've been taught, (no offense) why wade up thru a stream you can easily cast across. I've had some good advice from many great fisherman before me. Spruce creek isn't like the little J. I love wading honestly I just understand what's under my feet, and would be more cautious about wading for a hundred yards up spruce creek vs the little J.

 

[Hackle]

OnX isn't perfect, but after reviewing their property maps on my phone, that section of Rothrock would open a fairly substantial stream length to public fishing. People could even easily trek through the woods past the small, 1 acre property owned by the Edward Karlik Trust and access another short stretch of water that would be owned by the state. That would be great.

I used to have Onx, and your correct on accuracy but it's closer to accurate vs Google or rothrock maps. I remember as a kid going to colerain park in the 60s and 70s was just gorgeous. We would hike up along the stream above the park to see the ice caves in the summer and cool off. I don't know if that trail along the creek is there anymore but it's beautiful from what I remember.

 

[jifigz]

I used to have Onx, and your correct on accuracy but it's closer to accurate vs Google or rothrock maps. I remember as a kid going to colerain park in the 60s and 70s was just gorgeous. We would hike up along the stream above the park to see the ice caves in the summer and cool off. I don't know if that trail along the creek is there anymore but it's beautiful from what I remember.

I have actually never been to the park, and I have never wet a line in Spruce Creek. I should go check Colerain out, though, and walk that part of the MST.