Spruce Creek access

[tomgamber]

Like i said, read. There are conservation/protection considerations in there.
It is possible that this small strip of land was intentionally left there as a buffer to protect the creek. I'm sure it's researchable of one had nothing better to do.

 

[Hackle]

A quick search on this says: How does eminent domain work for public parks?
The government can use eminent domain to acquire land for public parks, even if the owner doesn't want to sell.
The government must show that the taking is necessary for the public good.
The government must pay the owner "just compensation" for their property.
The government must follow a process that includes filing a declaration with the court.
Examples of eminent domain for public parks
The federal government used eminent domain to acquire land for Yellowstone National Park.
Local governments can use eminent domain to acquire land for parks or to expand existing parks.

 

[riverwhy]

I get trying to save a good fly or wading to get a better drift. I can't fish the little J without wading but i can understand the damage 100+ fisherman a year, wading up a small short section of spruce creek could do to the aquatic life and stream banks. I think a no wade is a good compromise to get access.
An old fly fisherman asked me a question once fishing with him on spruce creek, "Why wade a stream you can cast across". He would step in to land a fish but that was about it. He didn't mind taking a kid fishing, but don't spook the fish he's about to catch under the bank. Lol.

Good point though I could see where a no wading rule could cause considerable damage to
The stream bank. I guess it would depend on the slope of the banks and vegetation.

 

[CRB]

A quick search on this says: How does eminent domain work for public parks?
The government can use eminent domain to acquire land for public parks, even if the owner doesn't want to sell.
The government must show that the taking is necessary for the public good.
The government must pay the owner "just compensation" for their property.
The government must follow a process that includes filing a declaration with the court.
Examples of eminent domain for public parks
The federal government used eminent domain to acquire land for Yellowstone National Park.
Local governments can use eminent domain to acquire land for parks or to expand existing parks.

What about private landowners taking public property?
And, these same individuals enforce no trespassing?
This property could be navigable waters of the state, state gamelands, or state forests/parks of the state of Pennsylvania,

 

[Hackle]

What about private landowners taking public property?
And, these same individuals enforce no trespassing?
This property could be navigable waters of the state, state gamelands, or state forests/parks of the state of Pennsylvania,

In reading about the history of of franklin township, spruce creek was never a navigable stream. There were grist mills, woolen mills and Iron works daming the stream up for water powered equipment for 150+ years. Colerain park was the location of large dam that was part of the Colerain forges from what I recall.

 

[caddisflyer]

Perhaps a topic for another thread but is anyone EVER prosecuted for posting of land they do not own? The taking of public property by posting or spray painting purple is out of hand in my area. I mentioned it to my local game warden one time and he showed zero interest. (Of course he is completely worthless).

 

[nymphingmaniac]

Once they get the boundaries clearly marked, I'll fish it to support DCNR's efforts to keep public land open to the public.

This is just one example of a larger issue. Some people will try to "privatize" public land, if allowed to.

your argument is one that resonates well with me. It might not be the best fishing experience, but use would demonstrate we appreciate their efforts to keep fishing access open. I'll see you there!

 

[nymphingmaniac]

Perhaps a topic for another thread but is anyone EVER prosecuted for posting of land they do not own? The taking of public property by posting or spray painting purple is out of hand in my area. I mentioned it to my local game warden one time and he showed zero interest. (Of course he is completely worthless).

I think this was discussed here at one point.
I would not call WCOs worthless. Did you give them a specific example or just speak in general terms? Is this their jurisdiction and charge- to prosecute land boundary disputes? Are you sure you are correct in your assumptions?
There was an incident on the Little J a couple of years ago where squatters put up posted signs on a section they did not own. This area is frequented by squatters and homeless who make a huge mess. The signs were taken down. A volunteer (who was an attorney) spent months trying to figure out who owned the land in an attempt to erect vehicle barriers to prevent squatting and dumping. He finally did. it was not easy. Figuring out property lines drawn and documented 100-200 years ago is not trivial. The GPS signals must have been weak back then when they drew the lines (😉) It's not like housing developments built 50 years ago.

 

[troutbert]

Neither "eminent domain" nor "navigable waters" has been mentioned by DCNR,. So probably neither has any relevance to this situation.

The situation is pretty simple. DCNR owns land along the stream on one side, so the public has a right of fishing access there.

 

[Hackle]

I think this was discussed here at one point.
I would not call WCOs worthless. Did you give them a specific example or just speak in general terms? Is this their jurisdiction and charge- to prosecute land boundary disputes? Are you sure you are correct in your assumptions?
There was an incident on the Little J a couple of years ago where squatters put up posted signs on a section they did not own. This area is frequented by squatters and homeless who make a huge mess. The signs were taken down. A volunteer (who was an attorney) spent months trying to figure out who owned the land in an attempt to erect vehicle barriers to prevent squatting and dumping. He finally did. it was not easy. Figuring out property lines drawn and documented 100-200 years ago is not trivial. The GPS signals must have been weak back then when they drew the lines (😉) It's not like housing developments built 50 years ago.

I wouldn't call WCO's worthless but most of them were outlaws growing up, lol. Had an uncle that was a game warden. I baited his tree stand one year and tried to have him arrest himself. He was pissed, but a good sport about gutting a deer full of corn. LOL
As i understand it, the ground in question was reclaimed by the state in the early 1900s to save state forest that were destroyed by logging and Iron works. With 100 years of people building dams, building rock walls or what ever. Is the stream where it was in the 1890s or 1900s when it was originally surveyed off of the the iron masters warranted grounds into state Forrest land.
Have a friend that thought he owned creek ( not part of spruce creek) because his deed described a pin was on other side of creek. The creek had moved from the time of original survey, thats an oops now. He can still fish but he dosnt own to the other side of the creek like he thought. Just wondering how much of that could be at play in this case.

 

[PennKev]

If only HALF is public, how does the PFBC make it C&R & no wading or is that just THE public half?

Um, I dunno just specify that only one bank is open to public fishing and is no wade only in the regulations?

Oh, wait that would just be too easy and wouldn't let us argue over minutiae or find trivial ways to discredit this effort to expand public fishing access on Spruce.

 

[Hackle]

Um, I dunno just specify that only one bank is open to public fishing and is wade only in the regulations?

Oh, wait that would just be too easy and wouldn't let us argue over minutiae or find trivial ways to discredit this effort to expand public fishing access on Spruce.

I think alot of folks may be missing how much human impact can cause to a stream. 100-300 people wading up thru a small stream, crushing everything under foot would do over time to the hatches. I'm pretty sure some sections of spruce creek are a no-wade by owners choice. I'm on the fence on wading, excessive wading won't destroy everything. It might move alot of fish up to private waters being constantly disturbed. If the state installed rock vane, casting points at every hole, it would keep currents channeled making, nice deep narrow holes. (I'd put money on it that if you put a nice spot for a fisherman to cast from, he will use it to his advantage). Right now it looks medium shallow, fast with a good enough drop in the valley. That the state could make some really nice pools with some stream improvements for both public and private landowners benefits. In looking at that section it has lots of rock bottom cover and fast water. I'm sure there is lots of 6" - 13" trout as the majority of fish. With lots of pockets along far side and middle that could hold quite a few larger hogs. I'd guess a hand full of fish food might tell one how many stocked trout are in that section. Lol.

 

[jifigz]

I think alot of folks may be missing how much human impact can cause to a stream. 100-300 people wading up thru a small stream, crushing everything under foot would do over time to the hatches.

How does Spring Creek even have any hatches left? It's bigger, but is easily "waded to death" through much of it's length.

 

[JeffK]

The no wading thing doesn't bother me. For most of my life the Heritage section of the Little Lehigh was no wading. It made planning your casts interesting and didn't disturb the bottom. Some fish were in spots it was maybe impossible to reach but there were always plenty more to target. Caught many, many trout under those rules. Then, wading was allowed and I don't think it helped the fishery or the fishing experience.

 

[jifigz]

I hope it gets ruled as being public water, but I am not going to make the 1-hour drive to fish it.

 

[5footfenwick]

How does Spring Creek even have any hatches left? It's bigger, but is easily "waded to death" through much of its length.

Spring creek has multiple no wading sections. Perhaps the bugs are all from these sections lol

 

[Hackle]

How does Spring Creek even have any hatches left? It's bigger, but is easily "waded to death" through much of it's length.

I stated excessive wading won't destroy everything. Spruce creek is alot smaller of a stream and fish can be easily spooked by wading. There will always be mayflies somewhere to lay more eggs thats a given. I just understand the impact humans can have on a small stream and its banks. I'm not opposed to wading, I just stay out of stream I can cast across to keep from moving fish out of its cover. And there probably will always be that guy that crosses the creek onto private property and causes an issue that could be prevented by a wading rule.

 

[Hackle]

Don't mean to ruffle feathers on the wading thoughts. I've had the pleasure of watching Joe Humphreys fish spruce creek, effectively with great presentation and not once did he need to wade. He caught fish right out from under the bank in front of him to the ones on the other side of the stream. If Joe can do it successfully so can I pretend to. Lol, I definitely lose more flies from over casting than he does for sure. But I'm not buying flies at a store for 30$ a dozen or what ever they cost now either.