ness

...searching the archives. Be back soon.

Renzetti Traveler, pedestal, older scew (not cam) jaws. It's a great tool -- well made and gonna outlast me. It'll spin, but I wouldn't call it a rotary vise. To me, rotary tying is kind of a specialty technique, and not really necessary for most folks to worry about. Honestly there are a lot of good ones out there.

Oh, I got convicted. Look it up on my county's web site.

Shoot JD -- you posted while I was typing. Same two things I read today.

I actually read Elder v. Delcour today at lunch. Pretty interesting to see how law gets made. I gotta say the old buffer was full by the time I was done. I wasn't confused per se, I couldn't think well enough for that. Also read Danforth's letter to the DA who was looking for guidance. I guess the takeaway is each stream has to be tested for a binding ruling. Ain't that just dandy?

Thanks Cricket, I didn't notice that. That dang "D" is right next to the "S" you know?

Well, I dunno JoeD. One of us Ozark Anglers has got him a justice of the peace staring right down at him for repeated trespassin on a feller's gravel bar on a non-navigable but public eased hiway of a crick. Nuther one said he'd tell the guy to go ahead and shoot, 'cause his wife is a lawyer. Yet another got run outta the Boy Scouts and later got sancioned for cheatin' on the Japanese bass circuit. Me, I got convicted of 38 in a 20 'bout ten years ago. One sells card fer a livin. So, we ain't all pure like you say.

Uncle.

That's some pretty solid logic there, Andrew. I wonder if any states have a setup like that? All that aside, JD is spot-on. You get more flies with sugar than shinola, er whatever. Respect, plus courtesy and common sense will get you further than insisting on being right will. Anybody who can boil down the stream access law into three or four bullet points wins a prize (to be announced at a later date).

1) First hand knowledge of a cub being seen <> you saw one, or have proof of one, right? 2) 1 Cub <> breeding population, necessarily, but it's a piece of evidence to consider. 3) Due diligence? How do you survey mountain lion populations? Door to door? I've said it before -- these guys are scientists, and they're not gonna say something unless they have evidence of it. They're not saying no, they're saying there's no evidence. You want black and white, watch cable news. You want scientific process, here's a definition: 'a method or procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.' You've got the hypothesis ....

I believe ness had a suggestion along those lines on about page 4. I'll shut up now.

I believe ness suggested that on page 3.

I think ness mentioned that on about page 2.

Great point ness, as always. I can see a nice packet of info, with all the pertinent information just ready to hand out to local officials whenever one of these things comes up. It'd be a great topic to discuss at organizations concerned with this stuff too, and they're always looking for someone to come talk at their meetings.

Like my daughter said, 'Dad, you're just too practical!' I got a pretty good chuckle out of that, and am happy to report that she did too after thinking about it for a second.

No, no Justin. ness' way just puts the fun back in it!

I'd add one more thing... The most practical thing to do here, and the one that will most likely fix this issue, is to get in front of law enforcement and discuss this thing. The sheriff was open to listening to Chief before and I'd bet he would be again. All you lawyer-wannabes could help Chief build a presentation to give to them. Make sure it's educational, professional, factually correct and not a bunch of hyperbole or name-calling. Just spell out things so they know how it's supposed to work and encourage them to educate the guys on the street. Maybe even make them up a cheat sheet. If you're lucky, they'll agree to go to Prater and discuss it with him. If not, they'll be a little smarter and have their little cheat sheet next time they have to go out there. And with modern photocopier and fax technology, the work could be sent to other law endforcement people as well. I'd chip in on a project like that. I would be MSA and other groups would too.

One of my major points is not who's got a right to what, but who's gonna get to fish hassle-free. I'm not gonna get involved in the technical discussions about stream bottom, midlines, cfs, navigable, or whatever. That's the immaterial part to me, and the vast majority of sportsmen, landowners and law enforcement. You guys can hash and rehash this thing and it won't change a thing. It hasn't yet. Chief will take the deal -- it's a darn good outcome compared to the alternatives which are (1) pay a fine or (2) pay an attorney so you don't get a fine. Just fish Shoal, scoot on by Prater's place and have a ball. If Prater and his goons are making trouble from the bank, give him a wave, paddle faster and wish them a good day. Then report his sorry arse when you're done, if you feel like it. You'll have a quiet day of fishing under your belt, and that's what really counts. If that approach would have been taken from the beginning, this whole situation wouldn't have come up.

Yeah - that's been my position on this since the first thread. Not such a bad deal -- yet. Everybody sure is brave with Chief's arse.

Read what Chief wrote -- he's sposta AVOID Prater's land. This ain't a constitutional case -- it's a fisherman and a landowner with a history, some pals lipping off to the guy and the authorities just want it all to go away before it becomes a bigger problem. They've got bigger fish to fry. I've chatted with the folks I think they're talking about on LP. Fished right on through (and back) without any issues. Sometimes we make our own problems.

Well I'm gonna keep fishing and hunting until the revolution comes.

Yeah, I know there's a lot more on the line than Prater's gravel bar. And I know if we were all wimps, a lot of stuff wouldn't be right in the world. It'd be like an old western where one bad dude could make the rules. But really, it's not a big issue for floaters in general, and not really for anybody but Chief in this case. I'm just trying to be practical. Even if he had the support of a bunch of people and organizations and it didn't cost him a penny, it'd still be an awful drain of time -- at a minimum. I've been down the path of dealing with crazy folks -- in this case, a neighbor. Even to the extent of having the police involved several times and serving as a witness for the city when the dude was up on disorderly conduct charges. At trial, the guy flat out made up stuff and in the end the judge said we BOTH needed to act right and dismissed the charges. I was pist, but I wasn't out a penny because it was city v. crazy neighbor. I'm sure the nut case spent several grand to get off. My family and I spent 10 years dealing with the schmuck and just let it all roll off. Stuff you wouldn't freakin' believe; stuff that was hard to let go by. I ran into him at a restaurant about a year ago, chatted him up and told him I just wanted to get this behind us. We're not buds, but he's civil now and the junk has stopped. I think that's a pretty good outcome and a great lesson for my kids.

I guess I didn't realize this was still an open case. I thought you got a pass if you promised to stay away for a while. What's the potential fine or sentence if you're convicted? The letter says the PA wants you to AVOID going on Prater's property. That's pretty tame language, and really doesn't mean squat. It's really just a way to conclude this thing -- they know they aren't assured of a win, and neither are you. The PA is likely telling Prater he's taking a chance because he's on shakey ground. I don't agree with the guys railing on the attorney. He'd have to spend a bunch of time researching it, building a case, going to trial. He's paid by the hour and he doesn't want to get stiffed if you lose your courage -- so a retainer. But he would love to get you to say yes and start the meter running. If all these guys willing to chip in covered all your costs (BTW, they won't), and you won, then what would we have? A crazy landowner with an even bigger grudge, and the same old gun-toting friends. Float a hundred guys through there, including a couple bonafide big mouths, and it'll be be a mess for sure. Oh, you may have the law on your side (when they get there) but they're not gonna take too kindly to everybody stirring the pot. It'll end up worse than it is, regardless of the law. It costs money to adjudicate these things -- that's just the way it works. So fight it all the way up until you get a satisfactory result. You'll be broke but have the satisfaction of sitting on his friggin' gravel bar telling stories about how you whooped this guy in Chief v. Prater. Screw the bravado. There are better ways to spend your time and money.

That's just gross. Take it elsewhere, sir!

Oh, yeah. Here's a few of mine: Stylin' Teamwork: Nobody works harder than the dawgs: They're absolutely one of the biggest reasons I do it.