|
Post by zimmerstutzen on Apr 1, 2014 10:44:20 GMT -5
Let me get this straight. I will have to put up with fishermen climbing fences and stomping fragile stream banks because 4 miles away some one decided to release a fish? Why would I bother fencing the stock away from the stream if humans can come in and do what I do not allow my livestock to do. You want to take away property rights, be prepared for the constitutional provision about not taking property without just compensation. How is the PFBC going to afford the reverse condemnation suits this will cause? The stream across my land is barely 4 inches deep and 8 ft wide with many small waterfalls. Not exactly a hot trout stream. I suppose I will have to "find" a bog turtle to have the area declared off limits.
|
|
|
Post by grouse28 on Apr 1, 2014 14:15:01 GMT -5
Trout or steelhead it is still unconstitutional. Amazing that a "lawmaker" could even propose this trash. We have too many legislators with too much time on their hands. Most states do not have full time legislators. We pay these fools big salaries, offices and staff. Have to sit back and really ask who are the fools.
|
|
|
Post by johns on Apr 1, 2014 15:34:49 GMT -5
I can't image this insane bill will go anywhere, it is clearly a property rights and trespass issue. It would be like a law that says if a stocked pheasant lands on your property, people have the right to hunt your property and you can't stop them. Some of the general assembly have gone round the bend.
|
|