Montana ... anything to do with streams
 

There is a bill being considered that could greatly diminish fishing
access in Montana ..... as a favor for ( ah, America ) rich land
owners .... and over turning much of the state's long history of
angler's rights to access

http://www.mtstandard.com/news/local...cc4c002e0.html

don't forget that nearly all rivers in the West can be considered
'irrigation ditches' with some justification.... and true 'ditches'
can't be legally accessed now

Montana ... anything to do with streams
 

On Feb 10, 12:11*pm, Larry L wrote:
There is a bill being considered that could greatly diminish fishing
access in Montana ..... * as a favor for ( ah, America ) *rich land
owners .... and over turning much of the state's long history of
angler's rights to access

http://www.mtstandard.com/news/local...364-11e0-8e41-...

don't forget that nearly all rivers in the West can be considered
'irrigation ditches' with some justification.... and true 'ditches'
can't be legally accessed now

another article

http://missoulian.com/news/opinion/c...cc4c03286.html

Montana ... anything to do with streams
 

On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 12:11:17 -0800 (PST), Larry L
wrote:

There is a bill being considered that could greatly diminish fishing
access in Montana ..... as a favor for ( ah, America ) rich land
owners .... and over turning much of the state's long history of
angler's rights to access

http://www.mtstandard.com/news/local...cc4c002e0.html

don't forget that nearly all rivers in the West can be considered
'irrigation ditches' with some justification.... and true 'ditches'
can't be legally accessed now


http://troutunderground.com/2011/02/...yboards-ready/

Montana ... anything to do with streams
 

On Feb 11, 6:12*pm, georgecleveland wrote:


http://troutunderground.com/2011/02/...na-stream-acce...

I liked this part: "HB 309 undermines our balanced stream access
law ...." :)

Anyone who believes there is ANYTHING "balanced" about western water-
rights laws deserves what he gets.

giles
who lives in a place where sanity isn't exactly mandated (****, has
anybody?.....ever?) but, on the other hand, isn't exactly a
crime.....yet.

Montana ... anything to do with streams
 

"Larry L" wrote in message
...
There is a bill being considered that could greatly diminish fishing
access in Montana ..... as a favor for ( ah, America ) rich land
owners .... and over turning much of the state's long history of
angler's rights to access

http://www.mtstandard.com/news/local...cc4c002e0.html

don't forget that nearly all rivers in the West can be considered
'irrigation ditches' with some justification.... and true 'ditches'
can't be legally accessed now

Good deal!

http://ravallirepublic.com/news/loca...8f84771d0.html

JT

Montana ... anything to do with streams
 

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 11:31:14 -0700, "JT"
wrote:

http://ravallirepublic.com/news/loca...8f84771d0.html

Yes I agree !!! Good deal
Thanks for this post
as I have been following HB30 9from afar

Fred

Montana ... anything to do with streams
 

On Mar 25, 2:40*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 11:31:14 -0700, "JT"

wrote:
http://ravallirepublic.com/news/loca...ba62-5175-9af0...

Yes I agree !!! Good deal
Thanks for this post
*as I have been following HB30 9from afar

Fred

And just think what might have happened if advocates on either side of
the issue spoke something resembling English!

Huzzah!

g.
but, enough of the spectacular......anybody noticed anything
concerning the mundane lately?

Montana ... anything to do with streams
 

On Mar 25, 9:48*pm, Giles wrote:
On Mar 25, 2:40*pm, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 11:31:14 -0700, "JT"

wrote:
http://ravallirepublic.com/news/loca...ba62-5175-9af0....

Yes I agree !!! Good deal
Thanks for this post
*as I have been following HB30 9from afar

Fred

And just think what might have happened if advocates on either side of
the issue spoke something resembling English!

Huzzah!

g.
but, enough of the spectacular......anybody noticed anything
concerning the mundane lately?

No?

O.k. Let's stick to the topic at hand, then. Teddy said, "The
doctine of private ownership of water apart from land cannot prevail
without causing enduring damage." He was right.....of course.

However, he missed the glaringly obvious corollary that the dcotrine
of private ownership of water, regardless of land, cannot prevail
without causing enduring and crippling damage.

And then there's the nearly universally rejected fact that the private
ownership of land cannot prevail without causing catastrophic and
effectively permanent damage.

giles
go fish.