Quote:
Originally Posted by CMichaud
So why not have them engage at the political level and amend/clarify the law. It is clearly a generalization and simply needs an amendment to exempt aerated ponds on public lands. Mitigate risk with signage and snow fence etc.
|
This is a definite solution ( could take some time) but what I'm wondering is why all of a sudden is the ACA concerned about liabilty when they have been aerating lakes for years and had/have future plans in place to aerate more?
Was there a case that used section 263 ( 1) as precedent? Who brought this to their attention?
I'm with you Snap, I should quit arguing, it's not conducive to coming up with a solution.
You're right it'll get solved eventually.
In the mean time, before I pop a blood vessel, I'll take a few more days off and go chuck a few leeches, boatmen and backswimmers at some fat, fiesty trout at a favorite
aerated stocked lake.
