- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Private vs public water in tidal navigable waterways
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:27 am to redfishfan
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:27 am to redfishfan
Again, idk crap about marsh, etc., but I can tell you the official U.S. surveys from the same time period I've dealt with are pretty damn accurate.
1
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:28 am to maisweh
quote:
they really have no idea the can of worms theyre opening just because they want to fish
It's a concession. A compromise if you will.
quote:
Deer hunters lease land to deer hunt, but now everything would be open to duck hunting
Timber shouldn't be managed the same way as tidal marsh. And not everything would be open to duck hunting, most people duck hunt above the saltwater line than below.
The problem is it's a conservation issue that is disguised as an access issue. I have zero issues with people owning the property if they can write a check big enough to keep it intact. Protecting the resource outweighs property rights.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:40 am to Barf
quote:Why is it the fault of the current landowner when I'd guess much of the damage was done decades ago?
The problem is it's a conservation issue that is disguised as an access issue. I have zero issues with people owning the property if they can write a check big enough to keep it intact. Protecting the resource outweighs property rights.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:45 am to White Bear
quote:Don't get sucked in.
White Bear
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:45 am to White Bear
quote:
Why is it the fault of the current landowner when I'd guess much of the damage was done decades ago?
I'm not saying it is their fault. People are hesitant to pay for the sins of their fathers but at the same time it's absolutely not my responsibility.
The bottom line is the marsh has to be protected and in it's current form we are losing more and more everyday. I think we can all agree that letting it wash away is a bad idea. It's an even worse idea to sink hundreds of millions of dollars every year into protecting your duck lease.
This topic has a weird way of polarizing people and at times it feels like most land owners think "well if I can't keep it then nobody should have it." This is why you get a lot of people who in exchange for footing the restoration bill are open to leaving the hunting system intact. There are lots and lots of places were you can fish but not hunt, it's not unheard of.
This post was edited on 12/8/16 at 8:50 am
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:47 am to Barf
The property owners did not destroy the land. The oil/gas companies did that indirectly
You think Louisiana is going to go ago against the oil/gas companies?!
People are just mad and have no idea who to be mad at. Most are directing their anger in the wrong direction though
You think Louisiana is going to go ago against the oil/gas companies?!
People are just mad and have no idea who to be mad at. Most are directing their anger in the wrong direction though
This post was edited on 12/8/16 at 8:48 am
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:52 am to Barf
IMO there's one way to rebuild the marsh, and that won't ever happen.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:02 am to Barf
quote:
People are hesitant to pay for the sins of their fathers but at the same time it's absolutely not my responsibility.
Where do you live?
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:04 am to Ron Cheramie
quote:
The property owners did not destroy the land. The oil/gas companies did that indirectly
You're stepping on your own dick here, because the oil and gas companies ARE the property owners in most cases.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:05 am to Ron Cheramie
quote:The biggest problem is the perpetuation of the myth of "navigable waterways". Most don't realize they are not being screwed. I feel for them because they honestly believe they are being screwed.
People are just mad and have no idea who to be mad at. Most are directing their anger in the wrong direction though
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:05 am to UpToPar
He must live in Russia. Or be one of those social justice warriors mad that trump won
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:07 am to White Bear
quote:
Again, idk crap about marsh, etc., but I can tell you the official U.S. surveys from the same time period I've dealt with are pretty damn accurate.
Marsh is a different animal. Without satellite imaging I'd be willing to bet a map made today wouldn't be very accurate.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:09 am to AlxTgr
quote:
Most don't realize they are not being screwed. I feel for them because they honestly believe they are being screwed.
If we are using tax payer money to help private property owners save their land, you're being screwed too. Unless you're ok with cleaning up other peoples mistakes with tax payer money, if that's the case we don't really have a discussion.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:10 am to Barf
Stop. Money has nothing to do with this.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:12 am to Barf
Where do you live Barf?
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:13 am to AlxTgr
quote:
Stop. Money has nothing to do with this.
Money does have to do with it. Public dollars should't be spent fixing private marsh. That doesn't mean in public dollars are being spent that people have the right to trespass. Just means the money shouldn't be spent.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:16 am to redfishfan
quote:Different issue.
Money does have to do with it. Public dollars should't be spent fixing private marsh.
quote:That's what Barf believes.
That doesn't mean in public dollars are being spent that people have the right to trespass.
quote:Might make a great thread.
Just means the money shouldn't be spent.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:18 am to AlxTgr
quote:
Stop. Money has nothing to do with this.
Do you think we should have a coastal restoration plan?
If yes, who should pay for it?
If you think it should be paid for with tax dollars, do you think you can convince a tax base that it's in their best interest to restore the coast line even if they are excluded from it's use? More or less paying to make sure those people with vanishing property can continue to enjoy it at the tax payers expense?
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:29 am to redfishfan
Most marsh in Louisiana is in fact private. Most land in Louisiana is private. That marsh (public or private) benefits is all. Shrimp, crabs, redfish, etc don't care if it's public or private.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:29 am to Barf
That's for a thread I doubt I even open.
Page 7 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News