- 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
State claimed water bottoms- can any OB Attorneys translate this disclaimer?
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:14 am
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:14 am
Land owners and lease holders seem to almost universally disagree with the GIS department maps of state claimed water bottoms. They usually cite the disclaimer on the SONRIS website as their reasoning.
Trespassing is becoming a huge topic. Especially among the kayak fishing community. It's nearly impossible to not trespass yet there does not seem to be a resource for people to make sure they don't trespass.
Let's use Delacroix as an example. The lower part of Bayou Gentilly and nearly all of Little Lake are owned by Delacroix Corporation. Try avoiding these two areas next time you're in Delacroix. As of right now the Delacroix land corp doesn't mess with people fishing but that could change with a single phone call. What happens to all the businesses if Delacroix land corp shuts down access?
Biloxi land corp handed down a ban on surface drives. They went as far as to force WLF to ban them even in the state claimed canal. I'm all for private property rights but what if the owners of biloxi marsh decide to pull the states lease? If Delacroix and Biloxi land owners pull the plug they could quite literally shut down fishing in the entire lower part of the parish over night.
quote:
This information is intended to serve only as an initial reference for research of water bottom information and does not purport to provide evidence of legal title to property. This information does not substitute for the need to conduct complete title analyses and should be viewed merely as a reference that does not represent a final agency determination or a judicial determination of ownership, unless otherwise noted. The information and data on this site are dynamic and will change over time. We strive, in good faith, to provide current, reliable and accurate information; however, we fully recognize the possibility of human and/or mechanical error occurring. We, the Office of State Lands, Division of Administration, State of Louisiana, its employees, officers and agencies, deny any warranty (expressed or implied) of accuracy, completeness, reliability or timeliness of any information published via this site and shall not be held liable for any losses caused by usage and reliance upon the accuracy, completeness, reliability or timeliness of such information. Any person or entity that relies upon such information obtained from this site does so at his or her own risk.
By proceeding further, the user acknowledges that he/she has read the foregoing statement and understands that any actions taken by the user based on the information provided in this website are undertaken at user’s own risk.
ABOUT THE DATA - STATE WATER BOTT
Trespassing is becoming a huge topic. Especially among the kayak fishing community. It's nearly impossible to not trespass yet there does not seem to be a resource for people to make sure they don't trespass.
Let's use Delacroix as an example. The lower part of Bayou Gentilly and nearly all of Little Lake are owned by Delacroix Corporation. Try avoiding these two areas next time you're in Delacroix. As of right now the Delacroix land corp doesn't mess with people fishing but that could change with a single phone call. What happens to all the businesses if Delacroix land corp shuts down access?
Biloxi land corp handed down a ban on surface drives. They went as far as to force WLF to ban them even in the state claimed canal. I'm all for private property rights but what if the owners of biloxi marsh decide to pull the states lease? If Delacroix and Biloxi land owners pull the plug they could quite literally shut down fishing in the entire lower part of the parish over night.
8
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:16 am to Barf
My prediction. This will be the thread I waste my day in 
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:16 am to Barf
1812
/thread.
/thread.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:23 am to Barf
Oh look, this again
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:23 am to AlxTgr
quote:
1812
/thread.
That wasn't as much fun as I thought.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:26 am to Barf
Here we go again. The proper answer is, there is no good answer.
That being said, I have used the data from SONRIS on many occasions where I'm applying for a permit and want to tell State Lands to GFY. I've never had anyone argue against LDNR's data.
That being said, I have used the data from SONRIS on many occasions where I'm applying for a permit and want to tell State Lands to GFY. I've never had anyone argue against LDNR's data.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:51 am to Barf
And
OFF
WE
GO!!!!
OFF
WE
GO!!!!
Posted on 3/12/15 at 9:56 am to tenfoe
Actually the proper answer is we are all trespassers based on Louisiana Revised Statues.
VERY high % are trespassers in South Louisiana just by leaving the launch site.
It comes down to some areas are inforced, some are not.
VERY high % are trespassers in South Louisiana just by leaving the launch site.
It comes down to some areas are inforced, some are not.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 10:05 am to AlxTgr
The 1812 thing is a weak argument. The land as been surveyed countless times since 1812. When I owned property near Myrtle Grove I had it surveyed twice in the 8 years it was in my possession.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 10:22 am to Barf
quote:
The 1812 thing is a weak argument. The land as been surveyed countless times since 1812. When I owned property near Myrtle Grove I had it surveyed twice in the 8 years it was in my possession.
Wait, what?
Posted on 3/12/15 at 10:36 am to TigerDeacon
Some land owners claim the navigable waterways are based off a survey that was done 200 years ago. It's true to a certain extent but things move over time. I when I first took possession of my property there was a navigable bayou that ran through the upper 1/3. This waterway moved. When I had the property surveyed what was once private property became a state claimed water bottom and what was once a navigable waterway became private land. The second time it was surveyed a massive section of the property became public due to the fact it was wide open water with no determinable boundary.
Edit- I should clarify this was our choice and was done for property tax purposes. I didn't want to pay property taxes on something that was essentially worthless.
Edit- I should clarify this was our choice and was done for property tax purposes. I didn't want to pay property taxes on something that was essentially worthless.
This post was edited on 3/12/15 at 10:43 am
Posted on 3/12/15 at 10:54 am to Barf
quote:
Some land owners claim the navigable waterways are based off a survey that was done 200 years ago.
It's not just "some landowners." It's the law as written. You don't have to like it (I don't), but stating it's just some people's idea is inaccurate.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 10:56 am to tenfoe
In Texas you can shoot trespassers on site... I like that method personally.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 11:09 am to tenfoe
quote:
It's not just "some landowners." It's the law as written. You don't have to like it (I don't), but stating it's just some people's idea is inaccurate.
I was never able to find a law that mentioned anything of a specific survey done on a specific date.
The reason I said some landowners is because when I owned property it was split pretty much 50/50 among the owners I knew when determining how things were deemed navigable.
I was inclined to believe the guys who were open to debate rather than the ones who shouted from their soap box about the DNR maps being horribly incorrect and said the only correct maps were the ones the land owners possessed.
The orginional question is still the purpose of the disclaimer on both the DNR and GIS maps.
quote:
This information is intended to serve only as an initial reference for research of water bottom information and does not purport to provide evidence of legal title to property. This information does not substitute for the need to conduct complete title analyses and should be viewed merely as a reference that does not represent a final agency determination or a judicial determination of ownership, unless otherwise noted. The information and data on this site are dynamic and will change over time. We strive, in good faith, to provide current, reliable and accurate information; however, we fully recognize the possibility of human and/or mechanical error occurring. We, the Office of State Lands, Division of Administration, State of Louisiana, its employees, officers and agencies, deny any warranty (expressed or implied) of accuracy, completeness, reliability or timeliness of any information published via this site and shall not be held liable for any losses caused by usage and reliance upon the accuracy, completeness, reliability or timeliness of such information. Any person or entity that relies upon such information obtained from this site does so at his or her own risk.
By proceeding further, the user acknowledges that he/she has read the foregoing statement and understands that any actions taken by the user based on the information provided in this website are undertaken at user’s own risk.
This post was edited on 3/12/15 at 11:20 am
Posted on 3/12/15 at 11:24 am to Barf
quote:
Some land owners claim the navigable waterways are based off a survey that was done 200 years ago. It's true to a certain extent but things move over time. I when I first took possession of my property there was a navigable bayou that ran through the upper 1/3. This waterway moved. When I had the property surveyed what was once private property became a state claimed water bottom and what was once a navigable waterway became private land. The second time it was surveyed a massive section of the property became public due to the fact it was wide open water with no determinable boundary.
Edit- I should clarify this was our choice and was done for property tax purposes. I didn't want to pay property taxes on something that was essentially worthless.
I think you were missing Alxtgr's point entirely.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 11:26 am to Barf
Navigability and the state/private owned waterbottoms are two different issues.
Also, the USACE and LDNR define navigability differently, so there is that issue to deal with also.
Also, the USACE and LDNR define navigability differently, so there is that issue to deal with also.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 11:48 am to tenfoe
quote:
Navigability and the state/private owned waterbottoms are two different issues.
Also, the USACE and LDNR define navigability differently, so there is that issue to deal with also.
Oh ok, I see what you're saying.
So is there even an correct answer? Or is it just one massive guessing game when fishing shallow tidal marsh?
Posted on 3/12/15 at 11:52 am to Barf
No there's no correct answer for all the dumbasses who will not accept the court ruling that said the opposite of what that particular dumbass wanted it to say.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 11:56 am to Motorboat
I think you just had diarrhea all over your keyboard.
Posted on 3/12/15 at 12:17 pm to Barf
quote:
So is there even an correct answer? Or is it just one massive guessing game when fishing shallow tidal marsh?
The correct answer is, "IT DEPENDS."
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News