- 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: Lena Lagoon in Hopedale gated off?
Posted on 12/2/16 at 10:45 am to Barf
Posted on 12/2/16 at 10:45 am to Barf
So your telling me you think it's acceptable for people to hunt other peoples leases because it's necessary for the economy of hopedale. Frick off. If you even think a minute percentage of the economy comes from hunters illegally hunting other properties you are merely trying to justify the fact that you hunt other people's shite. I'm not talking about keeping people from fishing certain properties which I would agree is where probably 95% of the economy for the BSM Marina comes from. But places like hopedale shell beach get their economy from commercial fisherman. Fisherman who aren't trespassing on each others oyster leases.... but frick those guys with oyster leases our economy can't be sustained by just them working their oyster leases we need other people to steal their oysters too...
This post was edited on 12/2/16 at 10:51 am
2
Posted on 12/2/16 at 10:52 am to Timmayy
Who said people are hunting his shite? I know tons of people fish back there.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 10:53 am to Barf
I hope you buy 1000 acres somewhere and I'm going to bring me and all my buddies and hunt your ponds all week long while your not there. Hey thanks for supporting the local economy and me and my buddies wallets
Posted on 12/2/16 at 10:54 am to bluemoons
Fair point.
What's weird is we have this hierarchy of trespassing. We view some trespassing as acceptable, mostly because it's impossible not to in some circumstances, while condemning others. We can't draw a line in the sand without running the risk of closing down the marsh all together.
Land owners are stepping on their on dick by chaining off water. Right or wrong there is a small chance the whole thing blows up in their face.
What's weird is we have this hierarchy of trespassing. We view some trespassing as acceptable, mostly because it's impossible not to in some circumstances, while condemning others. We can't draw a line in the sand without running the risk of closing down the marsh all together.
Land owners are stepping on their on dick by chaining off water. Right or wrong there is a small chance the whole thing blows up in their face.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 10:56 am to sloopy
This entire argument is based around the hypothetical and probable situation that people are hunting his property, that being his only justifiable reason for chaining off his ponds. If he is chaining off his ponds for the sole reason to keep people from fishing it frick him.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 10:58 am to Timmayy
quote:
I hope you buy 1000 acres somewhere and I'm going to bring me and all my buddies and hunt your ponds all week long while your not there. Hey thanks for supporting the local economy and me and my buddies wallets
You're trying to draw some kind of conclusion that doesn't exist but I get what you're saying. If you knew me, you would know if I bought a bunch of marsh property it would be fully open to the public.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 10:59 am to Timmayy
Isn't that what's happening on the west side of the river? People don't want people fishing and using their lease as route to run through to other areas?
Posted on 12/2/16 at 11:00 am to Barf
The way I view my leases to be written is that I have the Sole rights to the duck hunting and nothing else. I can't nor should I stop someone from fishing my ponds. This is where my argument before if it's a problem with no good answer. Because I can chain off my ponds and have no downside except that the local fisherman hate me or I can not chain it and have people overpressuring my ponds all week long. Again I will reiterate the only good win win answer is that the illegal hunting of private property is enforced and condemned to the point that no one ever wants to be caught hunting my property.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 11:04 am to Barf
And you are a great man for that. It's not quite unlike what the Biloxi land corp is. But little old me who has only two or three ponds to hunt and who pays good money for them doesn't appreciate everyone else and their buddies hunting it while I'm not there.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 11:06 am to sloopy
These are separate issues. That is where the navigable waterways becomes a very big deal. But knowing what lenas lagoon is I know this man hasn't chained off the entire lenas lagoon. Most likely he has chained off his hunting ponds that are not navigable waterways.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 11:07 am to Timmayy
Actually it's not a hard answer. You follow what the other 49 states do in regard to navigable waters.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 11:09 am to Timmayy
Gotcha. I was thinking gated off from MRGO.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 11:12 am to Timmayy
quote:
And you are a great man for that. It's not quite unlike what the Biloxi land corp is. But little old me who has only two or three ponds to hunt and who pays good money for them doesn't appreciate everyone else and their buddies hunting it while I'm not there.
Make not mistake about it, Biloxi land did nothing out of the goodness of their own heart. The biloxi marsh is neither free, nor does it come with no strings attached. At any point in time they can decide to terminate the lease and gate every pond and cut along that main canal that runs through the property.
As for your ponds, I don't no not disagree with you one bit. You pay for it, you should be entitled to enforce trespassing as you see fit. The problem starts and ends with the trespassing enforcement. While you may be able to press charges for someone fishing in your pond, someone else may not because of the long term implications of doing so.
It's not as simple as we wish it were.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 11:13 am to stoms
That is still not a solution as a win win for everyone. It's a win for the illegal trespassers definitely. Not a win for landowners and leases who now have no way of legitimately enforcing ppl from hunting there property.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 11:14 am to sloopy
So can someone clarify what has been chained/gated? Lena or Ameda? and what aspect of it?
Thanks in advance.
Thanks in advance.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 11:15 am to Barf
I have no right to enforce trespassing for fishing. Just hunting as I am a leasee
Posted on 12/2/16 at 11:19 am to Timmayy
quote:
The way I view my leases to be written is that I have the Sole rights to the duck hunting and nothing else. I can't nor should I stop someone from fishing my ponds. This is where my argument before if it's a problem with no good answer. Because I can chain off my ponds and have no downside except that the local fisherman hate me or I can not chain it and have people overpressuring my ponds all week long. Again I will reiterate the only good win win answer is that the illegal hunting of private property is enforced and condemned to the point that no one ever wants to be caught hunting my property.
I think you're onto something here. I've kind of floated the idea of lease language being more specific to an activity. Obviously my idea is full of fatal flaws but it's something I like to think about. Example would be the line drawn would be no exclusive fishing rights to anything influenced by the tide.
Duck hunting leases can enforce trespassing on a case by case basis during hunting season. String a chain across your entrance a few weeks prior and take it down on the last day. Those crazy crab leases can enforce trespassing laws to prevent others from crabbing, ect, ect, ect.
It's frustrating to have crab boat freak out on you for poling a pond on his crabbing lease as if we are somehow damaging his crabbing experience.
This is probably poorly worded but I hope some of it makes sense.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 11:20 am to Timmayy
It's absolutely a solution. This problem is 100% on LA law being weird and using old maps that aren't even close to accurate. No other state has this issue. If LA didn't allow people to own navigable water, it would be a non issue. Not to mention half the "land" people own isn't land anymore.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 11:31 am to stoms
Again how does it fix me being able to keep ppl off of my hunting lease from hunting it.
Posted on 12/2/16 at 11:31 am to stoms
quote:
If LA didn't allow people to own navigable water, it would be a non issue.
It's not so much people owning navigable water, it's when was that water deemed navigable. Proper that is open water now, was not open water when it was purchased, largely due to land owners exploitation of the land but I digress.
It's too expensive to redraw the boundaries and the sheriffs offices aren't willing to lose out on that property tax revenue.
A standard had to be set, I guess at the time the 1812 map was good enough.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News