Started By
Message

re: Private vs public water in tidal navigable waterways

Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:40 am to
Posted by White Bear
Yonnygo
Member since Jul 2014
14258 posts
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:40 am to
quote:

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.
Why is it the fault of the current landowner when I'd guess much of the damage was done decades ago?
Posted by AlxTgr
Kyre Banorg
Member since Oct 2003
81967 posts
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:45 am to
quote:

White Bear

Don't get sucked in.
Posted by Barf
EBR
Member since Feb 2015
3727 posts
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:45 am to
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
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram