I’m from NELA so I really do not know the lay of land/water south of I-10. But how can 80% of costal waterways be deemed private? Seems like it’s a huge black eye on the state. I also own land and understand landowners concerns as well. Is there no happy medium? Seems like the public have been fishing these water for years, why the change now? Also why is billions of both federal/state dollars being used to restore land that is then reverted to the land owner? Why not make the landowners foot that bill if they want to privatize a public resource? So many questions.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by HotKoolaid

Member since Oct 2017

444 posts

Posted on 4/17/18 at 6:19 pm to dpark

quote:
I’m from NELA so I really do not know the lay of land/water south of I-10. But how can 80% of costal waterways be deemed private? Seems like it’s a huge black eye on the state. I also own land and understand landowners concerns as well. Is there no happy medium? Seems like the public have been fishing these water for years, why the change now? Also why is billions of both federal/state dollars being used to restore land that is then reverted to the land owner? Why not make the landowners foot that bill if they want to privatize a public resource? So many questions.

A few good questions and a few stinkers. It boils down to land owners exercising their right to restrict access to private property. Most of what is private had no water on it when it was sold. It makes a little bit of sense to some people and none to others.

Meanwhile you should just go fishing. If someone asks you to leave, just apologize and leave. Do the best you can, try to keep an eye out for duck blinds, and enjoy the 800k acres of public land. It's impossible not to trespass in some places but it's not impossible to avoid trouble.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Profit Island

Member since Aug 2017

20 posts

Posted on 4/17/18 at 7:27 pm to dpark

1. The public has been fishing these waters for years and they still do. Most of the time people fish and landowners ask them to please leave and they do. The dance is not the biggest issue in the world. This problem was brought to a head when Daryl carpenter was run out of a place three times in a row and then filed a law suit against the landowner (land is a geographical boundary in the marsh not dictated by whether it is currently water or earth). Daryl lost the law suit and got mad and started a Facebook group to try and get a law put in place so he could fish wherever he wanted.

2. The idea for paying to rehab the coast is multifaceted. Hurricane protection is one issue. You also don’t want the marsh to erode all the way to Leeville or HOUMA. The state is also partially responsible (a recent study said up to 75% responsible) for the erosion by the way they leveed and dammed all of the rivers and bayous. This is a way to make that up.

3. The biggest problem that is going to come from this is further restricted access. There was an inclusion of a deadline within which to have a gate built. I am sure all landowners are now worried that if this comes again, which has already been stated in this thread, that they need to build gates now just in case.

If I were an entrepreneur I would start a canal gate building company.

Overall it was a good day for people who care about private property rights.

2 ...

Report Post

Outdoor Board - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board