re: HR 391 (Water Access Rights) Passes 5-3 in committee

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.