- 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: HR 391 (Water Access Rights) Passes 5-3 in committee
Posted on 4/19/18 at 2:45 pm to Motorboat
Posted on 4/19/18 at 2:45 pm to Motorboat
A hypothetical, and like all hypotheticals, is completely ridiculous. Anyway, say Bill owns land that has hundreds and hundreds of yards of frontage on a Louisiana bayou that was navigable in 1812 and at all other times pertinent herein. Bill plans and digs a huge pond that some would call a lake entirely on his property along the navigable bayou. What are the results, whether you call them legal, desired or otherwise, if Bill:
A: Makes a small cut with culvert from the pond to the bayou that even the smallest of kayaks cannot pass through to fill his pond and allow fish to swim both in an out;
B: Makes a small cut with culvert from his pond to the bayou that only kayaks can pass through to fill his pond and allow fish to swim both in and out;
C: Makes a larger cut with culvert that even a 24' Bay Boat can pass through to fill his pond and allow fish to swim both in and out;
D: Makes a cut with culvert equipped with screen that will allow water through to fill his pond, but no fish whatsoever?
Also, does it matter to you where in Louisiana this bayou and land is located, and if so, why?
A: Makes a small cut with culvert from the pond to the bayou that even the smallest of kayaks cannot pass through to fill his pond and allow fish to swim both in an out;
B: Makes a small cut with culvert from his pond to the bayou that only kayaks can pass through to fill his pond and allow fish to swim both in and out;
C: Makes a larger cut with culvert that even a 24' Bay Boat can pass through to fill his pond and allow fish to swim both in and out;
D: Makes a cut with culvert equipped with screen that will allow water through to fill his pond, but no fish whatsoever?
Also, does it matter to you where in Louisiana this bayou and land is located, and if so, why?
4
Posted on 4/19/18 at 3:18 pm to AlxTgr
You know the answer in the long run is going to be:
Those fish aren't his fish that can swim freely on and off his property, we have a right to his land to catch those fish!
Those fish aren't his fish that can swim freely on and off his property, we have a right to his land to catch those fish!
This post was edited on 4/19/18 at 3:24 pm
Posted on 4/19/18 at 3:20 pm to AlxTgr
I'm not sure what "results" you are asking for 
Your hypothetical is too much like work
Your hypothetical is too much like work
Posted on 4/19/18 at 3:33 pm to AlxTgr
In all cases it's for Bill as long as it has a proper permit and that it does not pose an environmental hazard (which will be attached to the permit) And I don't think the screen can be added. It most def cannot entrap the fish.
And hopefully Bill doesn't be offended when sport fish coalition call him names.
And hopefully Bill doesn't be offended when sport fish coalition call him names.
Posted on 4/19/18 at 3:33 pm to AlxTgr
In all cases it's for Bill as long as it has a proper permit and that it does not pose an environmental hazard (which will be attached to the permit) And I don't think the screen can be added. It most def cannot entrap the fish.
And hopefully Bill doesn't be offended when sport fish coalition call him names.
And hopefully Bill doesn't be offended when sport fish coalition call him names.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News