re: BASS Makes Louisiana "Off Limits"

quote:

---

don't think nobody's advocating trasspassing or the taking of land. I just would like some clarity on the issues and not so much gray. The only decent outcome of this is both side find some middle ground on the isssue.

---

You all are even if you don't realize it. Your side is angry, and it makes what I post seem worse than it is. Again, not my fault. You don't seem to realize that what you are advocating is exactly like advocating free use of your hardwoods for my deer killing.

No it's nothing like hardwoods at all. Trasspassing on land is cut and dry at is gets. In south Louisiana you have to study a damn map just to have any kind of half arse idea where you can and can't legally go.

Its not just man made canals which is easy to distinguishing. All most every other place in the country most natural bayous are navagable waterways. That is not the case in Louisiana, heck you could be in a costal bay in open water and still be technically trasspassing according to if it was land almost 200 years ago. The hole thing is absurd and no other state uses the same fuzzy determination as Louisiana.

Your damn right people are mad when in every other state is a cut and dry issue. Also the law is not evenly enforced. If you have money and political stroke you can pretty much do as you please in this state.

Let me ask you if say an oxbow lake was part of a navigable water in 1812. The lake silts in and now is no longer directly connected to the river except in high water. Is this still public waterway to use during high water ?

In almost every other state anglers have way more right to waterways than, the so-called " sportsmens paradise". Heck in other states the DNR will buy access to a natural lake that is surrounded by private land owners just to give public access because all natural waterways are considered public.

quote:

---

Correct every navigable waterway along Louisiana gulf coast sees tidal movement

Correct there is a ton of private property along the gulf coast with tidal movement bodies of water running through said private property...the physical land boadering these tidal movement bodies of water is private but not the water that moves with tide changes ( this is how the law should be )

Correct a lot of the "private land" bodies of tidal movement water are/have been posted as such ( this private posting is what the law should not allow )

At this point it appears per gray law to be ok'd by local sherriff ( the current law may allow this privatizing which is ok'd by the local sherriffs but doesn't mean it's the right thing to do )

As been others have eluded to the $$$$'s moved into the coastel parishes in the form of private hunting and fishing leases and corporations leading to the politicians writing the law in such an ambiguous meaning

---

Everything you have said is based off of your opinion of what the law "should" be or what should be allowed. What's considered to be the "right thing to do" as you said isn't necessarily the law. Whether the law is flawed or not, it's still the law and the local sheriff enforces it.

quote:

---

Yeah... that's not the least bit true. If it were then explain states like Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, etc.

---

It's absolutely true. Those streambeds are owned. There's no debating that part. So, if you change it, you have taken property. See Crooks case.

Best starting place is the coast. If it becomes the gulf, it's the gulf. End tax responsibility. OTOH, what about mineral rights? If there's an easy solution, I haven't read about it yet.

quote:

---

If there's an easy solution, I haven't read about it yet.

---

Hell no there is not. One thing is for sure, some amount of release of liability and ownership of mineral rights should be retained to water bottoms owners.

I believe they don't own the water above the sea floor. If the tide is out and the canal is dry walking on the ground should be trespassing.

You ever fly in an airplane?

And yes, you can.

Seems pretty easy to me, if you think you own the water and don't want others in there then dam it off with a levy and what's behind it is the landowners but you also lose public resources (water flow, fish, crabs, etc). If want continued access to said resources then anything that can float in is public waters.

What does that have to do with public access?