- 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: Catahoula Lake could become off limits to duck hunters
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:57 am to KemoSabe65
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:57 am to KemoSabe65
quote:
What’s a good year for that place? From their own site, I would figure they’re slamming the birds erryday. 5,000-6,000 should be easy with as much property and blinds they claim to hunt.
I know guys who go every year. Sometimes it’s on, sometimes it’s not. For the amount of money they charge I’d rather go to one of the best flooded timber places in Arkansas
Posted on 1/1/19 at 9:22 am to Midtiger farm
I don’t go on guided trips for the production. I go for the amenities and hang out time. HinevBrake has good hunting and great other shite when not hunting.
I respect folks that take my money and do everything in their power to make my visit the best they can.
If you go to HB everything they can control will be well done
I respect folks that take my money and do everything in their power to make my visit the best they can.
If you go to HB everything they can control will be well done
Posted on 1/1/19 at 9:47 am to rt3
So are the private landowners out there patrolling today and running people off? Who knows who owns what?
Posted on 1/1/19 at 10:07 am to headedwest21
quote:Best question in this thread.
Who knows who owns what?
Look for a writ application within 30 days. This is the type of controversy that our supremes look at.
Posted on 1/1/19 at 10:15 am to AlxTgr
Yea. It seems like the judgement was very vague. Of course i don't know the laws like you do. Seems like the landowners would still own the land until they receive their damages which will probably never get paid. And that goes back to who owns what and gets compensated for what. Will be interesting to see the whole outcome.
Posted on 1/1/19 at 10:27 am to headedwest21
I think it boils down to what the primary payment is actually for. The finding of the inverse condemnation is what's troubling though. If the payment was just for the damages suffered due to flooding, I guess they could still be the owners. The trial court should have been more clear on that.
Can you imagine the cluster during a criminal trespass trial?
How do neighbors out there know where their line is considering the fact that it's based upon a meandering river?
I know one of these guys really well. Ironically, he works for one of the firms defending the state. I'll talk to him this week.
Can you imagine the cluster during a criminal trespass trial?
How do neighbors out there know where their line is considering the fact that it's based upon a meandering river?
I know one of these guys really well. Ironically, he works for one of the firms defending the state. I'll talk to him this week.
Posted on 1/1/19 at 10:30 am to AlxTgr
Give us an update of what he says.
I'm not familiar with the lake itself. Been invited but never have gone due to the shitshow I've heard that it is. Without the control structure, how much of it would normally flood enough to hunt/hold ducks?
I'm not familiar with the lake itself. Been invited but never have gone due to the shitshow I've heard that it is. Without the control structure, how much of it would normally flood enough to hunt/hold ducks?
Posted on 1/1/19 at 10:35 am to headedwest21
Really not sure. Early season would terrible for everyone not right on little river. I've driven across the lake right before teal season in some years. If the gates at the diversion were left open, I'm guessing some parts would never be wet without the Red and Black backing up big time.
Posted on 1/1/19 at 11:43 pm to AlxTgr
If the lake goes private, the levee board will dismantle the control structure. The lake will be dry most of the year unless the canal backs up, then there will be no way to control the level. Greed may have destroyed Catahoula for good.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 7:54 am to Jack Daniel
quote:
If I own land behind the levee along the miss river, I own the river?!??
Motherfricking tug boat mafia owes me some rent.
I think the point is that you would own royaltues of the oil under the river "on your property
Thsee people better be careful. If they "win", theyll be responaible for all activities, financial liabilities, legal issues, etc...that go with ownership
Posted on 1/2/19 at 9:52 am to PinevilleTiger
quote:
Greed may have destroyed Catahoula for good.
I don’t agree with that. Catahoula Lake has wintered waterfowl for as long as ducks and geese have migrated. Before the control structure was put in ducks used it, and they’ll use it after it’s gone.
Every permanent blind on the lake should be burnt to the ground. The good ole boy bullshite that goes on out there is the reason decent honest hunters don’t utilize the lake since it’s been public property, part of the Catahoula NWR.
You have to buy the same permit to hunt it as you do to hunt places like Dempsey, Long, and Rhinehart lakes, which have a 10hp motor restriction, no permanent blinds, and no hunting after noon. If catahoula lake would have been handled the same way it would be a paradise for waterfowl and hunters who don’t mind putting in a little work.
Permanent blinds, no motor restrictions and the destruction that surface drives cause, joyriding and jumping resting birds, and the “ownership” mentality that people out there have, have been the factors that have brought about the decline we’ve seen out there over the past 10-15 years.
All that aside, nobody is going to post up at the mouth of old river and stop people from going out there hunting when the water comes up.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 10:06 am to tigah headache
^^^THIS X10
The control structures have done wonders for the fishing in Saline-Larto, it will go back to how it was in the 70's if they are taken out. Even so, I am on board with eliminating the Legacy blinds.
The control structures have done wonders for the fishing in Saline-Larto, it will go back to how it was in the 70's if they are taken out. Even so, I am on board with eliminating the Legacy blinds.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 10:25 am to KemoSabe65
This should not have any effect on Saline-Larto. The weir at the diversion canal will still be there.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 10:48 am to AlxTgr
Finally got around to actually reading the opinion. The 3rd circuit comes through once again with a terrible opinion. I’m not talking about the result (could care less), but the legal analysis. Seems as though they think the land is privately owned and the state owes those landowners “damages.” Although multiple references are made to “taking” throughout the opinion. The 3rd circuit probably doesn’t even know what the hell they were talking about.
If the Supreme Court takes the case, no doubt the damages portion will be reversed per Judge Amy’s dissent. They’ve prescribed. Even if it’s not, the state ain’t paying it anyway. So the damages are moot.
But, I’m not so sure that the state can acquisitively prescribe property (according to the dissent). I’m going to have to think on that for a bit.
If the Supreme Court takes the case, no doubt the damages portion will be reversed per Judge Amy’s dissent. They’ve prescribed. Even if it’s not, the state ain’t paying it anyway. So the damages are moot.
But, I’m not so sure that the state can acquisitively prescribe property (according to the dissent). I’m going to have to think on that for a bit.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 10:55 am to Mr Wonderful
Agree with every word.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 3:54 pm to Mr Wonderful
Mr. Wonderful you didn't go to North Dakota for law school did you?
Posted on 1/2/19 at 4:08 pm to MrLSU
quote:
North Dakota?
Only thing worth going to North Dakota for is goose hunting.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 4:28 pm to Mr Wonderful
There used to be another MrWonderful on the TD when TD was a baby and wondered if you were the same.
Posted on 1/9/19 at 8:42 am to MrLSU
The Jena Times did a pretty full length story on the Catahoula situation for anyone that feels like reading it.
LINK
Just a few highlights:
LINK
Just a few highlights:
quote:
In his written judgment in 2016, Judge Boddie found that the State unlawfully expropriated the riverbanks and owed the landowner plaintiffs over 30,000 acres of flooded land and nearly $38-million in damages, as well as over $4.5-million in unpaid oil and gas royalties. While the Third Circuit did affirm the trial court’s decision concerning the owners of the land/lake, they also vacated part of the decision concerning compensation and issued new financial orders changing whether they would be paid by the State or the common fund that will be received from the damages and unpaid oil and gas royalties.
quote:
With the Third Circuit’s decision two weeks ago, the only alternative for the state would be to appeal the case to the Louisiana Supreme Court. When contacted by this newspaper last week, a spokesman for La. Attorney General Jeff Landy said the AG office is reviewing the decision and weighing options in the best interest of our State. If the ruling is appealed to the Supreme Court, the current stay that was issued during the appeal process may be extended - meaning it would stay public until the Supreme Court rules.
quote:
As stated in the ruling, most of the land now considered Catahoula Lake would become private land again, reverting back to the landowners surrounding the lake. The only public water would be that area listed as the original Little River that flows from the Southwest part of the lake area to the Northeast area of the lake area into French Fork in a meandering path through the current body of water
quote:
Some think that once the lake reverts to private land officially after all court avenues have been exhausted, the issue of people duck hunting on waters above private land would be a trespassing issue to be dealt with by the sheriff’s departments of respective parishes.
quote:
Another unknown factor is what the state will do concerning the water level on the lake. With barge traffic still heavy on the Ouachita, many feel the level will continue to be controlled keeping the water high enough to maintain the barge traffic, but again, all of this is speculation at the present time. So, the unknown factor is exactly how much water will remain on the Catahoula Basin when the legal issues are finally settled.
Posted on 1/9/19 at 8:48 am to Drunken Crawfish
quote:I'd like to see that pointed out. Especially considering:
As stated in the ruling, most of the land now considered Catahoula Lake would become private land again, reverting back to the landowners surrounding the lake.
quote:
Judge Boddie found that the State unlawfully expropriated the riverbanks and owed the landowner plaintiffs over 30,000 acres of flooded land
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News