- 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
0
Posted on 5/2/19 at 1:10 pm to Mr Wonderful
quote:
Hold up. So you are in fact saying that there should be no such thing as a privately owned river, stream, canal, bayou, etc., unless it’s man-made?
Are you serious? You think every single naturally occurring body of water should be open to the public?
I'm pretty sure he is saying that if you have public access to the body of water, then you can access the entire body of water. If you can access a river, you can go the entire length of a river.
This is no different than say if 100 people all live on a private lake with no public access. Then anyone can go on the private lake that has private access, but not the public that does not have access.
Posted on 5/2/19 at 1:10 pm to Ron Cheramie
quote:
I would compare them to roads
there are gated roads that lead to private property also
just like a gated canal that leads to private marsh
Only thing being ignored is the public resources(fish) that can come onto and out of freely.
You can't compare tidal navigable waters to a private road or driveway because neither of these can hold public resources (fish)
Posted on 5/2/19 at 1:12 pm to baldona
Riparian Rights
Posted on 5/2/19 at 1:17 pm to td1
quote:
That is about one of the dumbest things I have heard today. Hunting, I might give it some consideration but fishing...... The public fish that are caught, will be replaced with other public fish.
Yes, because no place has EVER been overfished.
Oh wait....
quote:
I think I might make a cut through road on some of my property between two major roads here in baton rouge and lease access to the road. You think the city would maintain the road for me? I'll even put in some ditches on either side of the road, you think the city is going to maintain those ditches and do restoration projects for me from the erosion it might cause?
It’s already been stated in the thread, but I suppose it needs stating again: those taking public restoration money should become public IF and only if it is agreed to up front. You can’t retroactively do stuff like that.
Posted on 5/2/19 at 1:17 pm to Gatorgar
quote:Couple of confusing aspects to this. Are people gating natural waterways? If so, where?
Gate or no gate if I want to go somewhere fishing and the water is tidal and it doesn’t appear to be man made I will go.
Why is tidal important to you?
Posted on 5/2/19 at 1:23 pm to redfishfan
quote:Wait, the negative aspect transforms a private thing into a public thing? If it still causes damage, can we then sue ourselves?
Bc it's negatively impacting our coast and wetlands.
Posted on 5/2/19 at 1:26 pm to AlxTgr
How is it determined if it’s natural or manmade?
Posted on 5/2/19 at 1:31 pm to Decisions
"Yes, because no place has EVER been overfished."
We are talking recreational fishing, you are comparing it to commercial fishing. That is not a fair comparison.
We are talking recreational fishing, you are comparing it to commercial fishing. That is not a fair comparison.
Posted on 5/2/19 at 1:42 pm to td1
Things CAN be recreationally depleted, bud.
Get too many hunters in a block of woods and I don’t care if they obey limits or not, it will be cleaned out.
Get too many hunters in a block of woods and I don’t care if they obey limits or not, it will be cleaned out.
Posted on 5/2/19 at 1:50 pm to Bedhog
quote:Like deer, ducks, squirrel etc?
Only thing being ignored is the public resources(fish) that can come onto and out of freely.
quote:Holy shite.
You can't compare tidal navigable waters to a private road or driveway because neither of these can hold public resources (fish)
Posted on 5/2/19 at 1:53 pm to td1
I would even compromise with: If you dig a private canal that connects to a public waterway, you can keep it blocked off as long as you are actively engaged in the production of your mineral rights. Once you are no longer actively engaged in the production of your mineral rights, the land and bottom of the waterway remain your private property but the canal(or waterway) must be opened to the public for recreational use but also offering you an option to keep it gated to lease the waterway for private fishing, but you will be assessed a "public resources" tax (we can even call it the fish tax), on top of your property tax, to be based on your income from the lease earnings. The money from this tax would be put aside to allow the state or parish to have funds available to purchase other "private" canals (waterways) and their bottoms to provide more areas for recreational boating and fishing activity.
You should also have to register your "private canal" with a central Wildlife and Fisheries database where that data can be put into a publicly available GIS system to make it easier for the public to visualize what parts of the river, bayou, lake, marsh, etc. are off limits. The way the system stands now is there is no central database or resource for the public to access for this information. I know it is available at the local courthouses, but someone heading out to fish on the weekend should be able to quickly pull this up in a centralized place. It could even be made available to gps mapping companies so your electronics could keep you safe from trespassing.
You should also have to register your "private canal" with a central Wildlife and Fisheries database where that data can be put into a publicly available GIS system to make it easier for the public to visualize what parts of the river, bayou, lake, marsh, etc. are off limits. The way the system stands now is there is no central database or resource for the public to access for this information. I know it is available at the local courthouses, but someone heading out to fish on the weekend should be able to quickly pull this up in a centralized place. It could even be made available to gps mapping companies so your electronics could keep you safe from trespassing.
Posted on 5/2/19 at 1:57 pm to Decisions
This is really quite simple. If the water is tidal and has state resources swimming in and out it should be accessible. My family owns an arpent of land in Reggio that is now 80% water bottoms thanks to storms and dredging. We have no thought of limiting access to the states resources that swim in and out of the boundaries. I find the arguments against allowing access to tidal water disingenuous. This is about private use of state resources for the few. Now if the water is not tidally influenced and it is private then there is no question about that being private. If a person with tidal water wants to keep the public of their land then build a levee around the property boundary to keep the fisheries from entering and I would not have an argument. Fat chance that ever happens.
Posted on 5/2/19 at 2:08 pm to iron banks
quote:
access to the states resources that swim in and out of the boundaries.
quote:How do you reconcile this with free ranging mammals and birds?
This is about private use of state resources for the few.
Posted on 5/2/19 at 2:08 pm to Decisions
quote:
Still no public dollars used in the process, so I’d say no.
The water is not some finite resource that the landowner illegally took from the public trust. There’s literally an ocean of it. Most of which we do not own any rights to.
...so you support open water remaining private.
quote:
If I used public air to blow up a balloon does everyone have rights to my balloon? I bought the balloon. I put in the labor to blow it up. Is it now not my balloon?
I know everyone is trying to hang an analogy on this thing but come on.
Posted on 5/2/19 at 2:10 pm to td1
quote:
assessed a "public resources" tax (we can even call it the fish tax)
Are you serious? You do realize that deer are considered public as long as the land isn’t fenced, and yet we aren’t being taxed to hunt them on “our” land, right?
Jesus. I thought the OB was populated with independent, small government people but obviously we have been overrun by the fishing socialist queens.
ETA: I know the balloon premise sounded silly, but really think about it. Is it any different than what you’re proposing?
This post was edited on 5/2/19 at 2:14 pm
Posted on 5/2/19 at 2:12 pm to baldona
quote:
I'm pretty sure he is saying that if you have public access to the body of water, then you can access the entire body of water. If you can access a river, you can go the entire length of a river.
So what? Just because you can “access” part of a river (or even the whole river) doesn’t make it public.
Posted on 5/2/19 at 2:12 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
How do you reconcile this with free ranging mammals and birds?
Balloon animals or nah?
Posted on 5/2/19 at 2:17 pm to TheDrunkenTigah
I wasn't considering the balloon animals when I posted because being that they are filled with public air, there is no such thing as a private balloon.
Posted on 5/2/19 at 2:22 pm to AlxTgr
What if they were filled using privately owned helium, but they also rise above 500 feet?
Page 7 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News