- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
1
Posted on 8/4/10 at 10:31 pm to The Sportsman
quote:
I fish pipelines all the time
Our pipelines cross private land.
Posted on 8/4/10 at 10:36 pm to INFIDEL
quote:see I see hunting and fishing as two different things.. I know what the law says right now and it's bullshite... Say there is only one canal to get into some popular lake and some guy buys a strip of land anlong that existing canal and gates it... That's what I'm fighting I.e. Lake theriot
Posted by INFIDEL
quote:
I fish pipelines all the time
Our pipelines cross private land.
Posted on 8/4/10 at 10:42 pm to The Sportsman
quote:
see I see hunting and fishing as two different things.. I know what the law says right now and it's bullshite... Say there is only one canal to get into some popular lake and some guy buys a strip of land anlong that existing canal and gates it... That's what I'm fighting I.e. Lake theriot
I don't think you really got my point but I really do hope you can come to peace with your dilemma. Hunting and fishing comes with a lot of very deep emotions and traditions and people get passionate very quickly. There are untold amounts of land I used to hunt that I can no longer get to due to private land. Wish I could still go, but I can't. Times change.
Posted on 8/5/10 at 7:30 am to INFIDEL
Don't get me wrong guys... I follow the law.. I was being a little extreme on my views for the sake of the argument.
I still believe that a canal that has been public for years and a new person leases it and tries to block it off is in the wrong
eta: How are we supposed to know that a canal is legally private without having a gate/fence across it that is approved by the state? If I'm just supposed to take someones word for it I'm not. If I'm supposed to obey posted signs I'm not, I'll go put bogus posted signs on the points of all my favorite canals to keep people out (see what I'm saying)
I still believe that a canal that has been public for years and a new person leases it and tries to block it off is in the wrong
eta: How are we supposed to know that a canal is legally private without having a gate/fence across it that is approved by the state? If I'm just supposed to take someones word for it I'm not. If I'm supposed to obey posted signs I'm not, I'll go put bogus posted signs on the points of all my favorite canals to keep people out (see what I'm saying)
This post was edited on 8/5/10 at 7:46 am
Posted on 8/5/10 at 8:50 am to The Sportsman
If it's a canal, then it's man-made. You can pretty much bet it wasn't navigable in 1812. Personally, I would assume it was private.
Posted on 8/5/10 at 8:52 am to Ignignot
quote:
I have some very intense opinions of this shite. We almost got into a shootout with some old coonass over this. Nobody owns the water. End of f@cking story. If you have a lease or whatnot, you own the land underneath but not the water
Unless you can prove it was a man made canal and you own the property on both sides. Cenac is still fighting this in court with the people of Gheens.
Posted on 8/5/10 at 9:10 am to bayoudude
Cenac vs gheens was decided by our Supreme court in 2003. No new cases come up on Westlaw. In the reported decision the Court said:
quote:
Instead, the evidence presented shows that the public was allowed to use the boat launch and canal for the purpose of traveling to other bodies of water for many years with the permission of the owners. This permissive use does not establish a plain intent on the part of the owners to permanently abandon the property to public use. Thus, like the court of appeal, we find neither the boat launch nor the canal is burdened with a servitude of public use established by implied dedication.
Posted on 8/5/10 at 9:18 am to AlxTgr
You cannot gate off a navigable waterway, doesnt matter if you own the land on both sides. If it is damned or a dead end then yes you are within your rights to gate the entrance of that canal off if you own/lease all the land surrounding that canal.
It's actually pretty simple.
It's actually pretty simple.
Posted on 8/5/10 at 9:20 am to tgrbaitn08
quote:
You cannot gate off a navigable waterway, doesnt matter if you own the land on both sides. If it is damned or a dead end then yes you are within your rights to gate the entrance of that canal off if you own/lease all the land surrounding that canal.
That's pretty much incorrect. Just being navigable is not a test at all. It has to have been since 1812.
Posted on 8/5/10 at 9:26 am to AlxTgr
quote:
Just being navigable is not a test at all
pretty much it is
quote:
It has to have been since 1812.
almost impossible to prove..
Do you have a link as to that? Maybe just look up the law and post it here for us.
Posted on 8/5/10 at 9:29 am to tgrbaitn08
The Constitution states any waterway that
was used for commercial transportation or
ties into that waterway
is a navigable waterway that may be used by the public.
From the Louisiana Civil Code,
Art. 450. Public things
Public things are owned by the state or its political subdivisions in their capacity as public persons.
Public things that belong to the state are such as
running waters, the waters and bottoms
of natural navigable water bodies, the territorial sea, and the seashore.
Public things that may belong to political subdivisions of the state are such as streets and public squares.
Art.452. Public things and common things subject to public use.
Public things and common things are subject to public use in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Everyone has the right to fish in the rivers, ports, roadsteads, and harbors, and the right to land on the seashore, to fish, to shelter himself, to moor ships, to dry nets, and the like, provided that he does not cause injury to the property of adjoining owners.
The seashore within the limits of a municipality is subject to its police power, and the public use is governed by municipal ordinances and regulations. .
Art. 455. Private things subject to public use.
Private things may be subject to public use in accordance with law or by dedication.
Art. 456. Banks of navigable rivers or streams.
The banks of navigable rivers or streams are private things that are subject to public use.
The bank of a navigable river or stream is the land lying between the ordinary low and the ordinary high stage of the water. Nevertheless, when there is a levee in proximity to the water, established according to law, the levee shall form the bank.
Art. 458. Works obstructing the public use.
Works built without lawful permit on public things, including the sea, the seashore, and the bottom of natural navigable waters, or on the banks of navigable rivers, that obstruct the public use may be removed at the expense of the persons who built or own them at the instance of the public authorities, or of any person residing in the state.
The owner of the works may not prevent their removal by alleging prescription or possession.
was used for commercial transportation or
ties into that waterway
is a navigable waterway that may be used by the public.
From the Louisiana Civil Code,
Art. 450. Public things
Public things are owned by the state or its political subdivisions in their capacity as public persons.
Public things that belong to the state are such as
running waters, the waters and bottoms
of natural navigable water bodies, the territorial sea, and the seashore.
Public things that may belong to political subdivisions of the state are such as streets and public squares.
Art.452. Public things and common things subject to public use.
Public things and common things are subject to public use in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Everyone has the right to fish in the rivers, ports, roadsteads, and harbors, and the right to land on the seashore, to fish, to shelter himself, to moor ships, to dry nets, and the like, provided that he does not cause injury to the property of adjoining owners.
The seashore within the limits of a municipality is subject to its police power, and the public use is governed by municipal ordinances and regulations. .
Art. 455. Private things subject to public use.
Private things may be subject to public use in accordance with law or by dedication.
Art. 456. Banks of navigable rivers or streams.
The banks of navigable rivers or streams are private things that are subject to public use.
The bank of a navigable river or stream is the land lying between the ordinary low and the ordinary high stage of the water. Nevertheless, when there is a levee in proximity to the water, established according to law, the levee shall form the bank.
Art. 458. Works obstructing the public use.
Works built without lawful permit on public things, including the sea, the seashore, and the bottom of natural navigable waters, or on the banks of navigable rivers, that obstruct the public use may be removed at the expense of the persons who built or own them at the instance of the public authorities, or of any person residing in the state.
The owner of the works may not prevent their removal by alleging prescription or possession.
This post was edited on 8/5/10 at 9:30 am
Posted on 8/5/10 at 9:30 am to tgrbaitn08
Read the quote from Cenac above. People used that canal for years. Obviously navigable. Supreme court said Cenac could shut it down.
Posted on 8/5/10 at 9:33 am to tgrbaitn08
quote:
the waters and bottoms
of natural navigable water bodies
Man made canals do not fall under this definition and, therefore, can be gated off regardless of navigability.
Posted on 8/5/10 at 9:34 am to AlxTgr
Posted on 8/5/10 at 9:40 am to poule deau
quote:
Man made canals do not fall under this definition and, therefore, can be gated off regardless of navigability.
You mean to tell me that since Turtle Bayou Pipeline was dug by the oil companies years ago, and is now used as a main commercial navigational waterway by tugs, crew-boats etc and I own the land on both sides that I can legally block off both sides of the pipeline???
I seriously doubt that would fly
Posted on 8/5/10 at 9:41 am to tgrbaitn08
Two things.
1. that's an AG opinion.
2. The canal became the Amite River. For all intents and purposes, the guy wanted to shut off a la. river.
1. that's an AG opinion.
2. The canal became the Amite River. For all intents and purposes, the guy wanted to shut off a la. river.
Posted on 8/5/10 at 9:43 am to tgrbaitn08
quote:
I seriously doubt that would fly
Happens every day and is completely legal according to current La law.
See the Cenac case quoted above.
Posted on 8/5/10 at 9:45 am to Ignignot
quote:
We almost got into a shootout with some old coonass over this.
Not a good idea IMHO. Posted on 8/5/10 at 9:45 am to poule deau
quote:
Happens every day and is completely legal according to current La law.
I didnt realize there was a distinction.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News