re: HR 391 (Water Access Rights) Passes 5-3 in committee

quote:

---

keep trying to make up excuses to defend land owners, its amusing to watch

---

yeah, frick those people

quote:

---

let me know as soon as someone puts a gate accross the mississippi river and claims it as private bub

---

There’s already been court cases about people trespassing on miss river during flood events. This will impact places like Giles Island, Glasscock, etc. bub

I’m ready to hunt miss river around Natchez like choirboy, but legally. Gonna stack that green.

I love using things that others build for me

quote:

---

Every boat owner that travels down those canals, which were permitted and built using private money, should also be held accountable for wetlands loss.

---

that's a stretch. The unwillingness for everyone to be just a little more objective, instead of throwing out crap like this, would help everyone understand the issue much better.

Here is a scenario we are discussing on the west side of the state. Older family friends that owns land along the Calcasieu River on both sides (heir cattle and oil land) I'm sure as I type some of you will know who and exactly where I'm talking about as it will come apparent. About 1/2 mile to be exact. That family has owned that land for more than 150 years in some fashion and they have documented proof of such (I've seen the records they keep long family lineage). Long before any laws were written about "running water" "canals" "water bottoms" and so forth. The argument is AS Louisiana Law is written and understood and allowed to happen at this time and how groups were grandfathered in over the decades for various political gain and reason. He could legally gate up the Calcasieu River!!!!! As you just read that, You saying to yourself, OH NO he can't that makes no sense and your ready to blast me with the next comment.....HOLD UP SWOLE UP. He has proof that the Calcasieu river was not running thru its current location!! The river ran on the far east side of said property when the family acquired the land. They dug and dredged a small path from the river thru the middle of this property to help traverse the marshes and bring fresh water in and had a board control weir on it until one of the hurricanes took it all away in the late 1800's I believe he said (maybe wrong on date here but it was a hella long time ago). They have all the documented proof of these actions. Over the decades the river of course took the path of least resistance and now the MAIN CHANNEL that ships and barges push thru are a Man Made canal and the old channel has silted in over the years and while passable is far from capable of handling modern channel traffic. This Family could go out right now, stop traffic and gate up the whole damn river, let that sink in a minute if you are against HB391. Everything I typed is a fact that can be proven easily in a court of law. Can you imagine the judges and politicians that would have to get involved if that came to fruition? They would of course never do such a thing but have every right too as our current law is read and enforced.

quote:

---

He has proof that the Calcasieu river was not running thru its current location!! The river ran on the far east side of said property when the family acquired the land. They dug and dredged a small path from the river thru the middle of this property to help traverse the marshes and bring fresh water in and had a board control weir on it until one of the hurricanes took it all away in the late 1800's I believe he said (maybe wrong on date here but it was a hella long time ago). They have all the documented proof of these actions. Over the decades the river of course took the path of least resistance and now the MAIN CHANNEL that ships and barges push thru are a Man Made canal and the old channel has silted in over the years and while passable is far from capable of handling modern channel traffic.

---

That series of events makes it subject to public use.

The Mississippi River wasn’t permitted and constructed in private land.

One of the first things that totalitarian/socialistic/communist regimes do is confiscate private property. Are you ok with that? Just so that you can fish wherever you please? Next will be open range hunting. After all, somebody always has better deer hunting than where you hunt, so maybe you should be able to hunt on their land also if enough people make enough noise in Baton Rouge. No difference at all. Don't give me that stuff about "public water", that is just an excuse to trespass upon private property. I realize that I am in the minority here, and down vote away. By the way, I don't have a private fishing lease nor am I a large landowner.