- 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: Louisiana Open Water Petition
Posted on 1/25/17 at 3:17 pm to TheCurmudgeon
Posted on 1/25/17 at 3:17 pm to TheCurmudgeon
and one more:
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. 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.
0
Posted on 1/25/17 at 3:22 pm to tgrbaitn08
I was waiting for the you to figure that one out. I have no answer
Posted on 1/25/17 at 3:25 pm to tgrbaitn08
quote:
What about if you have to use a mud boat to go through mud and marsh to get to a pond that is tidal? Isnt that the same as walking though someone's backyard to get to their pond?
If you're having to drive through marsh to get there, it should still be considered private land as far as I'm concerned. I don't see any difference between that an driving an ATV through the land. Otherwise I'm 100% behind the open water idea.
Posted on 1/25/17 at 3:27 pm to Hammertime
Louisiana's definition of navigable goes back to cover only water ways listed on some old map if i remember correctly. The overwhelming majority of coastal marsh and associated ponds are privately owned.
Posted on 1/25/17 at 3:29 pm to slackster
quote:
If you're having to drive through marsh to get there, it should still be considered private land as far as I'm concerned. I don't see any difference between that an driving an ATV through the land. Otherwise I'm 100% behind the open water idea.
The pond you are trying to access is tidal though.
Remember, if it floats it boats.
Posted on 1/25/17 at 3:30 pm to Nado Jenkins83
quote:
your pond argument is stupid.
The pond was in reference to the high fence argument, not really the issue of this thread. That trapping game on your property is some big issue. I was pointing out that we do it with fish in private ponds all the time.
quote:
thats not connected to a navigable waterway like some ponds in the marsh
Now to the other part of the argument, who gives a shite if anything is connected to a navigable waterway? My property that I live on is connected to a navigable road that is funded by tax payers. You still can't come on the property. If it was hunting property and a deer wondered off a WMA and onto my private property, you can't come on my property to shoot it, even if it's connected to a navigable road. I'm still not grasping how this is any different than property. If it's state owned, it's accessible. If not, then it's not accessible. You can be pissed that our government let that land be sold to special interests, but I cannot understand the concept of eminent domain just because you want to fish. The argument that the state owns the water is dumb too. That's like the state owning the air. The air comes on your property, so I should be able to hunt ducks flying in it.
This is all born out of people so used to going wherever they wanted because no body is actually out on their property stopping trespassers. But now with legal ramifications and ease of access by people who f88k everything up, owners are taking measures to just stop the problem. Then every joe blow who "been fishing there my entire life" feels like they have the "right" to it just because they thought they did before.
Posted on 1/25/17 at 3:34 pm to Hammertime
I believe that in LA, a waterway is defined by three things: water, bottom, and bank. Depending on a number of things depends on who has the rights to each. In some cases, the public has use to the water, beds, and some of the bank(during low tide mostly), but in other situation the public only has use to water and bank and bottom are privately owned. Some cases all 3 are privately owned.
Posted on 1/25/17 at 3:38 pm to Piece
quote:
but in other situation the public only has use to water and bank and bottom are privately owned.
Very true i found an oyster bed lease map and just about every square foot of bottom is leased whether they are fishing it or not
Posted on 1/25/17 at 3:41 pm to bayoudude
Prestige Oyster company has something like 30,000 acres in oyster leases along the la coast.
This post was edited on 1/25/17 at 3:48 pm
Posted on 1/25/17 at 3:41 pm to bayoudude
quote:Navigable in 1812 is the test. Navigable by itself is meaningless.
Louisiana's definition of navigable goes back to cover only water ways listed on some old map if i remember correctly.
Posted on 1/25/17 at 4:14 pm to JamalSanders
quote:Not all water should be classified in the same way. There's simply no reason to do so.
Water? Absolutely should be a public resource. Which is my point.
Posted on 1/25/17 at 5:17 pm to tgrbaitn08
Posted on 1/25/17 at 5:32 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
Not all water should be classified in the same way. There's simply no reason to do so.
If it connects off your property it (in my and the ACE opinion) that it is a waterway.
Posted on 1/25/17 at 6:35 pm to Bison
this whole problem is based on using 100 year old maps and therefore the law reads, only navigatable waters on that 100 year old map are public.
so based on that ridiculous criteria the law sees 100's of miles of tidal waters as dry land IE private property that can legally be gated off.
there is no provision to take into account oilwell canals as tidal waters and so they are seen as private canals and also can be gated off.
they were very clever to make this small little notation in the law that goes unnoticed until suddenly all tidal waters become declared as private land since the law doesn't consider the water to be water because it is limited to the law that states reality doesn't matter and only what the 100 year old land map shows is what is real.
all it would take is to have the law amended to use current "up to date" maps showing the real tidal waters that exist today. no "real" changes need to be made to the law other then that.
so based on that ridiculous criteria the law sees 100's of miles of tidal waters as dry land IE private property that can legally be gated off.
there is no provision to take into account oilwell canals as tidal waters and so they are seen as private canals and also can be gated off.
they were very clever to make this small little notation in the law that goes unnoticed until suddenly all tidal waters become declared as private land since the law doesn't consider the water to be water because it is limited to the law that states reality doesn't matter and only what the 100 year old land map shows is what is real.
all it would take is to have the law amended to use current "up to date" maps showing the real tidal waters that exist today. no "real" changes need to be made to the law other then that.
This post was edited on 1/25/17 at 6:40 pm
Posted on 1/25/17 at 6:53 pm to Hammertime
quote:
You're still using the water that I pay for.....and your argument is I can't use something I pay for?
You pay for the water? How much did it cost you and all your trespassing buddies in August? What about those storm surges? You pay for that too?
Posted on 1/25/17 at 6:56 pm to JamalSanders
quote:
if it connects off your property it (in my and the ACE opinion) that it is a waterway
But not necessarily a navigable one.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 1:13 am to tgrbaitn08
So whats the difference there than False River. Troll in front of your pier and throw down along side of your walkway to your Bulkhead and fish.
Just cause you gate it and it's connected to a body of water doesnt mean you own that access. Blame your corporate entities for it and no one else
Just cause you gate it and it's connected to a body of water doesnt mean you own that access. Blame your corporate entities for it and no one else
Posted on 1/26/17 at 6:15 am to AlxTgr
quote:
AlxTrg
Hello again. Doing some education on the OT I see.
[quote]Not all water should be classified in the same way. There's simply no reason to do. [quote]
No one is asking that to be the case, quit trying to frame the argument differently.
What actually defies reason is for Louisiana to treat it's free flowing water different than the other lower 47 states.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 7:34 am to Bmath
quote:
what happens if you get out of the boat in waders and walk along the bottom?
Motherfricker is trespassing.
quote:
the property owner liable for injuries to boaters accessing water within a plot of land they own?
Probably, but that's a result of a fricked up tort system.
This post was edited on 1/26/17 at 7:35 am
Posted on 1/26/17 at 7:49 am to TheCurmudgeon
are the land owners going to be compensated for the property taxes they have been paying on that marsh?
Page 12 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News