Please Sign In


New To Sportsman Network?

Right to Hunt and Fish Navigable Waterways

Reply
Hello All,
I am in lawschool and I am thinking about writing a legal article concerning the right to hunt and fish on navigable waterways in Louisiana. This has been a hot topic of late and I just wanted to get different perspectives on the issue. I have some personal feelings about this issue but I will save those for the article. Feel free to comment on issues such as gated/private canals, and hunting and fishing above and below the high and low water marks.
Reply
GPswamprat: I sent you an e-mail with some info and contacts that may help you with this project.
Reply
   hipboot
Respect what is not yours, if the property is posted the boundries do not move due to flood or high water. The reason this is such an issue in this state is due to the crawfishing people. They do not respect anyones boundries, they enter your hunting property when you are still in bow season. They damage your stands, steal your climbers and feeders, and they know that they do not belong there. They make dams that finally break your bridges so they can crawfish longer. We have given people permission to crawfish our properties just to keep the locals out and the locals end up stealing their traps. There is not way to beat trashy people.
Reply
I have a problem with gated canals, especially man-made. I believe that canal should not be blocked unless they are being filled in. These canals are a big reason for erosion, (countless oilfield canals). Its public tidal waters/fish that fill these canal so it shouldn't be privately blocked.
Reply
This is a big problem. The reason it is is b/c of the marsh lands we have. You should not be able to own a water way. La is a big grey area on this. This is a good topic and i read the comment below that if it is not your property then stay off. That's fine but water ways cannot be property so don't fall under that statement.

Private canals are a different story and up for discussion but in many cases they were never dug and are natural, in which case they cannot be made private. Yet they as the land owner claims it.

I don't think you should have the right to hunt the waterway but you should be able to travel it and fish it..

Many times the game wardens and land owner have worked a deal and it gets enforced and that is another problem
Reply
   Marshrat
I think that if you want your water to be private, it should have no ingress/egress from public waters. Some kind of earthen or rock dam to separate the two. That way there would be no confusing public from private.

Warren
Reply
Here is my view. We use to be a country of laws and not a country ruled by people. Well that doesn't seem to apply anymore and more and more PEOPLE are deciding what the law says instead of just reading the way it is writing.

The convoluted logic that was used in outlawing what has ALWAYS been legal is just sickening. The logic being use now-a-days is similar to the logic in the goverment saying the founding fathers wrote into the constitution that the government can't encourage or promote religion when everything they wrote or built had God on it or in it.

As they say, common sense isn't so common anymore.
Reply
   eman(R)
I have to agree w/ others here > If you say you own a canal and the state agrees so be it. But now you need to dam it off so that the water and the fish that belong to the public cannot enter your canal and tresspass in your water.
gates dont count You must stop all flow of public water into your canal.
Last time this came up . someone posted that this was the same as high fencing and the publics deer were kept behind any errected high fence. After a little investigation i found out that to high fence any property you are required to try to get as many of the publics deer off your property as possible b4 closing the fence in.
If you want to dam both ends of your canal to make it private then you can keep what fish are in it at that time.
Reply
we currently have the most corrupt state and federal goverment i have ever seen. nothing a common man will do will change it other than a out right revolution. a few more hurricanes and it want matter anyway. my two cents are greed greed greed
dam them up or open them back up. a good ole bosten tea party is what it will take to change anything, and we have become so passive dont see it happening
Reply
    Country
gentlemen,

Below is the link that lists your congressmen and senators.
copy and paste to browser.

http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newseek.cgi?site=ctc&state=la

Until you do something about them fishing and hunting for free on those waterways, your pissing in the wind.

Country

Reply
   wheeshu
I recommend looking into the Louisiana Revised Statutes for the laws of the land. Riparian (water) rights are a bit tricky. Check out this link for some land laws.
http://www.lapels.com/pdf/ls_comp.pdf

Here's an important one

LRS 9:1101. Ownership of waters and beds of bayous, rivers, streams, lagoons, lakes and bays. The waters of and in all bayous, rivers, streams, lagoons, lakes and bays, and the beds thereof, not under the direct ownership of any person on August 12, 1910, are declared to be the property of the state. There shall never be any charge assessed against any person for the use of the waters of the state for municipal, industrial, agricultural or domestic purposes.

While acknowledging the absolute supremacy of the United States of America over the navigation on the navigable waters within the borders of the state, it is hereby declared that the ownership of the water itself and the beds thereof in the said navigable waters is vested in the
state and that the state has the right to enter into possession of these waters when not interfering
with the control of navigation exercised thereon by the United States of America. This Section shall not affect the acquisition of property by alluvion or accretion.
All transfers and conveyances or purported transfers and conveyances made by the state of Louisiana to any levee district of the state of any navigable waters and the beds and bottoms thereof are hereby rescinded, revoked and canceled. This Section is not intended to interfere with the acquisition in good faith of any waters or the beds thereof transferred by the state or its agencies prior to August 12, 1910.
Reply
   cullin
I go where I want when I want as long as I am in the water! I will pay the fine if and when I get caught! STUPID RULE the Mike Foster put in to protect his Duck hunting!!!
Reply
   driftwood
collecting off the toils of others!!! This is great.

I agree with some. All these canals in question should be dammed off. and Joe public and the LCPA would be no better off than they are now, actually worse off than they are now. But there is a problem!!!! The law won't allow this to happen in most cases. pretty sure its something about damaging wetlands.....ever heard of it???

So, the landowners have been paying for this land for generations. You've only been fishing on it for free, for generations. Be grateful not greedy. If someone gets hurt on this private land, It is the landowner or leasee that takes the hit, not the state. The landowners have paperwork filed at the courthouse in each parish that proves they have ownership of the property. What does the state have? A disclaimer. If the state could prove it they would have done it already.

As for your paper. Good Luck. I hope you stick to the laws and leave the opinions out of it.
Reply
   Water-Man
So what ya'll saying is all these leases that everybody claims to have is b.s. that means as long as i don't touch the land i can hunt/fish anywheres, even though the waters on in the prem. of a lease. BULLSH""...... Check up on your laws. If you only have one entrance to a said property, regaurdless of water, if you or in the perm. of a lease, you or trespassing. There is no need for a gate or signs anymore, per state statue. I do agree if you have a lease with any type of entrance, you should by law have to place a gate or no charges can be file against anyone. everyone is right about La Law, it a crock of sh''.
Reply
   driftwood
Thats not all that they are saying. Groups like the LCPA claim that they have a right to the land even when its not flooded. In thier minds, if your hunting lease has ever flooded during the highest of water levels in the basin, everything that was under water at that time is public property. Just ask thier president whose house boat is sitting high and dry on private property that does not belong to him.
Reply
agree with everyone, if they want the canal to be private, it should be considered a pond and not a canal and should be contained within some sort of embankment... there shall be no flow of public water in or out of the "pond" and the owners are responsible for keeping up the land around this pond or they will forfeit their rights to keeping it private... and if they do decide to enclose the canal, they should have to pay for some sort of restoration of public hunting/fisheries area to mitigate the land/water they enclosed from the public...
no gates allowed over water... thats B.S.
Reply
alot of times crawfishermen claim that the land flooded 90 years ago so they have the right to fish it
Reply
Anybody that has a gate blocking a waterway is "STEALING" the public fishes, ducks and anything else that he can get to go up that waterway. As far as the Politicians, they have "PROSTITUTED" themselves to the big land owners that own them. I have been to the State Capitol when this issue came up and the whole front row is nothing but Lawyer's and Big Land Owners staring at the members of the council, (more State Prostitutes). The Baton Rouge State Capitol is just a big Whore House.
Reply
"I hope you stick to the laws and leave the opinions out of it."

I wish the judges would do the same. Unfortunately they don't.

The law does not say land that was once flooded is in the public domain. So any individual or organization making that assertion is a little off kilter.

The law does in black and white give you the right to fish in the waters of a river up to the high water mark... But despite that old old law being on the books the judge has ruled you don't have that right anymore... all because we let people be judges that apparently don't know how to read.
Reply
Dam it up or shut it up. If the water is connect to a public waterway then, it is public as well and the boundaries should fluxuate with the water level itself. It is said that people own the surface rights and mineral rights of property. With that being said, unless the water is not completely contained 360 degress by your land then, it is shared with the laws of the water it adjoins. By surface rights I mean trees. Water comes and goes as nature demands it. Trees don't. They are "fixed" to the surface. Water isn't.

I have fished public lakes and have actually had some FOOLS come out on their docks and scream at me for fishing around their docks. On a public lake. They throw feed out so, it's "their" fish around there dock.

What's next? Redirect air traffic for flying thru your air above your property?
Reply
I was told along time ago by a cajun in golden meadow. ( always when fishing the marsh bring 2 blades with your chainsaw , one for the metal and one for the wood) . I fish waterways and if something is in the way I move it.If I get fined I wont pay it and I will bring it to court. I haven't been fined yet and I do keep a gun in the boat in case someone pulls one on me. I like to fish and I dont step foot in anyones blind or on land.That would be tresspassing then.
Reply
   up-a-tree
I've read your past/present comments on this topic & you seem to be on top of your game. So I'm wondering if it's legal or illegal to construct a permanent bridge across a State Owned Navigable Waterway?
Reply
Why doesn't CCA stand up for us fishermen when it comes to illegal blocking of our waterways? They have to know whats happening around the state.
Reply
JustWant2Fish... u need to come down to Stephensville and put in at Doiron's, when you get into Belle River take a right and there are a few canals with gates on them.. the first one on your right that has a gate across it has 10lb bass in it if you can get in, go up a little further where the cut is at Lake Palourde and there is a pipeline with a gate across it and you can catch 4lb sacalait in that one.... lol just trying to give you a few ideas!!!!
Reply
The answer is corruption!! Look none of this should be an issue. If its a navigable waterway subject to ebb and flow of the tide you should be able to fish it and travel on it. Gate or no gate. But b/c these judges have connections this has become an issue. I for one don't care. I will use it. If it keeps up at this rate the whole marsh will be private. By the way other states don't have this problem, just this courrupt one.

In many other states there is a buffer along the banks of streams that are considered public. Even if the stream goes through your b-yard people can fish it. Litter fines are thru the roof to keep things nice.

This should be common sense unfortunately seems that those ruling have none...
Reply
Thanks for the comments guys, I'm aware of the laws and statutes that are on the books in Louisiana. I'm also aware of some of the cases dealing with this issue, specifically Parm v. Shumate. I can kind of understand the whole idea of trespassing during high water, but the whole idea of gated canals is really a separate issue.
Reply
   sledge
GP, you could spend most of your law studies in just trying to find a clear definition for a "navigable waterway"...one that everybody,even a judge,could understand without there being ANY doubt as to its meaning..from both State and Federal viewpoints. As I said,good luck!
Reply
I would but I dont freshwater fish anymore.Thanks anyways. One thing I did find out about gates is that they open easier than cutting down.Actually if you have agate across a waterway I am not goin throught that much trouble to take it down. I have actually only been told one time in leeville area that I was on private waterway.I was polite and told them to produce the papers saying it was there waterway I would leave and never come back again. He said he was gonna call sheriff, I plainly stated I would be here about an hour depending on the bite and I would love to talk to the sheriff if he can make it. Never saw a cop or that guy.hmmmmmmmmmm
Reply
i still think if the state would charge so much per foot of water flowing to the so called land owners canals. it would all be public really soon
Reply
cullen i agree with you and others if i can drive my boat in it i go and ant leaving tired of the bull. in fact one day we should all me up and go boat rideing in lake theriot
Reply
   Chris Y
justwant2fish - I probably know the waterway in Leeville you are speaking of. Just this past Jan. me and a buddy were travelling from Catfish lake to the Sulphur Mines when we happened upon a extremly large Barge that had been converted to a duck camp. I idled down to a no wake and as I was nearing the barge I noticed a hunter unloading his boat - just as I was about to wave and say hello - this bastard started cussing me and telling me this canal was private and to leave before he shot me. I kindly said how is that so when it connects to the Sulphur Mines (clearly shown on the GPS) He continued his rant as he picked up his shotgun loaded it and directed at both of us in the boat. At this point (about 10 feet away ) with a large shotgun loaded having a light trigger finger it seemed - I told the MF i would turn around and leave. I proceeded out of the canal and to the sheriffs office which at that time was manned only by a clerk who said they would contact me when the sheriff got back. Knowing I was in the right - the following Monday I perceeding to the LADWF in BR and made a formal complaint - at that time I was told any waterway that has an entrance and and exit to public water cannot be held private no matter the depth or size. They then told me that I should have stayed on the water and contacted them, waited for the LADWF to arrive and escort them to the old bastard which they would have arrested for whatever charges neccessary. - I will be back in that canal probably this weekend or next so I hope anyone reading this might know how owns that barge or who that old bastard might be - because the tables will turn this time
Reply
I hunt/ fish alot in the henderson area. Have never really been confronted with any problems being that when im hunting im in my boat on public water and the same with fishing. Hope I never have to deal with people that claim they own the water but if I do I will be nice and just ask them to show me that they own the water and once I see that I would leave. Just curious has anyone ever had problems with this in henderson?

alwaysnbasin
Reply
i know better by now since ive done been kicked out of a few marshes.. but here is my oppinion

one- if it runs thru someone's land (houses on both sides) they should be able to say wether you can go in and out of the waterway.

two-if the waterway connects to a marsh then i have been told you cannot hunt the marsh or fish it if it is supposably leased. but how can they lease a friggin marsh connecting to a public river????? yet i can fish it since they dont have fishing rights
Reply
    Country
These so called private canals that were dug by oil companies are part of the reason we have the coastal erosion problem we have.

Solution: Have the owner relinquish all claim to the water or fill it in at there expense. If they don't put a lean on it. He can neither buy or sale any property in this state until he satifies the lean.

Country
Reply
I can see stepping fot on land trespassing but not waterway. Now some on here are familiar with leeville real well I had one last year that shows how ignorant people are about leases.There is a 12 foot canal that goes between little lake and timbelier bay it is the only canal thats deep that runs through that small patch of land.People think that if they put cane sticks and block the canal and post a lease sign its theirs....negative.I have fished that area for long enough to know that this certain canal is deep enough to be a navigation canal and it has been open for years. I just move the cain sticks as I please so my boat will fit. I am not gonna run in a pond during duck season to redfish with everyone in the blinds hunting.Thats just rude , but come duck season closed I am gonna be in that pond lookin for some rod bendin action for my kids andwife to enjoy. I deer hunt a private lease and catch trespassers all the time wildlife and fisheries is on my speed dial for that reason and we do press charges. I am nice my father in law is not so nice.(cant say what he does) he scares me when he catches em. Open water ways are not private property, step foot on land and that is another story.
Reply
Actually, if the canal you are talking about is deemed a navigable waterway, the banks of that canal are considered a riparian bank and the public can step on the land and use it for certain purposes.
Reply
Wow just read my post and I cant spell.....
Reply
   driftwood
I completely agree. If it is a natural waterway it should not be gated. I also agree that landowners should dam off the private canals. The problem is ITS ILLEGAL to dam off the canals. No landowner can dam a drainage way if it affects another landowner. They cannot elevate thier property if it causes flooding or holding on thier nighbors property.

All of you talk about the water that comes into that canal. Someone even suggested taxing it(democrat, obviously). Well, there is a flip side. What about the water going out? Should the state pay for the water gained from said landowner? I DON'T THINK SO. The canals in the marsh that are natural should not be dammed. It doesn't seem right, i AGREE. But nothing in the atchafalaya basin is NATURAL. The water level is MAN-MADe, and would never reach 21ft. if the levees weren't in place. The same goes for the case on the Miss. river. Again, the government did not sieze these peoples property when building these levees and locks, therefor it still belongs to them, and they can prove it.

As for the natural waterways, they are public. and no, I don't think a landowner should be able to build a bridge or a gate across a natural navigable waterway.

For christ's sake, the 13 year old kid gets it, why can't the LCPA? maybe its because that 13 year old kid has sucessfully completed more classes in grade school than some of its members.
Reply
You know this was a big issue in 2005 and never went anywhere just under the mat.I personally dont think this issue will ever be solved due to this is Louisiana and I love this state but it is so currupt that no one wants to settle this , too much money to loose in payoffs. My kids will be fighting about this when they are my age and places like grande isle and leeville are virtually underwater due to no money for coastal conservation but we can give billions to some car manufacturer so he wont go belly up and loose there 10 million dollar bonuses. ooooh dont get me started.
Reply
water comeing out drift wood??? there wouldnt be a outgoing tide if there wasnt a canal dug there do you really think all the water in the canals came from rain or i know underground springs. its all greed
Reply
   up-a-tree
The reason I asked about a bridge being built across a State Owned Navigable Waterway is because I heard rumors that somebody in the basin built one and someone else hit it and got hurt...You hear anything about this? Of course you know how rumors start & get blown up.
Reply
I don't care what anybody says, the land owner owns the land under the water, he does not own that public water or fish in it. Now if someone got hurt in a boat while on that private water just watch how quick that land owner would say the same thing to keep from getting sued. As far as the CCA helping on this matter, don't even get me started on that, go to their web site, press contact us and just ask them, they will remain SILENT.
Reply
You people never sieze to amaze me!It looks like the lcpa is a thorn in yall side huh?Well just to say,without organizations like that people like yourself would just walk all over everyone in ya'll path,and we cant have that now can we?While you're on the subject of presidents,lets lay it all out!You see folks he talks about you shouldnt block water ways,but the pres. of his hunting club,aka mangement group,blocked of a bayou down there in the basin and an elderly man and his wife hit it one day injuring them both!The same group has also posted land all over that they dont even lease but run people off it anyway!This is a fact because i know some of the land owmers.The same pres. also got caught illegally tagging alligators around the same area not to mention the possession and/or buying undersized crabs,altering state documents(moving boundry lines on stae maps at the court house),the list goes on!Oh and lets not forget the one who has been shooting them deer dogs and falsifying police documents about people shooting at him!Folks this is the kind of people you are dealing with!They do more wrong than alot of us out here. Dont let them fool you,they will do everything in their power to control what they can!Wether its the truth or a lie!Its called greed!Yall need to join an org.that will stand for what you want,otherwise these people will get the upperhand!Remember they can only spit in the air for so long!I mean come on babe did i even get close?I i know i left alot out but baby its just the way it is you know?
Reply
the canal that leads to the marsh leads to a marsh that is 450 acres+ one man does not own it but leases it. 1 blind 1 man. i go out there hunt it youth weekend and the next and the next. go out there the next weekend hes at my blind cusing me.

try to go to his house and ask to lease it his reply- no. those are my ducks and nobody elses. my theory, go on the edge of MY land and call his ducks, and watch them leave him and come to me, but i dont shoot since those are his ducks.

now who is the arse hole now??
Reply
   CaptJS
As long as the powerful gang have excess to anyplace they want it will stay posted. All it would take is for a one of these guys to get run out then look out. PS Maybe we can ask the governor to go fishing get the idea.
Reply
Go figure. I was told today that some of the CCA people in Lafourche and Terrebonne are fishing exclusively behind illegal fences and dare the public to enter THEIR privately created fishing grounds. If so that is BS and they want us to support CCA? I'll support them with a cutting torch.
Reply
I live in Cocordia parish and was on the Old River near Vidalia the other day and someone (the landowner I assume). Painted posted on the trees down the side of the river bank I assume he did this to keep people from fishing that area when the Mississippi River Backs up in there. And when the River backs up in there along the bank I am referring to is a good area to catch white perch and he probally knows that but now according to the laws only he can fish there, Its a crock of s#!t in my opinion.
Reply
This entire issue has gotten completely out of focus. It is rediculous that any person can not take a rod & reel and wet a line with his family and enjoy the beautiful outdoors that we live in down here. But what everyone is not seeing is that this is a multiple group issue. You Have 4 different groups involved and our laws do not support all of our needs. Recreational fishing should be open to all navigatable waters....period. Now getting to the complicated part...if a person has a clear title to property and his taxes are all up to date and there is no claims by the state, it is considered "immovable propery". If your not sure what that means....go look it up and read the laws about "immovable property". When the levees were constructed around what we now call the Basin, there were no laws set forth that state when the private landowners propery floods...you have to let the public on it. I'm sure that all of you on here are like me...if you think your going to come walk in my yard at my house and just go and walk around and help yourself to whatever you feel....I promise you that you will not make it back to the road! Now tell me...whats the difference in the 2 properties? They are both immovable aren't they? These commercial fishermen have an agenda and I hate to tell all of ya'll recreational fishermen this...but it surely isn't to make sure that you can go fishing with your family...they are going to ruin it for the both of you. They are affraid that they are going to loose something that wasn't theirs to start with. They should be happy that they have had close to 70 years of fishing property for free. They want something for nothing....tell me where you can get that? Welfare????
Then you have the land owners and the hunters...who lease property...who are leagally bound by the documented leases they hold that clearly states: Leasse agrees to diligently patrol the premisis and keep the same free of trespassers and poachers, and to promptly notify Lessor of any such on the premises. This for those of you that have an opinion about these hunting clubs keeping people off of these properties. It is a legal contract...what do you not understand about that? And for those of you that know little about crawfish...they don't swin 10 miles up river to spawn and return later in the spring. Come on people. They are burried in the dirt on these peoples private property. Sounds like stealing to me. Everyone needs to learn how to read the laws of this state...if you think you can read 1, 2 or even 3 laws that have to do with these issues...you havn't read enough. There are resolutions to all these laws and if you don't read everything...in somewhat the order they were introduced...you'll never understand this issue to is fullest and remain one sided. How the old sayin goes....put the shoe on the other foot! What if it was your property....and you had some type of activity that you enjoyed doing on "your property" and it was ruined due to someone being on your property. How would you feel if that continually happened to you. With that being said...put the shoe on and tell me how it feels and if you say it wouldn't bother you....your a DAM LIER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply
   up-a-tree
After reading Dr.S's post I wonder if what he's talking about is what I heard about....Someone building a bridge across a State Owned Navigable Waterway & somebody else hitting it and getting hurt....According to the Dr.....Driftwood you should know about this?
Reply
I am a big supporter of CCA and I personally would like to see where they stand on the issue. I noticed that alot of the guides also dont respond in this post.What are their opinions? I have heard stories about certain areas to stay clear of and when my family is in the boat I do just for their safety . You all have me very inetrested to see where big organizations stand and if they will speak up.
Reply
   seagu11
CCA said it is not a fisheries issue. IMO, they seam to stand on the side with the deep pocket land owners/CCA members that supply funds for the organization.
Reply
   terryf
Well my 2 cents is that it depends on where the land is. Obviously if I live on the land and I own to the river bank and the river is way up, I dont want someone driving a boat into what would typically be my yard where they can see in the house and that sort of thing. That makes sense to me about this law. Or even where they may not be close to the house. If it is the area of my land that typically is not flooded and the land owner doesnt want someone over there land in the water that makes sense. But on land that maybe is not homesteaded it makes less sense. SO that being the case I dont believe as many areas would be affected if it was homesteaded land only that you couldnt navigate onto whether it be for safety ect. But raw land with no homestead makes less to no sense to me.?? Fishing it hurts nothing. Crawfishing may be different but simply fishing it when theres no homestead shouldnt really be an argument.
Reply
So what now you are saying the entire basin is private?And people are stealing yall crawfish?Man give that one a break!Its a big flood plain,with no crawfish ponds in it!Crawfish are everywhre in there.But if you want to talk about stealing,how about them gators that ol boy got off state land?The land belongs to the public and he didnt have permission for that!so why dont they give all the tax payers their share of the proceeds,cause i mean after all it is their land!Right padna?Wasnt that a form of stealing?O! im sorry,i almost forgot regular rules dont apply to yall!YALL HIGH UP.Scarey isnt it? Be careful not to fall!And if the commercial fisherman ruin it at,least they gave yall a fight.But hey that might be one of those scare tactics yall like to use.By the way are you one of those apostles out there with them?
Reply
I do not know who you are talking about but the issues are the same...IT SEEMS THAT YOU DON'T HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF PUTTING THOSE SHOES ON AND WALKING IN THEM FOR A BIT...maybe its cause you havn't learned how to tie them yet! It all comes down to a word called "compromise". There is a way to solve these problems but like the old sayin goes...you have to give a little to get a little. Until everyone can give a little....noone will get chit!!!!!!! There has to be some destinction in the laws between recreational fishing and commercial fishing. Last time I checked recreational fishing is legal on all navigatable waters....but I have never heard that it was legal to operate a business on someone elses private property...if thats the case....would you let me put up a Dollar Store in your front yard?

The entire basin is not private....the state still claims the same waterways and water bottoms as back when this state was formed....the same fishing grounds that were available before the construction on the levees.
Reply
I still have no idea who you are speaking about. We are discussing private property issues. SEEMS THAT YOU HAVE A PERSONAL VENDETTA TOWARDS THIS GUY AND THATS THE REASON YOU ARE SAYING WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. If you are here because you have it in for him...your just another person that is going to ruin everything for the decent people out there....YOU NEED TO GROW UP !!!!
Reply
a hunting club near krotz springs found a way to block a natural waterway. they put a culvert down and filled it in. Drainage is not disturbed but the poor old fisherman sure are. How they got away with it is beyond me. it has been there about 6-8 years now. The water way was halfmoon, north of 190. They had some of the best sac-o-lait and bass fishing around in them pits and bayous.
Reply
GP....your gonna be able to write a book by the time this is finished...lmao
Reply
   up-a-tree
GPswamprat....Just ask & you shall receive...LOL
Reply
   hotmama
WE NEED TO THANK GOD THAT LCPA IS FIGHTING FOR OUR RIGHTS OUT THERE! BECAUSE NO ONE ELSE SEEMS TO WANT TO STAND UP. WE DIDNT WRITE THE LAWS BUT WE ARE ALL SUBJECT TO THEM! LCPA ASKED FOR LEGAL BOUNDARIES TO BE PUT OUT THERE. THE LAND OWNERS FOUGHT THIS AND THE JUDGE SAID WE WERE MERELY THE PUBLIC AND WE HAD NO RIGHTS TO LEGAL BOUNDARIES OUT THERE. THESE LAWS WERE WRITTEN WAY BEFORE THE LEVEES WERE BUILT AND IF YOU CHECK THE RIVER STAGES WERE HIGHER BEFORE THEY PUT THE LEVEES IN. AND THATS THE REASON THEY BUILT THE LEVEES. WERE NOT TALKING ABOUT FLOOD WATERS, WERE TALKING ABOUT ORDINARY HIGH WATERS. DONT FALL INTO THAT TRAP!!! THE ATCHAFALAYA BASIN HASN'T REACHED FLOOD STAGE SINCE BEFORE THE LEVEES WERE BUILT. IF THESE "SO CALLED" LAND OWNERS HAD THE RIGHT TO KICK PEOPLE OUT, WE'D ALL BE OUT BY NOW!!!

THE PROPERTY WHERE I LIVE HAS LEGAL BOUNDARIES.. THERE ARE NO BOUNDARIES OUT THERE, AND THEY WANT TO KEEP IT THAT WAY! SO IF YOU'RE MAD AT LCPA, GET IN LINE, BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT MORE IMPORTANT PEOPLE THAN YOU, MAD AT THESE GUYS!!!

STILL FLOATING....
Reply
ok excuse my lack of knowledge but what is lcpa sounds like something i might want to support
Reply
Sorry but that sounds totally incorrect. Before the levees were constructed the had schools, stores, sugas mills, cane feilds, corn crops, cattle,,,etc....just like they have everywhere else in the state. There is no possible way that the water was higher before the levees. I know people that were born and raised out there....maybe you should speak to one of them to know how things were before the levee system were constructed.
Reply
   duck-head
Where does LA Sportsman stand on this issue. We need someone to organize support and a petition to get things moving.

To me when you close a canal you claim responsibility for any habitat loss and damage that resulted from the canal. It's time to stop talking and start moving, no one is above the law. If we had the organization and leadership things would change.
Reply
   hotmama
lcpa-west stands for louisisana crawfish producers association-west www.lcpa-west.com visit the website
there are legitiment land owners in the basin but most land owners have small tracts of land.water bottom claiments may own 50 acres but claim 5000 acres. these are the ones that will give you trouble. there are no legal boundries out there, paint on a tree with a GPS is not a legal boundary.( check your facts) naviagable waters are owned by the state up to the ordinary high water mark ( federal law) i think louisiana is subject to federal law.
if you go to the river gage data on the corps of engineer site (archives) you'll see that the historical info shows that the river was higher before they put the levees. when they build the levees they retricted the water with gates, the levels are actually lower now. ( check your facts )
most people who lived out there lived on house boats. i know because members of my family and friends lived out there. a farm (sugar, corn , and cattle ) was only like a modern day garden. the people made their living fishing out there, that was the biggest source of income. ( check your facts )
still floating.....
Reply
I have recieved an e-mail from cca on this and I was asked to call a number when I have free time so he can explain their stand on the right of way situation. I am impressed that they did respond to my e-mail and I will call him first thing monday morning (if they arent closed for mardi-gras). I am interested what they say and I will post their response. I asked them to post their standing on here but I think that wont happen.
Reply
   a.c.man
HOW MANY SPORTSMAN VOTED FOR KITTY KIMBLE, SHE RULED ON THIS ISSUE AND SIDED WITH THE LANDOWNERS. AS LONG AS WE ELECT THEM WE WILL LOSE. WE NEED MORE HONEST SPORTSMAN AND CONCERNED PEOPLE WHO HAVE OUR CHILDRENS FUTURE AT STAKE AND NOT THEIR CROONIES THAT CONTIBUTE TO THEIR ELECTION. ALSO IF WE EVER GET COASTAL RESTORATION WILL THE LAND RECOVERED GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL OWNERS. IF SO WHY SHOULD TAX DOLLARS WE PAY GO TO RESTORE LAND SOME CORPORATION WILL CLAIM AND POST. EDUCATE YOURSELFS ON THESE ISSUES GUYS BEFORE WE BECOME A DYING BREED.
Reply
   a.c.man
mrs kimble is new stste supreme court justice . she ruled in favor of the laandowners in the navagation dispute in north louisiana. she is also the wife of a former asst. director of wildlife and fisheries
Reply
   hotmama
THE PROPERTY AT BUTTE-LA-ROSE WAS STATE LAND , IT WAS THE BAYS OF LAKE LA-ROSE. A DEAL WAS MADE WITH ATCHAFALAYA LANDS FOR A LAND SWAMP OF PROPERTY THEY HAD NO LEGAL CLAIM TO. THEY TRADED STATE WATER-BOTTOM , I THINK, AT LOST LAKE AREA AND BUTTE-LA-ROSE BAYS. SANDRA THOMPSON, GARY KEISER, CLAY CARTER, AND JACK CALDWELL WERE ALL IN ON THE DEAL. THE CAMP OWNERS WERE FORCED TO BUY THE PROPERTY WITH NO CLEAR TITLE OR THEY WOULD BE FORCED TO MOVE. IT WAS JUST ANOTHER LAND GRAB OF OUR STATE LANDS BY PRIVATE INTEREST WITH THE HELP OF OUR POLITICIANS. (CHECK YOUR FACTS)
AS FOR THE CCA, THIS ORGANIZATION WAS FORMED BY MIKE FOSTER AND HIS FRIENDS ( WATER-BOTTOM CLAIMANTS) TO RID THE MARSH OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC. THEY RECRUITED THE SUPPORT OF THE SPORT FISHERMAN TO RETRICT THE COMMERCIAL FISHERMAN (GILL NETTERS) FROM THESE AREAS . NOW THE MARSHES ARE POSTED SO ONLY GOOD OLE BOYS CAN FISH DOWN THERE. THESE AREAS ARE NAVIGABLE,OWNED BY THE STATE UP TO THE ORDINARY HIGH TIDE ( FEDERAL LAW, CHECK YOUR FACTS)
STILL FLOATING.................HOTMOMA
Reply
I only posted about CCA to see where they stand, now if they are for (waterowners ) then I cannot contribute to their organization anymore. Thats me I am not a big $$$$ contributor but there are my friends who get the tables every year that are. Now if your family owns land and you pay taxes on it so be it. I consider land to be private and I dont go on anyones land but I will go in the waterways and no one can stop that.
Reply
Thats the problem in the Basin....nobody that I know is trying to stop anyone from wetting a line...man....enjoy yourself....I just looked at the state waterway and water bottom map...it shows clearly where you can go....and there are tons of places....but ya know what...it does not show any claim whatsoever passed the trees that outline all the bottoms and bayous...commercial fishermen are the reason you can't go everywhere else. The hard part for me is that I have the utmost respect for commercial fishermen....living off the land is a hard job and never any guarantees....but the facts remain the same...private is private....if certain people could learn to respect that...there wouldn't be this many problems
Reply
   hotmama
CHECK OUT THE DISCLAIMER ON YHE STATE LAND MAP.IF LCPA GIVES UP THE FIGHT YOUR FISHING OUT THERE IS OVER. THATS WHAT HAPPENED ALONG THE COAST,PUBLIC AREAS ARE BEING CLAIMED ALL OVER OUT THERE. CHECK YOUR FACTS.
STILL FLOATING .....
HOTMOMMA

Reply
   up-a-tree
First off....Why is it that everytime I go to check on this post I have to search through 10 pages of old stuff to find it????....I guess somebody don't like what's being said....A-S1111...I read your lastest post about commerical fisherman & you say you have the upmost respect for them & your first post basically say's they are a piece of cr@p that care only about themselves.....What gives???
Reply
   Redbuck
I can understand people gitting pissed about someone hunting over a flooded place. But as for as !FISHING! is concerned if the boat can float, it is legal even though some judges have "made it illegal". I'm one who will fish where ever I can float my boat. I will not step foot on land or hunt that water covered area. But those fish in that flooded water are the publics not the land owners. If your a land owner levee it in or make a youself a pound that can't be bother by flowing water.

GREED.

THIS IS THE ONLY STATE THAT HAS THIS PROBLEM.
Reply
The "Land Owner" owns the land under the water, they do not own the "Public's" water on top of it, they say it themselves "Land Owner" enough said. When there is no place to fish then who needs the CCA.
Reply
   sdoucet
So when I'm hunting on my lease that I pay for and joe numb nuts comes on my lease and is fishing next to my duck pond and behind the trees on the edge of my pond where I can't see. Or hear him to know that he's there, and I shoot at a duck and kill or hurt them who is responsible? Should it be the state that passed this law? Should it be the company I pay for this lease to hunt? Why should it be me when I leave this land to hunt just for me and no one else should be on it!
All I know is that in the area that I live in, there will be a lot of gun shot that are fired, and I'm not blowing it out of proportion either it's gunna be a blood bath!
So any lawyer/law school person that may have commented on this can you please clear the air on this?
Reply