CCA lets us down again
 

CCA refuses to back or support HB391
Which would allow all anglers to fish any tidal and navigable waters .

CCA is funded and paid off by land owners and oil companies to be keep in check over this !

CCA again will take money over anglers !!!

B.A.S.S. Is 100% behind this bill and supports it along with HTRedfish Series etc.
Sad when our own CCA of Louisiana turns its back to the fisherman of Louisiana yet 1 more time !!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yep it's a cop out ....They don't want to make landowners mad and don't want to make public mad so lets just study it to death....Its open and shut . Either allow access or deny it . And the part about grandfathering in those who already have canals blocked is the stupidest $&!* I ever saw.... La. politics at its best....It really makes no difference in southeast La. In a few more years it will be all open water anyway...

CCA just wants to give time to there big $$$ guys
So they can keep putting up gates and levees



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What makes it even worse is that the Louisiana Sportsman Coalition (have been in the front lines battling this from the beginning) contacted the CCA and asked them to back this two years ago and CCA said they were staying neutral. So now that it is an actual Bill to open all tidal waters they step up and say we need a ?special task force? to look at this. Just trying to get it pushed back and removed so this problem won?t get resolved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand if someone wanted to build a duck blind and make it permanent, but what will hurt if you chase a fish that can move day to day? It seems a little too much. Make it legit only if they put a fence up....lol

many of the Louisiana Landowner Association members are affiliated with CCA. Easy to see what side CCA would take.

yet another reason why CCA will never get a dime from me

Fishing those waters don?t hurt the land owners one bit. I can understand liability issues being a concern. But just put that in the law that you can?t sue if hurt in the boundaries of non state owned waters.

We all need to rally behind this bill. There are a lot of tidal waters that are posted and I will be able to duck hunt there now.

This is a real hot potato and I can see both sides of the issue. For instance, we had a lease near Wax Lake for 30 years and when the duck hunting cratered, we began deer hunting in the woods bordering a "bayou/ditch" that was on our lease. Sometimes, we would be sitting in our stands and see bass fisherman as they trolled by. We always feared that a deer would come out between our stand and the bayou and someone would shoot and possibly hit a fisherman. We often talked to them to warn them, but it had no effect. And although we were leasing the land, they felt that the water was navigable, which it was, and therefore okay to fish. Sure seems like some compromise could be negotiated, i.e. no fishing during hunting season or at least delay any fishing until 10 a.m. or something. Just saying.

Wait if I can fish in there, why can't I duck hunt?

the CCA task force is a delay tactic... as everyone states they were asked to get involved in the beginning and the decided to stay neutral. creating a task force will create delays, so that begs the question, whos side are they on? doesnt seem to be the fishermen.

As for the hot potato lease, you lease hunting rights, do you lease the fishing rights as well?. The "what would happen" scenario mentioned above, hunters safety courses teach you should not shoot high powered rounds over water.

I often think about this when fishing in the marsh and see deer stands.

Exactly, and therein is the conundrum.

And you should think about it.

The area I am talking about is Shark Bayou, Vermilion Bay. This area is, on the "map" a "disputed area" meaning the state and property owners claim rights to.

This is a notorious "public" area. So to all of you that think this is going on around the state but doesn't affect me, well...think again. We need you involved!

I have looked at maps and going back to when Louisiana became a state...I don't remember the year. Shark bayou was mapped out, just not named. According to the law, that means it is public waters.

If you are familiar with V bay, you know the area I am talking about. I have fished there for many years and refrained from going way back until late morning during deer season out of respect. I have seen some nice deer there while fishing, and I have talked to many hunters going in and coming out. Never had a problem, no one has ever said "you cant be here."

This seems to go to extremes in other parts of the state. I have read reports of people threatening fishermen with guns in open bays, etc. Or sheriffs deputies writing trespassing tickets for being on private lands.

I mentioned the Public Trust Doctrine in Louisiana, which clearly sides with fishermen and have been dismissed. The law written specifically for flood waters in river basins, and has been applied to tidal waters and, because of the wealthy, gained favor in the eyes of the judicial system would you expect anything less for Louisiana? $h!t, every coastal state recognizes tidal waters as public waters except for the "Sportsmans Paraidise". This law was never intended for tidal waters, but, yet here we are!

Jezz...rant over...I return you to your regularly scheduled programming...

here is the link to the land trust Doctrine.
https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/c...context=lalrev

Claiming tidal waters as private is same as claiming air space above my house

You can?t own water unless it?s pond or levee off surrounded by land

Tidal water is as free as air is


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Be hard to hunt in a floating boat
You can?t attached it to land
Which means no anchor , your decoys can?t touch bottom etc

So if you can duck hunt without being stopped have at it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Committee members in case you would like to call them:

Raymond Garofalo (Chair)....504 277 4729
Randal Gaines (Vice Chair)....985 652 1228
Taylor Barras....337 373 4051
Robby Carter....985 748 2245
Raymond Crews....318 716 7532
Gregory Cromer....985 645 3592
Julie Emerson....337 886 4687
Sam Jenkins....318 632 5970
Walt Leger III....504 556 9970
Tanner Magee....985 858 2970
Gregory Miller....985 764 9991

Just maybe in the wording in the "Bill" "Does NOT" Or isn't fair to all fishermen. IE.. If your Gates are Up you are grandfathered in, and U don't have to take them down... May BE the "Bill" NEEDS some revisions..

Well if its a "good bill for All" then all the Representatives and Senators will vote it to pass??? End of STORY...

The bill has good intentions but is absolute junk. You still arent going to be able to fish or hunt these tidal waters. The only word mentioned is "access". Its not well thought out and addresses hardly anything. Needs reworking big time

I wish it allowed us to fish and hunt all tidal waters, but it doesnt. CCA did good not siding with this bill.

Sorry but that is the truth.

HB 391 Original 2018 Regular Session Pearson
Abstract: Provides for the public navigation of running waters, including those running waters passing over any privately owned water bottom directly connected to a state-owned waterbottom that is subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
http://www.legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDo...aspx?d=1071594


Sorry guys, aint no new fishing grounds going to open up with this bill. You can drive through it, but dont stop to fish

Proposed law provides that no person may prohibit the public navigation of running waters which
are navigable by a motorboat required to be registered or numbered pursuant to the laws of this state
or the U.S., except where navigation has been prevented or impeded by an obstacle constructed by
the landowner prior to March 2, 2018.

No old gates coming down, if its gated up, still going to be gated up

Maybe I navigate with a trolling motor. As long as my boat is moving I'm navigating. And while I'm navigating I can surely fish for our public resource.

Did any of u know or care about your hunting and fishing license in going up? Does anyone of you know your saltwater license is going up to $13.50... But get this.. For $13.50 you can also tong for oysters and troll for shrimp... don?t know about u all... But adding tonging and trolling to my saltwater license is a little cra cra... I?m totally against this license fee increase on that alone... I?m all for helping to get more money to WLF to help run the department...

I think my biggest question is why do all landowners ( mostly oil companies) not want people fishing the waters on their land? What does it hurt? If its about liability then that can be addressed in simple legislation. Couldn?t it? Meaning ?fish at your own risk?.

We tear stuff up and trash places down here unfortunately. Go to a public launch or public fishing spot and look at the trash that people leave behind.

Also liability. People are sue happy. Every other billboard in Louisiana is a lawyer advertisment

its sad, but it is what it is

Saltwater already $13.50, but freshwater will be giong up
http://www.wlf.louisiana.gov/PriceofParadise

Even with all the increases, we will still be the cheapest licenses of any of our neighboring states. Its been a long time coming, dont see anything wrong with it

I agree with you, but unless wording is put in there for fishing, its a dead duck

Ol boy in NE LA already set the precedent. MS River came up several years ago and you could boat into Gassoway Lake (private landlocked lake full of big fish near the MS River). Guy went in there fishing and got arrested several times claiming it navigable waters and the Public Trust Doctrine. Judge said navigable doesn't mean you can fish it. The rules were put there in place for people traveling up and down the river way back when. They were allowed to tie up and dry their nets, but fishing over private water bottoms was never specified.

Something needs to change for sure, and this movement is needed, but this bill is not addressing what needs addressing.

I totally agree with Duck Butter Bill 391 has wording in that does not help us, fishermen, to have access to fish private canals.. Period...

Man, expect nothing less from good ole Louisiana. Duck Butter is correct, this law was created for flooded river basins, not tidal areas.

My guess is that they are trying to slip this bill in without anyone reading it.

I'm not a land owner, but I don't know as I agree with this for several reasons. I want a legitimate answer to these questions if you decide to respond.

What is the definition of tidal or navigable water?

Why should land owners pay taxes on property that is only accessible by a canal or mud boat trail that they paid to have dug, through LAND, on their property, and why should the general public all of a sudden be allowed access to that?

Natural bayous and rivers that have been around forever are one thing, and I understand that, but pieces of marsh that have land-locked ponds are another thing. Just because someone may want to access their property through means of digging their own trails should not mean the general public can access them as well.

Fishing is one thing, and I'm not so worried about it. Duck hunting is a whole other issue. I think this bill deals mostly with fishing rights, but there is going to be tons of people who think they can go duck hunt any marsh they want now, IF this bill passes. If I buy a piece of property and build a driveway onto it off of a major highway, that doesn't mean the general public can have free use of my land. This should be no different with marshes.

This is going to lead to a lot of chaos, and I think it will only hurt the public. Landowners, and I would too, are going to levee off and build weirs/put up gates to their properties.

If all marsh land is free to use as pleased by the public, then there is absolutely zero value on marsh property. Why buy it when you can do as you please for free?

Bill has ZERO to do with land.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

You shouldn?t have access to fish ?private? canals, period. Especially, as Noodle said, if it was dug to get through a landowner?s marsh. How is that even a thought? Cause the fish are ?public?? C?mon man. The marsh I hunt/fish in is privately owned. I?m fortunate to have a lease in there. Our neighboring marsh is owned by an individual that bought this chunk a few years back, and people around here know of how good the fishing is in there. Well, he put a gate up. Do I blame him? No! He owns this stuff. It?s going to pose problems in the future. Hell, it does now!

Let's say I propose a similar bill with land. Two public WMAs are on either side of some private land. Let's say it's your land. Private land smack dab in middle A pipeline company puts s pipeline in the middle of your land and it
goes through both WMAs.

You gonna let the public ride down that pipeline to get to the WMA?

You gonna let them deer hunt the pipeline? After all, it's a public resource

Or are you gonna put up a big gate at each access point

When/If that time comes we can have that discussion. THIS BILL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LAND.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Try and fence in said property and see what WLF does with their deer on your property. If you want to gate off your marsh then have at it. Just require that the gate doesn't allow fish to travel from public waters onto/from your property. Just like a game fence.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

It absolutely does. People dig on their LAND in order to access pices of their own marsh. In cases like this, that water where they dug is only there because they dug a canal or trailer on their property, that at one point was land.

Lets go further. Do you believe that is tidal or navigable too, even thouhh it is not a natural waterway? I'm guessing you will answer yes.

Then gate it off so my fish(public) can't go on your property.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

If water ebbs and flows with the tide it is tidal. If you dig a canal on your land and connect it to tidal waters ,it becomes a tidal waterway.
I have been fighting this battle for many years and yesterday at the capitol we got a bill passed through committee that is amended to say that you can not touch any land including the water bottoms you can not destroy or damage any vegetation . You can not damage the banks of anyones property. And the posted areas will be closed during waterfowl season. we understood the people that pay for leases to hunt didn't want anyone pulling up into there pond while they are in the blind. Like i said this fight has been going on for years and really gained traction in the last 18 months. For those that complain about the bill: I didn't see you at the capital lobbying the legislatures, i never heard from you in any discussion with Lasc. This bill was not filed by Lasc matter of fact we didn't even know about it until it was filed. The original bill had nothing in it for duck hunters or land owners . It was we want tidal waters open ,all of it all the time. Lasc discussed this for a few weeks on line and on FB with anyone that had an opinion and then sat down with the author and sponsor of the bill to make amendments to give some relief to the duck hunters and lessee. Is it Perfect ? Hell No . But it's what we have to work with. will it make it all the way through ? who knows . but i have been spending Hours upon Hours every day working towards this and i'm not going to stop now.

I don't own any land, but IF this thing passes, you better believe gates will be all over the place.

No they won't. Read the bill. Only gates erected previously with a permit from the Corp will be allowed to remain.


Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Pretty sure there will be ways around it. If not gates, levees, weirs, etc. Most of the big time land owners have plenty of pull, and Louisiana is about as political as it can get.

Has everything to do with what was once land, that's the issue

How can I soak shrimp if I cant touch the bottom. We gonna be topwaters only?

no anchors ,no traps or nets. no tonging ,no power poles fishing lure does not destroy damage the bottom.

I guess I will need multiple banks of batteries run in parallel to keep an ipilot running all day in anchor mode since we can?t use an anchor. LOL

Who?s water are they using to fill up there canal ?
States water
They sure the hell ain?t bringing water hose and 5gall buckets to fill it up
Again had zero to do with land
It?s tidal water only ..

49 other states have zero issues but La seems to have it ..
It?s simple
If Gulf of Mexico waters move it we should be able to fish it
State owns all tidal water

If I?m sitting at Jetties and that same water 5 hours later goes in a marsh it don?t become private.. it?s still tidal waters owned by the state

If land owners don?t want people fishing in marsh
Levee it off and have zero tidal state waters on it
It?s our fish shrimp oysters and crabs not the land owners !!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This bill has added amendments to it already
You need to get the updated version


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No one owns the air or ducks or geese either. Does that mean I can go hunt wherever I want too? Same principle.

I understand that no one owns water, and broken up coastal marsh is one thing. But, there are lots of marshes with only one or two ways in and out, and often times these ways are only there because the landowner dug a canal or trail on their LAND. That should not entitle everyone on earth to go into these marshes and do as they please. Hell, lots of these marshes are dead ends, which makes it tidal but not navigable.

50/50 on it passing, and if it does, I'd be willing to bet there will still be ways to keep people out. I'm not a landowner, and you know I mostly redfish, but I can't sit here and think that because I can get to someones land via way that they created, that I should just be able to go fish it. It's not a natural waterway at that point.

Won't this result in the supply of shrimp and crabs, which feeds our estuary, being cut off? That's what makes me nervous.