Arrested for fishing part of sabine river???

[Hydro]

Good luck and keep us posted !!!

Hydro

[regsterdcoonass]

lol go and find out for yourself. youd see why.

[Red Devil]

Originally Posted by regsterdcoonass

lol go and find out for yourself. youd see why.

I'm guessing it looks like a bass anglers DREAM. If this is true, I would say that it looks that way because it is private. If that was a public waterway, this conversation wouldn't be taking place. Just my opinion.

[jchief]

This battle has been fought and lost on the east side of the state. There was a huge push to get CCA involved and they would not. Not knockin CCA, just stating fact.

Do some research on the net.

[BigMamou12]

Dont give up Mike. Screwem all!!!!

Your caring and loving cousin,
Jamie





---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?eilnf5

[jchief]

http://restoreourwateraccess.com/

[jchief]

http://www.nationalrivers.org/states/la-law.htm

specific to rivers

[BigMamou12]

Damn Mike I didnt think Sulphur had that good of an education


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?4trjfr

[regsterdcoonass]

my point exactly jchief. if you read the la state laws, access is permited. if you read the FEDERAL laws access is permited. in other words they can do nothing. ive been to those and numerous other sites, including the attorney generals website. and found nothing stoping me from going to that lake.

[Duck Butter]

Similar case happened on MS River on Gassoway Lake. This was an oxbow lake cutoff from the main river until the water was up high enough to get into it. People were arrested for fishing it. Long story short, the judge ruled that even though the water was navigable, the land underneath was private and the only thing that was allowable was navigation (no hunting no fishing). The law of navigable waterways does NOT include hunting/fishing rights, the land is still privately owned. However, the regulations were put there to allow fishermen to moor and hang nets to dry from these areas but not hunt/fish.

This may be a similar case to yours, but not sure. IF the pond was private and then connected to the main river, its still private

I understand your frustration, believe me, but they are likely in the right here, just as many (not all) of the landowners in SE LA. People think that because the place is open water, that they should be able to fish/hunt there, and I was once in this camp. However, since the land is subsiding so much, what was land is now underwater, their land is still there, so technically they own it. If the state just 'took' all that land and made it public, then for some godly act the land reappeared, the landowner just lost his land. I understand both sides, I was mad at CCA, but then I realized that they were probably not going to win the fight and need to focus on coastal conservation and fixing the problem of land disappearing

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

Similar case happened on MS River on Gassoway Lake. This was an oxbow lake cutoff from the main river until the water was up high enough to get into it. People were arrested for fishing it. Long story short, the judge ruled that even though the water was navigable, the land underneath was private and the only thing that was allowable was navigation (no hunting no fishing). The law of navigable waterways does NOT include hunting/fishing rights, the land is still privately owned. However, the regulations were put there to allow fishermen to moor and hang nets to dry from these areas but not hunt/fish.

This may be a similar case to yours, but not sure. IF the pond was private and then connected to the main river, its still private

I understand your frustration, believe me, but they are likely in the right here, just as many (not all) of the landowners in SE LA. People think that because the place is open water, that they should be able to fish/hunt there, and I was once in this camp. However, since the land is subsiding so much, what was land is now underwater, their land is still there, so technically they own it. If the state just 'took' all that land and made it public, then for some godly act the land reappeared, the landowner just lost his land. I understand both sides, I was mad at CCA, but then I realized that they were probably not going to win the fight and need to focus on coastal conservation and fixing the problem of land disappearing

Let me add to this

Lets put ourselves in their shoes. Lets say you own a house and 1 acre near the Sabine River. If the Sabine comes up in December/January and floods your land would you allow people to duck hunt there? I think not, even though its navigable water. We have to look on both sides of the issue. This is private property, and we often let our emotions get in the way of logic. I see where someone posted this very message on lasportsman, I am assuming it was you, and a representative from the Marsh Club gave the answers to all the questions. There are 2 sides to every story, and the truth is in there somewhere