Att kayak fishermen

[duckman1911]

IMO if a person owns a piece of property they should have equal ownership of it whether its dry land or flooded land. Its their property even if its flooded by the tide.

[keakar]

Originally Posted by duckman1911

IMO if a person owns a piece of property they should have equal ownership of it whether its dry land or flooded land. Its their property even if its flooded by the tide.

I would agree as long as what they are blocking off is not naturally created tidal canals and its not state owned (which is public owned) leases that are blocking off access to natural public fishing grounds used for years that has only recently decided to be leased out.

public waters should not be reinvented as private canals just because a lease is signed for the LAND

in this case I don't think there is any question its all privately owned land that is nothing but tidal flats and washed out marsh so its not like they are closing public access areas even though it has become a popular area for small craft fishing to use.

im my opinion it cant be private and restricted unless it has been barricaded and gated to prevent public access or accidental egress.

the argument that they don't have to post it or put up barricades is bogus and got through the courts only because they paid people off to get the ruling but you cannot in any reasonable means of common sense, expect someone to know where a restricted boundary is or isn't unless its clearly marked or blocked off.

[duckman1911]

Originally Posted by keakar

I would agree as long as what they are blocking off is not naturally created tidal canals and its not state owned (which is public owned) leases that are blocking off access to natural public fishing grounds used for years that has only recently decided to be leased out.

public waters should not be reinvented as private canals just because a lease is signed for the LAND

in this case I don't think there is any question its all privately owned land that is nothing but tidal flats and washed out marsh so its not like they are closing public access areas even though it has become a popular area for small craft fishing to use.

im my opinion it cant be private and restricted unless it has been barricaded and gated to prevent public access or accidental egress.

the argument that they don't have to post it or put up barricades is bogus and got through the courts only because they paid people off to get the ruling but you cannot in any reasonable means of common sense, expect someone to know where a restricted boundary is or isn't unless its clearly marked or blocked off.

I agree.
If a piece of private land blocks access to public land there should be a way of passage to the public land. If said passage has to go through private property I think the owner should be able to deny fishing until the fisher has reached the public land.