CCA lets us down again

[noodle creek]

Originally Posted by "W"

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

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.

[schol]

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 !!

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

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by Ranger

Bill has ZERO to do with land.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

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

[eman]

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.

[DaPointIsDaBomb]

Originally Posted by eman

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.

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

[eman]

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

[redaddiction]

Originally Posted by eman

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

[jopete]

I love the gate we have across our deer lease canal. it keeps the idiots out of there so I can enjoy the land I lease without seeing a bunch of sqatters and litterbugs. if you were seeing this through my eyes you would agree.

it must suck to have the poors. lol

[Feesherman]

Originally Posted by jopete

I love the gate we have across our deer lease canal. it keeps the idiots out of there so I can enjoy the land I lease without seeing a bunch of sqatters and litterbugs. if you were seeing this through my eyes you would agree.

it must suck to have the poors. lol

Ain't you got guns to be builted in the dust bowl of Texas?

["W"]

So explain how this works in 49 other states and don?t in La ?

It will be a free for all
Free to float any tidal state owned waters .

If it has a influx of tidal water it will be subject for anyone to fish .


And I can navigate all day with my Trolling
Motor while fishing

This bill is not about fishing or hunting
It?s about using our own state waters

It?s simple
If you don?t want anyone on your so called lease., marsh etc
Use your own money and levee it off ...

Make it with our state owned waters

Again .... this movement has shook the Capitol
If they were not worried or scared why did they hold a mid night meeting trying to get bill to go back to another committee vote ?

Land owners had 21 people show up to oppose It
There was hundreds for it , from high school kids to 90 year old fisherman who spoke for his grand children !

The senators are listening !!
I promise


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by "W"

So explain how this works in 49 other states and don?t in La ?

It will be a free for all
Free to float any tidal state owned waters .

If it has a influx of tidal water it will be subject for anyone to fish .


And I can navigate all day with my Trolling
Motor while fishing

This bill is not about fishing or hunting
It?s about using our own state waters

It?s simple
If you don?t want anyone on your so called lease., marsh etc
Use your own money and levee it off ...

Make it with our state owned waters

Again .... this movement has shook the Capitol
If they were not worried or scared why did they hold a mid night meeting trying to get bill to go back to another committee vote ?

Land owners had 21 people show up to oppose It
There was hundreds for it , from high school kids to 90 year old fisherman who spoke for his grand children !

The senators are listening !!
I promise


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are some legitimate gripes out there. I know of 100% natural bayous that have been gated off (which is illegal btw), but what most people that are for this bill want is to be able to fish ALL waters that you can float a boat in, regardless of who owns the water bottoms. If that's what this bill is intending to do, it needs to be clearly written in there that you can FISH these waters. Not just NAVIGATE.

And just because a bunch of passionate people show up to show support doesnt mean it's right. There are marches on DC every single day with people passionate about being able to use whichever bathroom they want or wanting to marry their cousin or dog. Or passionate kids in Florida marching about gun control.

I agree with someone above saying this is like a bunch of Democrats trying to steal from someone with something and give it to someone else without compensation.

The bill AS WRITTEN is junk and opens up a huge pandoras box

[Top Dawg]

Kinda like the burns. Using tax payer money to levee/unlevee their marsh and charging people for a permit to pay for the quiptment and work we already paid for lol.

["W"]

Going to House Vote Tues 4/17



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AceArcher]

I don’t know that it means anything, or will do any good. But this bill seems to be the only thing being done to maintain some access rights to public waters in the marsh. The reality that there have been completely natural marsh systems where access has been lost, because access is being run thru navigable waterways running thru someone’s personal land....and there’s a legal loophole allowing it don’t make it right.

I’m glad to hear that there have been amendments to the bill, that address the current lease system. But it seems like so many other things needs to be addressed before this “feel good” Bill is or isn’t enacted.

Does anyone know is there a real concerted effort to a stage where it becomes workable for more affected? Or is this the best that the state of Louisiana can come up with? Yeah I know we are not exactly known for our sensible and trustable politicians. ��

["W"]

Originally Posted by AceArcher

I don?t know that it means anything, or will do any good. But this bill seems to be the only thing being done to maintain some access rights to public waters in the marsh. The reality that there have been completely natural marsh systems where access has been lost, because access is being run thru navigable waterways running thru someone?s personal land....and there?s a legal loophole allowing it don?t make it right.

I?m glad to hear that there have been amendments to the bill, that address the current lease system. But it seems like so many other things needs to be addressed before this ?feel good? Bill is or isn?t enacted.

Does anyone know is there a real concerted effort to a stage where it becomes workable for more affected? Or is this the best that the state of Louisiana can come up with? Yeah I know we are not exactly known for our sensible and trustable politicians. ��

My outlook is this
Something is better than nothing .
We are the only state that can call running water private due to an imagery line.

With the added amendments to this bill it is right on pace to work for everyone .
The duck hunters will get there privacy during duck season .
Land owners can keep collecting there 100k a year marsh leases .
And state can collect on permits by the land owners.
Win /Win for everyone !!

Make Louisiana sportsman Paridise Great Again !!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[redaddiction]

Originally Posted by "W"

My outlook is this
Something is better than nothing .
We are the only state that can call running water private due to an imagery line.

With the added amendments to this bill it is right on pace to work for everyone .
The duck hunters will get there privacy during duck season .
Land owners can keep collecting there 100k a year marsh leases .
And state can collect on permits by the land owners.
Win /Win for everyone !!

Make Louisiana sportsman Paridise Great Again !!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Except you can?t stop and fish those waters. Only navigate through them. What part of the wording of the bill don?t y?all understand? This is NOT a win for fishermen. This is going to be a cluster once this passes. Gonna be nothing but fights on the water with those (security guards) who patrol for the big oil companies and land owners. You know, the ones who run fishermen off and call the sheriff dept on them.

Both sides are gonna be interpreting the law their own way. That?s why we need SPECIFIC wording in the bill. It does not have it. Our politicians arent going to do it. They want to be liked by both sides. (Please resume your normal Louisiana politics)

["W"]

Originally Posted by redaddiction

Except you can?t stop and fish those waters. Only navigate through them. What part of the wording of the bill don?t y?all understand? This is NOT a win for fishermen. This is going to be a cluster once this passes. Gonna be nothing but fights on the water with those (security guards) who patrol for the big oil companies and land owners. You know, the ones who run fishermen off and call the sheriff dept on them.



Both sides are gonna be interpreting the law their own way. That?s why we need SPECIFIC wording in the bill. It does not have it. Our politicians arent going to do it. They want to be liked by both sides. (Please resume your normal Louisiana politics)

Navigate is fishing ... I navigate reefs all the time
Once this bill passes you will not get a fine or ticket for trespassing
Hell the ?patrol ? can wraps donuts around you all day long also ..
I know 3 guides with trespassing tickets right now in Cameron Parish
For fishing our tidal waters



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[redaddiction]

Originally Posted by "W"

Navigate is fishing ... I navigate reefs all the time
Once this bill passes you will not get a fine or ticket for trespassing
Hell the ?patrol ? can wraps donuts around you all day long also ..
I know 3 guides with trespassing tickets right now in Cameron Parish
For fishing our tidal waters



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I totally agree with you. But we?re talkinng about stupid Louisiana here.

["W"]

Nothing in Texas laws talk about fishing but they fish it 365 24/7



Q: What is considered a public stream?
A: In Texas a stream is public if it is "navigable in fact,"or" navigable by statute." There is no precise test for whether a stream is navigable in fact. The term is based on the idea of public utility. One court has observed that "[w]aters, which in their natural state are useful to the public for a considerable portion of the year are navigable."1

A stream is navigable by statute if it retains an average width of 30 feet from the mouth up.2 It is important to understand that the entire stream bed is to be included in the width, not just the area covered by water on a given day. A navigable stream may be dry part of the year, but does not lose its character as a navigable stream.

To complicate matters, some Texas land titles originated with Spanish or Mexican land grants, and the law of Spain and Mexico did not distinguish public and private streams on the basis of navigability. Streams were valued primarily as a source of water for household use and for irrigation, rather than a way to move people and goods. So when the sovereign granted land, perennial streams were retained for public use, regardless of navigability, so as to make as much land as possible capable of settlement.3 A stream is perennial if it flows most or all of the year. In determining the rights of holders of title under Mexican grants, the laws of Mexico in effect when the grants were made control.4 So in counties that contain Spanish or Mexican land grants, there are an unknown number of perennial streams which are public streams, even though they may not be navigable.

A: The Texas Supreme Court has stated that the bed of a stream is "that portion of its soil which is alternately covered and left bare as there may be an increase or diminution in the supply of water, and which is adequate to contain it at its average and mean stage during an entire year, without reference to the extra freshets of the winter or spring or the extreme drouths of the summer or autumn.5" Not clear? Again, the Texas Supreme Court: The streambed is that land between the "gradient boundary" on each bank. The gradient boundary is defined as "a gradient of the flowing water in the stream, and is located midway between the lower level of the flowing water that just reaches the cut bank and the higher level of it that just does not overtop the cut bank.6" Clear as mud? Blame it on those civil judges.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

["W"]

Well you are right about that
But as long as I cant get a ticket for floating over it
I?m good ....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk