What is this crap?
 

Not sure if this has been posted..... :mad:

Is this for real?

US federal judge declares boating illegal in all US navigable waters.

http://www.ibinews.com/ibinews/newsd...23ibinews.html

Re: What is this crap?
 

Some landowners and Marina owners wanted to keep fishermen out of the marinas and hunters out of the marshes as I understand it. The artical makes it sound a lot worse. It is going to a higher court.

Re: What is this crap?
 

some body drop a bomb on this ass hole . :mad:

Re: What is this crap?
 

and louisiana is sportsmans's paridise.... at least that's what the license plates say...

Re: What is this crap?
 

What has Boat US said about this? This means real trouble for EVERY boater.

Re: What is this crap?
 

Something just does not make sense in that article.

Re: What is this crap?
 

I have re-read that article several times and it seems full of conflict or at least, is very confusing to me.
There was a thread on this in another area and someone posted what seems a lot more logical explanation which is that the ruling is that during times that the mississippi river (or other waters) exceeds its "normal" bounds, it is illegal to cross over into what is normally privately owned property.......IOW, if it floods and the water is up to your back deck, a boater cannot use your home for a dock. Of course, entry and exit via normal ramps/etc should still exist and since you most likely would not be trespassing, you could still have water access.
This explanation makes sense to me but I am not sure how you go from that to what the article is trying to say. I am not familiar with the IBI.....their reporting appears to be intentionally misleading or just poorly worded or researched.
My opinion.....I could be wrong.

Re: What is this crap?
 

In the article below, a federal judge has made a ruling in a case from LA that will rock public duck hunting and fishing if it survives the Appeals Court. Please notice the distinction between marked river channels and high water mark.

Issue Date: 9/13/2006, Posted On: 9/13/2006

Court ruling makes boating illegal in much of U.S.

The Marine Retailers Association of America is alerting its dealer members to a court ruling that some say could have serious consequences for boating.

Judge Robert G. James of the U.S. District Court, Western Division of Louisiana, has declared it is a criminal trespass for the public to boat, fish or hunt on the Mississippi River and other navigable waters of the country.

"Even though this action seems like a horrible pre-April Fools’ joke, it is very serious," said MRAA president Phil Keeter, in a statement. "Because essentially all the waters and waterways of our country are considered navigable in the U.S. law, this ruling declares recreational boating, water skiing, fishing, waterfowl hunting and fishing tournaments – except if conducted in a navigable shipping channel — to be illegal and the public subject to jail sentences for recreating with their families."

In addition, the judge held that federal law grants exclusive and private control over the waters of the river, outside the main shipping channel, to riparian landowners. The shallows of the navigable waters are no longer open to the public, the MRAA reports, adding, “Boating has now become illegal in most of our country.”

In the Aug. 29 decision, Judge James rejected the findings of the magistrate judge who found earlier that the public had the right under federal law and Louisiana law to navigate, boat, fish and hunt on the waters of the Mississippi River up the normal high-water line of the river.

In that ruling, MRAA says Magistrate Judge James Kirk relied on long-established federal principles of navigation entitling "the public to the reasonable use of navigable waters for all legitimate purposes of travel or transportation, for boating, sailing for pleasure, as well as for carrying persons or property for hire, and in any kind of watercraft, the use of which is consistent with others also enjoying the right possessed in common."

"MRAA is working with the Coast Guard, state boating law administrators, and NMMA ... to fight this onerous ruling," said MRAA chairman Glenn Mazzella, in a statement.

Source: Soundings Trade Only Today - The Boating Business Newspaper Online

Re: What is this crap?
 

What does tee4texas think of this??? :rolleyes:

Re: What is this crap?
 

LOL

Re: What is this crap?
 

Well, considering the following statistics, good luck in enforcing this one! Talk about a revolution against the Government!

U.S. BOAT REGISTRATIONS INCREASE 94,000 IN 2001

Michigan remains top state for boating

CHICAGO, December 18, 2002 - - There were 12.9 million recreational boats registered in the United States in 2001 according to the U.S. Coast Guard. This represents an increase of 94,000, or 0.7 percent from the previous year. National Marine Manufacturers Association (NMMA) estimates indicate that 541,000 new boats were sold at retail in 2001, and that there are nearly 17 million boats owned across the U.S.

There are many small, non-powered craft that are not required to be registered by the states or simply not registered by owners, which includes large categories such as canoes (121,000 in 2001) and utility boats (approximately 49,000 in 2001). This accounts for most of the disparity between the USCG reported registration figure and NMMA's estimate on the number of owned boats.

State Rankings

The top 20 states for registered boats recorded almost 75 percent of the total amount in the entire country, accounting for 9.6 million boats. The top ten states for boat registrations account for 51 percent of registered boats at 6.6 million. Michigan retains its title as the number one boating state in the country, with more than 1,000,000 recreational boats registered in 2001. Virginia rounds out the top 20, reclaiming its position after falling to 21st in 2000. The only other change in the top 20 is Tennessee, falling two spaces to number 19, which moves Alabama and Washington up to 17 and 18, respectively.

Here's a look at the remainder of the top 20 states and the total number of boats registered in each:

1. Michigan 1,003,947

2. California 957,463

3. Florida 902,964

4. Minnesota 826,048

5. Texas 621,244

6. Wisconsin 575,920

7. New York 526,190

8. Ohio 414,658

9. South Carolina 382,072

10. Illinois 369,626

11. Pennsylvania 359,525

12. North Carolina 353,560

13. Missouri 335,521

14. Georgia 327,026

15. Louisiana 322,779

16. Mississippi 300,970

17. Alabama 262,016

18. Washington 260,335

19. Tennessee 256,670

20. Virginia 240,509

Re: What is this crap?
 

I'm impressed - finally someone asking for my opinion on something........glad to see my words are finally sinking in. :cool:

Panther - Well, I probably dont understand it well enough and havent researchd it enough to legitimately comment but I would have to say that if twinverados comments are correct, I would say its a bad interpretation of what must really be the story........same as MikeFever - surely there is more to the story than whats in that article. Think about it - all navigable waters off limits? Surely you jest.

Judges for the most part just interpret law and the way many of our state and fed laws are written and conflict, there are often many interpretations of the same law......similar to the Bible in many aspects - take a stand on something and you can find something somewhere to support it - likewise, many judges stay on the bench well after their prime and only after a few outlandish rulings do they get put into a position where they cant have much impact. I would like to see the legal basis (statutes, etc.) that the judge is using to make that determination - then it might be clearer as to how he arrived at this answer.

Panther - BuBoy - now that I gave my opinion, what do you think of this ruling - is it reasonable - any chance this could be correct - any chance this could be legislated?

Re: What is this crap?
 

This actually hurts.........you want strong representation in all states for any federal law setting.....luckily, most of these laws will be at the state and local levels where boaters can have more influence. Those numbers look strong until you put them in perspetive - multiply them by 3 and that is probably the boating public. Now compare that number to the US population as a percentage.

Ouch.

Re: What is this crap?
 

Just curious how sales tax breaks down per state....? Michigan has been the leaders for awile. but still has the shortest boating season.....

Re: What is this crap?
 

Don't flatter yourself, at least 95% of the people here think that you're a phucking retard. Don't think for a minute that anyone believes that you've never been here before with a different screen name.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Re: What is this crap?
 

Good point tomtbone.............legislators definitely feel the heat from locale and state levels when you talk about loss of sales taxes, registration fees, recreational monies, etc, etc. I would say boating overall definitely carries more clout in total absolute dollars spent than some other sports such as drag racing. Part of our problem is that we dont have a common lobbying organization such as the NHRA, NASCAR, SCCA, etc, etc.........at least one I am not aware of.

Re: What is this crap?
 

Actually this number looks strong, "NumberPeople participating in recreational boating 74,847,000" and there is NO WAY the Government is going to be able to take boating away from 74 million people

NumberPeople participating in recreational boating 74,847,000
Water skiers10,314,000
All Boats in use16,824,000
Outboard boats owned8,300,000
Inboard boats owned1,609,000
Sterndrive boats owned1,673,000
Personal watercraft1,100,000
Sailboats owned1,669,000
Miscellaneous craft owned (canoes, rowboats, dinghies, and other craft registered by the states)949,000
Other (estimated canoes, rowboats, etc. not registered by the states)1,524,000
Marinas, Boatyards, Yacht Clubs, Dockominiums, Parks and other10,320

1998 Boaters and Boats in the United States:Population EstimatesSource: “Boating 1998” prepared by the National MarineManufacturers Association, Chicago, ILThe “in-use” figures are based on actual state and Coast Guardregistrations and estimates of non-registered boats.

Re: What is this crap?
 

Playn - good research. If 74m is the boating public, then that makes 25% of the total US population boaters which is pretty impressive. That number surprises me but thats what the math says.

To expound on what t-tom said, imagine then the economic value of boating to the US. I, too, think its a hard row to hoe to make boating illegal.........that is why as I said above, I dont believe the article has all the facts or the judge is developing some artery blockage. This would be akin to outlawing hamburgers.

My point on the number of states has to do with federal law and the respective electoral college. Obviously, many states with significant impact is usually (not always) better than a few states with overwhelming impact. However, most boating decisions are made on local and state levels.

Re: What is this crap?
 

RonS and I tried to explain that the "ebb and flood" rule of the New Jersey Supreme Court might be important as an explanation for this news. Lets say we would have both enjoyed it if you had joined in in our posting, although we are not paying members:

http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/s...d.php?t=140601

Lets say this wouldnt have happened if you had named the both threads with appropriate titles and leave extreme titles for funthreads.

Re: What is this crap?
 

Okey, so I will answer myself once again. :rolleyes:

The "ebb and flood" rule literally taken means the shorelines of ebb and flood caused by the gravity of the moon. The space between the normal dayly tidal lines is public. The state is not allowed to sell that space. Above the flood shoreline the state can sell the land and mark that with? Right, landmarks. The watersurface is public too, but not in cases when rain or gulf water pressed by a storm into the estuary... cause an unnormal high flood shoreline above those landmarks that sign the privat property. RonS explained that already.
The next court will pobably point that out. The watersurface underneath the dayly flood shoreline must stay public till the first landmarks, according to the supreme court (or digital landmarks of privat property in the topographic... landmaps...). If a judge tries to change that one is allowed to start legal acts against that.

A landowner is allowed to let water flood his privat property above the tidal flood shoreline, is allowed to build piers on his property and call this a privat marina. In this case the marina is a waterbank which is not according to the former tidal flood shoreline but one can not argue that the marina is public property. The piers are only an extension of the former tidal flood shore and manmade, not caused by the gravity of the moon. The owner of the property and the marina is allowed to decide the issues concerning the marina inside of his landmarks.
That might be the whole story, the next court probably decides something like this. The story might end there which means that the story is a bubble rather than a story.

Re: What is this crap?
 

What do I think.....they forgot how Columbus discovered America... :eek: :drink:

Re: What is this crap?
 

Wtf is Columbus???

Re: What is this crap?
 

Is that the name of the judge?? :D

Re: What is this crap?
 

I wrote to BOAT-U.S. to find out their take on this whole issue. I received a quick response from Scott Croft, Assistant Vice President of Public Affairs and he is an Assistant Editor for BoatU.S. Magazine.

Here is the reply:

--------------------------

BoatU.S. Statement on Parm V. Shumate Ruling 8/29/06 US District Court Western District of Louisiana, Monroe Division


A recent decision by a Federal court overturning a lower court finding that a law enforcement officer, Sheriff Mark Shumate of East Carroll Parish Louisiana had probable cause to arrest a fisherman, Mr. Normal Parm, Jr., for trespassing has some recreational boaters concerned.
The property or swale* in question was located in Louisiana below the Mississippi River’s high water mark 3.5 miles from the waterway but connected via a drainage ditch. In his August 29, 2006 ruling Federal U.S. District Court Judge Robert G. James overturned Louisiana state Magistrate Judge James D. Kirk’s previous ruling. James found that the temporarily flooded land in question, owned by Walker Cottonwood Farms and on which Parm was found fishing without permission, was indeed private property and since it is dry most of the year it was not a navigable waterway. Judge James ruled that Sheriff Shumate was within his rights and had probable cause to arrest the trespassing fisherman.
Judge James also found that the fisherman did not have a federal or state common law right to fish or hunt on a navigable water, such as the Mississippi, when those waters periodically flood privately owned lands, even if the lands are below the traditional high water mark. Keep in mind that in many low laying parts of the country, a waterway’s high water mark can be miles from the normal (non-flooded stage) riverbank.
What is lost in the hype of the case is that Judge James agreed with the lower state court that the right to reasonably use navigable waters included “legitimate purposes of travel or transportation, for boating or sailing for pleasure, as well as carrying persons or property for hire.” And Judge James also concurred with the lower state court that privately owned land is subject to public use because it’s a bank of the Mississippi River.
Where Judge James differed from Judge Kirk’s findings, however, was that public use “is limited to activities that are incidental to the navigable character of the Mississippi River and its enjoyment as an avenue of commerce.” Hunting and fishing, specifically, are not activities included as incidental to navigation.
Ironically, previous rulings from Louisiana state courts have also supported Judge James' findings to exclude fishing and hunting from the type of public use permitted on flooded private property because these activities do not “Meet the definition of using the bank of a river at its high water mark for navigational purpose.” That definition from the Louisiana Civil Code of 1870 declares that “Everyone has a right freely to bring his vessels to land there, to make fast the same to trees which are there planted, to unload his vessels, to deposit this goods, to dry his nets, and the like.”
A 1990 Louisiana second circuit ruling found that “fishing and hunting in a boat over flooded private property are not incidental to the navigable character of the stream and its enjoyment as an avenue of commerce.” And as recently as 2004 another ruling found that using the banks along navigable rivers “is limited to navigation and not hunting.”
Much of the concern amongst boaters appears to have come from an August 31, 2006 press release — that was widely picked up by the boating press — issued by the Parm’s attorney, Paul L. Hurd.
In his press release, Hurd wrote that Judge James had, “declared it to be criminal trespassing for the public to boat, fish or hunt on the Mississippi River and other navigable waters of America…This ruling declares recreational boating, fishing tournament, waterfowl hunting, and pleasure boating illegal on navigable rivers, unless conducted in the main channel of the river or with the permission of all riparian landowners along the navigable river…The shallows of navigable waterways are no longer open to the public.”
BoatU.S. disagrees with Hurd’s characterization of the ruling and believes the press release was distributed in an effort to sensationalize the issue and gain funding for the lengthy appeal process. Judge James’ August 29 ruling makes no mention of separating activities that are permissible in the “main channel” or “shallows.”
BoatU.S. believes that Judge James’ ruling confines its focus to temporarily flooded land and does not alter or change boaters’ basic rights of navigation. BoatU.S. also believes that the ruling adequately protected rights of waterfront private property owners, and hopes the continued appeal process seeks successful resolution for all parties.
###

*Swale definitions include: A dry creek acting to divert and direct water runoff after heavy rains; a low-lying or depressed and often wet stretch of land, a ditch on the contour that does not direct water, but holds it and allows it to gradually infiltrate.

Re: What is this crap?
 

That was sarcasm, you dolt. Look at the "roll eyes - sarcastic" symbol next to it. Troll. :rolleyes:
Yeah, we didn't think that would stop you -- never has before. :cool:

Re: What is this crap?
 

My quick interpretation:
Law was written to prevent boater, hunters, fishermen, etc from boating over private property that's flooded. A good idea!

However, it was poorly writen to say you can only boat on the "navigable channel" (between the bouys). A bad idea.

It will be challenged, rewritten, etc and shouldn't be an issue.
It would also be pretty unenforcible as written.
Gary

Court refuses to hear Gassoway Lake appeal
By Johnny Gunter • [email protected] • October 16, 2008



Hurd said the U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 6 refused to hear his clients' challenge to a ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans of public access to waters off the Mississippi River.

Hurd filed the lawsuit on behalf of five recreational fishermen who were arrested by East Carroll Parish Sheriff Mark Shumate for fishing on Gassoway Lake, a popular fishing spot off the river that's only accessible during high water. The original suit was filed in the 6th Judicial District of Louisiana. Retired 4th Judicial District Judge John Joyce heard that case and ruled in favor of the landowners, Walker Cottonwood Farms.

The lawsuit would then eventually be moved to federal court where Judge Robert G. James also ruled in August 2006 in favor of the landowners. Hurd and the group then appealed to the 5th Circuit that further ruled that fishermen and other recreational users only had the right to use the channel of the river.

Fishing groups, more than 50 of them from throughout the U.S., filed briefs supporting the fishermen's lawsuit. The group filed a petition in April seeking a hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Hurd said the public's access to the country's waterways is as old as the nation itself. "The rights that the public had to navigable waters and the rights people had to carry and bear arms were fundamental rights in a new America," Hurd said.

Joyce said he didn't interpret the 5th Circuit ruling as meaning every body of water would be covered. "I think each case would have to be ruled on separately," Joyce said.

Hurd interprets the law as meaning that using any waters beyond a waterway's lowest level (the main channel) would be considered trespassing if the landowner chooses to prosecute.

Sterlington resident Bill Miller, an avid bass fishermen who lives on Bayou Bartholomew, said he never imagined the outcome of the lawsuit would result in changing the face of fishing for everyone in the country.

"The ruling basically says I own the land under the water here on Bartholomew, but I can tell you I'm not going to stop anybody from fishing on it," he said.

His interpretation is that the ruling affects every body of water throughout the country. He said many fishermen have fished the lakes off the Ouachita River during high water times, now that won't happen if the landowners around those bodies "have the law on their side. It's like I've always been told, 'He who has the gold, makes the rules.'"

Court refuses to hear Gassoway Lake appeal
By Johnny Gunter • [email protected] • October 16, 2008

****************************

Monroe attorney Paul Loy Hurd said Wednesday that fishermen and other recreational users of the nation's waterways better stick to the main channels or face the possibility of arrest for trespassing.


Hurd said the U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 6 refused to hear his clients' challenge to a ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans of public access to waters off the Mississippi River.

Hurd filed the lawsuit on behalf of five recreational fishermen who were arrested by East Carroll Parish Sheriff Mark Shumate for fishing on Gassoway Lake, a popular fishing spot off the river that's only accessible during high water. The original suit was filed in the 6th Judicial District of Louisiana. Retired 4th Judicial District Judge John Joyce heard that case and ruled in favor of the landowners, Walker Cottonwood Farms.

The lawsuit would then eventually be moved to federal court where Judge Robert G. James also ruled in August 2006 in favor of the landowners. Hurd and the group then appealed to the 5th Circuit that further ruled that fishermen and other recreational users only had the right to use the channel of the river.

Fishing groups, more than 50 of them from throughout the U.S., filed briefs supporting the fishermen's lawsuit. The group filed a petition in April seeking a hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Hurd said the public's access to the country's waterways is as old as the nation itself. "The rights that the public had to navigable waters and the rights people had to carry and bear arms were fundamental rights in a new America," Hurd said.

Joyce said he didn't interpret the 5th Circuit ruling as meaning every body of water would be covered. "I think each case would have to be ruled on separately," Joyce said.

Hurd interprets the law as meaning that using any waters beyond a waterway's lowest level (the main channel) would be considered trespassing if the landowner chooses to prosecute.

Sterlington resident Bill Miller, an avid bass fishermen who lives on Bayou Bartholomew, said he never imagined the outcome of the lawsuit would result in changing the face of fishing for everyone in the country.

"The ruling basically says I own the land under the water here on Bartholomew, but I can tell you I'm not going to stop anybody from fishing on it," he said.

His interpretation is that the ruling affects every body of water throughout the country. He said many fishermen have fished the lakes off the Ouachita River during high water times, now that won't happen if the landowners around those bodies "have the law on their side. It's like I've always been told, 'He who has the gold, makes the rules.'"