Please Sign In


New To Sportsman Network?
User has no reports at this time.
A comment titled: Re: Mud boats in response to a report titled: Mud boats

I'm just repeating what was shouted by land owners on here every time someone posted a SONRIS, GIS, DNR, or any other .gov map.

Sadly, I'm not convinced anyone knows for sure who owns what. Having seen the records first hand I'm surprised anything ever gets accomplished in that shit hole let alone title transfers.

June 03, 2015 at 9:26pm
A comment titled: Re: Mud boats in response to a report titled: Mud boats

Here is a more accurate map.

June 03, 2015 at 8:35pm
A comment titled: Re: Mud boats in response to a report titled: Mud boats

'map is not to be used for legal purposes'

June 03, 2015 at 8:12pm
A comment titled: Re: SUCCESSFUL FISHING !!! in response to a report titled: SUCCESSFUL FISHING !!!

Last year I told some people where I was doing well and finding a lot of big reds. That spot is officially ruined. The guys I told turned around and told their friends, who brought their friends, who posted it on the internet.

I don't think people realize how much time and money go into to finding areas that are consistent. The last thing on earth I'm doing is telling the internet where I'm fishing so every googin with a boat can burn the ponds.

I have no problem helping out people I trust. It's a give and take arrangement. I'm more than happy to tell people how I'm finding fish or the things I look for when deciding where to stop and fish. However, I will never again give up an area to just anyone.

April 08, 2015 at 8:48am
A comment titled: Re: Biloxi marsh in response to a report titled: Biloxi marsh

Make no mistake about it, Biloxi Land is not giving the state of Louisiana anything for free.

As for Biloxi Land, Terre aux Bouef, Delacroix Land, the Leons, ect... Just because they have not restricted access, does not mean they will never restrict access. Nor does it mean their lease holders are not restricting access.

At this point our recreational fishing industry is big enough to support these local economies. Sweetwater launches something like 150 boats a day during duck season. BSM is full of in state and out of state guides from September through January. At any point in time it can all be stopped. Not only can it be stopped, tax dollars are being ear marked to help restore these private marshes even when the canals dug by the owners are to blame for a lot of their problems.

Try articulating to someone who lives in Natchitoches that all these coastal restoration projects are using tax dollars to restore marsh that they aren't even allowed to use.

April 02, 2015 at 6:01pm
A comment titled: Re: Biloxi marsh in response to a report titled: Biloxi marsh

Louisiana is the only state with private tidal water.

Don't even get me stared on Fourchon Beach. The amount of tax dollars being spent to restore a beach that is effectively private is sickening.

April 02, 2015 at 11:05am
A comment titled: Re: Biloxi marsh in response to a report titled: Biloxi marsh

I'm just tired of the bullshit. People are either complaining about being chased out of private marsh or complaining about private owners making rules for their private marsh.

We need to have public access or we need to cut off public funds.

What's even worse is the vast majority of people who fish, don't own any water and they aren't standing up for themselves. Then you have land owners spreading rumors about having people arrested or making up lies about having the Fourchon Harbor Police patrolling their private water.

The whole thing is stupid and it's only going to get worse if people don't start making noise. Write your representative, tell them no more tax dollars to save someone's duck lease.

April 02, 2015 at 10:53am
A comment titled: Re: Biloxi marsh in response to a report titled: Biloxi marsh

I think the owners of the Biloxi marsh should close the entire thing off to everyone that doesn't have a lease. I would like to see zero public land south of the saltwater line. Then all the property owners to use their own money to save the marsh and the tax payers can stop footing the bill.

If you want to fish or hunt, get lease.

April 02, 2015 at 10:32am
A comment titled: Re: Biloxi marsh in response to a report titled: Biloxi marsh

Does anyone else see the irony in this discussion? When use of waterways is brought up on here the general answer is to get get your own lease or buy land.

Now we have a private owner making rules for his private land and people are crying a foul. How about you get your own lease? Or buy your own land?

Zero sympathy. I hope the close off the whole thing. It's the only way anything will ever get fixed. Just wait and see what happens when Delacroix decides to start enforcing trespassing laws. Not only is the whole area going to be closed off but some people might even go out of business.

You have to pay to play.

April 02, 2015 at 9:13am
A comment titled: Re: Ran off in response to a report titled: Ran off

You're trying to over simplify a extraordinarily complex problem. There are several important court cases that really set the tone for this discussion. Most argue there is no discussion and the judges decision is black and white. Personally, I think there is room for debate.

Don't take that the wrong way. I am a land owner just some others but I'm on the side that believes tidal waters should be publicly accessible. Others will say just because their land eroded away and is now covered entirely by water, doesn't suddenly make it public. They still pay taxes on it, therefore it's private. I honestly can't disagree with this stance given that the courts have sided with land owners in this situation.

I think both sides hold some truth and the answer lies somewhere in the middle.

March 24, 2015 at 2:33pm
A comment titled: Re: Ran off in response to a report titled: Ran off

I wish this issue was more black and white. Unfortunately the correct answer is, there is no good answer.

The reason this is an issue is because there is no reliable way to tell when you are trespassing. Man made dead end canals should be a no brainier but even they are occasionally public. Sometimes public doesn't even mean public, it means private but not enforced. A good example would be Delacriox or the public launch in Golden Meadow.

The problem with the 1812 map (yes there is an actual 200 year old cloth map, that is not a joke) is the natural waterways have moved so much that were there was once a natural bayou there is now land and vice versa. Man made canals as well as other factors have caused erosion so where there was once land, there is now open water.

The real issue is now the land owners want restoration efforts via tax dollars to save the marsh. Well, ok, but save the marsh for whom? Land owners will tell you everyone benefits from saving the marsh. Try articulating that to someone who lives in Natchitoches.

I sympathize with duck hunters on private land. I can only imagine the hassle of running people out of your blinds. That is something I consider a real issue. Those kinds of things I think require some kind of action. There is no debating the land itself is private. However, chasing me out of a pond in April because there is property line through the middle of a pond, that only the land owner knows exists, is bullshit.

There is blow back for the alleged increase of trespassing tickets. I use the word alleged because as much as I am on the water, I haven't seen an increase of sheriffs issuing summons. If all of a sudden Delacroix land corp put the hammer down and enforced the property rights, what happens to everyone along hwy 300? I've seen the maps, there aren't enough lease holders and active owners to support the businesses in delacroix. Same goes for Hopedale, Montegut, Chauvin, Dulac, Dularge, the list goes on and on.

If the recreational fishing population is forced onto WMA's and publicly owned blocks of water, the fall out would be a real problem for a lot of people. Including land owners. It would also be devastating to coastal restoration efforts. Why would anyone vote for their tax dollars to restore marsh they will just get kicked out of it?

- Tidal waters MUST become part of the public trust.
- Land owners retain property/mineral rights for everything above the average high water line.

If that happens the people who own/lease land get to keep their property and possibly pay less in property taxes. If coastal restoration works then you might get lucky and your land might grow. The ONLY thing that changes is the criminal trespassing element is removed from tidal water You can still 'call the law' on someone for being in your duck blind or hunting your lease you just can't have them charged with trespassing for fishing in your water.

March 24, 2015 at 8:52am
A comment titled: Flatboat in response to a report titled: Still unbelievable

[quote] The reason your property isn't being stopped from falling into the river is because it has no effect on millions of people and billions of dollars in property in the state genious!!! If you think building a wall around the coast would be more cost efficient than coastal restoration your clueless [/quote]

It's Genius not 'genious' and You're not 'your.' I understand you are an owner but at the very least use spell check if you want to have a debate.

Also there is no hierarchy of land ownership. If you're going to spend tax dollars to save one persons property you have to save everyone's.

I don't think anyone cares about people owning marsh land. Key word there being 'land.' It's the water that's the issue. I'm sorry your land eroded away but that's not my problem and I'm not paying to have it fixed. Tidal water needs to be part of the public trust and this is the reason why.

Look at what's happening in the biloxi marsh. The whole thing is a circus. A private owners is forcing the state to add new regulations on surface drive motors. What happens to Delacroix if the land corp decides to shut down all access? As of right now literally 100's of boats per day are trespassing and the only reason some businesses exist is because of the lack of enforcement by a land owner.

March 10, 2015 at 5:04pm
A comment titled: Re: Still unbelievable in response to a report titled: Still unbelievable

If you want to save it, then you pay for it. If you think the only way to keep the flood waters out is by saving private marsh then you are sadly mistaken. Just ask the people in the Netherlands. Nobody is giving me money to save my property that's falling into the Amite river, why should I have to give money to save yours?

March 10, 2015 at 1:57pm
A comment titled: Re: Still unbelievable in response to a report titled: Still unbelievable

The difference is public funds aren't being used to maintain/restore my back yard. The land that your tax dollars maintain are open for you to have a party.

I wouldn't call it left wing. If anything it's fiscally conservative. Eroding marsh needs to be saved but not at the expense of the public's tax dollars.

The correct thing to do would be to resurvey the property and adjust the property taxes accordingly. Tidal water needs to be part of the public trust.

January 23, 2015 at 11:51am
A comment titled: Re: Trepassing in response to a report titled: Trepassing

Ok.

January 19, 2015 at 1:57pm
A comment titled: Re: Trepassing in response to a report titled: Trepassing

I feel like I'm altercating with a child.

January 19, 2015 at 1:12pm
A comment titled: Re: Trepassing in response to a report titled: Trepassing

I do not duck hunt but I have fished the area dozens of times over the last decade or so. I don't fish the area during duck hunting season. Specifically the Baptiste Collette bayou area. I do my homework so I don't have to deal with being hassled. I have only had one issue but it was further south and I turned out to be correct in my assessment of where I legal to fish.

Do you believe the Public Lands Administration map is also incorrect?

January 19, 2015 at 12:30pm
A comment titled: Re: Trepassing in response to a report titled: Trepassing

continued.

The scaling isn't perfect since I used a screen shot but the data is obvious. The lines are all the same.

The map used was taken directly from the Sates Public Lands Administration was updated on The 19th of December, 2014.

January 19, 2015 at 11:23am
A comment titled: Re: Trepassing in response to a report titled: Trepassing

To put an end to your SONRIS claims I got the map data from the state Public Lands Administration. If you have the software to view the ESRI shape file you can download the .zip for yourself.

Links
http://doa.louisiana.gov/slo/waterbottomsdataaccess.htm
Physical Address:
1201 N. Third St., Suite G-150
Baton Rouge, LA 70802

Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 44124
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804

January 19, 2015 at 11:12am
A comment titled: Re: Trepassing in response to a report titled: Trepassing

Your ignorance is becoming apparent. Unfortunately for you, a belief system is not fact.

Like I said before, I am willing to have an intelligent conversation about this issue. If you want to be a part of that conversation then you're going to have to bring evidence. Real evidence, not something you simply believe to be true.

January 18, 2015 at 5:35pm
User has no ads at this time.