MS River hunters

[DeltaDawg3]

Dang Prof! We gonna have to chip in and get you some more books for christmas! [img]images/smiles/icon_eek.gif[/img]

[goosebruce]

You quote one thing then say another. Floodwaters are floodwaters, not public waters. OUR natural resources are that, water thats over someone else's ground aint. The arguements about levels are besides the point, cause for everytime there is an arugement actually solved by that, there is 100 more people that trespassed either by confusion, or thinking they get free use of someone elses land cause its got water on it. You know the area your in, and where the river stops. Where the river stops, public domain stops. I dont care if Joe's beanfield got 500 foot of water over top of it, and he hired the goodyear blimp to fly overhead with a NO MOOCHERS sign lite up, its still his beanfield, stay off it. And don't count on anyones land getting taken away by a new survey. Surveys are done by people who get get paid to do them, and thats the land owners, not the guys hoping to get a free duck hunt on someone elses ground. Everytime one of these things goes the distance, the public loses another place to hunt. If in doubt, get out. travis

[4-EYED GADWALL]

I agree 100% Goose.

[GulfCoast]

Meeka: In my experience at about 23 feet, the children at TARA begin shooting over the heads, attempting to board boats, etc. As I have said before, those antics are going to get someone killed. And when it happens, someone PLEASE subpeona me, because I would LOVE to testify UNDER OATH about what I have seen go on there. And I could get the "course of conduct" testimony in.....

[booger]

Travis, can you define a flood for me? Is anytime water is on top of dirt is that a flood?

Allow me an analogy, then I'm going hunting. Your home, do you own land to the centerline of the road or to the edge of the road? Are rights of way granted 6-8 feet from the road into your yard? What can you do about it if it goes to four lanes tomorrow? People walking can walk by your house but how far in the road do they have to be before you start yelling at them to "get out of my yard"?
While this may be a lame analogy, if you can read between the lines you can also conclude that if your yard was underwater it would be much more difficult to determine the edge of roadway or any other line of demarcation. The deeper the water the more difficult the task, even if there was a blimp. [img]images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

The surveying comment was simply made to demonstrate the shifting nature of the river and the notion of who owns what is often mistaken, due to surveys done before the Civil War!!!! Some of the most current U.S. Geological Survey maps haven't been updated since 1962, I know because I have most of them that pertain to this discussion.

I could carry this discussion further by naming specific points, lakes, bayous, etc. and proving my point but I think we all agree that's not a good idea. However, after having an hour long discussion at the Chotard landing with a game warden from our state while the Louisisna wardens were also on the prowl (January 28,1999 - Vicksburg gauge was at 31.3 feet, I have posted the date/levels so you'll know this is relatively current and not Grandpappy boogers old stories) it was made clear to me that concern over what state you are in is paramount to staying out of trouble. You would really have to get out of the boat on dry land to trespass under most conditions. Now how this works out on Joes new Beanfield WMA I don't know. IF it's legal to hunt there I doubt people will stay away from it. Perhaps Joe should consider farming at higher elevations instead of hoping for the kindness of strangers? Truthfully I'm looking for timber not beanfields but others..........

I think what the profesor is saying makes sense, but theres a whole lot of hunting at 38 feet or less.

Gotta load the truck, rivers rising [img]images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img] [img]images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img] [img]images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img] [img]images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

[bush]

I found out some more information. There was a supreme court ruling on this a few years back and I am in the process of getting a copy of it. If anyone wants a copy, please e-mail me and I'll try to get it to you. This deals particularly with the Chotard/Albermarle lake as it this was a Louisiana court decision. It is called "Louisiana Rights of Repareon(sp?) Ownership", and it it states as long as the river is between the mean water level and flood level (which at Vicksburg is 43 feet, I believe), any individual has the right to navigate therein. Isolated bodies of water I do not think apply as I may have originally implied. As long as the water between those levels, according to this ruling, a hunter/fisherman has the right to get out onto the banks and dry his nets, etc. You cannot set up shop there and pitch a tent. It is unclear about what happens once the flood waters go over the flood water stage. [img]images/smiles/icon_confused.gif[/img]

[professor]

In Mississippi, riparian rights of landowners extend to the thalweg of the channel (it's deepest part). In other words your property line extends all the way to the middle of the stream (if indeed, that is where the thalweg lies). If your property is adjacent to a public waterway, this still applies. To allow for passage and commerce, the law was written to allow for public usage of what is essentially the water standing over private land. Since the water level is ever-changing, the statute was crafted to say that usage of the waterway is permissible at water levels between the thalweg and the mean high water mark (and specifically differentiates mean high water stages and flood water stages). If not for this law, landowners could erect 100 ft. high fences from the thalweg of the channel, all the way to the banks and prevent free transport and usage of the waterway. If not for this law, any landowner could erect an obstruction such as a tollway in the river and prevent free passage.

[featherduster]

Dang folks, can't ya'll read!!!! It is legal to use high water.

[Meeka]

1. OK, so who can tell me what the actual mean, high water mark is(on the V-Burg gauge)?

2. Conspicuously absent from this discussion is a voice with a badge. How about it Scott? What is the MDWF&P position?

[bush]

43 feet is flood stage. It was at 56 feet once...ONCE! [img]images/smiles/icon_eek.gif[/img] In 1927 of course...

[goosebruce]

So if a NWR floods, and I can boat in it, I can float right past dem ducky blue and white sancuarty signs and shoot a sackfull, after all Im a taxpaying american. Refuge signs under water aint no more important than posted signs right? Sheeez. Nope, you'll get hammered, cause its still a refuge, under water or not. Just like its still private land, under water or not.
State lines and private property lines are 2 similar, yet different things. The state lines are in doubt in the cases you mentioned, the private proprty lines arent. Your opinion of Joe's land use isnt important, if its Joe's land, stay off. Even if its got 20 foot of your water on it, its still joe's land, or refuge, or whatever it is. The MS/LA boarder dispute doesnt change at higher water levels, the water simply offers ya'll more chance to cross state lines in a public domain setting. Its still public, just might beling to a different state. Buts it still whatever state it was when dry. travis

[RN989]

O.K. I think I will chime in here now.

As for the comment that was made earlier that the floodwater was was not the public domain and thus a private landowner's....(false).The entire concept behind flood control,levees,locks and damns and other such devices that are designed to control the river water is based on the fact that those waters are the public domain.
I fully support as I have said in the past that if the ladowner really wants to own that floodwater then he/she is more than welcome as long as they in no way benefit from the devices I listed above that are provided not by the private individual but rather the public(whole).So it's really an issue of ownership. The landowner wants all of the benefits that come with owning land after all the expenses incurred and the taxes paid. On the flip the public want to enjoy all of the benefits of the public waters all of wich they pay taxes on. The public pays through way of the government for all of the water flood or not so flood or not they should enjoy what they pay for.

This enjoyment can be done shoulder to shoulder with anyone else who wants to come and recreate landowner or not..

[Jefferson]

GulfCoast is correct that MS & LA law differ on what is huntable. One basis for the distinction relates to a US Supreme Court case from many years ago that originated in MS. The US S.Ct. said their holding applied in all the states except Louisiana. The holding ran contrary to some basic Civilian property law concepts. Our Code is sufficient in these matters, but their may also be a revised statute that I am not immediately aware of.

I am working on a project and am not really available right now to provide more substance on the LA requirements.

[SB]

Meeke,

Why bring me into this? [img]images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] I've seen this topic come up at least once before in the last year or two. It sounds like the subject is centered around hunting flood waters from State listed navigable bodies of water and other bodies of water. That area of land west of Chotard is LA property. What I say has no bearing on LA land. The LA conservation officers will handle that area, west of the lake. Most MS conservation officers would prefer the land owner sign the affidavit against the tresspasser for tresspassing. That is what I prefer anyway. This all the MS CO will do, sign an affidavit for tresspassing. The prof. and Gulfcoast are correct in regard to MS land. MS does have a hunter haressment law. What is the distinction from haressment and/or protecting ones property? Gulfcoast's professional opinion might differ but this is my distinction: Haressment begins if you have a legal right to be there. Protecting ones property is if you don't have a legal right to be there. Just make sure you have a strong case before you file charges for tresspassing or haressment when hunting on these navigable bodies of water. If it is not a navigable body of water then that gray area becomes black and white. If you do not have written permission to hunt or fish that property then you are tresspassing. Since Tallatchie and Quitman counties are flooded right now does that mean one could launch his/her boat from the county road ditch and hunt where ever they can float? No, not unless they have that permission slip. Can you boat in to a State WMA from another property and hunt it without a permit card? No.

[GulfCoast]

The thalweg is typically defined as the center of the navigable channel as of a certain date, at least for any navigable stream. MS and LA have been fighting over the proper location of the thalweg for the MS river for over a hundred years, since that determines what land is in what state.

Also, I believe the law in LA is the exact opposite from MS, in LA you do have the right to hunt the floodwaters, pursuant to a LA statute the number of which I cannot remember.