No Profanity *** No Flaming *** No Advertising *** No Anti Trappers *** No Politics
No Non-Target Catches *** No Links to Anti-trapping Sites *** No Avoiding Profanity Filter


Home~Trap Talk~ADC Forum~Trap Shed~Wilderness Trapping~International Trappers~Fur Handling

Auction Forum~Trapper Tips~Links~Gallery~Basic Sets~Convention Calendar~Chat~ Trap Collecting Forum

Trapper's Humor~Strictly Trapping~Fur Buyers Directory~Mugshots~Fur Sale Directory~Wildcrafting~The Pen and Quill

Trapper's Tales~Words From The Past~Legends~Archives~Kids Forum~Lure Formulators Forum~ Fermenter's Forum


~~~ Dobbins' Products Catalog ~~~


Minnesota Trapline Products
Please support our sponsor for the Trappers Talk Page - Minnesota Trapline Products


Print Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Navigable Waters #7116684
01/02/21 10:05 AM
01/02/21 10:05 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 19,763
williamsburg ks
D
danny clifton Offline OP
"Grumpy Old Man"
danny clifton  Offline OP
"Grumpy Old Man"
D

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 19,763
williamsburg ks
This might create some trapping access.



Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
Re: Navigable Waters [Re: danny clifton] #7116694
01/02/21 10:10 AM
01/02/21 10:10 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 41,064
Minnesota
330-Trapper Offline
trapper
330-Trapper  Offline
trapper

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 41,064
Minnesota
I hope they Win their case.


NRA and NTA Life Member
www.BackroadsRevised@etsy.com




Re: Navigable Waters [Re: danny clifton] #7116785
01/02/21 11:12 AM
01/02/21 11:12 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 36,947
Northern Maine
Bruce T Online content
trapper
Bruce T  Online Content
trapper

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 36,947
Northern Maine
Nice


My President is still President Trump
Re: Navigable Waters [Re: danny clifton] #7116867
01/02/21 11:45 AM
01/02/21 11:45 AM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,686
Alaska
D
drasselt Offline
trapper
drasselt  Offline
trapper
D

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,686
Alaska
Hmmmmmmm empower DC Bureaucrats to set access regulations nationwide? Hmmmmm.


you can vote your way into socialism, but you will have to shoot your way out.
Re: Navigable Waters [Re: drasselt] #7116875
01/02/21 11:47 AM
01/02/21 11:47 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 41,064
Minnesota
330-Trapper Offline
trapper
330-Trapper  Offline
trapper

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 41,064
Minnesota
Originally Posted by drasselt
Hmmmmmmm empower DC Bureaucrats to set access regulations nationwide? Hmmmmm.

For this, yes. States shouldn't monopolize anything


NRA and NTA Life Member
www.BackroadsRevised@etsy.com




Re: Navigable Waters [Re: danny clifton] #7116892
01/02/21 11:54 AM
01/02/21 11:54 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 19,763
williamsburg ks
D
danny clifton Offline OP
"Grumpy Old Man"
danny clifton  Offline OP
"Grumpy Old Man"
D

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 19,763
williamsburg ks
I live only a few miles from the Marais Des Cygne river. Its pretty easy to document it was used by trappers and Indians both to transport fur to the Missouri river and on to St Louis when this part of the world was still claimed by France. Trade goods in the other direction. Yet here in KS it has been declared Non Navigable. Would be worth going to court over if the supremes declare people have access.


Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
Re: Navigable Waters [Re: danny clifton] #7116903
01/02/21 11:57 AM
01/02/21 11:57 AM
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 593
Northern Missouri
Northmocats Offline
trapper
Northmocats  Offline
trapper

Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 593
Northern Missouri
Can in Missouri Luckily! Interesting Danny. My late Grandmother grew up fishing the Marais Des Cygne river. Always liked that part of Se Ks.

Re: Navigable Waters [Re: danny clifton] #7116909
01/02/21 11:59 AM
01/02/21 11:59 AM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,686
Alaska
D
drasselt Offline
trapper
drasselt  Offline
trapper
D

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,686
Alaska
Well 330 states can and do monopolise non migratory fish and game management in large part for example. Except in Alaska they don't because the feds do too. Can of worms. I'm not stating it would be bad outright but there are a LOT of variables here and there are ALWAYS unintended consequences. It would surely get messy so one may need to be very careful what they wish for. For example if the feds control all navigable waters then can they now set seasons up to the high water line? Could they then decide beaver, otter, muskrat regulations for example? Fishing regulations? I don't know and I doubt anyone else can claim to know.

Almost on cue, here is an article re fed management https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/trump-vetoes-calif-fishing-bill-over-seafood-trade-deficit

Last edited by drasselt; 01/02/21 12:35 PM.

you can vote your way into socialism, but you will have to shoot your way out.
Re: Navigable Waters [Re: danny clifton] #7116957
01/02/21 12:42 PM
01/02/21 12:42 PM
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,557
American In the Pyrenees; Fran...
S
swift4me Offline
trapper
swift4me  Offline
trapper
S

Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,557
American In the Pyrenees; Fran...
I used to guide on a huge spring creek in NE California, (Fall River). For years it was considered non navigable and ranchers put barbed wire fences across the river, and fishing clubs claimed their banks as well. There was no way for a regular guy to put a boat in the river and move up or down.... until one day. IN the late 60's a fisherman who lived an hour away put his john boat in the river next to a county road bridge and started to fish. A rancher drove by and read him the riot act and he calmly said, "...call the sheriff, I'll be here when he comes...". He had legal easement off a county road bridge, but he had bigger plans.

Long story short, he proved that before the war they had floated pine and cedar logs down the river to the mill in town... end of story. The fences came down and to this day it is a world class trout stream, the cattlemen are happy as there is no bank fishing and no trespassing issues, and money for local hotels and fishing guides like me. But the most upstream point of entry for timber is still the upper limit of boat traffic on the river. There is still a log and chain barrier there.

I remember as well a change in the Montana law about high water marks, but I don't know the long term inpacts of that.

Pete

Re: Navigable Waters [Re: danny clifton] #7116968
01/02/21 12:50 PM
01/02/21 12:50 PM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,668
Alaska and Washington State
W
waggler Offline
trapper
waggler  Offline
trapper
W

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,668
Alaska and Washington State
I don't know about the eastern States, but in most western States when the US Government granted Statehood the Feds recognized the navigable waters as being Federal (before Statehood). When the Feds granted Statehood they expressly specified that the navigable waters where to remain as such; useable by everyone.

Washington State where this case is taking place has ruled many decades ago that a water is navigable if you can float (and transport) a cedar shake bolt in the particular water.

This is an extremely important case, I sure hope the SCOTUS takes it up and rules in these brothers favor.


My life is better than your vacation
Re: Navigable Waters [Re: danny clifton] #7116969
01/02/21 12:50 PM
01/02/21 12:50 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 12,486
Sandhills Nebraska
G
Gary Benson Offline
trapper
Gary Benson  Offline
trapper
G

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 12,486
Sandhills Nebraska
In Nebraska the State determines which waters are navigable and which aren't. Used to be guys would kayak down the Snake river but now since it's leased for trout fishing by rich priks it has been determined un-navigable. Imagine that.


I know I'm paranoid......but am I paranoid ENOUGH???
Re: Navigable Waters [Re: waggler] #7117043
01/02/21 01:35 PM
01/02/21 01:35 PM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 31,340
McGrath, AK
W
white17 Online content

"General (Mr.Sunshine) Washington"
white17  Online Content

"General (Mr.Sunshine) Washington"
W

Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 31,340
McGrath, AK
Originally Posted by waggler
I don't know about the eastern States, but in most western States when the US Government granted Statehood the Feds recognized the navigable waters as being Federal (before Statehood). When the Feds granted Statehood they expressly specified that the navigable waters where to remain as such; useable by everyone.

Washington State where this case is taking place has ruled many decades ago that a water is navigable if you can float (and transport) a cedar shake bolt in the particular water.

This is an extremely important case, I sure hope the SCOTUS takes it up and rules in these brothers favor.



Back in about 1982.......after Jimmy Carter created the ANILCA mess.............I was asked to go to Anchorage and be questioned by a small panel of people working on the federal navigability issue. I believe they were state employees. Anyway, if I had a history of using any waterway, they considered that 'navigable'. This included using it on foot or with a snowmachine or dog team when frozen. I thought that was a pretty novel interpretation of the word


Mean As Nails
Re: Navigable Waters [Re: danny clifton] #7117127
01/02/21 02:32 PM
01/02/21 02:32 PM
Joined: Mar 2019
Posts: 863
Southern NJ
maintenanceguy Offline
trapper
maintenanceguy  Offline
trapper

Joined: Mar 2019
Posts: 863
Southern NJ
“the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”


-Ryan
Re: Navigable Waters [Re: danny clifton] #7117135
01/02/21 02:40 PM
01/02/21 02:40 PM
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 4,659
Marion Kansas
Y
Yes sir Offline
trapper
Yes sir  Offline
trapper
Y

Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 4,659
Marion Kansas
I'm sure there are lots of points on both sides. And both sides could take it too far from my point of view. The EPA has tried to abuse the term " navigable waters " for a power grab in recent years.

Re: Navigable Waters [Re: maintenanceguy] #7117144
01/02/21 02:50 PM
01/02/21 02:50 PM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,668
Alaska and Washington State
W
waggler Offline
trapper
waggler  Offline
trapper
W

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,668
Alaska and Washington State
Originally Posted by maintenanceguy
“the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

I believe the right to use navigable waters is a much better established legal right in most western States since they were established in a different manner and at a more recent time than many eastern States.
When the Federal Government granted Statehood the rights of people to use navigable waters was enshrined in the granting documents. The States cannot then later preempt those rights even though they continually try to.


My life is better than your vacation
Re: Navigable Waters [Re: danny clifton] #7117157
01/02/21 03:03 PM
01/02/21 03:03 PM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,668
Alaska and Washington State
W
waggler Offline
trapper
waggler  Offline
trapper
W

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,668
Alaska and Washington State
I really think what is actually at play here is that Washington State has by far the nations largest State run ferry system (https://www.arlis.org/docs/vol1/69415913/wsflargest.pdf) on salt water which is definitely federal navigable waters. It is a corrupt and extremely inefficiently run operation. People in the past have tried to open up their own private ferry operations only to be stopped by the State. The Sate does not want any competition.


My life is better than your vacation
Re: Navigable Waters [Re: danny clifton] #7117175
01/02/21 03:26 PM
01/02/21 03:26 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,357
Oregon
beaverpeeler Online content
trapper
beaverpeeler  Online Content
trapper

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,357
Oregon
The laws are murky in Oregon. 12 of the biggest rivers have been declared navigable. Lakes are I think all navigable.

But even if private landowners own the stream bank and land under the water.... the water itself is state owned. So you can float it and not be trespassing. If you start to attach a stake to the stream bottom you might be trespassing though.


"Can't we all just get along?" ---Rodney King (1991)
Re: Navigable Waters [Re: waggler] #7117177
01/02/21 03:28 PM
01/02/21 03:28 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 41,064
Minnesota
330-Trapper Offline
trapper
330-Trapper  Offline
trapper

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 41,064
Minnesota
Originally Posted by waggler
I don't know about the eastern States, but in most western States when the US Government granted Statehood the Feds recognized the navigable waters as being Federal (before Statehood). When the Feds granted Statehood they expressly specified that the navigable waters where to remain as such; useable by everyone.

Washington State where this case is taking place has ruled many decades ago that a water is navigable if you can float (and transport) a cedar shake bolt in the particular water.

This is an extremely important case, I sure hope the SCOTUS takes it up and rules in these brothers favor.

So do I


NRA and NTA Life Member
www.BackroadsRevised@etsy.com




Re: Navigable Waters [Re: danny clifton] #7117674
01/02/21 09:24 PM
01/02/21 09:24 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 6,864
Asheville, NC
C
charles Offline
trapper
charles  Offline
trapper
C

Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 6,864
Asheville, NC
I didn’t hear the entire recording but I think if someone carries customers for hire, they may need a Coast Guard captains license and their vessel is required to be inspected annually. Lots of other CG refs could apply, even on internal waters and lakes.

A lakeside restaurant cannot provide free pontoon boat rides to patrons. A coastal wedding venue cannot provide water born entertainment for wedding guests, without CG licensed operators. Not sure when a fishing guide requires licensing, probably on coastal waters for sure. More than six passengers requires a different license.

Re: Navigable Waters [Re: charles] #7117696
01/02/21 09:40 PM
01/02/21 09:40 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,750
Armpit, ak
D
Dirt Offline
trapper
Dirt  Offline
trapper
D

Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,750
Armpit, ak
Originally Posted by charles
I didn’t hear the entire recording but I think if someone carries customers for hire, they may need a Coast Guard captains license and their vessel is required to be inspected annually. Lots of other CG refs could apply, even on internal waters and lakes.

A lakeside restaurant cannot provide free pontoon boat rides to patrons. A coastal wedding venue cannot provide water born entertainment for wedding guests, without CG licensed operators. Not sure when a fishing guide requires licensing, probably on coastal waters for sure. More than six passengers requires a different license.


Navigable waters equals six pac here. I'm Captain Dirt on my little river boat. smile


Who is John Galt?
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread