Judge rules much of Mississippi River off-limits to anglers

BB

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
2,129
Location
SF Bay Area
Ran across this ruling from August:

Judge rules much of Mississippi River off-limits to anglers

"(T)he court adopts (Kirk's) recommendation to the extent that 33 U.S.C. (Chapter) 10 and the federal navigational servitude do not provide the plaintiffs with the right to fish and hunt on the Mississippi River," James wrote in his ruling. "However, … the court denies to adopt Magistrate Judge Kirk's recommendation that the plaintiffs have a federal common-law right to fish and hunt on the Mississippi River, up to the high-water mark, when it floods privately owned land."

In seeming contradiction, however, James also ruled that the "Walker Cottonwood Farms' property (where the arrests were made) is a bank of the Mississippi River and subject to public use to the ordinary high-water mark, as defined by Louisiana law."

But he then reversed course, ruling that the group of anglers did not "have a right to fish and hunt on the Mississippi River up to the ordinary high-water mark when it periodically floods Walker Cottonwood Farms' property."

Hilzim said it appears that James issued a very narrow interpretation of the law.

"I'm not a lawyer … but the judge seems to be saying that the public has the right to navigate up to the high-water mark but not to fish," Hilzim said. "The judge has basically said you can take your fast boat to the high-water mark, but you can't fish.

Sounds like a confused (or confusing) ruling... Basically, you can fish up to the low water mark, and can boat up to the high water mark...

I see a market for a whole new set of maps for GPS's when fishing on the good ol Mississippi.

Anybody have good information on what this ruling really means and how it might affect folks outside of Louisiana?

There is this later article (which is what I first read) that seems to spread more dark matter than clarity on the issue.

-Bill

PS: I guess here is the ruling from 1953 (Lake Erie). The second article (which I first read) has a very provocative quote--and does not really represent the decision at all--but seems to be a boating industry article trying to get attention.

If the ruling is you can't boat on a flooded farm, it probably makes a lot of sense--If the ruling is that you can't fish above the low water mark, I am not sure that this is a good thing. -BB
 
Last edited:
Top