id10t

So if this could happen and the outfitter bought the gravel bar from the land owner and the next flood moved the gravel bar to the next land owners property would the outfitter still own it ? Would the gravel bar not have the same assumed risk of loss for both the landowner and the outfitter. Could the outfitter sue the landowner for a piece of real property since he lost the gravel bar he bought. Better yet could he file theft charges against the land owner he bought the gravel bar from when mother nature steals it? Kinda makes you go HMMMMM what if? I may be wrong but the whole point of the high water mark ruling has something to do with the fact that a river bed does not nor will it ever stay the same. Rivers are always in a state of change. We just had a case in Arkansas where the property line was the river. During the 2008 floods the river changed course. One land owner felt the line should have stayed where it was when he purchased the property thus cutting the other landowner out of river frontage. The other landowner wanted his river frontage back. Fences went up fences got torn down by both parties. So in the end the second landowner not only gained land but kept his riverfront because the deeds used the river as a property line. Maybe during the next flood it will go the other way. HUMOR FULLY INTENDED AGAIN

However extending that right of passage to a commercial operation raises different issues. Why should the commercial operator enjoy use of the gravel bars for his clients with no compensation or consideration to the landowner? I believe you would have a hard time defending your position on that question. Definitions are needed. Basing these thoughts on a canoe or kayak being a form of transportation. There is a huge difference between a commercial operation and a commercial operator. The outfitter is a commercial business/operation. But they are not a commercial operator by transportation standards. They are a leasing/rental company. The person/company that leases/rents from them is the operator. The outfitter has no idea what materials legal or otherwise I am going to have in the rental vehicle once it hits the water. Case in point the Oklahoma City Bombing. The truck leasing company had no idea what or how that truck was going to be used. How could they or why would they be held liable for the destruction and cleanup of the situation. The truck was parked on a public right of way. The leasing company was named in several of the lawsuits however they were also dismissed as defendants in those lawsuits. The second part is the state has made the water a right of way to the public including those gravel bars so in a since they took the land owner out of the equation already. (not saying its right but it is the way it is) With it being a right of way there is not much that can be done. I am sure there are plenty of folks on here who have lost property to roads, sidewalks, etc etc. My best friend built a rock wall on his property and had it torn down because it was in the utility right of way. 22 feet from the edge of the road. The easement was 30 feet. Things like this go on every day. However, I think it's more likely that the law or the courts will recognize the time-honored Missouri right of passage, but I think the distinction may turn on commercial vs. non-commercial use. In the case of a non-commercial, private floater, either you have right of passage or you don't. No middle ground. Every floater is a private floater. Every Floater is a private citizen using the water as the state set forth. Because they use a rental does not change or make them any different that the fella who owns his own boat and in my opinion nor should it. If goods were actually moving and trade occurring for commercial purposes there may be a case for regulating commercial traffic however that is not occurring. We are talking about recreational not commercial traffic. (not so say that there might not be some meth trafficking going on If this were the case what would stop an outfitter giving/loaning the canoe to a floater and getting paid for the shuttle or the ice and food to make up for the 40.00 of the canoe. Does the outfitter become responsible for me with my own boat because he shuttled me? Does the ice companies who's name is on the bag become responsible for me because I left it on a gravel bar? Like it or not, I believe the law would in fact hold you responsible for the impact of your commercial activity on the rivers and stream banks. This is not to say that you would be held responsible for the individual actions of clients (floaters), no. But the impact your activity in total has on the adjacent landowners would be called into question. On this point I feel you (not you personally, but the commercial operator in general) would lose. Problem is there is no law so to speak. The law ( a prosecutor/police dept) is not in most cases going to take up this kind of case on property damage. They will tell you to get a lawyer and sue. While laws (the Legislature) could write laws to hold the outfitter responsible I don't think there is any logical way to make it happen. There are to many variables to hold one entity responsible and not nearly enough folks to investigate it. Lets say mad land owner dumps trash on his gravel bar calls the authorities and they have to investigate. You cant prove who put the trash there. High water brings trash in and landowner calls and someone has to investigate. There are way to many pitfalls and expenses to cover all of the waterways in the state. If an officer does not see the crime committed there is not much they can or will do except tell you to contact an attorney it is a civil matter. The burden is then put on the Land owner to prove his case. Same would be true if the outfitter tried to sue a land owner for trashing a canoe. In most cases it will be civil if it is a he said /he said case. The problem as I see it is it is only really important to 25K folks if that many. River Fisherman, Outfitters, & Landowners. If you put those 3 groups in a room the I bet the concerns by all parties would mirror each other. The general public is the X factor that can not be accounted for along with a few nutts from the 3 groups in the room. Unfortunately there is no law of common sense or stupidity and in this country I hope there never will be. I really don't see much changing because of the shooting because I don't think there is any money to be made in the long run by attorneys. I don't think the legislature has time to deal with such trivial (to them) issue. (HUMOR FULLY INTENDED) The legislature cant even figure out drunk driving laws. How simple is that either you blew past the limit and were driving or you didn't no grey area there. But with them there is always a grey area like when to really get serious about how many DWI before they throw the book at you. I could here the debate on the floor now. Senator 1: So some guy built a camp fire on a gravel bar next to the river and the land owner wants us to limit floaters because the fireit left a black spot on the rocks defacing his property. Speaker of the house: Yes Senator Senator 1: where is Senator 4 shouldn't he be here since he brought the bill to the floor. Speaker of the house: He was excused Bass pro outlet is having a big sale today and he needed to be there. Senator 2: Can we go take a look at this site I have a canoe. Speaker of the house: Well no it was washed away in the last rain storm. Senator 1: Did he cut down the landowners trees for firewood. Speaker of the house: Well no according to this the fella used deadfall. Senator 2: Sounds to me like he was removing a potential fire hazard. Are there small mouth in that river. Senator 1: So how many outfitters would this affect if we made them responsible. Speaker of the house: 35 or so Senator. Senator 2: I recommend we table this discussion till we speak with the Governor his brother in law is a guide/outfitter. Speaker of the house: That being tabled back to the DWI Laws 5 or 6 convictions before serious jail time

Playing devils advocate here. I don't disagree with any of this. However, the fine point is the landowner should also expect "quiet enjoyment" of the property. The drunk and disorderly mobs wreck this. My Understanding of Quiet Enjoyment laws has more to do with parties entered into an agreement ie Lease, Rental agreement etc. If a neighbor is having a party while your trying to sleep Quit Enjoyment does not apply. Local Nuisance laws would apply in those cases. Nieghboorhood covenants could also apply. Regardless it requires Law Enforcement to be envolved and determine what it is. The business model that the outfitters use, which is to dump hordes of drunks onto public rivers with no responsibility for them past a piece of paper (floater release), and to expect the private landowners along the way to tolerate them, is seriously flawed. Its hard to expect a Outfitter to be responsible for a drunk 4 hours into a float. I don't want an outfitter asking me to go through my gear, Ice chest etc just to say I might get drunk. How does an outfitter determine who is or is not responsible? Who is or is not allowed to be on the river. The people using the right of way have vague laws at this point to abide by regarding the right of way. When the Sherriff, Game Warden, and Local Elected Officials all have different interpretations its kind of hard to beat up the outfitter and make him the only responsible gate keeper. Would it also be the outfitters responsibility to ask to see your fishing license if you have a rod. I am not a lawyer but I deal with them regularly and know how they think. There is a collision here between "right of passage" and "quiet enjoyment." I feel a distinction the case could well turn on relates to commercial use, meaning the outfitters would have no right to expect unfettered use of the gravel bars for their clients (floaters) in a commercial capacity. Since the state owns the water and gives rights to the high water mark (still cloudy issue) the land owner would have to take the issue up with or sue the state. It would seem to me it is the same issue with highway rights. The state built a new entrance to a state park a few miles down the road from my property and now there is 10 times the traffic, trash etc I have to deal with. Would quiet enjoyment apply in this case. In my opinion it would not. The floater and fisherman who is just "passing through" ("passage") would retain that right, but the commercial use would be brought into serious question. I feel the unfettered use of the streams by commercial outfitters does in fact amount to a kind of "taking" and the landowners may in fact be entitled to compensation. I'm not sure what one has to do with the other. If I rent a canoe from an outfitter why should they be responsible for my actions in that canoe. When I rent a car and get a ticket for speeding is that the responsibility of the rental car company? If I used that car in the commission of a crime is it the responsibility of the rental car company. Not sure how that would apply. The outfitters dump their customers at Point A. They provide absolutely no services (bathrooms, security, trash pick-up, etc.) between Point A and Point B. The outfitter in my opinion has no "right" whatsoever to expect private landowners and the state or local agencies to pick up this slack. Again same as above applies. The outfitter is only providing a means (Rental Car) to from point A to B. While the outfitter may have no right whatsoever to expect help with picking up the slack the slack is not their responsibility in the 1st place. The slack takes all parties working together to resolve. The outfitters we use clean the launches and take outs. They have cleanup days where they provide the boats and clean between point A & B. Heck several on the Buffalo are running many of the day to day services at the campgrounds Trash/Bathroom Cleaning etc for the Feds during the furloughs. I believe the private individual has a right of passage, but I have doubts that the commercial operator would win the same case in court. Unless the laws change in regards to how they are expected to run their outfitting business they are doing everything they are expected to do. The majority of outfitters got into the business because the love the rivers and outdoors. They could be the fall guy but I don't see it happening. They don't want these issues and I would think most of them would be happy to have clear laws explain to floater.

Edited sorry. Tell me what a kid swimming in the whole who cuts their foot on broken glass knows about wearing proper footwear in a river.

Wayne is the no glass law in MO different for drift boats? Can I drink my beer in glass bottle if I am in a drift boat or jet boat? I honestly don't know. The law in Arkansas is no glass containers period. Had a buddy get a ticket for a glass bottle of mayo which was secured in his cooler on the white river in a john boat and the warden took his mayo.

Wrench that is about the dumbest thing you have ever said on this site. (well probably not you have said a lot of dumb stuff) funny ha ha Read what you will into it but calling my son a Nazi is crossing the line. At least he is smart enough to recognize and ask questions when he sees something that is not what he was taught. He is smart enough to question things. Bases on what your saying since its been done for 50 years repeatedly its OK. Tell me what a kid swimming in the whole who cuts their foot on broken glass knows about wearing proper footwear in a river. He shouldn't have to worry about that because we as adults should be responsible enough to not take glass on the river. Had the folks at the magazine intended for it to be a PSA about glass on the river don't you think they would have captioned it or is that a Nazi move these days.

If you enlarge the picture you can see the drop off of the bank to the water. As a beer snob myself I know you cant get Founders in anything but glass. Its not an accusation on my part the photo shows the facts no need to try and read anything into it. Not much else to say about that.

Need little clarity. Are you saying if he is responsible then having glass on the river is ok? Or were you questioning my use of responsible? Bottom line is laws are written to keep glass out of the rivers for multiple reasons. Reasons we are all aware of. swimmers, wade fishers are all put at risk when and errant bottle gets broken. The river these guys were fishing has a no glass containers law which they apparently chose to ignore. Responsible to me is knowing the rules and regs before you launch. If these guys are going to get pub time and promote the sport they should be a little more responsible. My son is the one who pointed the picture out to me and he will have the task in the future of taking care of these waters we love so much. It makes me proud that he caught it and called them out for it. If these guys want to risk the fines etc for their actions that's on them . I don't think the picture has any place in a magazine that a new or young fisherman could see it and take it as being ok.

Not to Hijack the thread but a Glass Bottle has no place in any responsible river fishermens hands except at the bar. Page 15 has a fella with a drink in a glass bottle wrapped in a cozie with the magazine logo on it. It would appear to me since it is in print and they have a logo they have no issue with glass. It appears they are on the water from the bank in the background. Regardless of on the water, near the water or under the water leave the glass at the cooler in the truck or better yet at home. JMHO

Wally World now has a full line of Berkley fish wear Shirts, Pants/zip shorts etc. 17.95 for each 19.95 for xtra sizes. Very similar to the clothing Academy sells. I know this sounds crazy but if you have an Academy you can get Columbia, Under Armor and the Magellan line really cheap. You have to stop in often and check the sales racks. It is really random but I have paid as little as 2.88 cents for all three lines. They start marking things down at 19.88 then drop to 14.88, 9.88, 4.88 and then 2.88.

Well yes they can so long as they have the proper license, I don't think there is a Felon Fishing Rod Rule.

Well let me just say I feared my Granny way more than my Grandad.

Can you explain why you think each is a win and each is a loss. Ill share my thoughts after. This has been fun to read. Keep it coming. See what happens when its 109 outside and the rivers are low.

Just want to welcome the Tiger fans to the SEC. The fun is about to begin. Your lucky to get both Georgia and Bama at home. Hopefully the Arkansas/Mizzou series starting next year will create some fun for the future. I hope it does not take you 20 years to adjust like it did Arkansas. It is a whole new ballgame.

Oklahoma State won the one the Bassmaster Series on the Arkansas river last week.. Not sure if that was the one they were showing. Stephen F Austin won last year. There are 2 or 3 Series going. Bassmasters/ESPN , BoatUS/NBC and FLW/National Guard. It gets really confusing because the teams can compete in all of them. The University of Arkansas competes in all of them. They have a National Championship from one of them and several top 5's overall. Great Concept that needs a little polishing.