Chief Grey Bear Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 Now that last line there is funny. I wasn't half way through that and I was thinking I would post about hiring you back. You beat me to it! Chief Grey Bear Living is dangerous to your health Owner Ozark Fishing Expeditions Co-Owner, Chief Executive Product Development Team Jerm Werm Executive Pro Staff Team Agnew Executive Pro Staff Paul Dallas Productions Executive Pro Staff Team Heddon, River Division Chief Primary Consultant Missouri Smallmouth Alliance Executive Vice President Ronnie Moore Outdoors
troutfiend1985 Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 Good to hear chief. Here's what gets me about Elder, the meramec was declared a nonnavigable stream, and yet the state held for fishing and wading rights. I almost wonder if there was an easement placed on that section of the stream(to my memory the court did not mention anything about an easement but I would love it if someone could find those words in that section). This is a confusing issue to me because it sends conflicting messages to the public about the importance of navigability and rights to fish. I think I'm going to have to sign up for water rights class next year, and then bug the hell out the teacher about what went on with Elder as it is a case that has been cited outside of MO. I will stand by this one though, I don't think you're going to win an argument that Crane is navigable. However, the court in Elder seemed to place a lot on the fact that the fish belong to the state. Truly an interesting case, but one that is difficult to interpret. If you guys like this stuff then I'll try to post some more modern cases that have interpreted Elder in the next few months. Just let me know. “The greatest menace to freedom is an inert people” J. Brandeis
drew03cmc Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 Hot darn. TF, you and I need to get together and fish some cricks around KC. I would love to pick your brains about this stuff. Now, anything you can find about Kansas water access laws ?!?!?! Andy
Buzz Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 On 3/26/2011 at 5:42 PM, troutfiend1985 said: I wouldn't rely on that information. Ok, here's my jargon I have to tell you. I'm not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, if you rely on this advice you rely on it to your own detriment, and you must promise to indemnify me at any legal proceedings. There, now let me post what my sources say. I don't know, but that sounds an awful like lawyer jargon to me. Thanks. That does put a few things into perspective. If fishing was easy it would be called catching.
troutfiend1985 Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 On 3/27/2011 at 2:47 AM, drew03cmc said: Hot darn. TF, you and I need to get together and fish some cricks around KC. I would love to pick your brains about this stuff. Now, anything you can find about Kansas water access laws ?!?!?! Yeah, I could probably find some stuff on KS law. But don't count on it on any time scale, ask buzz. BTW Buzz I have that letter about the C&R thing on Capps and Hickory done, but I figured I'd wait until this didymo and mountain lion thing calms down before sending it to KC. “The greatest menace to freedom is an inert people” J. Brandeis
troutfiend1985 Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 On 3/27/2011 at 2:47 AM, drew03cmc said: Hot darn. TF, you and I need to get together and fish some cricks around KC. I would love to pick your brains about this stuff. Now, anything you can find about Kansas water access laws ?!?!?! Just call me full service Only three rivers within Kansas have been declared navigable: the Kansas, the Arkansas, and the Missouri. Likewise, only three rivers have been declared nonnavigable: the Neosho, the Delaware, and the Smoky Hill. State ex rel. Meek v. Hays, 246 Kan. 99 (Kan. 1990) Whether a river is navigable in fact is to be determined by inquiring whether it is used, or is susceptible of being used, in its natural and ordinary condition as a highway of commerce, over which trade and travel are or may be conducted in the customary modes of trade and travel on water. Navigability is a question of fact to be determined from the evidence Title to the waters or bed of a navigable stream cannot be acquired through private use or occupancy, whether adverse or by permission, however long continued, or by prescription Neither occasional use of a creek by a large number of canoeists nor frequent use by a small number of canoeists gives rise to a prescriptive right in the public to use nonnavigable streams. A public prescriptive right arises during the prescribed period when public use becomes so burdensome that government must regulate traffic, keep the peace, invoke sanitary measures, and insure that the natural condition of the stream is maintained. Drew, I've attached the primary case of KS. Remember, this not legal advice. So please rely on it with caution. LEXSEE 246 KAN.doc “The greatest menace to freedom is an inert people” J. Brandeis
drew03cmc Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 Thanks TF. I took nothing more from that than, if you want to fish, ask first. I live in a communist state with regards to access laws... When I crave creek fishing, I drive to Missouri. You deserve a brew for helping all of us legally ignorant souls to stay within the law. Andy
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now