Fisherman/floaters Legal Rights

[solus_vero]

There was trouble on a float on shoal creek early this spring and I just happened to have my camera rolling at the time.

I am posting this in hopes that the issue of fisherman/floaters rights and land owners rights can be disscussed.

It is not my intention to start ANY trouble.

[flytyer57]

Looked like Praterville.

[Al Agnew]

Umm, I think it's already been discussed pretty adequately. Scroll down to "Trespassing on MO Creeks and Rivers", "You have a friend", and "Your voice counts". I think there was also a discussion in the Conservation board.

Here's the applicable passage of the MO Supreme Court decision that is considered to have the force of law on floatable MO streams...although some county officials don't know it or do ignore it:

The trial court determined the issues presented by the pleadings and declared the law respecting plaintiff's rights as follows: "That the Meramec River at the place in question and as described in the petition is public water and subject to travel by plaintiff and those who desire to wade it or to float down it in boats * * * that plaintiff has a legal right to fish in said stream subject to the regulations of the Missouri Conservation Commission and the Laws of Missouri * * *." The court declared that plaintiff had "the legal right to carry his boat around obstacles in the river where obstructions preclude the passage of his boat, subject to liability for damage he might inflict on defendant's property * * * (and) the legal right to tie up his boat or to camp on said stream as long as he uses the stream bed, gravel bars and clearly recognizable area over which the stream flows during its normal stages."

[ColdWaterFshr]

Solus,

What is missing from this is particular incident on Shoal Creek is context. Thank you for providing the video clip. It gives us a glimpse.

It seems apparent from this clip that there is a history with Chief prior to this float as they were asking for his whereabouts, and even knew him by name -- I can only presume it was him they were looking for and not so much you guys. They sure as heck didn't know you guys by first name, did they? It may be a big leap, but the fact that you decided to roll some video of this incident is also telling in that maybe you were prepared for exactly what transpired. Maybe not. In any event, it seems to me that your float party was probably not the hapless, feckless, innocent floaters wandering through a random stretch of river in the wilds of Newton County and never had any inkling about this guy Prater.

In my view, this is now LESS about floaters rights and more about provocation and whatever happened with Chief and this landowner PRIOR to this float. Maybe he can speak more to that than you guys. Or maybe you know already of some of the stories.

I still agree in principle on floaters rights and would like to see that set straight. However, this clip leaves me more questions about the whole back-story and caring less about your question of what floaters rights are.

[FishinCricket]

Maybe not. In any event, it seems to me that your float party was probably not the hapless, feckless, innocent floaters wandering through a random stretch of river in the wilds of Newton County and never had any inkling about this guy Prater.

I can only speak for myself and Solus, but neither of us had any "inkling" whatsoever about ANY of this until the moment that the landowners were standing there, we were completely taken by surprise...

(and the fact that you assume otherwise says allot)

[ColdWaterFshr]

Relax, Cricket, I said "probably". A smartass like me always leaves hisself an out. I tell you though, as innocent as you and Solus may have been, this here whole deal has me starting to side with Prater. You guys got led into this ambush by good ole Chief and his frictious ways . . . probably.

[eric1978]

Relax, Cricket, I said "probably". A smartass like me always leaves hisself an out. I tell you though, as innocent as you and Solus may have been, this here whole deal has me starting to side with Prater. You guys got led into this ambush by good ole Chief and his frictious ways . . . probably.

Doesn't matter if there was history with Chief and Prater or not...the floaters had the right to be there and do what they were doing. Too bad for the landowner if he doesn't like it. It's the law.

[ness]

Hmmmm.

Why were you rolling camera and keeping it concealed?

So, who was it in the boat doing all the talking? I'm guessing Cricket. There were instances of just plain being a smart azz, like 'if it makes you feel bigger', interrupting the guy (deputy?) to repeatedly ask who the agent was, and asking if the prosecutor was also a CA. Folks on the bank were keeping pretty cool throughout though.

I guess Britt is Chief, and there's a history?

Do you just know Chief 'from the internet', or was that a bit of a stretch?

Why press the point with '2-inches of water', etc.

When did the 'you'll be in a world of hurt' quoted in the earlier thread get said and by whom/to whom?

I don't know any of you guys, but I know something about your personalities here. I had a suspicion that there was some yakkin' going on, but I took you at your word. So, I called the Sheriff, gave my name, work number and asked him to see that this situation gets corrected. Prolly would have passed on it if I'd have seen this first.

[Buzz]

Relax, Cricket, I said "probably". A smartass like me always leaves hisself an out. I tell you though, as innocent as you and Solus may have been, this here whole deal has me starting to side with Prater. You guys got led into this ambush by good ole Chief and his frictious ways . . . probably.

Nothing could be further from the truth there CWF, but you go ahead and make assumptions. Chief did nothing wrong PERIOD!!!!!

[ColdWaterFshr]

Eric and Buzz, you haven't been paying attention. Chief discovered that he had a warrant for his arrest, much to his surprise, which was why, and again I'm assuming much because I don't know the whole story, but its why he went in to the poh-leese station and met with the Sheriff. Armed with signatures from uh-this-here forum he met with the sheriff and the sheriff pretty much told Chief to stay away from this stretch of Shoal Creek for a good while and allow a cool-off period. The history regarding Chief and this landowner IS relevant. Objection overruled. Continue. Your honor, please call Chief Greybear to the stand.