PDA

View Full Version : Court ruling makes boating illegal in much of U.S.



Richie Rich
09-14-2006, 12:08 PM
Here's an interesting read I found while doing a google search which if true could effect us all. I'm not sure how reliable the source is here but I figured I'd pass it on anyway.
http://www.tradeonlytoday.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=836DB1BD8E56405297CF019C5205D3C4

HCS
09-14-2006, 12:12 PM
What a Commie!!!! You ever wander why people want to shoot judges?

chub
09-14-2006, 12:16 PM
Will anyone enforce this though?

Richie Rich
09-14-2006, 12:24 PM
Will anyone enforce this though?
I hope if the Coast Guard is against it then it will probably be ignored. I don't need to give DNR another reason to f^ck with me out on the water.
"MRAA is working with the Coast Guard, state boating law administrators, and NMMA ... to fight this onerous ruling," said MRAA chairman Glenn Mazzella, in a statement.

Wake Havasu
09-15-2006, 11:41 AM
US federal judge declares boating illegal in all US navigable waters (http://www.ibinews.com/ibinews/newsdesk/20060814154923ibinews.html)
By IBI Magazine
In a rather bizarre ruling that has marine industry officials worried, Judge Robert G. James of the United States District Court, Western Division of Louisiana, has said that it is criminal trespass for the American boating public to boat, fish, or hunt on the Mississippi River and other navigable waters in the US.
In the case of Normal Parm v. Sheriff Mark Shumate, James ruled that federal law grants exclusive and private control over the waters of the river, outside the main shipping channel, to riparian landowners. The shallows of the navigable waters are no longer open to the public. That, in effect, makes boating illegal across most of the country.
"Even though this action seems like a horrible pre-April fools joke, it is very serious," said Phil Keeter, MRAA president, in a statement. "Because essentially all the waters and waterways of our country are considered navigable in the US law, this ruling declares recreational boating, water skiing, fishing, waterfowl hunting, and fishing tournaments to be illegal and the public subject to jail sentences for recreating with their families."
Last month, James rejected the findings of the Magistrate judge who found earlier that the American public had the right under federal law and Louisiana law to navigate, boat, fish, and hunt on the waters of the Mississippi river up to the normal high water line of the river. Judge James Kirk relied on the long established federal principles of navigation that recognized the public navigational rights "…entitles the public to the reasonable use of navigable waters for all legitimate purposes of travel or transportation, for boating, sailing for pleasure, as well as for carrying persons or property for hire, and in any kind of watercraft the use of which is consistent with others also enjoying the right possessed in common."
"MRAA is working with the Coast Guard, state boating law administrators, and NMMA to fight this onerous ruling," said Glen Mazzella, MRAA chairman, in the statement.
(14 September 2006)

SnakeWrench
09-15-2006, 12:48 PM
US federal judge declares boating illegal in all US navigable waters (http://www.ibinews.com/ibinews/newsdesk/20060814154923ibinews.html)
By IBI Magazine
In a rather bizarre ruling that has marine industry officials worried, Judge Robert G. James of the United States District Court, Western Division of Louisiana, has said that it is criminal trespass for the American boating public to boat, fish, or hunt on the Mississippi River and other navigable waters in the US.
In the case of Normal Parm v. Sheriff Mark Shumate, James ruled that federal law grants exclusive and private control over the waters of the river, outside the main shipping channel, to riparian landowners. The shallows of the navigable waters are no longer open to the public. That, in effect, makes boating illegal across most of the country.
"Even though this action seems like a horrible pre-April fools joke, it is very serious," said Phil Keeter, MRAA president, in a statement. "Because essentially all the waters and waterways of our country are considered navigable in the US law, this ruling declares recreational boating, water skiing, fishing, waterfowl hunting, and fishing tournaments to be illegal and the public subject to jail sentences for recreating with their families."
Last month, James rejected the findings of the Magistrate judge who found earlier that the American public had the right under federal law and Louisiana law to navigate, boat, fish, and hunt on the waters of the Mississippi river up to the normal high water line of the river. Judge James Kirk relied on the long established federal principles of navigation that recognized the public navigational rights "…entitles the public to the reasonable use of navigable waters for all legitimate purposes of travel or transportation, for boating, sailing for pleasure, as well as for carrying persons or property for hire, and in any kind of watercraft the use of which is consistent with others also enjoying the right possessed in common."
"MRAA is working with the Coast Guard, state boating law administrators, and NMMA to fight this onerous ruling," said Glen Mazzella, MRAA chairman, in the statement.
(14 September 2006)
Nice, What next. Soon it will be illegal to own or work on a boat. Well, this is where the voters come in. Keep in mind that if we don't vote, this kind of thing will happen.

riverracerx
09-15-2006, 12:52 PM
pretty soon it will be illegal to post threads about boating. Then we are all screwed! We will have to work during the day again..

DMOORE
09-15-2006, 12:55 PM
Sometimes I think that the " justice " has gone insane. There in no common sense to half of what these judges do.
Darrell.

centerhill condor
09-15-2006, 01:18 PM
so then, the corps de engineers have no jurisdiction and these land owners can fix their own river problems? this will create much work for many lawyers..woo hoo!

HCS
09-15-2006, 01:56 PM
I know there's not many LP fans on here but this is well put.
QUOTE:
You are going to have to make a choice. Either be proactive and save boating as we know it, or be passive and let NONBOATERS legislate for you. Politicians are always looking for something like this so they can make a new shiny law with their name on it. They don't care if it's fair. They don't care if it's right. They don't even care if it helps. They just want their name on it. Mark my words. There are people in office right now thinking we need speed limits. Right of ways. Hours of operation and who the hell knows what all else. Boating is the last true freedom left. You cannot buy a Ferrarri and drive it like a Ferrarri anywhere in America. You cannot buy a plane and practice barnstorming without years of approvals and tiered documentation and even then, limited time, in limited airspace. Only in boating can you go buy a boat and drive it like it is meant to be driven. Sit on your ass and you will lose that right.

RitcheyRch
09-15-2006, 02:18 PM
Unbelieveable. Cant imagine this actually happening.

C-2
09-15-2006, 02:20 PM
Sounds like a few people are trying to sensationalize what appears to be a local water rights case. Send us lotsa lobbying money and we'll fix the problem. Sure.
I think we're safe. :)

Second "PLACE"
09-15-2006, 02:51 PM
Next thing you know, boating will carry a mandatory 10 year sentance. :rolleyes:

sleekcraft137
09-15-2006, 03:42 PM
I think if you replace the word "country" with the word "county" Then it sounds more like what it really is. I think its supposed to say no boating on the missisippi river and other area's in the county. I REALLY don't think that a Louisiana judge can stop boating in the whole country.

Tom Brown
09-15-2006, 03:44 PM
You ever wander why people want to shoot judges?
Ahhh..... Tom??? Step off that ledge and we'll have a nice warm cup of cocoa.

HCS
09-15-2006, 03:52 PM
Ahhh..... Tom??? Step off that ledge and we'll have a nice warm cup of cocoa.
Damn! I forgot the combination to the gun safe.

Donttreadonme
09-15-2006, 04:01 PM
http://www.louisianasportsman.com/details.php?id=213

me4drvr
09-15-2006, 04:04 PM
"In addition, the judge held that federal law grants exclusive and private control over the waters of the river, outside the main shipping channel, to riparian landowners."
Water laws in CA and AZ are different... the bed of the river is owned by the adjoing state to the respective thread of the river, from the mean high water line is where the rights of private ownership stop, unless the river was to dry up and remain dry for I think 8 years, then the rights would revert to the upland owner, only by court order. Kinda like when they vacate a street or alley, the ownership reverts to the centerline of that right of way. The water itself is the right of the federal govenment and the City's/State are allotted quantites to draw from the source.
I doubt this would ever materialize, and I bet as stated above, Country was ment to be County.
Just my .02 as a surveyor

HCS
09-15-2006, 04:10 PM
The Sacramento river in CA. dumps into the ocean so it's considered an international waterway. International laws apply when boating there just as if you were boating in the the Ocean.
I don't don't see how his ruling would apply. It's international law.

Placecraft Dragstar
09-15-2006, 04:15 PM
LIVING PROOF THAT PEOPLE DO F#*K SHEEP :) :) :)

sleekcraft137
09-15-2006, 04:18 PM
LIVING PROOF THAT PEOPLE DO F#*K SHEEP :) :) :)
:p Isnt that legal in that part of the counrty??? LOL

LHC30Victory
09-15-2006, 04:37 PM
Another example of being so open minded that your brains fall out :220v:
And, sleek 137, a US District Judge rules on Federal Law......not just applicable to Mississippi.

sleekcraft137
09-15-2006, 04:40 PM
Another example of being so open minded that your brains fall out :220v:
And, sleek 137, a US District Judge rules on Federal Law......not just applicable to Mississippi.Really??.......Oh well, I really don't think boating will be "banned" nation wide. I think his law will end up on a list kinda like this :)
Weird Sex Laws
No man is allowed to make love to his wife with the smell of garlic, onions, or sardines on his breath in Alexandria, Minnesota. If his wife so requests, law mandates that he must brush his teeth.
Warn your hubby that after lovemaking in Ames, Iowa, he isn't allowed to take more than three gulps of beer while lying in bed with you-or holding you in his arms.
Bozeman, Montana, has a law that bans all sexual activity between members of the opposite sex in the front yard of a home after sundown-if they're nude. (Apparently, if you wear socks, you're safe from the law!)
During lunch breaks in Carlsbad, New Mexico no couple should engage in a sexual act while parked in their vehicle, unless their car has curtains.
In Cleveland, Ohio women are not allowed to wear patent-leather shoes.
Clinton, Oklahoma has a law against masturbating while watching two people having sex in a car.
It's safe to make love while parked in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. Police officers aren't allowed to walk up and knock on the window. Any suspicious officer who thinks that sex is taking place must drive up from behind, honk his horn three times and wait approximately two minutes before getting out of his car to investigate. [Hmmm... okay, there's one place with a law that makes sense... -psl]
In Connorsville, Wisconsin no man shall shoot off a gun while his female partner is having a sexual orgasm.
In Detroit, couples are not allowed to make love in an automobile unless the act takes place while the vehicle is parked on the couple's own property.
A law in Fairbanks, Alaska does not allow moose to have sex on city streets.
In Florida it is illegal for single, divorced, or widowed women to parachute on Sunday afternoons.
In Harrisburg, Pennsylvania it is illegal to have sex with a truck driver inside a toll booth.
The owner of every hotel in Hastings, Nebraska, is required to provide each guest with a clean and pressed nightshirt. No couple, even if they are married, may sleep together in the nude. Nor may they have sex unless they are wearing one of these clean, white cotton nightshirts.
Another law in Helena, Montana, mandates that a woman can't dance on a table in a saloon or bar unless she has on at least three pounds, two ounces of clothing.
A state law in Illinois mandates that all bachelors should be called master, not mister, when addressed by their female counterparts.
An excerpt from brilliant Kentucky state legislation. "No female shall appear in a bathing suit on any highway within this state unless she be escorted by at least two officers or unless she be armed with a club".
The following important amendment however is to be considered here: "The provisions of this statute shall not apply to females weighing less than 90 pounds nor exceeding 200 pounds, nor shall it apply to male horses."
In Kingsville, Texas there is a law against two pigs having sex on the city's airport property.
Any couple making out inside a vehicle, and accidentally sounding the horn during their lustful act, may be taken to jail according to a Liberty Corner, New Jersey law.
In Los Angeles, California, a man is legally entitled to beat his wife with a leather belt or strap, but the belt can't be wider than 2 inches, unless he has his wife's consent to beat her with a wider strap. Consent should be given prior to the event, as is carefully stipulated. [Not to be confused with the myth about "rule of thumb"'s origin -psl]
In Maryville, Missouri, women are prohibited from wearing corsets because "The privilege of admiring the curvaceous, unencumbered body of a young woman should not be denied to the normal, red-blooded American male."
In Michigan, a woman isn't allowed to cut her own hair without her husband's permission.
In Nevada sex without a condom is considered illegal.
An ordinance in Newcastle, Wyoming, specifically bans couples from having sex while standing inside a store's walk-in meat freezer!
In Norfolk, Virginia, a woman can't go out without wearing a corset. (There was a civil-service job-for men only-called a corset inspector.)
In Oblong, Illinois, it's punishable by law to make love while hunting or fishing on your wedding day.
In Oxford, Ohio, it's illegal for a woman to strip off her clothing while standing in front of a man's picture.
In hotels in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, every room is required to have twin beds. And the beds must always be a minimum of two feet apart when a couple rents a room for only one night. And it's illegal to make love on the floor between the beds!
A Tremonton, Utah law states that no woman is allowed to have sex with a man while riding in an ambulance. In addition to normal charges, the woman's name will be published in the local newspaper. The man does not receive any punishment.
Utah state legislation outlaws all sex with anyone but your spouse. Next to that adultery, oral and anal sex, masturbation are considered sodomy and can lead to imprisonment. Sex with an animal - unless performed for profit - however is NOT considered sodomy. Polygamy - provided only the missionary position has been applied - is only a misdemeanor.
(The following was received from Patrick Clark unterhund@mailcity.com
a resident of Utah: "Unfortunately, your page on weird USA sex laws ( http://www.bertc.com/sexlaws.htm ) has some errors. Utah law does not consider masturbation to be sodomy. Specifically, Utah Code section 76-5-403 ( http://www.le.state.ut.us/~code/TITLE76/htm/76_05048.htm ) defines sodomy to include the mouth or anus of one person, and the genitals of another. Near as I can tell by reading the law, both are guilty of the misdemeanor, unless it's without consent. Then it's a felony for the aggressor. I can't find anything making private masturbation illegal. In public, on the other hand . . .
Also, "polygamy" is actually "bigamy" in Utah law (section 76-7-101 at http://www.le.state.ut.us/~code/TITLE76/htm/76_09002.htm), and it's a felony. Of course, adultery and fornication are both illegal, but there's no mention of position in the Utah Code anywhere.
Finally, regarding sex with animals, it's not "sodomy," true. It's "bestiality," which is a misdemeanor (section 76-9-301.8 at http://www.le.state.ut.us/~code/TITLE76/htm/76_0B015.htm). If done for pay--in fact, if any of the legal or illegal things listed above (aside from bigamy) are done in public--it's lewdness or sexual battery, depending on how willing any other person involved might be (section 76-9-70 at http://www.le.state.ut.us/~code/TITLE76/htm/76_0B037.htm).
Yes, it's anal of me to call this to your attention. I'm a picky sort, especially when my state's already, um, interesting reputation is unfairly attacked.')
In Ventura County, California cats and dogs are not allowed to have sex without a permit.
The only acceptable sexual position in Washington D.C. is the missionary-style position. Any other sexual position is considered illegal.
In Willowdale, Oregon no man may curse while having sex with his wife.
In the state of Washington there is a law against having sex with a virgin under any circumstances. (Including the wedding night).
---anon---
And in a similar manner:
In Lebanon, men are legally allowed to have sex with animals, but the animals must be female. Having sexual relations with a male animal is punishable by death. (Like THAT makes sense.)
In Bahrain, a male doctor may legally examine a woman's genitals, but is prohibited from looking directly at them during theexamination. He may only see their reflection in a mirror.
Muslims are banned from looking at the genitals of a corpse. This also applies to undertakers; the sex organs of the deceased must be covered with a brick or piece of wood at all times.
The penalty for masturbation in Indonesia is decapitation.
In Hong Kong, a betrayed wife is legally allowed to kill her adulterous husband, but may only do so with her bare hands.!! The husband's lover, on the other hand, may be killed in any manner desired. (Ah! Justice!)
Topless saleswomen are legal in Liverpool, England - but only in tropical fish stores. (But of course!)
In Cali, Colombia, a woman may only have sex with her husband, and the first time this happens, her mother must be in the room to witness the act. (Makes one shudder at the thought.)
In Santa Cruz, Bolivia, it is illegal for a man to have sex with a woman and her daughter at the same time. (I presume this was a big enough Problem that they had to pass this law?)
In Maryland, it is illegal to sell condoms from vending machines with one exception: prophylactics may be dispensed from a vending machine only "in places where alcoholic beverages are sold for consumption on the premises."

Cheap Thrills
09-15-2006, 05:13 PM
Nobody owns the water ~ It's God's water ,man :D
http://www.***boat.com/image_center/data/500/1127PDVD_003.JPG
C.T. :wink:

sorry dog
09-15-2006, 08:24 PM
Guys...don't worry about it. It's a ruling on a common law situation...in Louisana which has a common law code unlike the other 49. In our state the raparian landowner has propery rights but flowing waters are also state water s giving all legal access.
Somebody is making a big deal over nothing. :yuk:

C-2
09-15-2006, 08:43 PM
Other breaking news...
In Cali, MWD just filed water claims against the petroleum companies. MWD is staking first claim on the condensation in our gas tanks.
.....and this just in...
Nevada and Arizona are now suing MWD and Cali - saying if there's any condensation to be had - it's theirs.
:220v: :220v: :220v:

Tom Brown
09-15-2006, 08:46 PM
It's a ruling on a common law situation...
I blame the muslims. :mad:

HCS
09-15-2006, 08:50 PM
I blame the muslims. :mad:
Your losing it.
But you may be right. :D

Boatcop
09-15-2006, 08:54 PM
The Sacramento river in CA. dumps into the ocean so it's considered a international waterway. International laws apply when boat there just as if you were boating in the the Ocean.
I don't don't see how his ruling would apply. It's international law.
Not correct.
International Navigation Laws (and any other International Maritime Law) stop at that point where the inlet from the open sea is less than 2 miles. Those points are known as "Lines of Demarcation". While the Sacramento River might be a US navigable waterway where the Federal Government has jurisdiction, inland navigation rules apply, not International.
The Sac River empties into the San Francisco Bay. The line of demarcation for the Bay is as follows:
§ 80.1142 San Francisco Harbor, CA.
A straight line drawn from Point Bonita Light through Mile Rocks Light to the shore.
Any waterway that has the ability to confer commerce between the US and another country or between 2 states is considered "Navigable", and the US can exercise jurisdiction.
Lake Tahoe is Navigable, because it lies between 2 States, while Lake Arrowhead isn't, because it lies completely within a State.
The line of demarcation for the Mississippi River is in the area of what's called the "Mississippi Passes", and is measured mainly by lat and long coordinates, but is only at the entrance of the Mississippi near Point Au Fer.
International laws ends at that point, and have no bearing on land ownership or water rights along the River.

Tom Brown
09-15-2006, 09:01 PM
Not correct.
Praise Allah! :D

HCS
09-15-2006, 09:15 PM
Navigating on the Sacramento river from San Fransico all the way to Redding California has the same navigational rules.
Individual counties can not dictate laws in there own jurisdiction.
It would be insane.
How could you possibly know what laws would be enforced as you pass through indivisual counties as you navigate the river.
That would be stupid. It's 250 miles of waterway. Or whatever. :rolleyes:

HCS
09-15-2006, 09:26 PM
I beat that up! :rolleyes:

Classic Daycruiser
09-15-2006, 10:54 PM
Not correct.
International Navigation Laws (and any other International Maritime Law) stop at that point where the inlet from the open sea is less than 2 miles. Those points are known as "Lines of Demarcation". While the Sacramento River might be a US navigable waterway where the Federal Government has jurisdiction, inland navigation rules apply, not International.
The Sac River empties into the San Francisco Bay. The line of demarcation for the Bay is as follows:
Any waterway that has the ability to confer commerce between the US and another country or between 2 states is considered "Navigable", and the US can exercise jurisdiction.
Lake Tahoe is Navigable, because it lies between 2 States, while Lake Arrowhead isn't, because it lies completely within a State.
The line of demarcation for the Mississippi River is in the area of what's called the "Mississippi Passes", and is measured mainly by lat and long coordinates, but is only at the entrance of the Mississippi near Point Au Fer.
International laws ends at that point, and have no bearing on land ownership or water rights along the River.
Wow Boatcop, you opened a can of worms. Does this apply to the channal at havasu? Where do the "Lines of Demarcation" start and end at The Havasu channal. Can a city impose their own laws on "US navigable waterway".

Boatcop
09-16-2006, 06:56 AM
Wow Boatcop, you opened a can of worms. Does this apply to the channal at havasu? Where do the "Lines of Demarcation" start and end at The Havasu channal. Can a city impose their own laws on "US navigable waterway".
No can of worms.
State laws allow that their laws, rules and regulations apply on all waterways of the State, including boundary waters. Compacts between the States. (AZ & CA, AZ & NV) allow courts to prosecute violators for offenses anywhere on the Colorado River, up to the high water mark of the opposite shoreline. It also gives peace officers authority on the same waters, including an additional 25 air miles (Straight line) into the opposite state.
The channel used to be dry land. It was dredged out after the London Bridge was built. It is also within the boundaries of the City Limit, so LHC Ordinances apply. As it does in Site Six cove, inside of a straight line drawn across the opening of the cove.
There is no "Line of Demarcation" for the Colorado River. US and individual State Laws begin at the Mexican Border. Jurisdiction is shared by Federal, State, and local (City, County) authorities along the entire River and it's Lakes, and laws can be enforced by any of those agencies.
The land under the River is "owned" by the Arizona State Department, up to imaginary lines drawn between certain landmark points on the River, approximately main River channel center line. The Water flowing over it is "owned" and under the control of the Bureau of Reclamation. The centerline is to determine ownership of the land under the River and has no bearing on enforcement of laws or respective State authority.
The exception would be on the River and Lakes completely within National Parks or Recreation areas (Mead, Mohave, Powell, Grand Canyon, etc) which is wholly owned by the US Govt, and administered by the Park Service.

Richie Rich
09-16-2006, 07:11 AM
pretty soon it will be illegal to post threads about boating. Then we are all screwed! We will have to work during the day again..
LMAO!! Hell yeah because I know my personal productivity at work is practically ZERO since I discovered ***boat.com....

Boatcop
09-16-2006, 07:19 AM
Navigating on the Sacramento river from San Fransico all the way to Redding California has the same navigational rules.
Individual counties can not dictate laws in there own jurisdiction.
It would be insane.
How could you possibly know what laws would be enforced as you pass through indivisual counties as you navigate the river.
That would be stupid. It's 250 miles of waterway. Or whatever. :rolleyes:
Counties generally don't enact ordinances on waterways, since state laws apply and County Officers can enforce them. However, when a waterway, Navigable or otherwise, enters into an incorporated City (as the Sac does when it enters the City of Sacramento) the City can enact and enforce ordinances. The ordinances can address items not stated in or amplify state or federal law, but cannot be less restrictive, or have the effect of nullifying State or Federal laws/regulations.

Tequila-John
09-16-2006, 08:03 AM
No can of worms.
State laws allow that their laws, rules and regulations apply on all waterways of the State, including boundary waters. Compacts between the States. (AZ & CA, AZ & NV) allow courts to prosecute violators for offenses anywhere on the Colorado River, up to the high water mark of the opposite shoreline. It also gives peace officers authority on the same waters, including an additional 25 air miles (Straight line) into the opposite state.
The channel used to be dry land. It was dredged out after the London Bridge was built. It is also within the boundaries of the City Limit, so LHC Ordinances apply. As it does in Site Six cove, inside of a straight line drawn across the opening of the cove.
There is no "Line of Demarcation" for the Colorado River. US and individual State Laws begin at the Mexican Border. Jurisdiction is shared by Federal, State, and local (City, County) authorities along the entire River and it's Lakes, and laws can be enforced by any of those agencies.
The land under the River is "owned" by the Arizona State Department, up to imaginary lines drawn between certain landmark points on the River, approximately main River channel center line. The Water flowing over it is "owned" and under the control of the Bureau of Reclamation. The centerline is to determine ownership of the land under the River and has no bearing on enforcement of laws or respective State authority.
The exception would be on the River and Lakes completely within National Parks or Recreation areas (Mead, Mohave, Powell, Grand Canyon, etc) which is wholly owned by the US Govt, and administered by the Park Service.
Thanks for the info Alan you always have the right answers