I'm not a lawyer but it looks to me like it says a bunch of nothing new. Until GA properly redefines "navigable" nothing will change.Onto the governor!
Georgia General Assembly
Georgia General Assembly, is one of the largest state legislatures in the nation. The General Assembly consists of two chambers, the House of Representatives and the Senate.www.legis.ga.gov
HB 1172
I'll let the lawyers tell us what this means
Welcome Guest!
Important meetings on fishing access- Flint River
- Thread starter lampern
- Start date
Fishing rights bill wins final passage in General Assembly
ATLANTA – Legislation guaranteeing Georgians the right to hunt and fish in the state’s navigable rivers and streams is on its way to Gov. Brian Kemp.
Anglers and paddlers closely watch bill intended to make some streambeds off limits in Georgia • Georgia Recorder
Conservationists and environmental groups are sounding the alarm over a measure that they say will unravel the protections for fishing and hunting in Georgia that were fast-tracked last session. The bill, sponsored by Waycross Republican Rep. James Burchett, has been presented as a follow-up fix...
georgiarecorder.com
Georgia General Assembly
Georgia General Assembly, is one of the largest state legislatures in the nation. The General Assembly consists of two chambers, the House of Representatives and the Senate.
Trying to rush through another study committee
Bill at link
kayaksteve
Senior Member
I guess it makes good headlines but it still doesn’t seem to mean anything new. If anything it’s still potentially shutting down a lot of what has always been considered public access in northeast georgia
dang
DANG !!!
Anything ever come of this?
From what I saw, a bunch of nothing other than making it worse. Most people overlooked that the new law in question applies to "navigable" waterways, and the upper Flint is not considered to be navigable by the State of GA or the feds. The DNR does, but they don't write the laws.
When the law inevitably gets challenged in court, GA courts are virtually guaranteed to side with the landowners, because the State Legislature doesn't have the integrity to change the current idiotic definition of the word "navigable".
across the river
Senior Member
The State Legislature doesn’t define “navigable”, and can’t change it, so regardless of what Georgia Politicians think, it really doesn’t matter. “Navigable” waters, as stated in the law, are defined by the feds, and in essence, that means it is either tidal or was historically used to haul freight at some point. If you want the definition changed, the Georgia Legislature couldn’t help you if they wanted to. You can pull up what is “navigable” from the USACE and see what waters are legal to fish. Yes, you are correct that if/when the law is challenged in court, they will side with the landowner, as they should based on the law. The DNR, Brian Kemp, or anyone else, can’t use the same law and then say, “Well, it now applies to this part of this river that wasn’t included before.” It doesn’t work like that. They can’t do that, nor should they be allowed to. The state legislature would have to change the enter law to a new standard of what water people allowed to and define what those waters are. While that is in theory doable, it is very unlikely to happen. Once you open a whole new can of worms to allow this water to be fished, where do you draw the line? If it is any body or water you can get a boat in, are you going to now allow people to put in at a right of way and fish someone’s private pond. Can I ride a creek , small river, oxbow lake, etc…. all back up on your property just because I came in off of a river that was navigable? Should Bubba be allowed to float a kayak downs Rae’s creek through the Augusta National. If you changed it to allow kayak on any stream like some Western States do, he could. There is way less private land and way more people to get ticked off about people on their property here. It isn’t going to change, because there is no way to change the law to allow access to this specific stretch without opening up a ton of unintended water.
cowhornedspike
Senior Member
Same old same old from you...Your first sentence claims it can't be changed and then later you admit that there are states that allow just what we are asking for...makes no sense.
Typing 100,000 characters does not make you correct. The State legislature absolutely does have the authority to define "navigable" as it pertains to state waters. They also have the authority to legislate that the public can use all waterways up to the high water mark, just like Montana did.
across the river
Senior Member
Y’all both follow along carefully as I will repeat it one more time. Navigable waters are defined by the feds. Montana still has navigable waters, and those are determined by the Feds as well. There are navigable waters for which Montana owns the bed, and nonnavigable that is doesn’t own the bed. That is no different that Georgia. Look at the links below if you don’t believe me.
However, Montanas access laws are indeed different. Montana established a law, in the 80s I believe, that allow for recreational use of streams for floating or boating regardless
of who owns the stream bed. Could Georgia legislature do that? Absolutely, but it would be a completely new law. What they can’t do, is under the current law say that water that isn’t currently considered navigable under the federal definition is now “navigable”. The can completely change the state law, but that won’t happen because it will open to many streams up that are currently private. There would be too much pushback.
85-1-112. Navigable waters, MCA
leg.mt.gov
Last edited:
across the river
Senior Member
And here is the actual “Montana Law”. Notice that there are rules for Class 1 (navigable) and class 2 (non-navigable) waterways in Montana. The state verses private ownership of the bed deal is no different that Georgia, but the law itself is. Like I said, the Georgia legislature can grant public access to whatever water they want to and could do something just like this for Georgia streams. It just isn’t going to happen, because they aren’t going to change the actual law. To many people would complain, and the political blowback isn’t worth changing the whole law just to grant access to a few folks who are mad they can’t fish a stretch of one particular river anymore. They are going to stick with the current law, which means you have access to “navigable” waters as define by the USACE, just like you do now.
cowhornedspike
Senior Member
Blah blah blah...Y’all both follow along carefully as I will repeat it one more time. Navigable waters are defined by the feds. Montana still has navigable waters, and those are determined by the Feds as well. There are navigable waters for which Montana owns the bed, and nonnavigable that is doesn’t own the bed. That is no different that Georgia. Look at the links below if you don’t believe me.
However, Montanas access laws are indeed different. Montana established a law, in the 80s I believe, that allow for recreational use of streams for floating or boating regardless
of who owns the stream bed. Could Georgia legislature do that? Absolutely, but it would be a completely new law. What they can’t do, is under the current law say that water that isn’t currently considered navigable under the federal definition is now “navigable”. The can completely change the state law, but that won’t happen because it will open to many streams up that are currently private. There would be too much pushback.
85-1-112. Navigable waters, MCA
You just contradicted yourself again.
across the river
Senior Member
I haven’t contradicted myself once. I have said two things. First, they cannot grant access to any additional water, Flint or other wise, under the current law. They do not have that ability. They can’t just say, “we now consider this “navigable” so you are free to fish it.” That is what they thought they were going to do, and quickly figured out they could not.
Second, the Georgia legislature could indeed completely change the law to say you can float and fish whatever water they want to. They could make a law that says you can float a kayak down any creek or stream that it will float down. They could rewrite the law to say that, but the law would have to change. Because of that, there is pretty much a zero percent chance of anything happening, because they aren’t going to change the law. There would be too much pushback politically. My point is all of you just saying, “Just declare the water navigable and let people fish it” have no clue what you are talking about. They can’t do that.
cowhornedspike
Senior Member
It doesn't have to be all or nothing. They can expand the waters that we can legally use without going to the extreme that you mention to include anything that would float a kayak as you say.
You are clearly against any expansion of public use and I am for expansion of public use. We are NOT going to agree of that so I am not gonna try. What I am gonna do is challenge you anytime I see you posting your side on here so post away.
Have you seen the list of the waters that would be considered public ie "state navigable" that has been published. It is far from all waters but does go a lot further than you beloved COE definition does. I'll post it below so you don't have to look it up.
List of Navigable Streams as outlined in HB 1397
(1) Alabaha River downstream from confluence of Hurricane Creek and L. Hurricane Creek;(2) Alapaha River downstream from confluence with Deep Creek upstream of Crystal Lake Road;
(3) Alcovy River downstream of Alcovy Trestle Road;
(4) Altamaha River downstream from confluence of Ocmulgee and Oconee Rivers;
(5) Apalachee River downstream of confluence with Jacks Creek above Highway 441;
(6) Armuchee Creek downstream of US Highway 27;
(7) Big Indian Creek downstream from confluence with Mossy Creek above US Highway 129;
8 Big Satilla Creek downstream from confluence with Colemans Creek above US Highway 84;
(9) Brier Creek downstream from confluence with Reedy Creek above GA Highway 88;
(10) Broad River downstream of confluence of North Fork and Middle Fork Broad River above Bond Bridge Road;
(11) Canoochee River downstream of confluence with 15 Mile Creek above Kennedy Bridge Road;
(12) Chattahoochee River downstream of GA Highway 115;
(13) Chattooga River (NE) downstream of boundary between Georgia and North Carolina;
(14) Chattooga River (NW) downstream of US Highway 27;
(15) Chestatee River downstream of confluence with Tesnatee Creek above Copper Mines Road;
(16) Conasauga River downstream of the boundary between Georgia and Tennessee;
(17) Coosa River downstream of confluence of Oostanaula River and Etowah River;
(18) Coosawattee River downstream of confluence of Cartecay River and Ellijay River;
(19) Etowah River downstream of GA Highway 9;
(20) Flint River downstream of W McIntosh Road;
(21) Hudson River downstream of GA Highway 326;
(22) Kinchafoonee Creek downstream of confluence with Choctahatchee Creek above GA Highway 45;
(23) Line Creek downstream of Line Creek Road;
(24) Little Ocmulgee River downstream of GA Highway 134;
(25) Little Ohoopee River in its entirety;
(27) Little River (Sinclair) downstream of GA Highway 16;
(28) Little River (Withlacoochee) downstream of Kinard Bridge Landing;
(30) Little River (Clarks Hill) downstream of Lumburg Road;
(31) Little Satilla River downstream of confluence of Big Satilla Creek and Little Satilla Creek;
(32) Little Tallapoosa River downstream of Bowdon Tyus Road;
(33) Middle Fork Suwannee River downstream of confluence with Bird Wing Run;
(34) Middle Oconee River downstream of Etheridge Road;
(35) Muckalee Creek downstream of confluence with Fox Creek above GA Highway 195;
(36) North Oconee River downstream of Newton Bridge Road;
(37) Nottely River upstream of Nottely Lake to boundary between Georgia and North Carolina;
(38) Ochlockonee River downstream of GA Highway 188;
(39) Ocmulgee River downstream of Lake Jackson to the Altamaha River;
(40) Oconee River downstream from confluence of North and Middle Oconee River to the Altamaha River;
(41) Ogeechee River downstream of confluence with Little Ogeechee River above Mitchell Road;
(42) Ohoopee River downstream of GA Highway 56;
(43) Okapilco Creek downstream of US Highway 84;
(44) Oostanaula River downstream of confluence of Conasauga River and Coosawattee River;
(45) Pataula Creek downstream of confluence with Hodchodkee Creek above US Highway 82;
(46) Saint Marys River downstream of confluence with North Prong and South Prong Saint Marys River;
(47) Salacoa Creek downstream of confluence with Pine Log Creek above Lovebridge Road;
(48) Satilla River downstream of GA Highway 64;
(49) Savannah River in its entirety;
(50) South River downstream of GA Highway 138;
(51) Spring Creek downstream of confluence with Long Branch above US Highway 27;
(52) Suwannee River in its entirety;
(53) Sweetwater Creek downstream of confluence with Olley Creek above Perkinson Mill Road;
(54) Tallapoosa River downstream of the boundary between Harrison County and Paulding County;
(55) Tallulah River downstream of Seed Lake to confluence with Chattooga River;
(56) Tobesofkee Creek downstream of confluence with Rocky Creek above Bond Swamp National Wildlife Refuge boundary;
(57) Toccoa River downstream of confluence with Cooper Creek;
(58) Towaliga River downstream of confluence with Little Towaliga River above GA Highway 42;
(59) Tugaloo River downstream of Tugaloo Lake;
(60) Turkey Creek downstream of GA Highway 19;
(61) Upatoi Creek downstream of confluence with Randall Creek above Red Arrow Road;
(62) Warrior Creek downstream of Ellenton Omega Road;
(63) Withlacoochee River downstream of GA Highway 37; and
(64) Yellow River downstream of GA Highway 124.
^^^^^^
I like that.
I like that.
B. White
Senior Member
Ya'll let me know when they start removing boat ramps so I don't waste any fuel.
Did HB1397 pass during the legislative session?
Similar threads
