Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 12:17:15 -0500
Reply-To: mcneely4@COX.NET
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Dave Mcneely <mcneely4@COX.NET>
Subject: Re: For you paddlers--a petition
In-Reply-To: <505358DC.3090605@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Yeah, well, the Native Americans in Oklahoma were forced here from their homelands to Oklahoma, and promised in treaties that the lands would be theirs "..... so long as the sun shines and the grass grows." But then European Americans wanted the land, 1889 came, and that was the end of that. What land was left in Indian hands was partitioned among individual Indians and privately titled, but that was a minor fraction of what they had before. Oklahoma is owned by the oil companies for the most part now, if not literally, at least in practical terms. mcneely
---- JRodgers <jrodgers113@gmail.com> wrote:
> In Alaska during the settlement of the Alaska Native Land Claims
> Settlement Act of 1972, Alaska Natives were permitted to select lands
> for the designated areas - including any river bottoms of rivers defined
> as non-navigable. This shut out the use of many areas in Alaska to
> sportsmen, sports fishermen lest they be trespassing on Native land.
> This produced a whole lot of problems but they have over time gradually
> been worked out. Some areas remained closed,but means and methods
> satisfactory to all parties have been worked out. In some cases land
> swaps between the State, the Feds and the Alaska Natives took place. In
> others, The Feds and the State simply bought back the land given,
> thereby in creasing the cash wealth of the Native corporations. Much of
> this came about because 9in the beginning many Natives felt the the land
> they were getting was like gold, but in time the younger more educated
> Native people began to seen that to possess and control that much land
> was going to be problematic and they set out to remedy the problem but
> selling back their land grants in some cases, and turning exclusive
> management of some lands back over to the Bureau of Land Management and
> Federal Fish and Game. This seems to have worked in most cases.
>
> John
>
> On 9/14/2012 9:16 AM, Dave Mcneely wrote:
> > In Oklahoma we also have this bizarre situation of streams being considered private property. The water is public property, but the streamside owner also owns the stream bottom. So, put your canoe in, slip downstream with pleasure and impunity until you reach a riffle requiring walking a bit. Step on the stream bottom, you are trespassing. Further, streams are divided into navigable and non-navigable by state law, and whether the stream is in fact navigable and the Corps of Engineers would recognize it as such is irrelevant.
> >
> > Texas, too, has some really odd water laws, but at least one is allowed on any navigable stream by law, and can portage if necessary, or camp if below the first berm. Now, not all property owners know or recognize that, so permission is always best. An irate Texas rancher with a firearm is not someone to argue legalities with. And, some streams, even navigable ones, may have fences across them. That is true of the Sabinal River, even within its navigable stretch. And I guarantee that no local magistrate will ever find in favor of a non-resident of the county when a landowner accuses him of trespass. Even county roads, built and maintained at county expense, may have gates across them with no-trespassing signs. The sign legally applies to the adjacent land, but is often placed on the gate, intended to intimidate non-residents from driving on the road though it is perfectly legal to do so.
> >
> > Oh, I am a native of Texas and consider the state my home, though circumstances keep me away. I dearly love it, though it has gone far awry in recent times. To emulate someone who has been in the news for his obscene declarations about his detractors lately, "The times, they will be (eventually) a changin." Texas will someday see the error of its current errant ways.
> >
> > mcneely
> >
> > ---- Mark Dearing <VWBrain@AOL.COM> wrote:
> >> Hello Jim think that is bad try being in Virginia where they can close a
> >> class 5 whitewater creek using a Kings grant ( if a single person owns both
> >> sides he can claim the whole creek),which is what has happened to johns
> >> creek . This creek is one of the best,drops 165 ft a mile for 4.5 miles, 35
> >> named rapids, bambi meets godzilla being one. he did this after the AWA
> >> had bought property and built a parking lot and change house. damn shame
> >> later mark d
> >>
> >>
> >> In a message dated 9/14/2012 9:04:30 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> >> jim.felder@GMAIL.COM writes:
> >>
> >> I hope this is OK with the moderators.
> >>
> >> I have an online petition going to try to make the US Army Corps of
> >> Engineers reverse their decision to close the locks on the Alabama rivers to
> >> recreational traffic. The link is
> >> <http://www.change.org/petitions/alabama-scenic-river-trail-push-back-against-closing-alabama-river-locks-to-recreational-
> >> traffic>
> >>
> >> Sent from my diesel Westy in Chickasabogue Alabama
> >
> > --
> > David McNeely
> >
--
David McNeely
| 
