PDA

View Full Version : Part of the reason TSAS was founded


Hernandoman
09-06-2009, 06:23 PM
I found these old scans and let me apologize for the small text for those that may have troble reading it. Get a magnifying gl*%#$!*%#$!*%#$!*%#$! its worth the read. Its a letter from Lonice Barrett, then DNR Comissioner regarding HB 698.

Hernandoman
09-07-2009, 02:41 PM
Let me try this again....http://i654.photobucket.com/albums/uu261/Hernandoman/Barretpage1.jpg

Hernandoman
09-07-2009, 02:42 PM
Page 2http://i654.photobucket.com/albums/uu261/Hernandoman/Barretpage2.jpg

Hernandoman
09-07-2009, 02:44 PM
Page 3http://i654.photobucket.com/albums/uu261/Hernandoman/Barretpage3.jpg

Hernandoman
09-07-2009, 02:44 PM
This letter may prove helpful to those in privately owned creeks..........

old creek warrior
09-07-2009, 03:05 PM
thanks for posting that hernandoman !!!!

Bobby Gilbert
09-07-2009, 03:28 PM
It was well worth reading. Thanks for posting.

george
09-07-2009, 08:12 PM
Wow, Team Crass has 125 years experience!

I guarantee we have more than that. Maybe we can set up a poll that has our years of collecting experience and add that up.

old creek warrior
09-07-2009, 08:15 PM
125 years combined experience seeing who can dig the last donut out of the box

Matthew
09-08-2009, 02:04 PM
This letter may prove helpful to those in privately owned creeks..........

I think that depends on where you are. Some states own water (creek, river, etc) up to the high water mark. So while the creek may be on private land, the state owns the river/creek bed itself.

Just my .02 worth, i admit i'm totally new to this hobby. I will say i've noticed this hobby is a lot like fishing, everyone wants to talk about/show what they caught, but nobody wants to say where :)

Hernandoman
09-08-2009, 03:20 PM
Part of the debate is who owns the creek or stream bottom. In Georgia, the state DOES NOT own the bottom of a non-navigable waterway, the landowner owns to the center of the channel, if the landowner owns both sides of the creek or stream, they own the entire creek bottom as well.
The "gray area" comes in when a DNR officer writes a ticket for looking for artifacts or artifact removal, on what he/she "thinks" is a navigable waterway. The precedent has already been set in the Ichuaway Case, where the courts ruled that since that landowner owned both sides of the creek, they could, in fact, close the creek off to all boat, swimming, and diving traffic.

The last paragraph is the key for what you do on private property (with permission of course) - they can not and should not have any interference with artifact removal or collection as long as it is not in a grave context. Period.

Rivers are a completely different matter altogther.

fatman
09-08-2009, 06:39 PM
I was told that a navagible waterway was defined when it could be travelled by a commercial vessel....but what is considered a commercial vessel?

Alaskan_Lithics
09-09-2009, 08:27 PM
Main Entry: nav·i·ga·ble
Pronunciation: \ˈna-vi-gə-bəl\
Function: adjective
Date: 15th century

1 a : deep enough and wide enough to afford passage to ships <navigable waterways> b : capable of being navigated (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/navigated) <navigable terrain>
2 : capable of being steered


A body of water, such as a river (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River), canal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canal) or lake (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake), is navigable if it is deep, wide and slow enough for a vessel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship) to pass and there are no obstructions, like rocks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_%28geology%29), trees (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree) and low bridges (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge). Shallow rivers may be made navigable by the installation of locks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canal_locks) that increase and regulate water depth, or by dredging (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dredging). A very high water speed may also make a channel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_%28geography%29) unnavigable and high-latitude (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latitude) waters may be unnavigable in winter because of freezing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freezing). Navigability also depends on the size of the vessel: A small river may not be navigable by a freighter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freighter), but it might be navigable by a smaller craft, like a motor boat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_boat) or kayak (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kayak). Therefore, whether a water body is considered navigable or unnavigable depends on the context.

Navigable waters of the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States), as defined in 33 CFR 329, are those waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide and/or are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce while the waterway is in its ordinary condition. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rivers_and_Harbors_Act_of_1899) (33 U.S.C. 403), approved 3 March 1899, prohibits the unauthorized obstruction of a navigable water of the U.S. This statute also requires a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Army_Corps_of_Engineers) for any construction in or over any navigable water, or the excavation or discharge of material into such water, or the accomplishment of any other work affecting the course, location, condition, or capacity of such waters.
Also, the Clean Water Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Water_Act) use the term "navigable waters," "navigable waters of the United States" and "navigability." These terms are dependent on judicial interpretation and are somewhat more flexible currently, in light of a U.S. Supreme Court decision on two joined cases: "Carabell v. United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carabell_v._United_States&action=edit&redlink=1)" and "Rapanos v. United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapanos_v._United_States)"[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navigability#cite_note-0).

Archaic
09-09-2009, 08:39 PM
The State Attorney for the State of Alabama stated that Navigable Waterway is any body of water that can has been used in commerce. The example he used to explain that way any waterway that has floated logs to a sawmill... Well that about covers every creek in SE Alabama...

fatman
09-09-2009, 10:10 PM
Agreed, a crafty way to get around the "navigable" thing. The problem is, the rules that we have to follow are usually left a little vague, so its up to the discretion of the "officer" if any of said rules are being broken...which sucks for us.

Matthew
09-10-2009, 06:54 AM
Laws and definations aren't made for common folks. They're made so lawyers can argue about it and then charge you a fortune.

Hernandoman
09-10-2009, 07:40 AM
In more times than not, the common man doesnt have the money or the will to fight when charged wrongly. Even if they do decide to fight it, they usually give up and decide "its just not worth it" and either pay the fine or plea down to a lesser charge,etc...

Further complicating matters is if the person being charged has some other illegal activity going on (like in posession of weed, probation violation,etc.)........

droptine
09-29-2010, 11:28 AM
A navigable waterway is defined as being able to float a raft with a bale of cotton and a goat on it from one end the other.

Martingeetars
09-29-2010, 01:09 PM
All the necessary things a man needs.I forgot my goat and cotton.:D

River Stained
09-29-2010, 01:16 PM
All the necessary things a man needs.I forgot my goat and cotton.:D

I would let you borrow my old goat, but my wife would miss her mother. :)

runswithbeer
09-29-2010, 01:27 PM
I would let you borrow my old goat, but my wife would miss her mother. :)

he could borrow mine(MIL), i think my wifes tired of her too.