Pantera1

What a crock !!

satisfactionII

I worked for 14 Federal Judges for 8 years. Daily experience with all of them. My take on Judges: some of them(a majority) make some of the dumbest rulings you could ever think of. Allmost all the time their lawclerks write the rulings. A large majority of the Judges are morally decrepit, egotistcal buttheads, and have GOD complex. Judges are not your friend.

CcanDo

Does that ruling start precedence for control of water rights.Rationalization would indicate it does.
Therefore,the town that has been using the lake or river as a supply source would owe a royalty to......someone ?....Would that fee pass to the consumer .......probably.....What about the electric power generators,do they have to pay a fee ?.....Of course,that would mitigate resistance for nuclear generators......Then,there is the water toll booth for freight......the railroad,airlines and truck-lines wouldn't mind that.

I do know there is discussion regarding drilled water wells.Point is,mineral rights ownership may own any minerals in water pumped from the ground.Therefore,water pumped from the ground might be construed to require a meter and proportionate fee.

The Alabama lawsuit might have another complexion related to the La. Judges ruling.

Some garbage,huh ? But no more than the Judges ruling.....There has to be a hidden agenda.

CcanDo

Thanks Scott, for finding this and pointing it out !!!

Also,thanks for the hospitality at Lake Of The Ozarks !!!

RonS

The way I understand the ruling it has more to do with when the mississippi floods, in other words lets say you had your boat dock at the waters edge which is normaly 300 ft from your lake house. We get a ton of rain and the lake floods within 100ft from your house. The ruling would prevent me from coming past your dock where the lake normaly ends and fishing in your back yard which would now be only 100ft from your house. In other words just because the water is in your back yard it does'nt mean its now public property and anyone has access to it.

I'm not an attorney but that's the way I understand it.

ducktail

The waters of rivers and lakes are to a certain extend also touched by this law "ebb and flood", depends where they are. Better try to get in contact with those "commons" who tried already to get access to the coast shores:
http://onthecommons.org/node/708

Blaming a judge for following the original literally text of a law or a granted right is no good idea as a judge has to do right that. The best one can do is making the judge convinced that he has to take care literally for these old rights of the commons from the beginning of the state building.