This will certainly leave you shaking your head in disbelief...

[Shack]

The "third half" of the story is that some bubbas got arrested for trespassing, and they tried to defend themselves by saying they had "a right" to be there because they were fishin'.
Gotta love the Media on this!! Rush to print - screw the facts.
Maybe much ado about nuttin'.

It looks like the words "no rights" vs. "illegal" are being used too casually. They aren't really the same. One is still permissve to a point, but the other is literally restrictive.

The press are mincing words on these reports. The court determined that there exist "no right" to fish at a specified area, but stopped short of saying that it was "illegal" either. I can't claim the "right" to fish "anywhere", but I would still have the right to fish. I just have to find a spot of water that is no specified as being off-limits. (Crabbers don't have the right to lay pots in channels.) (but hey got the right to go crabbin'.)


Legaese from court record below:
"To the extent that Magistrate Judge Kirk found a federal common law right to fish and hunt over the privately owned lands of Walker Cottonwood Farms property when it is periodically flooded by the Mississippi River, the Court DECLINES TO ADOPT the Magistrate Judge's recommendation."

"Also, to the extent that Magistrate Judge Kirk found that the Plaintiffs have a state law right to fish and hunt on Walker Cottonwood Farms' property, when it periodically floods from waters of the Mississippi River, the Court DECLINES TO ADOPT the recommendation, and the Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment is DENIED."

I'm with the crowd who will not loose any sleep over this one.

G'nite