Magnolia Springs GA

[Caver95]

You are correct. I was looking into this just the other day. Some states have used the 1800's basis of meandering lines IE: if the waterway is not meandered the Government does not consider it navigable. Luckily here in Florida in the 1800s just about the only way to get around was by boat, So Florida has used the definition that if the waterway was used to "transport goods or people" then it is navigable. Regardless if it is currently used for this purpose. Well just about every creek was used to transport people at sometime so if it can float a canoe it's navigable.

I believe the case in Crystal River some years ago brought this to a head.

So, why can't I paddle up to wakulla again?

[resolute]

I think you might find navigable waterway defined differently in Georgia. I've asked that question of several DNR rangers with different answers to enforcement,because how can somebody block off the Ichaway Natchaway river (long story). The one answer I got was a naviagable waterway is one that is controlled by the army corp of engineers.

same way in N. GA - just look at how some people have blocked off access to the Soquee river - one of the finest trout fishing rivers in the country. They have put signs and barbed wire across it in certain places to block the river (where the landowner owns both sides of the waterway)

JB

[Tegg]

So, why can't I paddle up to wakulla again?

Nick, you know better...

It's because you're not a badass cavediver that sticks to rigid standards and never deviates...

It's for your own safety. Kinda like the drinking age at 21 law but you vote at 18... you're just not mature enough to dive that location.

Now move on and go back to diving the low vis river caves where you need a shovel to get in...

[Genesis]

You are correct. I was looking into this just the other day. Some states have used the 1800's basis of meandering lines IE: if the waterway is not meandered the Government does not consider it navigable. Luckily here in Florida in the 1800s just about the only way to get around was by boat, So Florida has used the definition that if the waterway was used to "transport goods or people" then it is navigable. Regardless if it is currently used for this purpose. Well just about every creek was used to transport people at sometime so if it can float a canoe it's navigable.

I believe the case in Crystal River some years ago brought this to a head.

So, why can't I paddle up to wakulla again?

Get 'yerself a lawyer on retainer, and have at it.

Win the case and Wakulla is open - by water anyway.

(BTW from my reading of the law on the matter you've got a decent shot at it....)

[curtschu]

That is the point I was trying to make. I don't understand how the law pertains to one NAVIGABLE waterway and not another.

Especially if the waterway is already on state land, the sovereignty laws pertain to waterways that go through private property. This should be a no brainier but I’m not a lawyer. Is there any out there in the forum that can shed some light on this?

Now this obviously only pertains to Florida and maybe we should move the discussion.
I’m just so darn sick of Bureaucracy getting in the way of people using natural resources in this county. Don’t get me wrong I am all for setting boundaries and criteria for use.
Case in point, Eagles Nest, I even can deal with Diepolter. I'm currently do not qualify to dive them mainly because of not having Trimix yet, but also because I have never been one to log dives, so no Abe Davis. I'll log them now since that is what is required if I want access to certian caves.
I just don’t think it is right to just say no. We need our resources to be managed more like the west does.
They make it very clear you are on your own and if you get hurt don’t come crying to us.
If we gotta save your butt it’s gonna cost ya. I don’t know maybe I just think in too simple terms. But I love getting a discussion going.

[Genesis]

The Law in Florida already states this.

If no fee is charged for access, the landowner is not responsible for hazards which may exist, or the consequences of the actions of those who are using the resource.

Period.

End of discussion, full-stop.

Section 375.251, Florida Statutes

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/...375/Sec251.HTM

Claims that these restrictions are about "liability" - at least in Florida - are false.

If you are told this, point out that they're lying and the above mentioned statute - then ask what their real agenda is.

[curtschu]

But I was actually bring up another law regarding access. I think I might have blended my thought I just get going because the issue burns me so. I believe two Things

1. If the government owns it, then I own it and no one should keep me from using it. BTW this goes for mountians and woods ETC: also.

2. If I can get there by boat (in Florida) then you have no right to keep me out. because you don't own the water.

[resolute]

That is the point I was trying to make. I don't understand how the law pertains to one NAVIGABLE waterway and not another.

Especially if the waterway is already on state land, the sovereignty laws pertain to waterways that go through private property. This should be a no brainier but I’m not a lawyer. Is there any out there in the forum that can shed some light on this?

Now this obviously only pertains to Florida and maybe we should move the discussion.
I’m just so darn sick of Bureaucracy getting in the way of people using natural resources in this county. Don’t get me wrong I am all for setting boundaries and criteria for use.
Case in point, Eagles Nest, I even can deal with Diepolter. I'm currently do not qualify to dive them mainly because of not having Trimix yet, but also because I have never been one to log dives, so no Abe Davis. I'll log them now since that is what is required if I want access to certian caves.
I just don’t think it is right to just say no. We need our resources to be managed more like the west does.
They make it very clear you are on your own and if you get hurt don’t come crying to us.
If we gotta save your butt it’s gonna cost ya. I don’t know maybe I just think in too simple terms. But I love getting a discussion going.

Have you signed the petition out there circulating on the Cheryl and Emerald issue? And written a letter to Jeb Bush's office and your FL state representative and Senator asking for favorable responsiveness from the State Park officials on this matter? If not, please take the time and do so. Many of us can direct you to the resources to help you find example letters as well as there is an electronic petition circulating you can use (search the archives...) Please also get your friends and family to take a moment to do so, and remember that they can't keep saying "no" forever. The access policies will eventually change but its up to us to make that sooner rather than later...

JB

[rchrds]

So- as I have found, Georgia and Alabama do not have, or at least do not enforce at all, navigable waterway laws. This allows private landowners to completely block off spring runs and such and the local sherriff -WILL- arrest you for simple trespass.

As for florida- you will find that the law is interpreted differently in different counties. Of course, many know that both Blue Springs in the Florida Caverns State Park (which is off-limits to diving) and Jackson Blue fall under this- My understanding is that the judge (or judges?) in Jackson county do not consider springs and spring runs to be navigable waterways- as you are not navigating beyond the spring- (navigating where?) So- despite common sense might dictate the waterway itself, to which the spring discharges is the navigable part, and the historical argument, it doesnt really matter- cause if you are hauled into court in Jackson County, the same judge has already set the precedent, and you will be trespassing, despite florida law to the contrary. Unless you have a lot of money for lawyers, which I certainly dont.

I do not know for sure, but I would imagine that Wakulla, and Silver Springs have similar arrangements.

J

[Genesis]

One time up the appeals court road will fix that problem permanently.

Once an appeal has been heard on the matter that's the end of it - the opinion is published and that becomes binding on the court that is overruled.