Zach Matthews
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Andrew –
Your question was the same I had when I got home. I did some legal research and I am afraid the answer is ‘yes.’ The following is my professional opinion as a lawyer (which I wrote down because I would eventually participate in a challenge if the opportunity arose). However, I am not holding it out as something you should rely on:
In Georgia, if a waterway is classed as a “navigable stream,” the public enjoys an unhindered right to fish it, because the rights of owners of the adjacent land extend only to the “low water mark” of the river. O.C.G.A. § 44-8-5(a), (b). However, under Givens v. Ichauway, Inc., 268 Ga. 710, 493 S.E.2d 148 (Ga. 1997) (involving an attempt by a river user to challenge the non-navigability of a stream by floating it in a 16 foot long by 4 foot wide raft containing two passengers, a bale of cotton, and a goat – a typical 19th century commercial cargo), the test for “navigability” in Georgia is the “current commercial standard” for carrying “freight” (i.e. not rafters) down the river. The “current commercial standard” which was implicitly cited by the Court for carrying freight was a “barge which was 245 feet long, 35 feet wide, and drew seven and one-half feet of water.”
If a waterway does not meet the Givens standard, which the Toccoa River, among others, certainly does not, then that waterway is not a “navigable stream” under the current interpretation of the law. The rights of adjacent landowners to a non-navigable stream extend “to the thread or the center of the main current of the water.” O.C.G.A. § 44-8-2. If one landowner owns property on both sides of the river, that landowner’s rights extend across the entire river. That landowner has the right to restrict all access, including fishing, under trespass laws. In a final blow to commercial rafting interests, “navigability” is further restricted by O.C.G.A. § 44-8-5(a), which clarifies: “The mere rafting of timber or the transporting of wood in small boats shall not make a stream navigable.”
Consequently, it is clear under current law that landowners’ interests on the Toccoa and other smaller “trout streams” in Georgia would be able to effectively close down fishing should they so desire. The only exception would be rivers such as the Chattahoochee which are owned by the State of Georgia or the United States. To my knowledge, no trout stream in Georgia would pass the Givens test because none of them are large enough waterways. Thus, only rivers in which the actual stream bed is owned by the government would remain technically open to fishing.
Now, people raft the Toccoa all the time. They do so basically on the forbearance of the landowners, who are giving implicit permission by not asserting their technical right to post the land. My belief is that the landowners do not wish to provoke a change in the law. There are enough commercial rafting and fishing interests in Georgia to make up a significant lobby; possibly a stronger lobby than the landowners and certainly more motivated since this is their livelihood. If we saw mass posting of rivers like the Toccoa, the Chattooga, the Flint, etc., then I think the Legislature would alter the law.
Zach
Time for my version.
My cat is blameless – his box was dirty and I wouldn’t have wanted to use it if I were him either. I cleaned the box and resolved the issue.
As I said above, putting Neal in that situation was largely my fault. I also blame the Orvis company for rigging his pontoon with a holder that tempts anglers into letting their rods wave five to six feet in the air. (Although I think the holder is really meant for a spinning rod). ALWAYS leave your rods parallel to the waterline in a pontoon boat on any water with overhanging obstructions.
The millionaire’s land that Neal pulled out on is a prime hold for big trophy trout, because said millionaire feeds the fish pellets and attracts them for about a mile on both sides. Unfortunately, that’s the reality on the Toccoa; except in periods of high water or heavy hatches, the fish congregate near the feeders. Yet another example of the me-first attitude plaguing rivers in our country. The irony is, having drawn in all the fish, the millionaire has now posted signs saying “No Anchoring! Private Property!” in an effort to keep fishermen away.
As for not catching fish, I actually blame my ability to kill the strip properly. While Neal was off turning circles learning to control the boat, I counted no fewer than five follows. I drew one littler brown to my boat three separate times but he wouldn’t take the fly. I am not following through somehow, or my tippet was too heavy, or something. Gotta figure it out. The only big fish I drew out unfortunately followed out too far before striking and got within sight of Neal’s boat (not his fault), and spooked off. Knowing that hole and based on the flash I saw, that one probably was over 20″ – not 28″ but it would have been a decent fish. I have been in the boat when 5 lbs. plus fish were caught on that stretch.
Incidentally, I took the bladder out of the liner and inflated it last night, searching for holes.
I’ll post them Neal. 😉
To Neal’s credit, this was in large part my fault. I took him down a tight river in high water conditions which were serious enough that I had to really pay attention to keep the boat in order while still trying to fish. I have eight years of experience in my pontoon boat. Neal had his out for the third time. We would have been far wiser to simply float the river once without rods and reels to let him get the feel for it, then to come back at about half as much generation for fishing.
Zach
PS My right pontoon sprung a leak on the way home.
Zach, please excuse the ignorance, but is that Lite Brite dubbing that you are mixing in with the synthetic hair or is there another version of Lite Brite that I am not aware of?
I don’t understand this reaction guys, and I think if you think about it a second you will agree with me. Simms has never billed itself as “fly fishing products.” The company is called “Simms Fishing Products.”
They told me they were going to get into the conventional fishing market in a bigger way when I was out there last year. I think this is a good idea. It extends the base of the company and makes it stronger. A broader sales base allows them to do more research and development, while still lowering the cost of their products based on volume sales. It also ensures the company weathers what are clearly bad economic times, and if I know the mentality at Simms, it will help make bait anglers more aware of some of the environmental crusades fly fishermen tend to spearhead.
Patagonia makes products for all kinds of non-fly fishing markets. So does Cloudveil. So do L.L. Bean and Orvis. Cabelas and Bass Pro are built on non-fly fishing markets. Does it really make sense for Simms to limit itself to our little slice of the pie? Are rainproof coats and high-end fleeces only useful to fly fishermen? Several years ago Simms made camoflage Guide Waders for the duck market. I have been trying to get them to bring them back ever since. 🙂
Personally I don’t see any problem with Simms sponsoring a walleye tournament or for that matter professional bass fishermen. Those guys are anglers too and most of them deserve our respect. As far as sponsoring the Cuttie-thon goes, Cameron, I would just say that Simms has a lot on its plate. I’ve made a formal pitch to them to sponsor this site and been turned down; one of the only companies who actually said no. (Maybe THE only company, actually). Their explanation made perfect sense: at the time of my pitch, my website did not represent the greatest value for their money, and they had a lot of other things to sponsor, some of them more worthy. I am not dogging the Cuttie-thon, I’m just saying that they get all kinds of requests for money yearly and they have to pick and choose more than you may imagine.
Zach
But, I have been watching his site since he started publishing at the end of the magazine with Gierach and his prices have tripled. That amazes me because it has not been that long.
Kevin –
Do you see why the magazines regard the end of book painting as an “advertisement” they should not have to pay for now?
Zach
Hey Cameron –
I don’t think 800 pixels would ever have fit here; the board panel is only 900 pixels wide and the avatars alone are 100 pixels.