What can be done on a local level to make the penalties tougher or at the least....enforced for poaching.

Especially repeat offenders.

So on the river stuff guys, technically if you're in a boat and hunting out of the boat (over water) you're not trespassing unless you knowingly cross a property boundary fence. However, if your projectile lands on a private property which you do not have the right/permission to hunt on you have trespassed by omission. If you get out of the boat and walk on terra firma you are also trespassing.

If you want to recover downed game, you must make a reasonable attempt to contact the landowner and gain verbal/written permission. If contact cannot be made, you legally cannot trespass without fear of being ticketed for such. However, if contact with the landowner is made and they refuse you right of access, knowing downed game is on their property, they may be held liable for "wanton waste of game."

If you want to hunt a river, you technically can hunt off of sand bars that are below the high bank of the river. While some legal plats describe the private property going to the middle of the river, they will not be able to cite you for trespassing, you may get harassed and asked to leave though; but if worse came to worse you couldn't get a ticket for it (they would want to know how you got there though), same thing goes for shooting though, if you shoot up and a single pellet lands up on the high bank then you've trespassed.

Possession limits

State allows possession to mean what you've taken on the hunting trip (2 days worth of limits for migratory birds and most if not all other game birds).

Federal regulations say that, no, possession means how many birds you have in your possession at any given time. Birds/fish in freezer do count according to federal law; they charged someone with over the possession limit on something like perch in either 2011 or 2012.

-deboning the meat is simple, if you debone the meat at camp it is technically illegal. The fact is they want to be able to determine the meat that came from "x" animal. Same reason you have to leave a wing on migratory birds until you get back to the house, they want to know that certain amounts of meat came from certain animals.

So you if have 8 quarters in the cooler they will expect to see 2 heads (for deer). If you just have a cooler full of meat, they have no idea how many deer it came from. Logic (having 45 lbs of meat obviously came from only 1 deer) is not a part of this law.

[This message has been edited by OnlyForNow (edited 1/4/2013 9:17a).]

OFN- hit on the river stuff.

IIRC, the boundary line is the median between the high-water mark and the water's edge. As for navigable, I seem to remember the phrase "navigable in part means navigable in full" which means that if any part of the river is considered navigable then the river is considered navigable all the way to it's source.

As for duck hunting on a river adjacent to private land, you can set up on the bank as long as you're below the boundary mentioned above. And you're always responsible for where your shot lands, but in practice unless there's a house or person extremely close by nobody will know if any shot falls on the private land.

I believe Finn is correct. So of course the ferry don't run up and down the brazos no more, but the fact that boats are able to get in the brazos at some point means the entire thing is navigable.

technically drainage ditches can be navigable. With new legislation to be proposed this year the EPA is trying to get away with calling any ditch a "regulated" Water of the U.S. under Section 404 of the CWA.

And as an FYI- tons of the flood control ditches & bayous in Houston present some really good fishing opportunities.

Myself and some other flyfishers catch a lot of bass, bream, and tilapia flyfishing various bayous & ditches. If it holds water year-round and has deeper holes for the fish to winter in you're going to catch fish.

quote:

---

As for navigable, I seem to remember the phrase "navigable in part means navigable in full" which means that if any part of the river is considered navigable then the river is considered navigable all the way to it's source.

---

Not necessarily. USACE publishes a navigable waterways list with limits of "navigability"

http://media.swf.usace.army.mil/pubdata/environ/regulatory/jurisdiction/navlist.pdf

They also throw out the term "navigable in fact" in terms of Section 10 regulation on occasion to seemingly extend the reach of their jurisdiction.

You're talking about completely different definitions of "navigability".

USACE and USFWS =/= each other.

Ursus, did you ever gather any responses regarding the deboning of meat in the field?

Yes I did, got busy and forgot to report back.

#1--"Yeah, technically you aren't supposed to, but I probably wouldn't say anything unless there was something else involved."

#2--"Let me check, but I've never written a ticket for it."

#3--FB messaging him "Yea. Not supposed to process beyond qrtrs in camp" Me--"yeah I asked 2 other gws about the deboning issue, and got 2 different answers" him--"Yea. Ull have that."

Meant to call a couple captains, haven't thought about it until now.

quote:

---

So on the river stuff guys, technically if you're in a boat and hunting out of the boat (over water) you're not trespassing unless you knowingly cross a property boundary fence.

---

This may not be completely true. A friend of mine owns some land on the Lampasas River - and his deed specifically states that he owns all the way to the midpoint of the river. He has paid taxes on that portion of the channel for many decades now.

quote:

---

However, if your projectile lands on a private property which you do not have the right/permission to hunt on you have trespassed by omission.

---

Yep. Which is why river hunting can be.....tricky.

quote:

---

If you get out of the boat and walk on terra firma you are also trespassing.

---

Again - that depends. Using the example above, even though you may still be in the channel, during the low water season the Lampasas has much of the channel as dry land. According to his deed, you would be trespassing if you were on dry land on his side of the channel.

According to other laws, you would not be. There is a massive gray area concerning what is owned by the State in terms of river channels and what is not. This really should be clarified to cover all waterways.

In your example schmelba, I think state law rules here. You may for the purpose of a deed, own to the river, but the public has the right of use between the median of the high water mark and the water's edge, as long as the waterway in question is considered navigable. I don't know if the Lampasas River is considered navigable though.

They might force the individual to leave, or arrest them if they refused to leave. However, state law takes over. If it went to court, state law would take precedent and the offender would not be charged with trespassing. If that happened, I'd fight the state to get back taxes paid though.

It is a gray area, but most people are respectful of it. If I was camping on a sand bar and someone give me grief about being on their property I would talk to them about it, if they wouldn't ease up, I'd back up and move down river. Not worth the fight imo.

quote:

---

Yes I did, got busy and forgot to report back.

#1--"Yeah, technically you aren't supposed to, but I probably wouldn't say anything unless there was something else involved."

#2--"Let me check, but I've never written a ticket for it."

#3--FB messaging him "Yea. Not supposed to process beyond qrtrs in camp" Me--"yeah I asked 2 other gws about the deboning issue, and got 2 different answers" him--"Yea. Ull have that."

---

Hmmm so basically you aren't supposed to debone the quarters, but it sounds like you may have some wiggle room if the GW is a cool guy.
Sounds like I may take the chance next time because it would be a lot nicer to debone while the meat is still hanging and its easier to pull the meat off. Not to mention, disposal is easier as well.

Place where I hunt has Mulies and Whitetails. They do cross breed. What rules apply for the hybrids?

quote:

---

This may not be completely true. A friend of mine owns some land on the Lampasas River - and his deed specifically states that he owns all the way to the midpoint of the river. He has paid taxes on that portion of the channel for many decades now.

---

You may own it, and therefore have more rights to modify it, but you can't prevent the public from moving in the water if it is navigable, and this typically includes portages up to the middle point of low and high bank.

There is navigable by statute, and navigable in fact.

In fact basically means if you legally got a boat on it, and can float things downstream on it for a reasonable public purpose, then it is navigable.

That is how all those people are legally able to go tubing on the Guad, Comal, and Frio even though those are mostly on Spanish land grants where the river beds are owned privately.

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/nonpwdpubs/water_issues/rivers/navigation/riddell/navigability.phtml

All the Spanish Land grant thing really means is that you're getting the screw from the state because you're paying taxes on rivers that laws mostly limit your ability to modify the flow or path of, and prevent you from denying others access to from public access points like public right of ways or other private properties that permit access.

Mouth, the problem is that by statute the State owns most riverbeds, which conflicts with many property deeds (and taxes).

There is a lot of gray area, even with what is defined as the limits of the waterway and where private property begins.