cholst_at_bitstream.net wrote: > I'm a layman in legal matters, but it looks to me like this ruling is just > about hunting and fishing rights, and then only on those parts of the > river between the normal high- and low-water marks. So how is it supposed > to apply to kayakers and canoeists? You're not the only one who read it that way. If that is the ruling, the newspaper articles sound like they were written by someone who didn't read the judgement we just read. Unless there's something in the shorthand/legal references that indicate other rulings provide for the further restrictions, it sounds to me a bit like a tempest in a teapot. Any US (land use?) lawyers out in Paddlewise land? Mike *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************Received on Fri Sep 22 2006 - 12:19:23 PDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:31:21 PDT