Was looking in on a discussion on Jason Mitchell’s Facebook page. Apparently South Dakota has or is intending to pass a law that gives property rights to landowners of flooded lands. So portions of lakes will pretty much be treated like private hunting land.
This is the only article I was able to pull up on it
It will be interesting to see what comes out of the state legislature. I know they were writing hunting and fishing rights in to the state constitution. Will have to see if they make list of all non meandering lakes.
If u read the fine print of the bill i guess landowners would lose their rights to the water as well so at least they can gove fishing privileges to the highest bidder and it applies only to non meandering waters…thats what my boss was told by his friend who is a lawyer
There was some discussion about it on Dakota Anglers Facebook page also.
Please post any updates if you find anything. I will do the same.
I talked to a few South Dakota people at the NW Sportsmans Show last week. It sounded like this could have a big impact on which lakes are ok for the public to fish. It sounded like GFP is still trying to figure out the impact. Hopefully they have something soon.
This is probably a necessary step so China can buy land and our gubment won’t have to just give it to them.
This is probably a necessary step so China can buy land and our gubment won’t have to just give it to them.
Don’t you mean Russia?
Don’t you mean Russia?
Are there Uranium mines in SD?
Not trying to hi jack this thread in any way. But something very similiar happened last fall to me on Mille Lacs. I was duck hunting on the west side south of garrison I waded out with a friend where we spotted some golden eyes the previous morning. And a native that lived across the frontage road proceeded to yell out his windown that I was on his land. I crossed on state land and I was out in the water and explained that he doesn’t own the water I’m hunting on. So he continued to act belligerent so we both ended up calling a sheriff his was a tribal sheriff. Both sheriffs showed up and explained to me that he claims he owns the water out from shore for 120’wide by 80’long and they told me he would have to post the water and get approval from DNR stating he owns this water but they said the land was in his family for years and they owned it when the water level was lower and it was all land at the time and basically the state sheriff said natives can do what they want and get whatever they want around here so he probably will own that water soon. We both laughed in disgust but both sheriffs said if he does do all the correct paperwork and leg work he can mark off with buoys and technically own that portion of Mille Lacs!
A little talk about the subject starting at 1:30
Watch “Dakota Angler 2-Minute Fishing Report (4/5/17)” on YouTube
Swan indian both drys in clark county reetz and goose are all closed immediatly
There will be an official announcment today at 2pm with a complete list to my understanding
Pretty crazy stuff, wonder where it will go from here.
A Property owner tried to get public ditch hunting stopped by claiming he owned the air over his land and shot etc cannot trespass.
Mwal
It will be a war..gfp will not be answering any questions from what im told due to a lawsuit and there is noone to contact for clarification until legislature decides where to go with it…that list is just for now there could be more added at any given time
If this stands and private control these waters I hope the sdgfp rote tones the lakes. All these fish were put there by stocking and should not benefit private parties. I am not going on my annual trip there till this is resolved.
Swan indian both drys in clark county reetz and goose are all closed immediatly
There will be an official announcment today at 2pm with a complete list to my understanding
Forgive my ignorance here Brady
Are you saying Reetz, dry #1 & #2 are off limits to fishing as well as Swan?
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Brady Valberg wrote:</div>
Swan indian both drys in clark county reetz and goose are all closed immediatlyThere will be an official announcment today at 2pm with a complete list to my understanding
Forgive my ignorance here Brady
Are you saying Reetz, dry #1 & #2 are off limits to fishing as well as Swan?
Yup! Check out the link Arcticm1000 posted.
lOOKS LIKE IT COULD BE A PAY TO FISH AT THE CHOICE OF THE FARMER. PRIVATE AND FISHING LIKE SOME COUNTRIES. BUY THE PERMIT FROM THE LAND OWNER. CAN CONTROL THE HARVEST AND FISHING PRESSURE.
lOOKS LIKE IT COULD BE A PAY TO FISH AT THE CHOICE OF THE FARMER. PRIVATE AND FISHING LIKE SOME COUNTRIES. BUY THE PERMIT FROM THE LAND OWNER. CAN CONTROL THE HARVEST AND FISHING PRESSURE.
No that landowners do not have superior rights to the water or ice over private land as well…this ruling could last up to 10 months until the annual legilative meetings
Bullcans you are correct
The gfp will not be facilitaing a public access to these waters…nor can a landowners facilitate a non meandered body of water for the intended use of recreational purpose including hunting or fishing
Holy chit this passed?
SD legislature is a mess right now, they’re passing some crazy stuff with no regard to how it may play out in real life, gonna be lots of court battles to sort it all out. The next 2-3 years will be interesting, to be sure…
James Holst just posted this yesterday on FB…. 
“A few days after filming this week’s episode of In-Depth Outdoors with Marcus Quam out on a fabulous South Dakota fishery a court decision has shut down access to the lake we fished along with many others. Almost unbelievable to be honest. I truly hope South Dakota’s legislature is able to find a solution to keep these bodies of water open to the public.”
Done. Thanks for providing the link.
Thanks for posting the link.
When i signed it today around 10am there was 600 looks like theres over 3000 now…just remember if you post comments be respectful with what you say they dont overlook the sportsmans side of things and throw it out
Please share this with anyone who fishes south dakota waters resident or non resident..wether they fish the lakes included in this bill or not..small town economy will greatly suffer
If these landowners start making money by charging for fishing access it will become very hard to stop it.
If these landowners start making money by charging for fishing access it will become very hard to stop it.
Some lakes they already do.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>disco bobber wrote:</div>
If these landowners start making money by charging for fishing access it will become very hard to stop it.Some lakes they already do.
Many of the lakes that have Private pay accesses also have state owned ramps. Buckshots on Waubay is one. $3 to access there, but there are many times that you can’t get to that side of the lake on the ice because of heaves.
You could go it at Grenville, but many times there is a heave that runs down the middle of the lake, leaving no public access of that side.
The interpretation of this ruling is all over the place. If you look at it as EXACTLY as it’s written, even if you get permission from a landowner to access a body of water, you are only able to be ‘above’ their land boundaries.
Supreme Court ruled that “neither the public nor the Landowners have a superior right to use the waters and ice” sooooo….even if you have permission, you really don’t…
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
