The link isn't working for me.
is the case brief and oral arguments from the case. Hunting in city limits already has been a past practice if ILDNR keeps issuing permits for controlled Canada hunts within limits. I still need to keep digging around, but looks like SCOTUS is using definition of "section by section" for what is navigable. Also, the equal footing doctrine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_footing
is defined more. This decision does set precedence. Ironically, the U.S. filed an amicus brief in favor of the petitioner. Should be an enjoyable read to hear what they had to say. There is other cases mentioned that I can't locate right now (Montello
and Utah v. U.S.
(1933)). It seems that all water was navigable at the time of state inception unless otherwise stated. SCOTUS even mentioned Lewis and Clark journals in the opinion. But, it seems the nail in the coffin for hunters is that the it's still a state issue with no federal regulation that navigabitlity is "subject only to the federal government's powers over interstate and foreign commerce."
Not sure where this leaves us still. IL should make a point to clarify our waterways once and for all. Only if we all had the money to lobby and buy government.