Idiots in the river

[Rocketfish]

Jesse--Same here in Va. Something called a "Kings Grant Deed". A lot of court time has been expended over this but the land owners have prevaled. You can float on the water but you can't touch bottom because it belongs to the landowner.

I can imagine a landowner shooting a guy in the boat because his fly touched the bottom and a sign in the shore..."Just floating lines or I will open fire"

[Rocketfish]

I think that only (currently) applies to a section of the Jackson River (otherwise the Shenandoah River would be littered with the bodies of countless anglers), a piece of water that's been hotly contested for years.

Rocketfish, if I were you I would have moved a bit closer to the bridge and "accidentally" allowed my backcast to drift up and back a bit

Regards,
Scott

Scott, that's a good one!

[EdD]

Originally Posted by Steven McGarthwaite
Nobody can file claim to a segment of any water system in the USA.

You are going to need a better lawyer, the courts has found for the landowner in this matter in the state of Georgia to the point where a heat discussion broke out with a guy floating down a north Georgia stream ending when the landowner shot him, a non-fatal wound. The courts found the landowner not guilty.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the size of the stream have something to do with it? Doesn't a state have to delcare a body of water or a stream to be have a public right-of-way. Otherwise every dinky trickle of water would be an invitation to trespass.

Ed

[rainbowchaser]

The definition of navigable waters has been left up to the states. Here in Michigan that means that each body of water is subject to individual court decisions. Most have not been litigated. The DNR has proposed a definition of navigable water but has been unable to get it through the legislature.

[Kerry Stratton]

http://www.nationalrivers.org/us-law-public.htm

[Uncle Jesse]

http://www.georgiariverfishing.com/G...oOwnsRiver.htm

[AllenOK]

I have always maintained that it is in every fisherman's best interest to keenly know and understand Riparian rights in the State that they live in.

Here in Oklahoma, we are blessed. Landowners that own property that fronts on a waterway own the land under the water to a point halfway to the other bank. If said landowner owns the land on both sides of a stream, they own the land under the water from one bank to the other. However, the WATER is public, as long as you don't make contact with the land under the water, it's public. The common saying here in OK is, "If it's deep enough to float a boat, it's public."

I have a kayak. I can freely navigate in 6" of water. I can get to areas most powerboats cannot. This can and does lead to confrontations with landowners. Although I have NOT witnessed this, or heard of it happening, one of my guide friends has cautioned all the kayakers on my local board to "keep your eyes out" when you're literally up a creek somewhere out in the sticks. Such remote places have been known to have dubious "cash crops" growing, sometimes with armed guards present, who tend to shoot first, and don't like to ask questions.

Someone mentioned a "King's Grant". This is a legal thing that probably can prevent access to "navigable water", since the legislation predates our government.

Down in Texas, I've heard about a "Spanish Land Grant", deeded property from when the land belonged to the Spanish Crown. I think that kind of grant actually gives ownership of the water and water rights to the holder of the deed.

The Federal Government defines "navigable waterway" as a stream that can support commerce, transportation, and recreation. The Supreme Court defines the "commerce" part as a stream capable of floating logs or paddling canoes for at least part of the year. That's because when the Northwest Ordinance was written in 1795(?), the bulk of commerce was carried in canoes, or was in the form of logs floating downstream to a mill.

The problem is that the individual States see this VERY differently. Some States stick with the Federal view. Pennsylvania decides which streams are "navigable" on a stream-by-stream, mile-by-mile basis, in the courts. Kansas has declared that only three rivers are "navigable", the Arkansas, the Kansas, and the Neosho/Grand River.

Unfortunately, the only way this is ever going to be resolved is for a case to go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In-Fisherman did a nice write-up on this in some of the issues; most of that was condensed down in a chapter in a book I bought last year. Most of that is what I based this post on.

[Byron haugh]

State laws on the type of streams most of us fish on rule. It is never static. If you aren't careful, landowners who usually have a big presence in state legislatures often attempt to change the law to exclude recreational uses of rivers. Now, you have to admit that one cause of this are the thoughtless fishers who leave gates open, pollute and climb over fences and damage the same.
The best way to protect open water is to be respectful of property and keep tabs on proposed changes to state laws regarding riparian laws..........

[Kerry Stratton]

State laws on the type of streams most of us fish on rule. It is never static. If you aren't careful, landowners who usually have a big presence in state legislatures often attempt to change the law to exclude recreational uses of rivers. Now, you have to admit that one cause of this are the thoughtless fishers who leave gates open, pollute and climb over fences and damage the same.
The best way to protect open water is to be respectful of property and keep tabs on proposed changes to state laws regarding riparian laws..........

I will agree that the cause of some landowners to attmept to change laws regarding access to rivers are thougtless people with little respect for property but I will also contend that some landowners are arogant, selfish asses and want to keep people out for their own personal reasons.

[shortcaster]

Just got back from 3 days offishing in N GA. The fishing was GREAT! The catching was only so so. Land owners are leary of people comming on because a few dopes trash the area. I found that if you're courteous & ask permission most will say ,"go ahead." Their's a lot of public access there if you have the gumption to get to it & don't trash it. GA has a $1200.00 fine for littering. Too bad it's not 3X that.