The logic, Steve, is simple. If you buy a building on a piece of property in downtown Seattle, then you are required by law (and your insurance company) to provide and pay for ensuring safe access to that building. That's why urban property owners and managers make sure that their garages are well lit and that the sidewalks in front of their buildings are clear of snow or other potentially dangerous obstacles. This is the responsibility they accepted, along with the associated costs, when they acquired the property.

Similalry, anybody who buys a piece of property bordering a public waterway should understand that there are people who will want to reach the adjacent shore. Since the law is clear that the river and its shore is public property, they should be prepared to accept that keeping that area clean may become their problem and their expense.

As our rivers become increasingly urbanized, I believe access needs to be ensured. If that burden has to fall on the property owners, then so be it. Consider it a cost of ownership and decide accordingly whether you can accept and afford it.

As for the Snoqualmie example, I am a fisherman, so that is my primary motivation for wanting to get to the river. Presumably, because this is a site about fishing, others will have the same concern.

Gerard W.
Seattle, WA