What I've never understood is that on the coast the beaches are public and treated as a public highway as far as rules of the road go.
Once you get in Puget Sound they become private.
At the coast you can walk/drive down the public access and then walk up and down the beach as far as you want. Inside Puget Sound, you go to the park and can walk on the beach within it's boundaries.
Never have understood that one. Maybe it goes back to the days before our paved highways when the beach was used.

I know that OHWM applies to property rights after a certain point in history. I have been informed by both state and county folks that some of the older properties (the one I know if is over 100 yrs with the same family) do have property rights that not only include the ground under the water, but the water itself where it corsses the property. From what I understand, it is some kind of grandfathered property right.

I can't vouch for it's validity...but since the topic came up I figured I contribute

If you think the freshwater ownership issue is a convoluted mess, you should take a look at the saltwater ownership in Puget Sound.

From my understanding (as limited as that might be), the OHWM rule applies to ANY body of water that has been deemed "navigable". What determines that? That's where the murkiness appears. Only a court ruling can deem a waterway "navigable", so only a trip to court can ultimately tell you if you're in the right or in the wrong. There are no "grandfathered" rights of ownership of "navigable" waterways. But you might easily be arrested for trespassing on private property, and then have to go to court to find out that the waterway is indeed navigable and any deed showing ownership of said waterway would be voided by such a finding. For instance, Lake Washington has never been deemed a "navigable" waterway. Clearly it is navigable, but the state does not recognize it as such.

As for saltwaterfront, you must determine if the property has been deeded to the homeowner as oyster beds, under a mining contract, and where those tideland rights end...at the mean low tide mark, the extreme low tide mark, or what. The only way to find out is to call the State DNR Photo/Mapping Sales Office and ask them to send you a catalog of the available plot maps. Pick out the beaches you frequent, and order the maps that apply to you. It will tell you what's state land and what's been leased, deeded, and to where. You can reach their office at : 360-902-1234. The gal that answers the phone is super cool. If you need help interpreting the maps (some of them can be difficult to understand) Jim Thomas in the DNR Title/Records Office can help you out. He was very helpful with the questions I had. He can be reached at 360-902-1791.

This issue is anything but black and white. Black and white is where EVERYONE knows the answer and there's no need to get arrested and go to court to see where the chips fall. It's not easy getting an answer, either. After getting NO help from the Attorney General's Office, the WSP, or the WDFW I was lucky enough to get referred to Mr. Thomas by the Mason Co. Assessor's Office. Do your research to protect both yourself and the private property owners. Yelling "[Bleeeeep!] off!" to somebody who tells you to get off "their" property isn't the right way to handle it. Talk to them about it and see if both sides can be happy. Remeber, this issue became a hotbed partly due to slobby scumbag anglers (and I use that term loosely) dumping every kind of crap imaginable on the people's property, and those people are getting fed up.

Also remember that every piece of trash you pack out helps ensure our access to the water, every pice of trash you leave could result in another property owner getting fed up and denying you access to your favorite hole.

Question, How many miserable, hoop wearin, dip chewin, hair dyein, 4wheel drive havin, mud throwin, riverbar tearin up, camp fire buildin, tubin, diaper changin, used condom flickin, schmitty pop, animal beer, berry cooler drinkin, no garbage packin, insinc or brittney spears lookin, MIS-GUIDED, CLUMSEY, F****S does it take to inhibit my legal access to my local holes on my local river?

Answer----------UNFORTUNATLY-----JUST ONE


CAN YOU TELL I JUST GOT HOME FROM THE RIVER?

Hey guys,

Does anyone know where I could find the Washington State law (in writing, on the web) that has the wording for the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) and ownership of property?

I'd like to have a little paperwork in my back pocket to show the warden in case someone sicks him on me.

-N.

stormin, check this website out, it ought to help, if not go to your local city hall, or county engineers office, they also can supply you with a copy of this info.http://www.adventuresports.com/river/nors/states/wa-law.htm, hope this helps.

Try using this link to search through state law. It may take some time though to find the correct RCW. RCW 90 is water rights, but I am not sure if what your looking for is in there.
http://search.leg.wa.gov/pub/textsearch/default.asp

Ya know this is a hot topic:
First I'll start by saying when I was a kid I just went there and fished and if people didn't like it the cops would show and I'd leave.
More recently in my calmer days, there have been a couple of situations that occured on the NF lewis and EF lewis. On the northfork there's a gentlemen that owns the rock on the northside of the meathole. During the spring it's usually closed to boats so the best spot to fish is off his rock. So we used to just go there and fish and he'd yell at us to get off the rock and we'd yell back about the high water mark and then one day he called the cops. Well the cop showed up asked us over and told us we couldn't fish there anymore. I asked the cop why and explained about the high water mark. He said he didn't know the law and said that we just had to leave.
On another note we were fishing the EF of the lewis and there's a hole above daybreak bridge that rocks for winter runs. We'd always anchor there during the weekdays and on the weekends the guy would come out and yell about anchoring in that hole, claiming he owned the river. That guy I told to pound sand and he's now moved and the issue is over.
But overall, the best way to go is to ask before you even enter the property. You'd be surprised how many people let you fish there land if you give them fish to eat, and keep things clean. Some people I've even offered to help with hay for the summer to gain access during primetimes.
It's sort of like hunting ask and thou shall be granted access!
Keith

Hey Dr. Pepper,

I talked to the guy that runs the duck club at the mouth of the Dungeness. According to him, the Dunge is one of three rivers in Washington State in which the state deeded the property UNDER the river to the property owners. In other words, the property owners own all the property, to the middle of the river (not to the observed high water mark like other rivers) but the State owns the water itself (since it is navigable).

What this means is, the only way you can legally fish in the river without the property owner's permission, is from a floating device (boat, etc.) but the boat can't be in contact with the land, or logs or such that go into the river, even if the only thing touching land is an anchor. In their case, they have even been deeded the land in the salt water to the -4.0 tide mark, which in Dungeness Bay is WAAAY the heck out there... so you (legally) couldn't even anchor up out there without their permission... not that I'd want to this time of year anyhow, as you'd want to be wearing a flak jacket... I was down at the Oyster House on Saturday, and you could see & hear the duck hunters firing many rounds.

He said they are going to crack down even harder this year on trespassers on the duck club land near the mouth, and won't hesitate to call the GW's. I guess they've had an increase in problems in the past 4 years.

Anyway, just figured I'd give you a head's up and try and avoid a ticket. There are fish already upriver of that property anyways, and with a little rain, we'll all be fishing further upriver anyhow.

-N.

Hey I saw your post and wanted to fill you in on the legalities of the situation. I'm a commercial real estate agent in Tacoma and wanted to inform you on how it works. The post that talked about the river being navigable by boat is correct!! If the river is navigable by boat, the property owner owns to the high water mark, aka the flood plain. If it's not navigable by boat, the adjoining property owners own the "the said" middle of the river. I got into an argument with a property owner telling me I was trespassing on his property. When I explained that I wasn't and if he didn't believe me he could call the sheriff and he would explain it to him, he backed away and let me go about my business. This situation seems to come up a lot these days and it's important to be informed on the law. Let me know if there are any questions.

Hey Dom,

This guy I talked to said that the way you explained is how it normally works on most rivers, but that the Dungeness and two other rivers in the state were not this way.

He said these rivers were originally deeded by the state as strictly for irrigation, that the state didn't view them as having any fish-holding value. Because of this, the state deeded all the land, even the land UNDER the river, to the property owners.

This guy sure seemed like he knew his stuff, had done his research, etc. Perhaps as a real estate dealer, you could do a little poking around and find out if this is true. I'd also like to know about the Elwha, if it falls under the normal OHWM rules or not.

-N.

Dom,

You are correct. The state never had the authority to deed land below the OHWM on a navigable river. They may have deeded the property that way, butg they had no authority to do it in the first place.

Of course, if the sheriff doesn't see it that way, and you get thrown in the pokey, then it's going to cost you to defend yourself. It may or may not be worth it to you to test the waters, so to speak.

Stormin' I was just curious if the duck hunters could own the river. I probably wouldn't fish there though because there's a chance of getting shot. Sorry this is brief, but I gotta get to bed.

~ Dr Pepper

I'll do some checking on the Dungeness and talk to the state real estate authority to get the facts. This is an interesting topic and I'd like to do some research on it so we can get this straight. As far as whether a river is navigable by boat, the government decides that. How you find that out is out of my hands, but the government decides or decided what rivers are navigable. Anything else? When I get an answer from the real estate authority I’ll be sure to post it. Also, an enter tube or rubber raft doesn’t constitute a boat, a boat constitutes a boat. Does this make sense? You can email me for other questions and I’ll be sure to try and get them. Happy fishing!

This seems to be confusing to some people. The bottom line is this. If you can float it
it is public property belpw the normal highwater mark. Therefore you can go anywhere you want to below that mark and noone can say anything about it.

Review of the relationship of federal and state law regarding rivers:

The section on National River Law discusses river ownership, use, and conservation law throughout the United States. Following is a review of what individual states can and cannot lawfully do with the rivers within their borders.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that rivers that are navigable, for title purposes, are owned by the states, "held in trust" for the public. This applies in all fifty states, under the "Equal Footing Doctrine."
Rivers that do meet the federal test are automatically navigable, and therefore owned by the state. No court or government agency has to designate them as such.
The federal test of navigability is not a technical test. There are no measurements of river width, depth, flow, or steepness involved. The test is simply whether the river is usable as a route by the public, even in small craft such as canoes, kayaks, and rafts. Such a river is legally navigable even if it contains big rapids, waterfalls, and other obstructions at which boaters get out, walk around, then re-enter the water.
The states own these rivers up to the "ordinary high water mark." This is the mark that people can actually see on the ground, where the high water has left debris, sand, and gravel during its ordinary annual cycle. (Not during unusual flooding.) It is not a theoretical line requiring engineering calculations. Where the river banks are fairly flat, this mark can be quite a distance from the edge of the water during medium water flows. There is often plenty of room for standing, fishing, camping, and other visits.
States cannot sell or give away these rivers and lands up to the ordinary high water mark. Under the "Public Trust Doctrine," they must hold them in perpetuity for public use.
The three public uses that the courts have traditionally mentioned are navigation, fishing, and commerce. But the courts have ruled that any and all non-destructive activities on these land are legally protected, including picnics, camping, walking, and other activities. The public can fish, from the river or from the shore below the "ordinary high water mark." (Note that the fish and wildlife are owned by the state in any case.) The public can walk, roll a baby carriage, and other activities, according to court decisions.
States do have authority and latitude in the way they manage rivers, but their management must protect the public uses mentioned above. They can (and must) prohibit or restrict activities that conflict with the Public Trust Doctrine. "Responsible recreation" must be allowed, but activities that could be harmful, such as building fires, leaving trash, and making noise, can legally be limited, or prohibited, in various areas. Motorized trips and commercial trips can legally be limited or prohibited by state governments.
State and local restrictions on use of navigable rivers have to be legitimately related to enhancing public trust value, not reducing it. Rivers cannot be closed or partially closed to appease adjacent landowners, or to appease people who want to dedicate the river to fishing only, or to make life easier for local law enforcement agencies.
State governments (through state courts and legislatures) cannot reduce public rights to navigate and visit navigable rivers within their borders, but they can expand those rights, and some states have done so. They can create a floatage easement, a public right to navigate even on rivers that might not qualify for state ownership for some reason, even if it is assumed that the bed and banks of the river are private land. Note that this floatage easement is a matter of state law that varies from state to state, but the question of whether a river is navigable, for title purposes, and therefore owned by the state, is a matter of federal law, and does not vary from state to state. Note that a state floatage easement is something that comes and goes with the water: When the water is there, people have a right to be there on it, and when it dries up, people have no right to be there. But rivers that are navigable for title purposes are public land up to the ordinary high water mark, so that even when the river runs dry, people still have the right to walk along the bed of the river.
Only federal courts can modify the test of standards that make a river navigable for title purposes. States cannot create their own standards, either narrower or wider in scope. They can’t make definitive rulings about which rivers are navigable for title purposes, only a federal court can.
The situation gets confusing when a state agency or commission holds hearings about navigability and public use of rivers. Landowners, sheriffs, and other people tend to think that such an agency or commission can create state standards that determine which rivers are public and which are private. But these are matters of federal law which state agencies cannot change.
State agencies should make provisional determinations that various rivers meet the federal test of navigability for title purposes. These provisional determinations should be based simply on the rivers' usability by canoes, kayaks, and rafts. They should then proceed to the question of how to manage navigation and other public uses of the river. In these days of government cut-backs, the agency should look for solutions that use existing enforcement agencies rather than setting up new ones. Littering, illegal fires, offensive behavior, trespassing on private land, and numerous other offenses are all covered by existing laws, and offenders can be cited by the local police, sheriff's office or state police.

Yeah, yeah, I followed that link earlier and read that text... what this guy on the Dungeness is saying is that three rivers in Washington state are EXCEPTIONS to this federal law, the Dungeness being one of them. They are excepted, he said, because they originally were defined as irrigation sources, not navigable rivers. The Dungeness, however, in the definition above, is clearly navigable.

So like I said before, I'd like to know if anyone knows where to look to find the definitive answers for the Dungeness and the Elwha.

Thanks!!

-N.