I had an incident recently that I would like to gain some knowledge on. I floated the wynoochee and beached the boat hopped out with my waders on and began to fish the run. A few casts in a man and woman came down with there poles and told me this was private property and told me to move on. I politely obliged and went on my way. But was curious if they legally have the right to do so. I was standing in the water the entire time. I looked at the navigable river map and there is nothing definitive on it; listing the wynoochee as "probably navigable". Do property owners own the river bed? Is it legal to fish there if the only thing touching "their" property is my anchor? I have never had this experience before and only assume it was due to the amount of people out and about on the river. I am wondering if anyone has any legal clarifications on this or can put me to someone with the state or wdfw(enforcement?) to get a better understanding of this.

Thanks

i remember something about the normal high water mark being the line

It depends on the specific waterbody. In some cases, ownership goes to the middle of the stream and the upland owner owns the bed. In others, the State owns the bed up to OHW. Unless they sold it which the state has done.

In WY, you can float through private property can not stand or anchor. It would be nice if WDFW or some other statewide LE could clearly state the law. That said, you could be right legally and still get run off by an irate and armed landowner.

This is true according to usgs definition of navigable rivers. But a stream that is defined as "probably navigable"? Seems a gray area is an understatement.

No one owns the gravel bar. Its the same on the Satsop at Cook creek corner. You can walk on the gravel bar, park your boat whatever. The land owner owns the access (road, trail, field..). Don't ever let someone bully you off a gravel bar. Gravel bar (according yo WDFW and GHCS) is riverbed, even when exposed.

There are a number of locations in this state where the land owners owns the river bottom(including the gravel bar). Unfortunately the amount the river the land owner has (to the high water mark, to the river center, to the whole bottom) depends on the individual deed and can vary from parcel. To be sure check with the county assessor which fortunately today is usually on line. Just need the legal description of the property in question.

Curt

Correct.

In Grays Harbor, you can use "legal description" OR a persons name, this is a major change. Software update, recently, made this possible or maybe it was just a change in how GH County allows a more open access to public records.

Don't trust the property maps on GH's website. Read the legals. We owned a piece of property there and the map was not only wrong but they couldn't explain how it got that way. Gave us something like 30% more land. Plus, we owned across a creek, both sides, but nothing that I recall in the legal said if we owned the bed.

I would have laughed and proceeded to keep fishing unless you already ran your stuff from top to bottom and it was time to move on anyways. Lol. Good luck,

SZ


I go by the high water mark...........

The ecology link seems to say that we can access, by water, all waters. But, it gets fuzzy when the motto, is privately owned. You could float a river, even if the upland owner owned the bottom. But, you couldn't anchor or wade. If they own to OHW you can walk, anchor, use the land below OHW but you can't cross "their" uplands.

We own tidelands but I have been told that we can't stop the public from simply walking across it. They have to legally access it, but they could then walk along it. And, they certainly couldn't dig shellfish there.

As I talk with folks who have worked in land-use and access issues there are some really interesting twists with every state different.

Doubtful that their legal description states to the centerline of the river, or if they own property on both sides it probably has an exclusion for the river. The description of "the river" is pretty loose, however it usually means OHW or edge of vegetation along the Wynoochee. A lot of land owners will use this to their advantage. I.e. defining their property boundary as the meander margin to save on taxable land, or the opposite pushing it to the edge of the water to create enough land to subdivide it.

Most likely you pay the same in taxes for the gravel bar you were standing on as the people who kicked you off of it.

The WA Supremes are looking into a navigable waters case. Somebody filled/raised their land on Lake Chelan. At one time, it was all upland. Then, a dam was built that seasonally raised the lake to flood the land. So, the landowner filled the (former) upland so that it remained always upland, and therefore buildable. The state was sued for allowing this because it "took away navigable waters from the people and the state has a trust responsibility to protect the waters".

It gets really convoluted in streams that regularly wander across floodplains.

I was recently involved in one on the Wynoochee where a family trust received 75 acres or something from deceased. The brothers and sisters divided the property evenly and each got 25 Ac+/-.

Then the river changed course and left the one who wanted most of the river frontage (an inside corner) with 7 acres. Property lost 18 acres over the course of a couple winters. She is trying to sue her family to re-adjust the boundaries to be equitable again. What a mess. The lawyers are having fun with it though.

Goes back to how you write the legals. Start at an upland point and go x feet on y degrees to the next corner. And so on. I think, when I asked this question about boundaries with streams, that the determining factor is the distance from the fixed point.

I will never leave a gravel bar. Had the tribal cop on the Skokomish tell me if I was on the gravel bar (island in the middle of the stream actually) when he made his next rounds, he was going to put waders on and come get me. Three bobber downs, and two keepers later I was done before he came back. I told him the law. Streambed/high water mark, he wasn't hearing it. I told him I follow state laws on state land. He didn't appreciate that either. Game warden told me I'm right. Stay out of the brush, trees and grass and I'm good. Gravel bars are fair public use.

Don't let whinny property owners run you off (unless they are drunk, stupid and using a weapon). I fish on private property, and there is not much I can do or say if people beach the drift boat and get out on the little gravel bar and fish. However, the moment they hit the grass I tell them to get back to the gravel. Most are understanding, some argue then leave, one had the sherrif called on him (don't try and take a [Bleeeeep!] of someones land). Sheriff took our side. Its pretty cut and dry on rivers. Owners think they own the bar, but they don't. They will always try and run you off.

another good one is the nisqually river above the WDFW (handicap) access. 9 years ago the RR company bouldered off the area under the trestle(allegedly due to some idiot kid shooting at their workers with a BB gun) then the owner of the riverbend campground laid claim to the huge gravel bar above the trestle. i haven't personally been kicked out of there, but the place is posted all to hell and i've heard enough stories of it being enforced. the whole place is under water when the river's up, and is easily accessible from within the low water mark of the WDFW property.

I have a family, well, a dad and a couple of kids (sometimes others too), plus various dogs, that show right in front of my house almost everyday and stay for hours, sometimes all day when it's sunny.

They somehow have access on the other side of the river and come across, dogs and all. The kids are young, 5 and 8 maybe, sometimes the kids come over on their own, or the dad sleeps on a foaty.

I have a lagoon (pond in the summer) in my yard from a flood a couple years ago, last year they started playing in it all day, I couldn't even take my dogs out because their three dogs were here. I said something to them about the dogs and the guy said they weren't his, but they stopped playing in the lagoon and the dogs seemed to follow them... even back across the river when they left..????

I say this because they just started showing up again this week, dogs and all, out there right now, have been for several hours.

I don't mind so much that they're out there, but the dad never watches them, and this year he doesn't even bother coming over with them about half the time, they're just on their own. I hate knowing that kids that young are out playing completely unsupervised on a river where people die every year. The water is cold and the youngest one (girl) doesn't wear a life vest most of the time. I end up watching them because I don't want something to happen, but I don't like feeling somewhat responsable for somebody elses kids.

What a nice guy you are ??????? The "sue you generation" might be waiting to cause you a time in court and financial hardship.

I'd post your property, take some pictures, notify police/sheriff's department of the happenings, the dogs, the father.

Good luck !!!!!

Technically, the lagoon or pond is below the high water mark now, so people do have access to it, but they don't, or at least haven't, played in it this year yet, they play on the gravel bar out front.

I don't mind people stopping to fish, I enjoy talking to them, same with most of the floaters, and the bikini hatch can be good at times. The big problem is the drunks in the evening, they realize that my place is about half way to the take out, and that they have a couple (or more) hours to go, and it's about 7:00 pm. They want to use the phone, get a ride someplace, wait in the house because it's cold, etc. If you don't satisfy their needs some of them tend to get obnoxious or even violent. One went to the ER with a nasty head wound a couple years ago when he thought it be would OK to steal a boat from out front.