If you owned property along a river and the river changed ways onto your property, can you own the river? I don't think you can, but according to some people, you can no longer fish a stretch of water after the river changes its way onto their property. Who's right? Them or me? Keep in mind that this is a major river, not just a little creek.

~ Dr Pepper

hay: the way it was explained to me was, if you can take a boat raft or inertube down it is navigatable(SP)and they cant keep you off it. this is left to interpretation.what the river does to get there I do not think is even a question.no one can own any river.they can only own the land under it and only if it is non navigatable but who wants to argue that with a pissed off land owner.

Here's a better question: What differentiates a Navigatable stream from a non-navigatable stream... Could someone please tell me?

I was told ages ago by the state that if it holds gamefish it belongs to the state. They can own land down to the high water mark, but everything below the high water mark is the state's.

you can own the river bottom but not the water that flows through it the state owns that

Lands or waters below the ordinary high water mark are held in trust for the full enjoyement of the public. However, it is indeed a trespass if you use private uplands to gain access to those lands below the OHWM. A riverside or saltwater beach owner may have property's lines that extend out into the river or saltwater, but they must realize that the citizens of washington have a right to use lands below the OHWM. All of this only apply's to shorelines of the state (saltwater shorelines, creeks with a greater mean annual flow of over 20 cfs, & lakes greater than 20 acres in size), and waterways deemed "navigable" by the Army Corps of Engineers.

This link helps explain it to:
http://www.adventuresports.com/river/nors/states/wa-law.htm

Hope this clears up things a little....

Bobber Down

"Keep your hooks sharp!"

dont forget that most of the saltwater property owner do own the shellfish rights to their property. And many would be willing to share if you were to ask them first.

D.P., Let me take a guess on the river.....
I would bet it's the Nooch below the Cross Over Bridge! I had a run in with a guy who said he owned the whole River in front of his bar all the way across the river, because it was grandfather into the property. He told me this when I was in my drift boat pulling plugs on the far side of the river. We had a little discussion about it and he really thinks he owns the river!
I think he has been smoking something other than fish!
Scott

I really do not think that property rights would be such an issue if there weren't so many arsehole anglers out there causing trouble for the rest of us. When Redneck and I went fishing awhile back there was a plainly posted sign reading that anything from the obvious markings onward was private property and that people were NOT to trespass.

Sure enough some heavy-browed, knuckle-dragging, brain donor decides that he's just going to march right onto the property and start fishing. There was plenty enough room in the public property, so other than just being an arsehole I couldn't see why he was doing it.

When the property owner (rightly) yelled from her house that he was on private property and that he needed to move immediately he yelled back some pretty nasty stuff. She threatened calling the police (who I'm sure know those landowners by name) so he moved, but many of the anglers there were just saying nasty sheit about and to her.

What is up with these pigs? Sure, the majority of us here on the boards respect the property owners rights but I have a feeling that it comes having enough intelligence to go beyond the solitaire cards in the computer and find these forums.

I'm not sure what can be done, as it is difficult to educate those who refuse to be educated.

I have thought many times about access to a river but now you have me thinking about ocean beaches. For example, if you go to Bush Point on Whidbey Island there are numerous no trespassing signs. Is it OK or not to walk down the beach and fish and if so how close do you need to be to the surf? Is the high water mark defined by high tide? Thanks. -Neil

Old Chum:

Yes, Bush Pt. has some very thick headed property owners around the public access area that believe fishermen are trespassing on their beach even if there fishing below the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). The county put in signs that say "no trespassing beyond this point, end of pulblic area", so the nearby homeowner's interpret this as meaning nobody is allowed in front of their beachhouse, even if a fisherman is wading in the water well below the OHWM. The county trespass signs are not erected in error. The signs are not descriptive explaining what is trespassing and what is not trespassing....yes it's trespassing if your fishing above the OHWM in front of the residence's but no it's not trespassing if you're fishing below the OHWM in front of their homes. So the county no trespass signs are only partially correct.

Last year I got into it real bad with a lady from a neighboring residence to the south of the access. It was a low tide and I was fishing in front of her place about 8 a.m. for coho at least 20' below the OHWM. She came out of her house and told me "to get off Her! beach!" I said that I have every right to fish on lands below the OHWM. She seemed confused and told me to get off her beach, I said "look I only have one bait left and I'll leave as soon as I lose it". About 10 minutes later I was packing everything out and proceded to drive away when a Island Co. Sheriff flew by me heading towards the access. Didn't take me long to figure out why he was going down there, she called the cops on me. If I was down there when the cop showed up I'm sure I would of gotten a trespass ticket. Who is the cop going to take sides with the homeowner or a fishermen. My bet is on the homeowner. Anyway if I would of gotten a ticket I would of taken the trespass issue straight to the state shorelines hearings board.

So this summer when the pinks hit the beach there are going to be some confrontations with homeowners down there. I admit there are some definate bad apples who litter up the beach that have gotten fishermen off on the wrong foot with homeowners. Sportsfishermen have rights though and the access issue I'm willing to fight for my rights to fish on a beach that god made for every free man and woman to use in the state of Washington. Just because you may be a "have" it doesn't mean that the "have-nots" aren't allowed to enjoy the beach to.



Bobber Down

"Keep your hooks sharp!"

The answer sorta depends on what State you're in and whether the river is considered "navigable" by the Army Corps of Engineers. In many states, the OHWM is the limit, as already explained by several folks. In other states (e.g., New York I think), the landowner owns the land under the river but not the water. That means you can take a boat down the river but you can't walk along the riverbank (even if in the OHWM) or set an anchor without permission.

Angler behavior doesn't change the limits of State jurisdiction but it sure does change landowner attitudes towards those anglers trying to exercise their access rights. I try to practice good public relations with landowners knowing that my actions might make life easier for the next guy/gal trying to fish that stretch of river.

THIS IS A HOT ISSUE THAT REALLY BOTHERS ME
THERE IS TO MUCH BIG MONEY THAT HAS AN IS BUYING UP WATER FRONT PROPERITY, AN LEAVEING THE PUBLIC JAMMED UP IN SMALL ACCESS SPOTS ON THE RIVER . I THINK IT IS THE DUTY OF OUR LEGISLATERS TO REDEFINE SHORE LINES . FOR STARTERS THERE SHOULD BE AT LEAST 200FT FRONTAGE ON ALL RIVERS . WITH ACCESSTO THE RIVER EVERY 100 YARDS OR SO . BIG MONEY ALWAYS IS THE DETERMAING FACTOR , AN THE LITTLE GUY HAS TO SEE ACCESS DIMINISH STEADILY.

bronc-

Couple things here

1) Turn the microphone down. Yer blowing my speakers out over here.
2) If I were a riverfront landowner I wouldn't want my property split by public access every 100 yards and have 200' of trash between me and the river I loved enough to move next to. Local government doesn't have the manhours available to clean all this property, and when the landowner owns it they tend to keep it cleaner than the general public does.

I'm sorry, but it has been shown in the past that anglers as a group cannot police their own ranks enough to keep the riverbanks clean from trash and the trash that the trash leaves behind. Nor do they <I>generally</I> leave the river cleaner than they found it. Thus begins the downward slope to environmental distruction.

Now, with the combatative attitude that many anglers possess when it comes to riverside property owners it is no wonder that these folks see us hookers as a detriment to the environment. Instead of marching through their property with the attitude "my tax dollars make me part owner of this river, to hell with the property 'owner'", we need to instead make it a habit of approaching the landowner beforehand with the promise of carrying out more trash than you brought in with you and sharing of your catch (if they want any at all). Most land owners would be more than happy to agree to such a sportsman.

Heck, when you know that you are going to fish a particular stretch of river in the wee morning hours head up there a week or so early and "scout" out the area by stopping by the home owners house and introducing yourself. Tell them your intentions then, and you may just get some inside info about if there have been any fish passing through and where they tend to sit.

You'd be surprised at how far a dose of humanity will get you.

***EDIT*** What, UBBCode won't let me italicize? *******s.

[ 07-25-2001: Message edited by: Heywood Jablomie ]

but the legislaturers are some of the ones with big money.

One other thing, could you please spellcheck your messages before you send them out. I know that we're not all master typists, except for Hey y'all, but all of these typos are makin' my eyes hurt.

Bobber Down,
Thanks for the reply. Sounds like we have had similar experiences except no one has called the police on me yet. Since I tend to avoid river confrontation (typically I try to fish to get away from the masses and especially the loud ones) I will probably end up avoiding Bush Point this August. On the other hand I will probably end up going there at least once this fall so I would sure like to have a printed copy of the regs with me just for peace of mind. -Old Chum

Thanks for all the info guys. One old guy I asked this question to said that you had to the high water mark. I guess he was right . The rivers I was referring to are the Elwha and the Dungeness. There is a spot on the Elwha with a whole bunch of No Trespassing signs on it. I've heard of wardens making fishermen leave. Maybe it was just a rumor about the warden making them leave; I'm not sure. Near the mouth of the Dungeness River there is a duck hunting club that has a big sign on the river bank. It says you cannot fish passed the sign and you have to get or buy a permit from them. I don't think I have to buy a permit to fish a river?!?! I already pay when I buy a fishing license.

About allowing 200' of spacing along rivers, I think that is too much. But I do think that allowing an extra 15-20' so you can go around tough spots wouldn't be asking too much. Of course some people have their house 20' from the river.

Like people mentioned previously, just talking to the people makes things much smoother. Of course there are occasional jerks that mess things up. Dogfish, your eyes don't hurt after reading this do they? Don't proof-read it either

~ Dr Pepper

i have never owned a river but i have owned more than one pool table in the local taverns

Heywood,

<i> is HTML. [ ] for UBBCode Generally