River Bank hunt interrupted by misinformed landowner

[dig deeper now]

Every lake in Mich. has a 5 foot " right of way " for two men to carry a CANOE to the lake. Not everyone knows but is really TRUE, thank the Indians I think. Even the lakes that have no access totally owned by people in houses around the lake. Learned from a DNR officer- on maps of lakes , small but FIVE FEET IS access. HH

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[IMAUDIGGER]

I'm not referring to dinky streams where you can pan for gold. I'm talking about streams, rivers and ponds that you can navigate a canoe through. If they're public access and navigable, then home owners along the shoreline cannot claim the land under the water belongs to them. If the town, city or state manages and maintains the body of water, they own the land under it as well.

The only people on earth who would try to claim that someone owns the land under the water in front of their house are people who own waterfront property. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. I know you think you and your neighbors control that small pond or stream that you live on, but you don't. You just own the land and access to the pond at that particular point, period.

I get what your saying and the definition of navigable waters can seem pretty simple, leading someone to believe if you can float it in a canoe it’s navigable.

I think it also depends on the condition or existence at the time of statehood.

If it’s listed by name in statute it’s definitely navigable.

If not, for all practicable purposes, it’s probably not navigable by law until it’s recognized in court?

I’m not sure the lands commission will even issue permits for waterways not listed specifically by statute.

Many small streams were un-navigable for commerce purposes simply due to beavers.

So complicated, even a specialist would probably have a difficult time giving a straight answer.

 

[sprailroad]

There are times that I feel, that when I leave my front door, I begin a full day of "Trespassing" no matter where I go for whatever reason.

 

[huntsman53]

That is not the law in Tennessee huntsman. Non navigable stream beds belong to the private owner of the land where they are found. Only those stream beds that are established by a court as navigable are owned by the State of Tennessee.


Here's a PDF of the opinion of your State Attorney General where they outline the water and bed ownership issues. Notice that a right to travel upon the water does not amount to a right to travel or dig a stream bed. Control of water does not automatically result in control of the stream bed or the banks.

Pennsylvania and Virginia have similar laws.

That was the Law in Tennessee up until I got out of the U.S. Army and probably into the 1980s. I admit that I have not kept up with the Laws here being gone from Tennessee so long and don't know when they changed. They likely changed in the 1980's or 1990's when all of the lawsuits came down on TVA and the State over loss of property due to lake and river waters encroachment. The lawsuits were brought about by corporations, real estate companies and out of staters who bought up property that fronted lake and river waters but were losing some or all of their' properties due to record flood waters that moved the high water lines in some areas only 10 to 30 feet but in other areas hundreds of feet. It is understandable that they sued and anyone would have that had affected properties would do the same. My uncle even lost a lot of money on lake properties that got encroached on and he sold before the law suits. The problem is that they apparently changed all of the laws for not just lakes and rivers (navigable waters) but also for all streams and creeks which contained wild fish and were at the time considered to be owned by and controlled by the State of Tennessee. I walked many a mile back in the 1970's in small streams which were bordered by private lands fishing for native Trout. My brother-in-law (Larry, God rest his' soul) and myself would take leave from the military around Christmas and as soon as he got in, we would grab a copy of our' Leave Orders, red worms from under the cow pies and our fishing poles and head out to winter Trout fish. The Trout would be so hungry that we could catch our limit in 5 minutes but we would always put back smaller Trout and catch bigger ones worth taking home to fry up.

 

[Nitric]

We are still mixing the "land' or dirt, with "water".

No, as a land owner on water I can not stop anyone from standing in it, fishing, driving a jet ski, etc..... But you can't dig or take things from the dirt by "Right".

Not that I would actually even give a crap, or stop someone personally. But like having that option depending on circumstance.

Uggghhh.....Now, I have to actually research this a little, because I believe some of you are wrong. I'm also sure it really depends on the State and other things like mentioned above. But the guys that say no one can stop someone from taking things from the water? I don't think that is correct for all areas and may lead people into some trouble or even shot in some area's with that advice. Probably rare, but very possible out in no where land where the laws for removing people from your property, that refuse to leave, are a little different.

I can also dredge that shore or dirt out to make the water deeper with permits. Not sure I could do that if I didn't own the soil under the water. There is an area where I couldn't do this because my line is too thin and the neighbor owns more of the soil under the water than I do. I may be completely mislead on all of this........

And I would bet that removing even an arrowhead in a PA water way? There is probably a law for that even though most all of us would do it.

I know in WV I was told "if you can pick it off the surface it's yours, if you dig it belongs to the state." This was concerning one water way that was on State land and it was a State employee that told us this . This was also 20 plus years ago. Never actually looked into the laws, just went with what the people watching the area told us.

 

[Nitric]

2. Rivers and Streams

For non-navigable streams, the boundary line, as discussed above, goes to the thread of the stream. The owner on either side of a non-navigable river would therefore own the riverbed out to that point, and would have not only the right to use the water, and the riverbed, but would have the right to exclude others from passage, fishing, swimming and boating.

For navigable waters, the riverbed is considered in general to belong to the public, because the boundary is only to the low-water mark. At common law, grants of land from the state bounded on rivers above tide-water, or where the tide does not ebb and flow, were to the thread of the river. O.C.G.A. § 44-8-5, providing that where the river is navigable, the rights of the owner of adjacent land extend only to the low-water mark of the riverbed, became effective with the adoption of the Code of 1863, and therefore does not apply to grants that predate that Code. Parker v. Durham, 258 Ga. 140, 365 S.E.2d 411 (1988). Hence, as a practical matter, many navigable grants run to the center of the stream, but the public still has a right of passage. Such owners could prevent the taking of minerals from the riverbed, or from fishing the stream, however. Even in a latter day navigable stream situation, the owner can prevent fishing down to the low water mark--requiring the fisher to use a boat.

Taken from...https://www.jbwpc.com/Zoning-and-La...ES-WHAT-ARE-YOUR-RIGHTS-AND-LIABILITIES.shtml

And for AL.

And the Lake has A whole different legal Gibberish.....It's very confusing and seems to depend on how the property Deed or the time it was deeded either before the lake was built or after? ...I can't fully understand, but I'm starting to think some land does own under the water and some owns up to the shore line, depending on Deed?

To say no one owns the land under the water is false. It really depends. "navigable" also doesn't mean by canoe in some cases, it means cargo type boats. That's a whole other thing to try to sort out.

b. Navigable

If the boundary is a navigable river or stream, the boundary line only extends to the low-water mark of the riverbed. O.C.G.A. § 44-8-5. The term "navigable stream" means a stream which is capable of transporting boats loaded with freight in the regular course of trade either for the whole or a part of the year. Id. Mere rafting of timber or transporting wood in small boats does not make a river navigable. Givens v. Ichauway, Inc., 268 Ga. 710, 492 S.E.2d 148 (1997)This provision is not applicable to ocean tidewaters, nor to any bay, estuary, or arm of the sea. Formerly, the law held that if the tide did not ebb and flow in the river, the boundary was the middle, but the Code changed that.

Heck, just do what you want, the cops will sort it out at some point if someone really cares! haha

Added.....
4. Title to Underwater Minerals

The right to mine soil, sand, gravel, minerals and other valuables from the bed of a river, stream or lake belongs to the owner of the bed. In the case of a non-navigable stream, or a navigable stream which grant predates 1963, therefore, ownership is split between the two adjacent property owners. Rockefeller v. First Nat’l Bank of Brusnwick, 213 Ga. 493, 100 S.E.2d 279 (1957).

Not sure if this subject would fall into the above category. I would imagine it does, even small and just trash, someone owns the the dirt and the rights to what's in it and the say "not to do it".

All this stuff is just for my State, just showing that the statement of "no one owns it" or " we have the Right to take things" is false. And Not that most people would ever even care. But the guy that does? Should have the right to kick people off his land with no issues. Even if it seems dumb to us.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

It will most likely be by state and locality.

Hereabouts there are sections of the Susquehanna River (Navigable the way down to the Chesapeake Bay) that cannot be fished or disturbed in certain specific sections between March and May because of walleye breeding season. That includes causing silt.

One thing: if the landowner calls the police it will be unlikely that they know the specific laws. So they will just try to quiet the disagreement. Since the landowner is already in a "neutral corner" they will ask you to leave. Nothing they like more than to have a citizen get in their face to instruct them in law, so that might lead to you being allowed to discuss the law with a judge. Especially if the landowner fills out a complaint or tries to press charges.

Simpler to just leave. Or detect from a boat. ;-)

 

[NEPA History]

Update..I have a call into the PA Fish and Boat Commission, waiting for an officer to call me back. I will post again when I get an answer. Thanks again to everyone who commented, no matter what your opinion..I'm just happy to have the discussion.

 

[Nitric]

Update..I have a call into the PA Fish and Boat Commission, waiting for an officer to call me back. I will post again when I get an answer. Thanks again to everyone who commented, no matter what your opinion..I'm just happy to have the discussion.

Please ask them if you can detect or take things from the waterway legally. I'd really love to know their response since I've become obsessed with this thread. It may be allowed in your state and I'm really curious if they even know. I'm going to bet that if they know the whole situation they will ask or tell you to move on from that land owner. I will be surprised if they don't.

I did it on the Western side of PA (Beaver Creek or Beaver Falls, Beaver something area just outside of Ohio)and OH with no issues. Never had anyone that I can remember, get upset. Even panned a few areas. People were usually laughing or just curious.

I'm a huge Property rights type person and get carried away in some of these type arguments, same with Drones, I love drones too, but if my neighbor doesn't want it flying over his land he should have the say. Most people don't care, but the few that do should be left alone. or have that Right. We are talking about hobbies in these forums for the most part. Why make people upset when they see the hobby? Out West is a whole different situation and I get the argument for the Right's and the not calling it a "hobby". That's a different situation there and Rights are being taken away.

 

[Duckshot]

Update..I have a call into the PA Fish and Boat Commission, waiting for an officer to call me back. I will post again when I get an answer. Thanks again to everyone who commented, no matter what your opinion..I'm just happy to have the discussion.

Horse sense would indicate that talking to the warden who would be enforcing any law you might break is a good idea, but use caution. Remember you called them to ask them questions, not the other way 'round.

Don't expect the officer to know the law in any specific way either. That's not their department.

I hope it works out for you.

 

[IMAUDIGGER]

Horse sense would indicate that talking to the warden who would be enforcing any law you might break is a good idea, but use caution. Remember you called them to ask them questions, not the other way 'round.

Don't expect the officer to know the law in any specific way either. That's not their department.

I hope it works out for you.

I also read that on navigatable streams the lands commission owns below the normal low water in fee. The lands between the normal (ordinary) low water and the normal high water is subject to a public trust easement, where as a owner can use it as permitted as long as it does not interfere with an ever growing list of public uses. Again that’s for streams that have been recognized as navigable.

 

[Nitric]

I also read that on navigatable streams the lands commission owns below the normal low water in fee. The lands between the normal (ordinary) low water and the normal high water is subject to a public trust easement, where as a owner can use it as permitted as long as it does not interfere with an ever growing list of public uses. Again that’s for streams that have been recognized as navigable.

How does that translate to taking things from the soil or center of the waterway? If someone were to take things, who would they belong to?

We are talking about trivial items, but say it was something valuable discovered, who would own it? Or be able to stop someone from looking. I've been trying to read all the gibberish on different websites for different areas and it really gets confusing!!!

Another thing....Why is it that in this day our terms in describing law can't all be the same? Geezzz,,,something as simple as "navigable" has different meanings depending on area or state. It should have one meaning and it's either navigable or not and mean the same no matter where it is in the country. haha added....It may be, I may be reading things wrong.........

This is also interesting....https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Navigable+Waters
But didn't get far enough to understand the soil part of it.

So....now I've read two different meanings of "navigable" . One is that Canoe can be considered, the other stating that it's only freight type boats. One from fed and one for state. Maybe the state has the right to more define what the Fed set up? The fed is broader and state can "fine tune"?

 

[IMAUDIGGER]

For people interested in these types of issues, including mining rights, this online study course Understanding American Property Rights”
Is a good reference. It takes some concentration to take it all in, but it’s a lot of info.

https://famguardian.org/publications/propertyrights/tableoc.html

 

[Digger_O'Dell]

This may not apply to the topic directly, but it's kind of on topic as to what's legal and what's not.

I've found Wisconsin to be probably the most anti detecting state around. The laws here specifically forbid any detecting on state owned or managed land. Technically that includes any lake or waterway, or even private land if they receive state money such as crop damage relief or allowing use for public hunting, etc.

Most counties also strictly ban detecting their public places too. On top of all that, there are so many local communities that outright ban detecting on public land, or disguise it with ordinances against "disturbing the soil", or grass, plants, etc. If I were to guess, I would say 90% of "public" lands are off limits to detecting.

Horror stories abound too, such as children threatened with prosecution for "picking up pretty pebbles" at a state park, or an elderly lady threatened for collecting old bottles along a roadway (state road).

But on the flip side, hobbyist gold prospecting is fine on state property without any permit needed as long as the equipment isn't motorized and an individual doesn't move more than 2 tons of soil annually. Go figure.

 

[Ogre1190]

It's something in the cheese, Digger. 😁

 

[Digger_O'Dell]

It's something in the cheese, Digger. [emoji16]

LOL Ogre, too funny!

But reality is the state archeologists have the money and the politicians in their pockets. They have the attitude that detectorists are the enemy of the state. They also have the belief that they "own" every artifact or object on in the state, and they would rather items never he found than someone else get them. It's mostly simple greed and ignorance.

 

[FreeBirdTim]

If the land under the water adjacent to someone's property is their land, what happens when I catch a trophy bass in the water over that land? Do I have to give it to the homeowner? Just being sarcastic, but you get my point. Only a real horse's butt would try to claim land under water as being their property and off limits...

 

[flinthunter]

If the land under the water adjacent to someone's property is their land, what happens when I catch a trophy bass in the water over that land? Do I have to give it to the homeowner? Just being sarcastic, but you get my point. Only a real horse's butt would try to claim land under water as being their property and off limits...

On the Illinois River in Illinois you have the right to be on the water as long as you are not damaging things that are attached to the landowners property on the river bottom, such as trot lines. Drop an anchor or put a fishing line on the bottom and you can be ticketed for trespassing. This comes straight from the conservation police. Every state has different laws regarding this.

 

[Nitric]

If the land under the water adjacent to someone's property is their land, what happens when I catch a trophy bass in the water over that land? Do I have to give it to the homeowner? Just being sarcastic, but you get my point. Only a real horse's butt would try to claim land under water as being their property and off limits...

Take the water and land as separate things.....In some places you are probably right. But it's not true for all. Fishing is a little different than removing items from soil, or digging in the bottom. I am actually someone that is real easy going when people are using my land. I haven't kicked hunters, guys fishing from shore, or just there walking around. Have not kicked one person out!! I'm just now starting to consider some of it because of all the trash left scattered all over. So, I usually don't even care. But If I want someone out of there it's nice to know what the details to some of these laws are. I even invited people to it in the AL forum just this week in a post. Anyone local there would know exactly where it is by what creek I'm on. I put it on a public forum. SO I can't be too concerned about it.

Your talking about a fish....Can you take someones dock? It's in the water. Why can't you take that? You can fish under and all around. An owner can tell you to get off their dock. I understand we are talking about garbage basically that we dig out. But the landowner may still have the right to tell them to stop!

I guess I have a hard time understanding......That's why I'm so obsessed with this thread. Why would I push and further upset someone on the banks just to dig a little trash. A true "Horse's butt" would cause problems...."I have Right to the trash!!!!!" Come on! Think of it that way too!

 

[IMAUDIGGER]

If the land under the water adjacent to someone's property is their land, what happens when I catch a trophy bass in the water over that land? Do I have to give it to the homeowner? Just being sarcastic, but you get my point. Only a real horse's butt would try to claim land under water as being their property and off limits...

While a private landowner does not own the game on his land, he holds exclusive rights to take game (in compliance with game management regulations.) It’s one of the apprutenances incidental to the land (that were discussed in an earlier thread).

Utilizing timber, herbs, mushrooms, berries, pasture,. also fall into a similar category.

Water is a weird thing and there are many special laws governing its use.
I couldn’t tell you, but if there were no fishing signs posted everywhere, I’d probably move on and find a more friendly place to fish. Many private lakes, ponds, reservoirs exist that are off limits to fishing, I’m not sure why a stream would be any different.

I would assume you could float through, but not anchor, wade, or fish from the bank.