For years, i've been following what is generally acceptable practice when fishing, which basically states that you can go where you want on a river as long as you stay below the high water mark, as that's not considered private property and you can't get nailed for trespassing. But i've heard some different info on this, and even to the point of people getting in trouble for even anchoring in a river in front of private property.

That indeed presents a scary idea to me, if my ethic about access that was taught to me by my dad isn't true, we need some kind of law that protects it.

Maybe like in Finland where they have "everyman's rights" where you can access any body of water as long as you don't leave a mess behind or harass people. But it's just wishful thinking here

WE HAVE NO RIGHTS - ONLY PRIVILEGES! Seriously though while this holds true for most of the waterways in this state there are a few rivers where the titles read the ownership is to the middle of the waterway. The pilchuck river is one of these here in Sno. Co.

The OHWM line of demarcation for access only applies to those waterways of the state that are deemed "navigable" by the Corps. If a river is not considered navigable the land owner, as is, can ask you to pull anchor and leave.

There has been many threads in the past on this issue that you can pull up under the search engine.

Every year some one always tries to boot me off of Puget Sound beach while fishing, usually I leave even though I know I have a legal right to be there since I've accessed the tidal area from a public access point. Fighting with the land owner and the biased cops would just cut into my fishing time for the day.

Guess you got to pick you battles.

BD

i think the main problem with this is that a "navigable" river means that it can float a barge down it, or other large boats like that

so that would pretty much screw us on rivers like the nisqually, cowlitz, etc

Chum Man
Go to:
http://www.adventuresports.com/river/nors/us-law-public.htm

And do a search on our board. We have lots of great information on this issue that will inform you of the does and don'ts

Cowlitzfisherman

I would like to point out that the rules for access land below the high water line only applies to rivers. In the salt a land owner can purchase the tide lands. this is the beach uncovered during low tide. This is what shellfish farms do and I can tell you the majority of them don't like people tromping around on their beach it would be like you tromping through the middle of a farmers feild steping on his crops.l

my understanding of the pilchuck is that the snohomish sportsman's club purchased an easement for fishermen from locsloy on down. with the stipulation that it would be illegal to fish from any boat. this was relayed to me by some of the older fishermen who fish it. I have never researched it myself though

One of the problems is a conflict of state vs. Federal law. Federal law states that you can't own into a river bed but some deeds in the state that they do. Here in lies the conflict. In all legality you are right to stay below the high water mark but some land owners don't get it. Most of the time if you feel it is worth the fight have them call the sheriff and they can sort it out.

Navigatable water only means that the river can be used or was used for commerce. not just barges. So if I guide floats down the river it is commerce. Or if historically they floated logs down it that passes the test. Unfortunately not a ton of rivers have had the study done on them to get official designation.

I will find more information later.

JJ

I have called the land owners bluff on more than one occasion.Each time I have benn fishing well below the mean high water line.It dose take some balls to stand your ground,land owners go nuts when you tell then No I will not move till I am through fishing this drift.Once You start this you have to be able and willing to pay the price for your rights.
Ask the moron that called the police about us fishing on the Sky at Proctor creek.

land rights issue

Just got back from a trip on my favorite river.I have been hiking this canyon for fifteen years without seeing a sole.Last two year there has been quite abit of logging activity on top.All private.I knew that it was coming.Ran into a slew of no tresspssing ,fishing, hunting or trespassing signs.Unfortunatly high water mark does not do me any good as the mark is basicly five feet sraight up the side of the canyon walls.River kyacks are the only thing that makes it down this canyon and the crazy *******s that are paddling usually have a steel mask around there face.

I am going to have a friend access the records and tell me exactly where his property lines are.If I can not find away to sniggle through that way,I am going to go and talk to the property owner.If he denies me passage than I am left with hacking a new trail from the other side which I already know is brutal.

This SUCKKS!!!!

I understand when people abuse private property,with litter etc.This is not the case here.I am one of a couple of people that access this canyon and the only thing we leave behind are foot prints.You have to hike 2 miles through national forest to even get to these signs.

Done ranting now

God help me and him if I find out he is just another selfish californian

ltlCLEO

Don't call a kettle black until you know what color it really is! Some people post their property because they are libel for what happens if you or someone else gets hurt on it! It's a sad day, but this is what people want it to be. Blame it on the outsiders, or blame it on the insiders who sue them when they get hurt.

It's our great American legal system!

Like you said, now its time to find the owner and ask for permission. Sorry but it's a sign of the times that many of us have already had to cope with.

Good luck, and let us know that the final outcome is.

PS, what happens if he or her just happens to be a Washingtonian? Is that OK then?

Cowlitzfisherman

cw,
That is what I am banking on.This canyon is dangerous and,infact,has claimed a couple of lives.I hoping for the best.I was just frustrated yesterday as every year I lose another special spot.

Cow is right on with that link
basically according to the supreme court:
Any river has to be deemed navigable if...

1 it can was or could have been be used as a highway to transport people or goods.
2. is useable by customary modes of transportation on the water
there might be one other thing but these two are the main things..
The corps of engineers has NO jurisdiction over whats nagagable or not, neither does the coast guard Though they use the term to define certain water types neither deffinition can be used to determine " navagability for title purpose" and therefore public ownership of the streambed.
it's my opinion that many streams are improperly classified as non navagable.. like certain parts of the Kalama.
According to my interpretation of federal law if you can get a driftboat down a river in it's natural state then the state must find it legally navagable and therefore own theriver bed. Also though these are state lands they are "held in trust" specifically for the use of the public and it is against federal law to restrict such access..

Right, just footprints. Hacking a trail on someone else's private property or is it public? You are the reason private landowners are closing their lands to entry.

Do not assume!

The other side of the river is not private property,it is just terrible access to the canyon.

I AM NOT THE REASON THAT PEOPLE POST THERE PROPERTY PRIVATE.I LEAVE NO SIGN AND GO WHERE NOBODY ELSE WANTS TO.I DO NOT PACK A MACHETTY AND HACK A TRAIL THROUGH THE WOODS.HAVE YOU EVER GONE CROSS COUNTRY IN THE OLYMPICS BEFORE?I DOUBT IT.

I think I must of hit a californian nerve?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JR32:
[QB] I would like to point out that the rules for access land below the high water line only applies to rivers. In the salt a land owner can purchase the tide lands. this is the beach uncovered during low tide...

JR32, I disagree about your analysis of the Public Trust Doctrine not applying to salt water shorelines of the state.

"Although the state may sell lands beneath the waters, which are either navigable or effected by the ebb and flow of tides, the new property owners must abide by the dictates of the public trust.

The Doctrine of Custom

The doctrine of custom may also have applicability in many Washington cases. This doctrine provides that a public right exists for use of private lands if the following circumstances exist:

1) the area has been used by the public for as long as people can remember;
2) the use has continued wihtout interruption;
3) the use has been peaceable and acquiesced to;
4) the use is reasonable;
5) the use is certain and definable;
6) though established by consent, the use is compulsory in its operation; and
7) the use is consistent with other custom and laws.

The Washington State Attorney General opined that this doctrine applies to the outer coast, and that the public has a right to use wet and dry sand portions of the beach to the line of permanent vegetation. This is written opinion has stood for over 15 years (apparently 28 years so far) without a challenge. Although it has not been applied to inland waters, it is possible that there are a number of instances where the seven criteria could be met." - -Washington State Department of Ecology Shoreline Public Access Handbook, Shorelands & Coastal Zone Management Program, February 1990.

My take on this is that until the State Supreme Courts decides to make a ruling on the public access issues on inland Puget Sound the formal ruling above applies to the use of our Puget Sound beaches, and that is
"the public has a right to use wet and dry sand portions of the beach to the line of permanent vegetation. "

I always try to respect other peoples property as much as possible by being quiet and picking up after myself, but sometimes I stand up for my right to be on a particular beaches at certain times!

<img border="0" alt="[wall]" title="" src="graemlins/wall.gif" />

BD

Bobberdown

Did you ever get to read this one (Artical 15 & 17 ) ? How do you think that it may also applies to what you have posted?

Washington State Constitution
ARTICLE XV
HARBORS AND TIDE WATERS
SECTION 1 HARBOR LINE COMMISSION AND RESTRAINT ON DISPOSITION.
The legislature shall provide for the appointment of a commission whose duty it shall be to locate and establish harbor lines in the navigable waters of all harbors, estuaries, bays and inlets of this state, wherever such navigable waters lie within or in front of the corporate limits of any city, or within one mile thereof on either side. Any harbor line so located or established may thereafter be changed, relocated or reestablished by the commission pursuant to such provision as may be made therefor by the legislature. The state shall never give, sell or lease to any private person, corporation, or association any rights whatever in the waters beyond such harbor lines, nor shall any of the area lying between any harbor line and the line of ordinary high water, and within not less than fifty feet nor more than two thousand feet of such harbor line (as the commission shall determine) be sold or granted by the state, nor its rights to control the same relinquished, but such area shall be forever reserved for landings, wharves, streets, and other conveniences of navigation and commerce. [AMENDMENT 15, 1931 p 417 Section 1. Approved November, 1932.]

Tide lands: Art. 17.
Original text--Art. 15 Section 1 HARBOR LINE COMMISSION AND RESTRAINT ON DISPOSITION OF CERTAIN TIDE LANDS - The legislature shall provide for the appointment of a commission whose duty it shall be to locate and establish harbor lines in the navigable waters of all harbors, estuaries, bays and inlets of this state, wherever such navigable waters lie within or in front of the corporate limits of any city or within one mile thereof on either side. The state shall never give, sell or lease to any private person, corporation or association any rights whatever in the waters beyond such harbor lines, nor shall any of the area lying between any harbor line and the line of ordinary high tide, and within not less than fifty feet nor more than six hundred feet of such harbor line (as the commission shall determine) be sold or granted by the state, nor its right to control the same relinquished, but such area shall be forever reserved for landings, wharves, streets and other conveniences of navigation and commerce.

SECTION 2 LEASING AND MAINTENANCE OF WHARVES, DOCKS, ETC.
The legislature shall provide general laws for the leasing of the right to build and maintain wharves, docks and other structures, upon the areas mentioned in section one of this article, but no lease shall be made for any term longer than thirty years, or the legislature may provide by general laws for the building and maintaining upon such area wharves, docks, and other structures.

SECTION 3 EXTENSION OF STREETS OVER TIDE LANDS.
Municipal corporations shall have the right to extend their streets over intervening tide lands to and across the area reserved as herein provided.

Cowlitzfisherman

Cowlitzfisherman:

You got me on this one. I never have even heard of the "Harbor Line Commission". Does the Commision even exist any more?, 1932 was a long time ago. Did the Commission ever set any ownership marks and measurements for the Sound? May just be another long and forgotten RCW, that no longer has a heartbeat.

BD

Bobber Down

It Looks like is is still an active commission, but it under a different name now. This RCW should explain it.

RCW 79.92.010
Harbor lines and areas to be established.
It shall be the duty of the board of natural resources acting as the harbor line commission to locate and establish harbor lines and determine harbor areas, as required by section 1 of Article XV of the state Constitution, where such harbor lines and harbor areas have not heretofore been located and established.
[1982 1st ex.s. c 21 § 69.]


RCW 79.92.020
Relocation of harbor lines by the harbor line commission. Whenever it appears that the inner harbor line of any harbor area heretofore determined has been so established as to overlap or fall inside the government meander line, or for any other good cause, the board of natural resources acting as the harbor line commission is empowered to relocate and reestablish said inner harbor line so erroneously established, outside of the meander line. All tidelands or shorelands within said inner harbor line so reestablished and relocated, shall belong to the state and may be sold or leased as other tidelands or shorelands of the first class in accordance with the provisions of RCW

79.94.150 : PROVIDED, That in all other cases, authority to relocate the inner harbor line or outer harbor line, or both, shall first be obtained from the legislature.
[1982 1st ex.s. c 21 § 70.]

And here is some information:

RCW 79.01.242
Lease of state lands -- General.
(1) Subject to other provisions of this chapter and subject to rules adopted by the board of natural resources, the department may lease state lands for purposes it deems advisable, including, but not limited to, commercial, industrial, residential, agricultural, and recreational purposes in order to obtain a fair market rental return to the state or the appropriate constitutional or statutory trust. Every lease issued by the department, shall contain: (a) The specific use or uses to which the land is to be employed; (b) the improvements required: PROVIDED, That a minimum reasonable time is allowed for the completion of the improvements; (c) the rent is payable in advance in quarterly, semiannual, or annual payments, as determined by the department or as agreed upon by the lessee and the department of natural resources; (d) other terms and conditions as the department deems advisable, subject to review by the board of natural resources, to more nearly effectuate the purposes of the state Constitution and of this chapter.
(2) The department may authorize the use of state land by lease at state auction for initial leases or by negotiation for existing leases. Notice of intent to lease by negotiation shall be published in at least two newspapers of general circulation in the area in which the land which is to be the subject of negotiation is located within the ninety days immediately preceding commencement of negotiations.
(3) Leases which authorize commercial, industrial, or residential uses on state lands may be entered into by negotiation. Negotiations shall be subject to rules of the board of natural resources. At the option of the department, these leases may be placed for bid at public auction.
(4) Any person, firm or corporation desiring to lease any state lands for any purpose not prohibited by law, may make application to the department, describing the lands sought to be leased on forms to be provided by the department.
(5) Notwithstanding any provision in this chapter to the contrary, in leases for residential purposes, the board of natural resources may waive or modify any conditions of the lease if the waiver or modification is necessary to enable any federal agency or lending institution authorized to do business in this state or elsewhere in the United States to participate in any loan secured by a security interest in a leasehold interest.
(6) Upon expiration of the lease term, if the leased land is not otherwise utilized, the department may allow the lessee to continue to hold the land for a period not exceeding one year upon such rent, terms, and conditions as the department may prescribe. Upon the expiration of the one year extension, if the department has not yet determined the disposition of the land for other purposes, the department may issue a temporary permit to the lessee upon terms and conditions it prescribes. The temporary permit may not extend beyond a five year period

RCW 79.95.010
Lease of beds of navigable waters.
Except as provided in RCW 79.95.060 , the department of natural resources may lease to the abutting tide or shore land owner or lessee, the beds of navigable waters lying below the line of extreme low tide in waters where the tide ebbs and flows, and below the line of navigability in lakes and rivers claimed by the state and defined in section 1, Article XVII, of the Constitution of the state. In case the abutting tide or shore lands or the abutting uplands are not improved or occupied for residential or commercial purposes, the department may lease such beds to any person for a period not exceeding ten years for booming purposes.


Nothing in this chapter shall change or modify any of the provisions of the state Constitution or laws of the state which provide for the leasing of harbor areas and the reservation of lands lying in front thereof

RCW 79.96.010
Leasing beds of tidal waters for shellfish cultivation or other aquaculture use.
The beds of all navigable tidal waters in the state lying below extreme low tide, except as prohibited by section 1, Article XV, of the Washington state Constitution shall be subject to lease for the purposes of planting and cultivating oyster beds, or for the purpose of cultivating clams or other edible shellfish, or for other aquaculture use, for periods not to exceed thirty years

RCW 79.90.035
"Second class tidelands."
Whenever used in chapters 79.90 through 79.96 RCW the term "second class tidelands" means the shores of navigable tidal waters belonging to the state, lying outside of and more than two miles from the corporate limits of any city, and between the line of ordinary high tide and the line of extreme low tide.


Finally, there is a ton more that can affect your right to use ourmintre state waterways that are to long to list, so I will just list the RCW's and what they are for:

SECTIONS
79.94.010
Survey to determine area subject to sale or lease.

79.94.020
First class tidelands and shorelands to be platted.

79.94.030
Second class tidelands and shorelands may be platted.

79.94.040
Tidelands and shorelands of the first class and second class -- Plats -- Record.

79.94.050
Tidelands and shorelands of the first class and second class -- Appraisal -- Record.

79.94.060
Tidelands and shorelands of the first class and second class -- Notice of filing plat and record of appraisal -- Appeal.

79.94.070
Tidelands and shorelands of the first class -- Preference right of upland owner -- How exercised..

79.94.090
Sale of tidelands other than first class.

79.94.100
Tidelands and shorelands of the first and second class -- Petition for replat -- Replatting and reappraisal -- Vacation by replat.

79.94.110
Tidelands and shorelands of the first and second class -- Dedication of replat -- All interests must join.

79.94.120
Tidelands and shorelands of the first and second class -- Vacation by replat -- Preference right of tideland or shoreland owner.

79.94.130
Tidelands and shorelands of the first and second class -- Vacation procedure cumulative.

79.94.140
Tidelands and shorelands of the first and second class -- Effect of replat.

79.94.150
First and second class tidelands and shorelands and waterways of state to be sold only to public entities -- Leasing -- Limitation.

79.94.160
Sale of state-owned tide or shore lands to municipal corporation or state agency -- Authority to execute agreements, deeds, etc.

79.94.170
Construction of RCW 79.94.150 and 79.94.170 -- Use and occupancy fee where unauthorized improvements placed on publicly owned aquatic lands.

79.94.210
Second class shorelands on navigable lake
s -- Sale.

79.94.220
Second class shorelands -- Boundary of shorelands when water lowered -- Certain shorelands granted to city of Seattle.

79.94.230
Second class shorelands -- Platting -- Selection for slips, docks, wharves, etc.

79.94.240
Second class shorelands -- Platting of certain shorelands of Lake Washington for use as harbor area -- Effect.

79.94.250
Second class shorelands -- Platting of certain shorelands of Lake Washington for use as harbor area -- Selection for slips, docks, wharves, etc. -- Vesting of title.

79.94.260
Second class shorelands -- Sale or lease when in best public interest -- Preference right of upland owner -- Procedure upon determining sale or lease not in best public interest or where transfer made for public use -- Platting.

79.94.270
Second class tide or shore lands detached from uplands by navigable water -- Sale.

79.94.280
First class unplatted tide or shore lands -- Lease preference right to upland owners -- Lease for booming purposes.

79.94.290
Second class tide or shore lands -- Lease for booming purposes.

79.94.300
First and second class tide or shore lands -- Preference rights, time limit on exercise.

79.94.310
First and second class tide or shore lands -- Accretions -- Lease.

79.94.320
Tide or shore lands of the first or second class -- Failure to re-lease tide or shore lands -- Appraisal of improvements.

79.94.330
Location of line dividing tidelands from shorelands in tidal rivers.

79.94.390
Certain tidelands reserved for recreational use and taking of fish and shellfish.

79.94.400
Access to and from tidelands reserved for recreational use and taking of fish and shellfish.

79.94.410
Tidelands and shorelands -- Use of tide and shore lands granted to United States -- Purposes -- Limitations.

79.94.420
Tidelands and shorelands -- Use of tide and shore lands granted to United States -- Application -- Proof of upland use -- Conveyance.

79.94.430
Tidelands and shorelands -- Use of tide and shore lands granted to United States -- Easements over tide or shore lands to United States.

79.94.440
Tidelands and shorelands -- Use of tide and shore lands granted to United States -- Reversion on cessation of use.

79.94.450
United States Navy base -- Exchange of property -- Procedure.

79.94.900
Savings -- Captions -- Severability -- Effective dates -- 1982 1st ex.s. c 21.


This should give everone some homework to do on their rights to use or enter many tide waters areas.


Cowlitzfisherman