Trespassing Or Not?

[walleyerich]

I farmed 240 acres in Hickory county, I had a guy drive thru one of my hayfields in the spring while it was really wet and cut ruts in the field because he was scouting for turky. How did I know this? He drove past me in that field while I was building a fence and then couldn't understand why I was mad, or why I ran him off. The next year I had a group of deer hunters tear down that fence and then tell me it wasn't them and then told me they were from Kansas City and owned a half acre lot in the county so that gave them the right to hunt there, they couldn't believe I ran them off either. watched a couple climb a fence to fish a small river thar ran thru my place. and cussed me when I ran them off. After chasing cows, guilding fence, fixing ruts in fields, and fixing vandalized equipment, my rule is if it's not worth your time to stop at the house ask permission, then use gates or crawl under the fence leaving my stock alone your getting run off with a ticket from the sheriff for trespassing.

Wow, Amish. You seem a little stessed. Remind me not to go fishing with you. By the way I watched Clint throw his fishing rod into the water today...never to be seen again.

[Amish Bill]

Hey Rich...No I'm not stressed a bit. Sounds as if Clint's the one needs a calm bomb.

[troutfiend1985]

Define Navigable...

State Water and State Fish are for the public, not the land in most cases.

Capable of transporting commerce as stated by Delcour. However, I would really caution anyone from just going up any stream that appears navigable. A person may never use deadly force to protect property, but I think that a lot of people have a certain misconception that shooting at people on your property is justified.

This topic must be brought up on this forum at least once a year. However there is no clear answer as to what defines navigable. The case, Elder v. Delcour, describe illustrations of navigability but does not define navigability beyond a stream that is capable of transporting commerce.

I wouldn't advise people to park at a bridge and just start walking up any creek. A person may not own the water but they can own the bottom of the streambed, nad unless the stream is navigable you would be tresspassing.

Be careful. It is not a good idea to play do it yourself lawyer.

[ozark trout fisher]

Capable of transporting commerce as stated by Delcour. However, I would really caution anyone from just going up any stream that appears navigable. A person may never use deadly force to protect property, but I think that a lot of people have a certain misconception that shooting at people on your property is justified.

This topic must be brought up on this forum at least once a year. However there is no clear answer as to what defines navigable. The case, Elder v. Delcour, describe illustrations of navigability but does not define navigability beyond a stream that is capable of transporting commerce.

I wouldn't advise people to park at a bridge and just start walking up any creek. A person may not own the water but they can own the bottom of the streambed, nad unless the stream is navigable you would be tresspassing.

Be careful. It is not a good idea to play do it yourself lawyer.

My humble opinion, sir, is that the streambed of any stream that I can get a kayak or canoe down is public land. If I'm wrong about that, then I'm more than willing to break the law. I'm not playing lawyer, I'm just standing up for what I feel to be my right. Civil disobedience is necessary at times.

I simply won't allow myself to be intimidated by crooked county prosecutors or selfish landowners.

[Flyflinger]

My humble opinion, sir, is that the streambed of any stream that I can get a kayak or canoe down is public land. If I'm wrong about that, then I'm more than willing to break the law. I'm not playing lawyer, I'm just standing up for what I feel to be my right. Civil disobedience is necessary at times.

I simply won't allow myself to be intimidated by crooked county prosecutors or selfish landowners.

Understood...and lets be frank. It is not the humble Angler that causes these land owners to get all huffy, its the paocher/meth head that ruin it for us all. I do belive that most people would let us fish if you just ask. Tracking down the owner is hard pressed sometimes though.

For instance: I wanted to hit the Dry Fork creek yesturday and I couldn't find anyone to ask. I saw a sign posted that read "no fishing without daily permission" so I respectfuly drove on....but man that water looked good.

Oh well....

[eric1978]

My humble opinion, sir, is that the streambed of any stream that I can get a kayak or canoe down is public land.

It's not, though. Property lines generally run to halfway across the stream to meet the adjoining property, unless of course you own land on both sides. The gray area is still what is considered navigable and what is not, and of the navigable streams, are you allowed to wade as well?

Our old property on the Huzzah was shaped like a piece of pie, and the tip of it ran along and across the stream for about 200 yards. It was ours. We paid taxes on it. But the Huzzah is a navigable stream and folks had the right to float through our property. I wouldn't care if they were wading or swimming, either, as long as they weren't doing anything untoward...which they usually didn't. Most people who saw us atop our bluff watching them go by gave us a wave and moved on. We weren't on the busiest part of the river, so passersby weren't all that common, and I'm sure the more river users a property owner encounters, the more leary he becomes.

Anyway, the point is, the streambed technically is not public land...technically. But I do think that if you access a stream legally through a public access or a private one you have permission to use, you should be able to wade it regardless of its size...as long as you stay within the banks. Too bad my opinion isn't law.

yesturday

Very clever. That's how I felt about it, too. A hot, steaming pile of yesturday.

[Randall]

There are a lot of landowners that are intolerant of people accessing streams on their property; I'm one of them. My family has land on Lost Creek in Warren County, my folks still live there but I grew up and left. I have confronted a handful of trespassers alone, making every one of them leave, only ever bringing a firearm into the equation once when the guy came at me with a chain, (I never had to point it at him, seeing it was deterrent enough). Dealing with the kind of people we have down there, I've carried every time. You'd really be surprised how often trespassers get aggressive, especially when they have you outnumbered or their girlfriend is there.

When you live in an area like we do where people come in and tear up your fields, cook meth in the hollers in the more difficult areas to access, continuously get stuck in the creek, litter, break into your buildings, set broke down cars on fire, and poach, then the law tells you that they won't respond becuase of how far out you live, your bottle will fill up pretty quick. Our creek is in no way navigable by the way, it is intermittent throughtout my entire piece of land and we've had people tell us that they had a right to be there. From our point of view, a trespasser is a trespasser is a trespasser.

On a brighter note, Chuck Tryon came out when he was writing his smallmouth book, talked to my dad and got a tour of our ground and a lot of our neighbors' who let us go play in the creek on their property. We've also let strangers have weddings in the waterfall when the water is down and others have played in the "swimming hole". The difference is that they came up and asked. I can't stress how much we appreciate the courtesy.

As a landowner with plenty of experience dealing with disrespectful trespassers I will say that if you don't have permission, go somewhere else. If you really want to fish there, find out who owns it and ask first.

[ozark trout fisher]

There are a lot of landowners that are intolerant of people accessing streams on their property; I'm one of them. My family has land on Lost Creek in Warren County, my folks still live there but I grew up and left. I have confronted a handful of trespassers alone, making every one of them leave, only ever bringing a firearm into the equation once when the guy came at me with a chain, (I never had to point it at him, seeing it was deterrent enough). Dealing with the kind of people we have down there, I've carried every time. You'd really be surprised how often trespassers get aggressive, especially when they have you outnumbered or their girlfriend is there.

When you live in an area like we do where people come in and tear up your fields, cook meth in the hollers in the more difficult areas to access, continuously get stuck in the creek, litter, break into your buildings, set broke down cars on fire, and poach, then the law tells you that they won't respond becuase of how far out you live, your bottle will fill up pretty quick. Our creek is in no way navigable by the way, it is intermittent throughtout my entire piece of land and we've had people tell us that they had a right to be there. From our point of view, a trespasser is a trespasser is a trespasser.

On a brighter note, Chuck Tryon came out when he was writing his smallmouth book, talked to my dad and got a tour of our ground and a lot of our neighbors' who let us go play in the creek on their property. We've also let strangers have weddings in the waterfall when the water is down and others have played in the "swimming hole". The difference is that they came up and asked. I can't stress how much we appreciate the courtesy.

As a landowner with plenty of experience dealing with disrespectful trespassers I will say that if you don't have permission, go somewhere else. If you really want to fish there, find out who owns it and ask first.

I agree with part of your post and disagree with another part. If the stream that flows through your land truly is intermittent, then it goes without saying that it is in no way navigable. Therefore no one has the right to fish it unless they have your permission. And I truly sympathize with the problems you've had with meth heads and other trouble makers.

But, if the stream is navigable (which, in my possibly incorrect opinion means that I can get a canoe down it a significant portion of the year), and I access the stream at a bridge right of way, and fish legally, then I don't think any landowner has the right to kick me off.

I may be wrong legally on this. Frankly, I don't care very much about that. I am a responsible angler. I release all my fish, I use artificial lures and flies only, and I don't litter. I won't scream and yell and make a lot of noise. And I will never go above the high water mark without permission. So if the way I fish is illegal on a few of these questionable streams, than I am at worst, taking part in a bit of harmless civil disobedience. I'm okay with that. I'll pay the fine if I have to.

[eric1978]

A relevant story...notice who represents who...go figure.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128619563

[Randall]

On a truly navigable stream, I think you are right. On a river like the Current, I think it's public water regardless of who owns the land around it. Blue Springs Creek on the other hand, is not navigable even though water flows through it year round.

My point is that we landowners are not just mean people that are out to ruin a fisherman's day. We are people that will almost always allow a person to access our land if they ask. We will also defend our property from those disrespectful trespassers and if we don't know you, we can't differentiate. There's also a reason we come armed. I read a lot of posts condemning the landowners and I don't think they were fair. Again, I don't know that we've ever told a person they couldn't play in the creek, but we've kicked a lot more out for not asking. The bottom line is courtesy and respect. If you don't respect me enough to ask my permission, how do I know you'll respect my property?