Trespass

[joeD]

"Philosophising" might be a stretch... But, we do like to talk don't we?

Truth: I have a drawn caricature of my dad on my wall, rendered when he was in college. He is on a soap box expostulating, while in the background there is a cow's butt with some stinking excrement on the ground. Apparently, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

[FishinCricket]

"Philosophising" might be a stretch... But, we do like to talk don't we?

Well it is a discussion forum, fellas....

[ness]

Nobody in this forum will be breaking the law anytime soon. We're not going to shoot anyone, nor are we going to get shot at. We are going to fish our streams just as we always have, having fun in the outdoors in a reasonable and respectful manner. I daresay that no one who posts on this forum belong to the class of buffoons and miscreants that we always allude to. While JDs post is valid and has common sense, his advise is redundant to the users of this forum. Because we (on this forum) already behave in a lawful, reasonable, and respectful manner, especially when it comes to our usage of the outdoors. It's like our law officers in St. Louis going to nursing homes and telling the residents not to go to Wellston and buy crack cocaine. Good advise, but...

Well, I dunno JoeD. One of us Ozark Anglers has got him a justice of the peace staring right down at him for repeated trespassin on a feller's gravel bar on a non-navigable but public eased hiway of a crick. Nuther one said he'd tell the guy to go ahead and shoot, 'cause his wife is a lawyer. Yet another got run outta the Boy Scouts and later got sancioned for cheatin' on the Japanese bass circuit. Me, I got convicted of 38 in a 20 'bout ten years ago. One sells card fer a livin. So, we ain't all pure like you say.

[FishinCricket]

Well, I dunno JoeD. One of us Ozark Anglers has got him a justice of the peace staring right down at him for repeated trespassin on a feller's gravel bar on a non-navigable but public eased hiway of a crick. Nuther one said he'd tell the guy to go ahead and shoot, 'cause his wife is a lawyer. Yet another got run outta the Boy Scouts and later got sancioned for cheatin' on the Japanese bass circuit. Me, I got convicted of 38 in a 20 'bout ten years ago. One sells cars fer a livin. So, we ain't all pure like you say.

Fixed that for ya...

[ness]

Fixed that for ya...

Thanks Cricket, I didn't notice that. That dang "D" is right next to the "S" you know?

[jdmidwest]

While doing some research, I found a letter from Attn John Danforth regarding the matter on the St. Francois River in 1971. It lists the navigable streams of MO. And it references Elder v Delcour.

http://ago.mo.gov/opinions/1971/264-71.htm

The decision circa 1954. The camping reference was to pull over and eat lunch or make repairs to the boat, not overnight camping.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16972749023983545035&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr

And it simply states the banks of the stream, but does not define how far the easement extends from the water edge.

[ness]

I actually read Elder v. Delcour today at lunch. Pretty interesting to see how law gets made. I gotta say the old buffer was full by the time I was done. I wasn't confused per se, I couldn't think well enough for that. Also read Danforth's letter to the DA who was looking for guidance. I guess the takeaway is each stream has to be tested for a binding ruling. Ain't that just dandy?

[joeD]

I didn't say pure. Living a colorful life and being respectful of others are not mutually exclusive traits. Also, one gets "convicted" of murder or rape or beastiality, not speeding. That's a nuisance that your attorney handles when he's not chasing women.

[ness]

Shoot JD -- you posted while I was typing. Same two things I read today.

[Al Agnew]

On nearly every stream, it's pretty easy to know the "high water mark". It's defined, or should be defined, as the part of the bank that is solid dirt, or where the bank turns to dirt and goes up to a bottom field or forest. As a practical matter, it could be defined as any part of the bank that isn't covered by gravel. So it seems to me that an easy way to define floaters' and anglers' rights is that you have the right to be in the water or on gravel. You do not have the right to be in the trees or up atop the high bank. As an ethical angler, I pretty much stick with that rule except for taking a leak when I'm in mixed company, in which case I might go into the brush if there isn't a handy sycamore growing out of the gravel bar to hide behind.

I fully understand JD's original points, and if I'm choosing a gravel bar to camp on, I'm not going to choose one that has a cabin atop the bank or a driveway down to the bar with a picnic table. I don't want to be disturbed in the middle of the night any more than the landowner coming down then wants to see somebody on his gravel bar. On most streams, it's pretty easy to find a bar that isn't "civilized".

But the fact is that river landowners have "always" understood that people can and will park and camp on "their" gravel bars. A lot of new landowners don't know it or choose to ignore it, but anybody who has owned land along a float stream for a long time should. As a river landowner myself, both in Montana and Missouri, I fully understand that I do not have exclusive use of the gravel bars that I own.

That doesn't mean I have to like it when I come down to the river and there's somebody there already. I may even nicely ask them to go down to the next bar, since I own the land next to this one and right now it's the only one I can access. And I certainly don't like it when the group on "my" bar is a bunch of obnoxious party pinheads. But unfortunately, that's the price of owning riverside land. If they are doing something obviously illegal, I might call the cops, but I can't ethically call the cops if the only thing they are doing is being loud and obnoxious. If only I had a nest full of trained hornets...