Legal or not?

[Rusty]

I strictly wade fish here in my part of the world. I live in Arkansas, but fish in Oklahoma and Missouri as well. What are the laws concerning tresspassing or not tresspassing when walking a river and its boundaries. I was told in Missouri, that once you legally enter the river you may walk anywhere as long is it is in the natural river boundary or flood plain. Im not sure about Oklahoma and Arkansas, I have yet to be able to find a definite answer. Any and all help on this would be helpful, i dont need to be shot at!

Trespassing signs here read...Trespassers Will Be Violated

[RiverRunner]

I've always wondered about that sign. I'm sure that there is an interesting story about its placement.

[Gary Lange]

It may come down to how the Landowner sees it. If you're coming up to the intersection and have the right of way and go into it thinking you have the right of way and the semitractor trailer rig runs over you then you're still dead whether you had the right of way or not. Landowners have been burned before you got there and they are going to protect what they feel it there property cause they have had it in there family for 100 years. They may or may not shoot you but can you take that chance just to fish a part of a river that is on his property. You could ask for his permission to fish the waters that border his land and if he says no then respect that casue to law may not be on your side.

[Rusty]

I've always wondered about that sign. I'm sure that there is an interesting story about its placement.

The people that own the land that I saw this sign on, made the Deliverance Family look like the Partridge Family.

[jdmidwest]

That is interesting about the high water mark in Ark, did not know that. Does Charlie still have his shooting range sign up by the river?

Here in MO. it is the navigable stream rule, but the landowners has rights to the waterline as far as I know in most streams. Some will even challenge you in the water in a canoe. There have been instances in the past where landowners have removed men out of a canoe on a stream running thru their property and held them until the Sheriff arrives. And there has been prosecutions. That is what a law is, something that any judge can screw any way he wants. If they were written exact, they would be called something else and you would not need a judge to decide about them.

The best rule of thumb is to be cautious or ask for permission if it is a smaller stream, when in doubt, stay out. Public rivers that have float camps running canoes are usually a safe bet. Same goes for scenic riverways owned by the National Park Service.

A new thing going on around here is to "take over" a section of county road for private uses by groups of landowners. The county has no responsibilities for the upkeep and taxpayers have no rights to it, the landowners own the land on both sides with no right of way. The reasons for this was usually the wild parties and blocking of the road by persons attending. Now, nobody can use the area for access without trespassing. Or the county will build a new higher truss bridge to replace a low water crossing and eliminate an access.

[taxidermist]

Ok Arkansas is up for grabs. I have fished part of the Little Buffalo since I was a kid, I enter from a public road. I was also issued a ticket for treaspass at the same spot. Cost was $145.00 plus court cost of $75.00

Now to the Buffalo National River, I was trail riding with friends we were all on horseback. It was raining and the river came up way to heck up. The only way we could find out took us across Lunce Cash and his property.

Now had I not known the Sheriff I would have thought I had just violated every law in the books. Something about safe egress is all that saved us from maybe being shot by Lunce!!

It is best to get the land owner permission if you can or stay within the banks, many landowners dont by the high water mark idea.

Now also if the public has used a fishing hole or swimming hole and the way to it crosses your land, you may not stop them public from using it. Case in point is a hole on Long Creek near Alpena and the Blue Hole on OSage Creek near Osage. Its been done in Federal District court.

[Crippled Caddis]

<If you're coming up to the intersection and have the right of way and go into it thinking you have the right of way and the semitractor trailer rig runs over you then you're still dead whether you had the right of way or not.>

That sums up the bottom line very well indeed.

And reminds me of a barracks argument I witnessed in basic training between a little guy from California and a huge, black, slow talking Baptist preacher from Alabama. The California lad finally became so excited that he was literally jumpimg up and down shouting "I'm right, I'm right!. The preacher looked down at him and issued the finest quelch line I've ever heard, "So was Jesus but they crucified Him".

[Randall]

That is what a law is, something that any judge can screw any way he wants. If they were written exact, they would be called something else and you would not need a judge to decide about them.

The problem with that statement is that no law, or whatever else you would call it, can be written "exact". no matter how clear cut a law may seem, there are always going to be points of contention regarding the elements of a law.

as far as water in missouri, i would imagine you can find a list of waterways that are considered navigable. if the water you want to fish is not on that list, only use the areas that are on public use lands.

as a landowner that has a non-navigable waterway running through my property, i have had unpleasant run-ins with people in my creek. it is unreal how many people have caused us problems. on more than one occasion, my father and i have had to make it very clear that we were prepared to defend ourselves and our property. however, when people ask us politely, we (along with most landowners) usually grant permission to use our creek.

[John Berry]

Charlie is no longer with us and alas the shooting range is closed. As a Vietnam Vet the hair on the back of my neck would stand up every time he popped off a few. I don't mind gunshots as long as I know they are coming. With Charlie, you never knew.

[Al Agnew]

I think just about everybody is partly right, but the bottom line is that in questionable cases, nobody knows. Here's the legal situation in Missouri:

Whether or not you can legally get on a stream in a canoe or other watercraft was decided by a court case on the upper Meramec many years ago. Basically, the court said that, for the purposes of recreational navigability, the stream is usable by the public if it was ever used in the past for commerce, which the court further went on to say that if it had ever been used in the past to float logs to market, among other uses. This pretty well established the public right to use the larger Ozark streams, including wading and getting out on the banks below the normal high water mark.

However, what it didn't do was establish how big a stream needed to be before it was permissable for the public to use it. Who knows which of the smaller streams of the Missouri Ozarks were used to float logs? The Meramec in the area considered by the court case is not floatable year-round, being well above Maramec Spring. So a creek doesn't apparently have to be completely navigable at all times to qualify for public use. However, that doesn't mean it's settled as to which creeks are and aren't "floatable" and therefore "navigable".

There are only a few federally navigable waterways in MO, including the Mississippi, Missouri, Osage up to Bagnell Dam, and the lower end of the Gasconade. Others, below federal dams, are in a different category. On all streams not federally navigable, the landowner owns the stream bottom--everything but the water. If the stream forms the boundary between two landowners, each owns to the middle of the stream bed. So technically, had there not been the court case deciding otherwise, you'd be trespassing if you were standing in the water, or if your canoe dragged the bottom in a riffle.

Now, when it comes to the wading angler, it's pretty much settled that you are technically trespassing if you're on a stream that is too small to take a canoe down, and the landowners along said creek have the right to keep you off. So don't assume that because you got onto the creek at a public right of way that you can fish it without getting arrested. As a practical matter, about all you can do is check out the access you're using. If it has an obviously well-used parking area and a well-worn footpath to the water--and it doesn't have a bunch of purple paint or keep out signs--it probably means the nearest landowner doesn't mind you using it and won't run you off. If the access doesn't look used and/or all the trees in sight are painted purple, you probably should stay off it.

In the end, on any stream that is questionable, it all depends upon the landowners, the county sheriff's department, and the county prosecutor. Some counties and some landowners are pretty easy-going when it comes to stream trespass issues, others aren't. I float a lot of little creeks that are seldom floated, and have only once had any trouble. That time, a landowner ran me off before I could get my canoe in the water. I also wade some small creeks, and have never had a problem. But I only use obviously used accesses, I stay in the creek, and otherwise keep a low profile, moving pretty fast past places where I could be seen from a nearby house. No sense tempting fate.