Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[BigFisher]

A couple times this year Iv been fishing the Vedder off the dike behind peoples houses and have been told to leave because it is private property? I dont really know if it is or not, so I usually leave when told too. Id would really like to know, I talked with some guys from the river and they all have different thoughts.

[Fish Assassin]

I believe the private property ends at the high water mark.

[BigFisher]

so if his property was flooded last fall, then I wont have to worry about this issue? 

[searun17]

 What i was told is thier property ends at the high water mark,what bothers me is when you are walking the river and some property owner tells you to leave because your on his property when it isnt,perfects example is the chehalis before the river changed direction,i used to fish below purdys which on the right side of the river is private ,now fenn lodge,we would cross the river and walk down on crown land and cross again to fish the river that isnt thier property only to be hassled by the owner to get off of his land which doesnt belong to him to begin with.i dont know the legalities of it but as far as i am concerned as long as you are not on private land the rivers should be accessible to all.

[Tinhat]

Now thats a very interesting question....

http://www.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/reg/T/85_62.htm    > see item 4

I always thought that within 20 feet of the water was considered public property, but this was information from an older friend so..... do I trespass when I walk along the beach past someones house or along the riverside at the bottom of someones yard? ... how can you possible own a moving / constantly changing piece of the planet?

In Scotland I believe you have to pay a fee to the landowner to fish the river that passes his property, and further to this I believe he can lay down the rules.... fly only etc.

Any lawyers out there?

[BwiBwi]

Chilliwack River changes with each flood.  Government has not done new surveys to determine if the current dyke is on private property or not.  So places where erosion has been bad, the entire dyke can actually been built on private property and yes, by fishing there it is trespassing.

[johnny]

I would welcome them to call the police and let them sort it out if it's that big a problem to fish public waters. Knowing the cost of fishing in England and Scotland because of the "privatizing" of the rivers, I would press the issue to ensure we are not going down the same path..

[hotrod]

I believe the private property ends at the high water mark.

I believe the problem here is getting to the high water mark which usually intails tresspassing.


    Hotrod

[eddy]

BwiBwi has it right.
In general, the current high water mark may not be the legal high water mark.
Specifically, if you want to know whether the owner's trespassing claim is right or not, you can go to City Hall and they will see where the Dyke is constructed, i.e. on crown land or private property.
You want to enjoy the day and not be harassed. It is a big river and lots of other places to fish.
Enjoy it.

[Xgolfman]

Went through this last year at Mid river, Hell, can't remember the name but the tree fort spot....Guy said he owned land over to other side of river and we were trepassing...Total B.S. I found out later...
You are allowed to the high water mark BUT with flooding that doesn't change from where it was...In other words you can't go walk up on some guys yard because it was underwater during the flood...you can go along the river but should always respect people property...It's the slobs out there and most read this forum that trash the river and cause these problems...Before you bit ch too much think how you like it if a bunch of 'tards came and trashed your yard and lawn every weekend...

[Sam Salmon]

I would welcome them to call the police and let them sort it out if it's that big a problem to fish public waters.

One thing to remember-if it is private property and you've been asked to leave 3 times and don't then you can be charged with 'Assault by Trespass'.

[Moe]

States side in some states  I believe that the property owners claim half the river or if they own on both sides then they own that section of water, so you can't even anchore and fish.

[BwiBwi]

Property regulation with streams is very complicated.  Many small creek and streams flowing through private property can not be accessed as there is no such thing as high water mark and the owners do own the river property but just the the right to it's contents which belongs to the crown.  Usually high water mark only applies to rivers with flood control (dykes), as this is maintained by public funding and is usually built on crown land.  However, if flood did occur and dykes are pushed back and onto private property well, it becomes a sticky situation.  Dyke itself is owned by crown but not the land it's sitting on.  So property owners does have the right to ask people to leave until crown buy the land from the owners.  But on the other hand dyke is public access, so usually if all parties play nice, be neat and considerate, we won't have problems.  So just remember some dykes are on private land and that's the backyard for some people.  So don't just walk on top of the dyke, instead walk the dyke close to the water and not be seen, and be very quite.

[jetboatjim]

These streams you cant cross private land.....but you can wade or walk the shoreline.

as far as I know there is only one person in B.C. that still owns water rights and that is the fellow downstream of 216 th on the alloutte.

this battle has been going on for many years, I just tell the person "call the police and let them sort it out" this use to be the case on the upper/mid alloutte.

[canso]

why bother,

I admit I wouldn't want people fishing around my house. take a hike and fish somewhere else.

have some respect for others.  weather its law or not.

seems like common sense.