Tresspassers....again

[singlestacksig]

I had heard of the premise in law that you cite re: navigation. I never was quite clear on the distinction As a point of law. Regardless, a friend of mine lives on Sugar Creek and had floated the creek for years. When the new"neighbor" starting acquiring both sides of the creek he began to make life miserable for folks. I'm not saying he had the CO in his pocket, but I can attest to several instances where the CO, at the request of his landlord, made life very difficult for some non ill intentioned sportsmen.

The navigable vs non navigable relevance issue came to light when my friend tried to wade Sugar Creek and fish it. He was able to get into the creek at his house since his property line went right down to the creek's edge, but he was technically unable to get out downstream because he was trespassing. The neighbor had literally dozens of trail cameras set out and he used them as both an intimidation factor and as a source of evidentiary submission when he pressed for trespass violations.

A number of circumstances did arise over time where seemingly strong woven wire fence 10' high had multiple inexplicable failures - perhaps due to manufacturers defect or acts of God. Some say wire cutter marks were observed but I can't say one way or the other if that allegation is true.

the property line of a water way is the mean waters edge, the average point of the water over a certain # of years..
Yes someone could own both sides of a river & you can not get out of the water if the water is high.. you would have to go past that area to get out...
NRC: Navigable Waterways Roster
NAVIGABLE WATERWAYS ROSTER