Abuse of the law happens.
Once while doing whitewater, I had a property
owner-lawyer yell at me from shore that he actually owned
the very water I was eddied out on top of!
I produced a laminated copy of NY State law
that cleared his misconception and tossed it
at his feet.
I myself, also own property bordering a stream.
I posted a “Paddlers Welcome” sign on a tree, but with
this caveat, “Take out what you bring in or future access will be denied.”
Greedy people/those with their own head up their
ass need to lighten up.
Outfitters…
Well - some outfitters…seem to have a sore spot for folks doing their thing without paying an outfitter. Some like to claim “turf” that extends beyond what they legally control. I’ve experienced it and know others who have as well. It’s a universal problem that isn’t limited to just water sports.
These individuals give outfitters a bad name, and should be exposed and/or corrected. If it were me in this case (an it is a given that I would not be purposefully obnoxious or abusive), I would go public with the story.
Other States?
This is a very interesting subject. Maybe someone could start a new thread posting law from various states, including citations to statues and cases.
Joe
Interesting…
i live in Wisconsin, just bought my first kayak this spring. I work weekends and am off during the week so I am looking at doing a lot of solo trips. I have pondered how to do this on the rivers and the only solution I have come up with is to buy a shuttle. After reading this, I am wondering…
I have not dealt with outfitters before, other than the Bear Paw. After reading this I am a little amazed that they aren’t more supportive of ANYONE out on the river. I would think they would see that as interest in their business. I do know some of them must be like the “other” outfitters on the Wolfe and it is all about weekend warriors and drunkfests. I have heard many a tale of the “rafters” heading down the wolf with their gallons of beer. ughhh
Any advice or words of wisdom??
Good luck w/ the outfitters.
YakJak and I went out both of the last weekends about an hour & a half away from (my) home, and shuttled our own vehicles (I suggest you find a paddling friend quickly). The alternative was paying the outfitter $25 per boat, for a 16 mile (one way) shuttle. $50 for the two of us to load two boats and drive us 16 miles!!! What a load of crap. They only charge $35 per canoe for rental, the rat-bastages. I chose kayaking over golf to avoid stupid fees like that per outing.
The outfitter close to me on the river I frequent won’t even do it. Not even if he’s already got a group headed that way. I just don’t get their obstinance . . . .
YoS
State by State
– Last Updated: May-07-08 4:07 PM EST –
Here's a link to the National Rivers' take on matters concerning river rights and access, with volumes of legal briefs and other information:
http://www.nationalrivers.org/us-law-menu.htm
Wisconsin law (at least, as interpreted by the National Rivers) is outlined here:
http://www.nationalrivers.org/states/wi-law.htm
Here's a listing of all states:
http://www.nationalrivers.org/registry.htm
Good Luck!
Delphinus
http://www.AquaDynology.com
My own experience
In years past I have used Blackhawk for shuttle service, and found them to be extremely helpful friendly and accomadating.
I find this posting/case to be odd.Odd that an outfitter would summon the police because someone simply happened to pull in on their shore, and that the person would be there long enough for the police to even arrive.
There is a public access point directly adjacent to their property.
Before I used the services of Blackhawk we were using the public launch and stopped in for information, and they were very helpful with information about the public access along the river and didn’t push the issue of using their service.
For Birdiewi, there are several outfitters and bars/resturaunts along the Wisconsin river that offer shuttle services. I have used a number of them and had great experiences with all of them (never a complaint about any, other than maybe price).
This whole incident seems odd and out of character to me and I hope it doesn’t give the people along the Wisconsin River an undeserved bad impression. If someone thruly deserves a bad report that is important to know also, but there hasn’t been enough information given about this incedent in this post or the previous one linked here to draw a useful conclusion in my opinion (worth what you paid me for it).
PJC & I used them several times
years ago to drive shuttle for us. I do remember one time, we pulled up on the street, and pulled a couple of things out of my truck, and I instantly heard a few shouts of “you can’t launch that here” or “the public launch is over there!” I wasn’t even across the sidewalk with my gear. The gear (pfd, paddle) was right next to my back tire.
We promptly walked into the trailer / shed / office and asked about shuttle costs. THEN they were happy to allow us to launch on their beach.
Most of the issue with Blackhawk is that people don’t ask first. I agree that it’s in an outfitter’s best interest to befriend paddlers - afterall, when we introduce new people to the sport, and ask them to join us on a river trip, we’ll need to rent boats from SOMEONE…
I would always launch a trip at a poorly located friendly outfitter’s shop than someone who was conveniently located but snotty.
But, … if the guy says he’s calling the cops…and the cop had a long drive to get there (there really isn’t anything close by Blackhawk), why hang around and wait?
Well, Indiana law stinks…
The water is open for use BUT the ground is not. If you so much as wade in the creek you are trespassing on someones property. The owners on each side of the creek own to the center of the creek.
Most owners don’t know that, and most in Indiana are friendly as long as you stick to sand bars and islands they really don’t care.
I don’t think that’s true.
I can’t find the link at the moment, but I’ve found something before from the DNR or state sites that cite the high water mark. Either way, I think it’s been settled that push come to shove, federal law trumps state anyway. I wouldn’t want to push it myself, but it’s there if necessary . . . .
YoS
Hmm… cool.
I’ll see if I can find that. I have seen the other in print, but that was quite a while ago…
Here it is, Sloop.
It’s an in.gov document, but I tinyurl’ed it to save the thread from going three screens to the right.
http://tinyurl.com/4d2498
““Shore” means the shoreline or water line of a public freshwater lake or the ordinary high watermark of a navigable waterway.”
YoS
can you provide a link?
– Last Updated: May-08-08 9:36 AM EST –
Because otherwise I'm dubious of that claim. Most states and federal law references high water mark, and as long as your feet are wet you're not trespassing.
OTOH, many of these laws are being challenged or modified, some at the behest of private landowners who have been sold a bill of goods by their realtors or developers.
Be careful which law you choose
– Last Updated: May-08-08 11:39 AM EST –
Reading the posts in this thread cause me to suspect that many of the posters are not aware of how stupifyingly complex federal and state law can be. References to the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution seem to imply an assumption that any federal law takes precedence over any state law; this is incorrect. Article VI of the Constitution gives supremacy to Federal law enacted under the authority of the Constitution, but the Constitution gives the Federal Government limited (albeit broad) authority. The 10th Amendment reserves any powers not delegated to the Federal Government by the Constitution to the States or the people. Just sorting out this clause has probably generated enough case law to sink a bidarka. Even if the Federal Government has the right to legislate some activity, if it chooses not to, states can enact legislation controlling the activity. States can even legislate control of activities concurrently with the Federal Government so long as their law does not conflict with a federal law. Even if the Federal Government has exclusive jurisdiction in some activity, it can still delegate control of that activity to the states. A similar relationship exists between the states and municipal governments. Federal laws may permit states to enact concurrent laws that are either more or less restrictive that the Federal law depending on the purpose of the law.
Before you can sort out which government’s laws control an activity you have to define the activity. There are different statutes and regulations controlling different activities, such as land use, land ownership, taxation, environmental protection, policing jurisdiction and hundreds more. Different laws may define things differently for different purposes. Land use laws may define the area controlled down to the low water mark, but define building setbacks from the high water mark. The Federal Government may define control of federal navigable waters up to the mean high, or extreme high, tide line, but not have the right, or not exercised the right, to define land ownership boundaries, so the one state may define coastal land ownership as ending at the high water mark while another may use the low water mark. Riparian ownership may extent to high water, low water, or the middle of the waterway.
Before you commit yourself to doing something with legal consequences, you would be well advised to determine what your rights are with respect to any particular piece of ground or water. You need to find the specific laws that apply to that particular resource; then you need to determine which law controls the particular activity that concerns you. It may be obvious or generally known, but it may not be. Ignorance of the law is not generally considered to be a defense against charges of violating the law, but God knows why.
agreed
It is convoluted and you really have to dig deep. And in some states the laws are being modified or challenged, or even formulated.
It’s an issue that needs to come to the forefront because if we don’t show an interest we can be damn sure the development industry will have the greater influence.
For all my criticism of the outfitter, I would like to hear the situation framed from their perspective before jumping all over them (more).
I found these…
http://www.in.gov/nrc/2443.htm
http://www.indianawaterways.com/innavigablestreams.htm
Looks like it’s the high water mark for about any stream in Indiana.