What's the deal with stream access in OR?

[dirty dog]

What little I know is from talking the river boaters here on the North Umpqua river.
Stay in the boat to fish when crossing private land unless you have permission to fish from shore.
Also from both OR and WA. Some new land/home owner with water front property might think they own the river when they really don't.
I have had property owner on the Wenatchee river say I was trespassing and were going to call the law. I have said go right ahead and when the sheriff arrived the land owner was pretty disappointed.

 

[Westfly Refugee]

The Assoc of Northwest Steelheaders has long led the fight to ensure public access to Oregon's rivers. It's appropriate to acknowledge the efforts of the late Art Isrealson who both advocated for the public's rights and pushed back, defeating the efforts of politicians who sought to restrict access.

Here's a summary with a number of helpful links. It also mentions efforts in WA.

Public River Access – Association of Northwest Steelheaders

nwsteelheaders.org

 

[SurfnFish]

With a few exceptions including the occasional asshole landowner, water access in OR is wide open, one of the reasons we decided on OR when we moved here from Half Moon Bay 18 years ago.
We had been considering both OR and WA during the pre-move years, and were at the tail end of a road trip criss crossing WA, finding ourselves a bit dismayed by some of the signs and fences we had encountered at various lakes and rivers on the trip when we experienced the 'campgound incident."
We had just set up camp at a vacant campground on a small river when a Ranger truck pulled up and a middle aged gal in a uniform got out and inspected the fee ticket on our windshield.
"This is for a non riverview campsite, so you have to pay another $10 to stay in it or you need to move to a non-river campsite" she tells us.
"you're kidding, right? We're the only campers in this entire campgroud."
Shakes her head. "Doesn't matter, the fees are the fees."
On the lame scale, that was a 10...

 

[JimTravers¤£a!!Travers]

Won't this be covered by your "Main Amendment"?

My Main Amendment covers all cases.

 

[GAT]

I was involved for many years with a group from Westfly that fought with the state legislature in Oregon over river rights. Some of them thought landowners could own parts of the river but we proved to them that was incorrect. One of the guys on our side spent weeks in the legislature library looking up cases that went back to the pioneer days. ... when the rights were first established.

In a nutshell, it came down to this: in Oregon, you have both a federal and state right to float and wade navigable waters. ... (there's a couple rivers on the coast that are exempt but they are not popular fishing rivers).

A "navigable river" was one use for commerce -- similar to how we use highways today. They were used for moving commerce from one point to another. Obviously, you can't start stopping traffic on I5 because your deed indicates you own the land under the pavement . When goods and products were moved around via the waterways, they were in fact the highways of the day and it was decided that land owners could not stop the movement of commerce.

The normal high water mark, established during the winter flows, is basically the shoulder of the highway. You can walk or drive along the shoulder of a highway without trespassing.

The key is that your rights do not allow you to cross private property to enter a navigable river. A land owner must give you permission or you must enter at a public site ... like a boat ramp.

If you have the time and money to go to court with a land owner who claims you were trespassing while staying below the normal high water line, you will win. This has happened time and time again. The land owner may have a deed indicating they own the river but the deed is wrong. The federal and state rights over ride an errant deed.

Personally, I know my rights but I also don't have the time and money to take a land owner to court so I simply avoid fishing contested waters.

 

[JimTravers¤£a!!Travers]

MY MAIN AMENDMENT COVERS ALL CASES!!!! That's the deal with MY Main Amendment!!

Look, here's the deal with MY Main Amendment: its often referred to as one of the most ALL-ENCOMPASSING legal laws to date!!!! Nothing has usurped My Main Amendment in terns of being a BROAD STROKE LAW!!!

 

[DerekWhipple]

Thanks to Jim Travers bringing this thread back up, I looked at GAT's post.

Seems like any river that was in an area that was logged to shit was likely used for "commerce". If you can find any evidence of a splash dam, even better.

https://www.fs.usda.gov/pnw/lwm/aem/docs/burnett/splash_dam_mapping_rmiller.pdf

Page 3 has a map of Western Oregon with splash dam locations and log drives. Puts most steelhead waters in play.

 

[Driftless Dan]

Here in Wisconsin, the state DNR (which is orders of magnitude better than Oregon and Washington's equivalent) publishes good information on stream access.




I carry a copy of this in a plastic bag wherever I fish. I've had a landowner call police on me, and when I showed the policeman this, he told the landowner that as long as I have one foot in the water, I'm legal.

 

[GAT]

Here in Wisconsin, the state DNR (which is orders of magnitude better than Oregon and Washington's equivalent) publishes good information on stream access.

View attachment 101857


I carry a copy of this in a plastic bag wherever I fish. I've had a landowner call police on me, and when I showed the policeman this, he told the landowner that as long as I have one foot in the water, I'm legal.

At one time we had a similar information pamphlet in Oregon. I'm not exactly sure what happened to them because I haven't seen one in years.

I know of one case where a land owner called the sheriff in regards to what he claimed was trespassing because the angler was wading in "his" river. This was one of the instances where the angler had the time and money to fight the trespassing claim. Turns out, the land owner's deed DID NOT indicate that he owned the land under the river but in fact indicated that he did not due to river rights.

So many times the land owner assumes more than their deed indicates. Besides, a deed written in error has no impact on our river rights. The owner would need to take that up with whoever wrote the deed.

 

[SSPey]

A quick look at county tax maps shows which properties run to the river’s edge vs all way the river’s centerline. I‘d imagine that landowners who pay property taxes to the centerline of a river or all way across it would feel some ownership over the river bottom. I have no idea whether these tax maps reflect property deeds and hold any sway in court, though.

 

[Matt B]

Thanks to Jim Travers bringing this thread back up, I looked at GAT's post.

Seems like any river that was in an area that was logged to shit was likely used for "commerce". If you can find any evidence of a splash dam, even better.

https://www.fs.usda.gov/pnw/lwm/aem/docs/burnett/splash_dam_mapping_rmiller.pdf

Page 3 has a map of Western Oregon with splash dam locations and log drives. Puts most steelhead waters in play.

And how are those steelhead populations doing? I wonder if there might be any linkage between the legacy of massive clearcuts, log drives and splash dams, and the current population status of those fish.

 

[SculpinSwinger]

And how are those steelhead populations doing? I wonder if there might be any linkage between the legacy of massive clearcuts, log drives and splash dams, and the current population status of those fish.

I can tell you one of the rivers on the map as being splash damned is presently home to a decent non hatchery winter steelhead, as well as coho (no fishing for) populations.
Most of these rivers are scoured to bed rock. Some gravels have redeposited in areas. It certainly caused a tremendous amount of damage. There are pockets where recovery is happening.

 

[jact55]

Maybe I'm a basic peasant (i am), but I'd be the last person to own a water front home. Just out of the concept of it.
It's feels like littering, just trash among nature. Sorry, not sorry.

I'd happily give up my rights to ever own water front to have everyone else's gone too (in concept, if we could go back In time. Not wanting folks to be stripped of their land)
I own property and will obviously do what it takes to protect it. So I get the protective nature of those who do live on it. And people nowadays can be rude and disresptectful to nature and property. But it shouldn't have gotten this far. Money is king I guess.

"Lets all get out for the city and get into nature, to sit in the middle of a lake city, or river city"

OK, useless rant over. I understand this doesn't really give any help to anything. And hopefully doesn't start any fights (unless it's directed at me only, that's fine)

Just can't think of much uglier than sitting in the middle of a lake with row houses jammed in there. Blah.

 

[dirty dog]

I fished a couple spots on the N. Umpqua this afternoon.
Pretty day. No fish caught.
I had a bump or two that I think was a trout.
What I know about the fish counts on the N. Umpqua is the river has been closed for two summers in a row because of the low numbers for the summer run steelhead.
I like to hit the river as soon as the trout season opens cause it may close by June or July.
There are some nice RB's and coastal cutts to C&R.
I don't know what the winter run is like without looking it up for the past years

 

[SculpinSwinger]

I fished a couple spots on the N. Umpqua this afternoon.
Pretty day. No fish caught.
I had a bump or two that I think was a trout.
What I know about the fish counts on the N. Umpqua is the river has been closed for two summers in a row because of the low numbers for the summer run steelhead.
I like to hit the river as soon as the trout season opens cause it may close by June or July.
There are some nice RB's and coastal cutts to C&R.
I don't know what the winter run is like without looking it up for the past years

NU cutt, and my first fish of 24’ - a couple weeks ago. Beautiful fish!

 

[PhilR]

A quick look at county tax maps shows which properties run to the river’s edge vs all way the river’s centerline. I‘d imagine that landowners who pay property taxes to the centerline of a river or all way across it would feel some ownership over the river bottom. I have no idea whether these tax maps reflect property deeds and hold any sway in court, though.

They don’t hold sway. I own all the way to the curb, but can’t put up a tollgate on the sidewalk on my property.

They can feel all the ownership they want, but that ownership also comes encumbered by easements for public use of navigable waterways.

All that said, I’m not going to get arrested to prove the point. Not worth it to me.

 

[Westfly Refugee]

A quick look at county tax maps shows which properties run to the river’s edge vs all way the river’s centerline. I‘d imagine that landowners who pay property taxes to the centerline of a river or all way across it would feel some ownership over the river bottom.

But the property owner does not pay taxes to the centerline.
The counties don't assess taxes on submerged lands. (someone might be able to cite some exception, but this is the general rule in Oregon)

 

[Driftless Dan]

So many times the land owner assumes more than their deed indicates. Besides, a deed written in error has no impact on our river rights. The owner would need to take that up with whoever wrote the deed.

I found out that I own the river behind my house here north of Chicago, and even a king-sized bed sized piece of the opposite bank, which would be a big surprise to the golf course.

And I have to say, I only had to pull that WDNR map out one time. I had entered the stream via an easement, and was coming off of it to the bridge when I was met by the landowner (who had no weapons that I saw, who was unhappy but not rude and never got physical). He had already called the police, who arrived shortly. We worked it all out with a handshake, went on our ways. It was a very civilized exchange. I only say this because although this is likely as contentious as 99% of these things get, it's the other 1% that get the press.