# Riparian tresspass



## Retiredducker (Oct 11, 2011)

You can sue for anything , winning is another story. Doubt it's on the tax rolls but in general waterfront owners pay high taxes . Obviously if you are fortunate to have an exclusive on a certain stretch of property this law works in your favor. If not, not so much.


----------



## Retiredducker (Oct 11, 2011)

Obviously there are three types of owners. Those that allow no hunting, those that allow anyone and those that limit it to one or two groups. Those are the kind to be nice to...


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

I don't see how you can own property and NOT pay taxes on it, don't make sense to me. These laws, as we have them, remind me too much of England, where everything is owned by someone. There should be a limit on water that has public access. 500' or 1000', but some kind of limit. Also if you own it, it should be deeded, and taxed.

If you own it, you should also be responsible for everything that happens on it. Ownership laws should be equal.


----------



## Retiredducker (Oct 11, 2011)

It's definitely two sided . I have areas that I control by having sole permission ( not huge areas) and areas I'd love to hunt but can't do to owner choice . Some just work more aggressively for permission , treat the owners right, and I like knowing that some guy who never spent a second seeking permission could simply pull up and hunt. These are all areas near homes, our habitat is very splintered . I don't think you'd like some hunter pulling up to your shoreline to hunt that you don't know or didn't invite. I think the tax issue is mute. Simply because the taxes they pay are very high simply by assessment. By the way you can't get 1000" from a home on the lakes around here..they are too numerous .


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Retiredducker said:


> It's definitely two sided . I have areas that I control by having sole permission ( not huge areas) and areas I'd love to hunt but can't do to owner choice . Some just work more aggressively for permission , treat the owners right, and I like knowing that some guy who never spent a second seeking permission could simply pull up and hunt. These are all areas near homes, our habitat is very splintered . I don't think you'd like some hunter pulling up to your shoreline to hunt that you don't know or didn't invite. I think the tax issue is mute. Simply because the taxes they pay are very high simply by assessment. By the way you can't get 1000" from a home on the lakes around here..they are too numerous .


What about on lakes like Houghton? I bet you can get 1000' away from anything on lakes of that size. 

If I have to pay taxes on every inch of property I own, so should everyone else. Assessment is not the issue. If you choose to live in a high cost area, that is your choice, you should still have to pay on every inch you own, same as the rest of us do.

I am not being hurt by this, I don't hunt areas like that, and likely never will, I mainly hunt Lake Erie and the Detroit River. 

IF they own it, they should be taxed on it, regardless of the assessment rates. Either you own it, and pay the proper tax, or you don't own it. It's not right as it is. 

500' or 1000' is not the shoreline. 1/2 or a mile off shore is not the shoreline. Shoreline is where the water meets the land, not halfway out into a lake. Safety should be the only issue. 

Again, I don't care, other than the tax problem. I don't hunt there.


----------



## fsamie1 (Mar 8, 2008)

How about some lakes with no public access? People living on these lakes own the entire lake. I think that is wrong.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

fsamie1 said:


> How about some lakes with no public access? People living on these lakes own the entire lake. I think that is wrong.


If there is no public access where is there a problem? Why can't someone, or a group, own a lake that their land surrounds? As long as they pay the proper taxes


----------



## andyotto (Sep 11, 2003)

DecoySlayer said:


> I have always wondered, since they do own that land under the water, is the acreage included on their tax bill?


Property taxes aren't based on the amount of land you own but instead on taxable value of the land. Lake front owners pay more because the value is greater. Bottomlands are part of that value. Effectively you would be changing that value by changing riparian rights.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

andyotto said:


> Property taxes aren't based on the amount of land you own but instead on taxable value of the land. Lake front owners pay more because the value is greater. Bottomlands are part of that value. Effectively you would be changing that value by changing riparian rights.


Maybe so, I don't know.

Like I said, I don't have a horse in this race. I don't own lake front property and I don't hunt those lakes. I do, however see many problems with the existing system. Problems than could lead to fines, tickets, etc, even when care is taken not to break the law.

Let's say I get permission to hunt in front the property that Mr. Snodgrass owns on Canvasback Lake. I hunt divers, so I am not hunting close to the shoreline. Just how in the world am I to determine if I am still inside of the invisible "wedge" that he owns? I very well could have left the "wedge of Snodgrass" and floating into the "wedge of Poindexter" who is a vegan and a member of PETA. He calls the CO, who heads out in he boat, who can't really determine who's invisible wedge I am really on, and writes me a ticket for being on the "wedge of Poindexter".

That is why I say that a set value away from property, like 500' or 1000' from the shoreline is easier to see, understand, respect and enforce, while still protecting the rights of the land owner and providing for needed safety.


----------



## jody bird (Jul 3, 2015)

Follow the laws, I have permission to hunt from someone, private lake Oakland County there are a lot of houses on one half not so many on the other half and it has a canal to a smaller lake which the flight ducks use frequently I do have permission to hunt the smaller lake also as long as im in the water they just don't want me parking there ,past neighbor problems I guess.so ask permission a lot of the time they will let you be smart hunt wise don't shoot towards the house and let them know a day or so before you're hunting so you don't scare the crap out of them lol Christmas card with a bonus in them keeps it good to, I have had cops and d.n.r out there several times because the half of the lake where all the houses are they think they own the lake I have been harassed and the cops have told them that had complained on me to leave me alone stay there distance from me and there will be no problems and I do hunt on the water not the land where I don't have permission, but I'm 450 ft away from any house with no issues from the cops you people that have problems with it you're wrong don't buy a house on the water you don't own where the water is and I do own a place on a lake so we are all clear there but I don't own it i don't pay taxes on it so that's my thoughts that's like the dock in the water I fish bass under docks you don't own the water I can fish under the dock say what you want it's not yours


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

jody bird said:


> Follow the laws, I have permission to hunt from someone, private lake Oakland County there are a lot of houses on one half not so many on the other half and it has a canal to a smaller lake which the flight ducks use frequently I do have permission to hunt the smaller lake also as long as im in the water they just don't want me parking there ,past neighbor problems I guess.so ask permission a lot of the time they will let you be smart hunt wise don't shoot towards the house and let them know a day or so before you're hunting so you don't scare the crap out of them lol Christmas card with a bonus in them keeps it good to, I have had cops and d.n.r out there several times because the half of the lake where all the houses are they think they own the lake I have been harassed and the cops have told them that had complained on me to leave me alone stay there distance from me and there will be no problems and I do hunt on the water not the land where I don't have permission, but I'm 450 ft away from any house with no issues from the cops you people that have problems with it you're wrong don't buy a house on the water you don't own where the water is and I do own a place on a lake so we are all clear there but I don't own it i don't pay taxes on it so that's my thoughts that's like the dock in the water I fish bass under docks you don't own the water I can fish under the dock say what you want it's not yours


How do you know on which owner's "wedge" you are over? That is where the problem lies. On a lake with many landowners that can very confusing fast.


----------



## Retiredducker (Oct 11, 2011)

When I'm talking about getting 1000' from a home I'm talking about among shore, not out in the water. Not many issues arise with boar blinds or layouts way out in open water, it's the shoreline that is the issue here . As a hunter and non property owner I like it as it is rather than a free for all, having to get up at 3:00 to get your spot. Just work hard to secure permission .


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Retiredducker said:


> When I'm talking about getting 1000' from a home I'm talking about among shore, not out in the water. Not many issues arise with boar blinds or layouts way out in open water, it's the shoreline that is the issue here . As a hunter and non property owner I like it as it is rather than a free for all, having to get up at 3:00 to get your spot. Just work hard to secure permission .


I understand that, but as the law is written, a layout boat is not legal out in front of any house and you are subject to a ticket, fines, etc. There is no good way to determine over which "wedge" on the lake you are on. That is not a good system.


----------



## jody bird (Jul 3, 2015)

DecoySlayer said:


> How do you know on which owner's "wedge" you are over? That is where the problem lies. On a lake with many landowners that can very confusing fast.


I have never had it brought up yet, all they say is stay 450 ft away from where I don't have permission and all good been hunting here for years


----------



## Nicoli7153 (Oct 9, 2012)

Recreational trespass has signing requirements in order for it to be enforced. Never seen bottom land posted to meet these requirements. Burden of proof is on the prosecutor.

450' "safety zone" applies

General criminal trespass requires that one be given notice that they are not welcome and then disregard that notice. Burden of proof is on the prosecutor.

Civil trespass is an action between two parties in civil court. Landowner must prove damages, law enforcement is not a party to this action.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

jody bird said:


> I have never had it brought up yet, all they say is stay 450 ft away from where I don't have permission and all good been hunting here for years


I get that. The problem is still there. IF that one CO who dreams of writing tickets went out there and legally writes you up for that. There needs to be a "set" distance for riparian rights.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Am I not understanding the law? 

As I understand it a lake front landowner "owns" the land, under the water, in a "wedge" shape, out to the center of the lake. Under that law no one hunt on any part of that wedge without permission of the landowner, even if you are a 1/2 mile or more out, regardless of the distance from the shoreline.


----------



## jody bird (Jul 3, 2015)

RetiredDucker I do agree, go out and work hard to get permission I do and it pays off I only hunt state land when I hunt divers out on big water I hunt only private inland and I'm the only one on my lake that duck hunts and I love it that way it's such a privilege to have this, i do go days with no ducks but there not molested out there I don't over hunt it


----------



## jody bird (Jul 3, 2015)

DecoySlayer said:


> Am I not understanding the law?
> 
> As I understand it a lake front landowner "owns" the land, under the water, in a "wedge" shape, out to the center of the lake. Under that law no one hunt on any part of that wedge without permission of the landowner, even if you are a 1/2 mile or more out, regardless of the distance from the shoreline.


Yeah I guess he could write me a ticket I pray it doesn't happen the wedge has never been brought up not byet a c.of or a cop or a homeowner and I will tell you this I'm hunting on the edge on this lake and I know I am in some spots but I'm always cool with the law I even go up to the police station to let them know when I will be out there


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

DecoySlayer said:


> I am curious, is the acreage of the under water part of the property included on the deed? I have always wondered that.


I many cases yes, sometimes you have to remedy the situation my quit claiming the property to avoid paying taxes on lake bottom.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Gamekeeper said:


> Here's how you can address your anxiety.


Thanks for all the info, but, I don't have any anxiety, I just don't hunt those lakes. Makes it easy. Most of them don't hold enough divers long enough to make it worth the effort to pull my boats, drive 50 miles or so, and hope it's the one day there are a few ducks there. 

Maybe someday, if I start hunting puddle ducks more, I MAY look into it. 

I know it can be, and is, being done. I just don't see any reason to subject myself to the possible hassles if there is no reason to do so. At least for now, the Great Lakes are open to hunting so that is where I shall hunt.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Gamekeeper said:


> Sometimes they'll whine about how she fed those ducks all summer, and now you're killing them in front of her house.


IF they whine about how she was feeding the ducks all summer you should ask them why she was not arrested for that crime. It's illegal to feed them.

She can't have it both ways. She can't complain about her riparian rights while breaking the law herself. That makes her just as bad, or worse, than the hunter that crosses an invisible line a mile off shore. Her act of feeding is wanton, and deliberate.


----------



## Oger (Aug 28, 2008)

I own property on an inlake lake and I think the law is ridiculous. Am I also allowed to tell people they cant fish out of a boat in front as well? Although I do think 450' is too short with these new super duper loads these days. I try to be much further then that.


----------



## Far Beyond Driven (Jan 23, 2006)

Ahh, bass fisherman who can fish wherever they want. Love them. Love replacing the awning on the shore station when it gets a 3' tear in it from an errant cast. Love having to look the dock over for hooks when we pull it, or before I let the kids swim. And what I really love is standing on the shore watching some dolt fire repeated casts into the stern ofmy grandpa's 1956 Chris Craft, that my dad spent 100's of hours restoring, and then gettng told to eff off. Really?

Just because you can fish anywhere doesn't mean you should.

Now the guy who was wet wading (we're 6 places from the only launch and get a lot of traffic) in front of our place the night I got married and was cool enough to move down shore during the ceremony, he ended up pulling a 19" during our reception. Not too many people get to take pictures of a guy holding a bass at their wedding.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Oger said:


> I own property on an inlake lake and I think the law is ridiculous. Am I also allowed to tell people they cant fish out of a boat in front as well? Although I do think 450' is too short with these new super duper loads these days. I try to be much further then that.


450' is too short. I was thinking more like 1000' No, you can't stop fishing, only hunting.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Far Beyond Driven said:


> Ahh, bass fisherman who can fish wherever they want. Love them. Love replacing the awning on the shirestation when it gets a 3' tear in it from an errant cast. Love having to look the dock over for hooks when we pull it. And what I really love is standing on the shore watching some dolt fire repeated casts into my grandpa's 1956 Chris Craft, that my dad spent 100's of hours restoring, and then gettng told to eff off. Really?


There are slob fishermen too.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

Just trying to help, Decoy.
Being able to look up online plats is a valuable skill.

We forget (or I presume many have never known) that these lots are often 60' or less wide, and most importantly, people pay taxes on them. The property owner has rights.

When the bay levels fell ( a different riparian matter), we had anxieties about people legally parking campers out on exposed bottomlands in front of the house. The neighbors were going to burn them. LOL


----------



## Retiredducker (Oct 11, 2011)

Some seem to be confusing distance from a dwelling with riparian tresspass. Obviously a landowner can prevent anyone from hunting from his dry ground shoreline regardless of how far it is from a home. What we are talking about here is a boat blind nestled up to shore or very close to it. The law is clear ... he can prevent that as he controls the hunting rights in his zone . In my area the COs and Sheriff deputies don't hesitate to enforce this ... it's their job . It normally is simply a case of making the trespasser leave with no ticket written.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Gamekeeper said:


> Just trying to help, Decoy.
> Being able to look up online plats is a valuable skill.
> 
> We forget (or I presume many have never known) that these lots are often 60' or less wide, and most importantly, people pay taxes on them. The property owner has rights.
> ...


I know you are helping and I am sure there are many in here that you have helped. That is the great thing about this forum, you just never know who you may help out.


----------



## cadillacjethro (Mar 21, 2007)

I can see a lake front owner wanting to protect his dock space, but what more is needed for riparian rights. Take a look at Houghton Lake with it's 50' lots, and tell me whose property I would be trespassing on if I were several hundred yards out. I'm a firm believer in property owners rights, but let's be realistic here.


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

I agree, the riparian law is ridiculous. If they maintain exclusive rights to the center of the lake, they should be taxed on that property.


----------



## craigrh13 (Oct 24, 2011)

swampbuck said:


> I agree, the riparian law is ridiculous. If they maintain exclusive rights to the center of the lake, they should be taxed on that property.


Agreed.


----------



## Retiredducker (Oct 11, 2011)

Guys, the post was never intended to challenge open water layout hunting , it is merely to point out the illegal practice of boat blinding along privately owned shoreline without permission ......


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

Retiredducker said:


> Guys, the post was never intended to challenge open water layout hunting , it is merely to point out the illegal practice of boat blinding along privately owned shoreline without permission ......


I understand what you are saying, but, as the law is written, it is illegal to layout hunt in some land owners "pie wedge" even if you are 2 miles off shore on an inland lake/river etc.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

DecoySlayer said:


> Interesting. Would you then give up control of your wedge?


Sorry I missed that, yes you do give up control and the state can sell the property. Sometimes lucky bidders buy 10 acres of sight unseen lake bottom. There is a lake in Shiawassee county that hits the state land sale every few years and there is a new happy owner until they stop paying the taxes.


----------



## mikecatt13 (Dec 16, 2014)

I'm not real loose lipped about things me or my friends have worked hard to learn, kind of like hunting spots but I will say that I don't think this issue is understood well by many...I didn't understand it before I was assisted and then researched it. Take the time to find and read the applicable laws and understand them.

If I read correctly, the OP made it sound like someone was hunting within riparian rights of a landowner that gave sole permission to someone else. If that's the case it's clear that that person was in the wrong.

Unfortunately, hunting riparian water of private property in Michigan is extremely confusing, I've found that many COs don't even know all the laws, they have given me misinformation. Therefore, i keep certain ones saved on my phone and/or printed out so if there ever was an issue it's not just my word.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## rcleofly (Feb 18, 2012)

I own the biggest lot of lake front on a private inland lake. I'm more then legal shooting distance from any house. I still don't hunt cause the laws are so confusing lol. I have a couple neighbors on my side that I'm pretty sure might get mad. I know I can hunt legally no problem. But, it was made clear to me that it would piss off my one neighbor. I have another neighbor who duck hunts and wants to band together and start hunting lol. My lake is loaded with mallards and geese. The pond and creek on the edge of my property is holding 18 wood ducks. I can definitely get a couple good hunts in. But, I just don't want to deal with the drama.

In my experience on inland lakes is, even when your legal you can get some drama. Especially on private lakes such as mine because people feel they have complete control of the lake. Sometimes it's better to not bother with it. 

As far as your tax comments go when it comes to making sure we pay taxes. Trust me we do. My taxes are insanely high. Simply because I'm on the lake.


----------



## bheary (Dec 29, 2010)

rcleofly said:


> I own the biggest lot of lake front on a private inland lake. I'm more then legal shooting distance from any house. I still don't hunt cause the laws are so confusing lol. I have a couple neighbors on my side that I'm pretty sure might get mad. I know I can hunt legally no problem. But, it was made clear to me that it would piss off my one neighbor. I have another neighbor who duck hunts and wants to band together and start hunting lol. My lake is loaded with mallards and geese. The pond and creek on the edge of my property is holding 18 wood ducks. I can definitely get a couple good hunts in. But, I just don't want to deal with the drama.
> 
> In my experience on inland lakes is, even when your legal you can get some drama. Especially on private lakes such as mine because people feel they have complete control of the lake. Sometimes it's better to not bother with it.
> 
> As far as your tax comments go when it comes to making sure we pay taxes. Trust me we do. My taxes are insanely high. Simply because I'm on the lake.


Dang neighbors!


----------



## Water_Hazard (Aug 16, 2006)

DecoySlayer said:


> IF they whine about how she was feeding the ducks all summer you should ask them why she was not arrested for that crime. It's illegal to feed them.
> 
> She can't have it both ways. She can't complain about her riparian rights while breaking the law herself. That makes her just as bad, or worse, than the hunter that crosses an invisible line a mile off shore. Her act of feeding is wanton, and deliberate.


The person hunting ducks in front of a house that feeds them would probably be illegal as well.


----------



## mikecatt13 (Dec 16, 2014)

rcleofly said:


> I own the biggest lot of lake front on a private inland lake. I'm more then legal shooting distance from any house. I still don't hunt cause the laws are so confusing lol. I have a couple neighbors on my side that I'm pretty sure might get mad. I know I can hunt legally no problem. But, it was made clear to me that it would piss off my one neighbor. I have another neighbor who duck hunts and wants to band together and start hunting lol. My lake is loaded with mallards and geese. The pond and creek on the edge of my property is holding 18 wood ducks. I can definitely get a couple good hunts in. But, I just don't want to deal with the drama.
> 
> In my experience on inland lakes is, even when your legal you can get some drama. Especially on private lakes such as mine because people feel they have complete control of the lake. Sometimes it's better to not bother with it.
> 
> As far as your tax comments go when it comes to making sure we pay taxes. Trust me we do. My taxes are insanely high. Simply because I'm on the lake.


I get where you're coming from but that's craziness. I would be hunting. Someone will probably call it in, if you're legal who cares

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

Much to the constirnation of people that don't put money where their mouth's are, I don't post stuff that I just pull
out of m yass. With regards "Quit claiming", the township would have to accept the "quit claim", and I doubt any would. They would hammer you with the foreclosure costs, as well as the subdivision fees. You'd be in court several times before you got out from under it.

The county would have to agree to accept the "gift", and I can't see one doing so.



Howitzer said:


> All correct, in my own recent exerperince landowners are quit claiming bottomland for tax relief with a new survey. I have only dealt with inland lakes and only have elementary experience with RE on large rivers and the Great Lakes which is a whole new rule book.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

Thanks for the kind rebuttal. The information I pulled out of my ass is based on reality not speculation. It's not worth arguing with you since it's clear that you are guessing. 

Welcome to the ignore button buh by. Don't drink and post.


----------



## Gamekeeper (Oct 9, 2015)

It's that whole Fiduciary Responsibility thingie born by the County treasurers.

You are welcome to identify a county, show a deed or abstract or parcel number where you say this has occurred.
If it can be proven that what you claim is true, I will say I was wrong.

And I'll start subbing my properties, creating land locked parcels, and quit paying property taxes on them.
And thank you for the guidance.


----------



## dead short (Sep 15, 2009)

Some good information, some bad information, some is just.......wow.


----------



## Howitzer (Nov 1, 2004)

Gamekeeper said:


> It's that whole Fiduciary Responsibility thingie born by the County treasurers.
> 
> You are welcome to identify a county, show a deed or abstract or parcel number where you say this has occurred.
> If it can be proven that what you claim is true, I will say I was wrong.
> ...


Woodhull Township, Shiawassee County James R Pike. Can't remember the exact year.
If you really have more time than sense as it appears you do once you get that tract follow the State of Michigan auctions trying to sell the lake bottom in the following years after the survey.
Have a nice day.


----------

