# How can I tell if I’m trespassing



## the green tracker (Apr 16, 2016)

I am new to creek fishing and have been trying to find new spots to fish but when I’m on these little steams and rivers and see a house I always wonder if I am trespassing and am going to have the home owner coming out and shooting at me thanks for any help


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

the green tracker said:


> I am new to creek fishing and have been trying to find new spots to fish but when I’m on these little steams and rivers and see a house I always wonder if I am trespassing and am going to have the home owner coming out and shooting at me thanks for any help


 Probably yes unless these creeks are navigable and you stay in the water or you are fishing public land. If you are seeing houses and the creek is smaller chances are you will be shot.


----------



## Boardman Brookies (Dec 20, 2007)

If gained access legally you are likely ok. Id ask your local CO. You are going to get several responses here stating you are ok and that you dead wrong.


----------



## Waif (Oct 27, 2013)

If you don't know if you are legal ...You might not be.


----------



## toto (Feb 16, 2000)

Well here I am...As long as you stay in the water you are most likely ok, there are only 3 streams adjudicated as non nav in michigan. I would clear it with the CO. One thing you can do is see if the creek has EVER been played by the DNR if so you can win either way. If you're told to stay put, but the creek has EVER been planted, the property owners along there can't fish it either.

One other thing you could do is contact prosecutor for that area and see if he would press charges for trespassing, on your case. He may not, I'm having this exact same issue in my area, and it appears I'm right, and fishng stocked fish part has been confirmed by the DNR. I guess if you got shot, none of this matters anyways. Wait for it, I'm sure yzman will chime in any second now.


----------



## YZman (Mar 4, 2004)

Stream must be deemed "navigable" as stated in fishing guide. Contact DNR office for specifics on a particular stream. There is no statute or ruling that states a stream without a ruling (Court, Army Corp Eng., etc.) is navigable by default. In fact, U.S. Compiled law states otherwise for all non-tidal streams (those not connected directly to an ocean).


----------



## toto (Feb 16, 2000)

In a way you are sort of correct with one exception, you can't be breaking a law that doesn't exist. You would very hard pressed to have a prosecutor prosecute if it hasn't been determined either way. I have tt two different prosecutors and both said the exact same thing. Besides in the stream I mentioned, it was planted with trout back in the 60's, when I told one property owner that I can't fish it neither can he, the look on his face was priceless, wanna guess where I fish now occasionally? Me thinks you are over stating the realities of the law. How about showing us the compiled law, you have stated this before, but never shown it.


----------



## dirtyfisheyes187 (Jul 12, 2017)

Sry but if you can’t walk or float it “you are trespassing” I know this from a personal experience


----------



## toto (Feb 16, 2000)

What do mean walk it? By your post, I'm assuming you got a ticket for trespassing, did you fight in court? Or did you just pay the ticket?


----------



## dirtyfisheyes187 (Jul 12, 2017)

Walk, wade


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dirtyfisheyes187 (Jul 12, 2017)

He couldn’t give me a ticket because he didn’t catch me in the act. But when I was at my truck he explained it too me. You cannot access public waterways through private property. Period


----------



## toto (Feb 16, 2000)

Different subject and he was correct on that.


----------



## Nostromo (Feb 14, 2012)

plugger said:


> Probably yes unless these creeks are navigable and you stay in the water or you are fishing public land. If you are seeing houses and the creek is smaller chances are you will be shot.


If you're out fishing and a guy comes charging out of the house guns a blazing.

You'll know you found plugger's place.


----------



## mattawanhunter (Oct 30, 2011)

I have found that many houses don't even own down to the stream but claim they do and put no trespassing signs up to keep people out you know how dangerous those trout fisherman can be!

many times you can get on a GIS tax map to see who owns what we're on a particular stretch of stream!


----------



## mattawanhunter (Oct 30, 2011)

EXACTLY, that's the first thing I would do if I owned property on a stream, I would go out with my gun and shoot anyone fishing in the Stream illegally!

Geeze oh HYPE!



plugger said:


> Probably yes unless these creeks are navigable and you stay in the water or you are fishing public land. If you are seeing houses and the creek is smaller chances are you will be shot.


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

mattawanhunter said:


> I have found that many houses don't even own down to the stream but claim they do and put no trespassing signs up to keep people out you know how dangerous those trout fisherman can be!
> 
> many times you can get on a GIS tax map to see who owns what we're on a particular stretch of stream!


 In the areas I fish I generally know whether the property is public or private, I often carry a plat book. The question becomes is the stream navigable? we have property on two different streams and both are obviously not navigable. Often, I would say most often, people use the navigable rule but do not stay in the water. They fish from the bank and walk the bank where no obstacles are present. I stream fish but I make sure I am not infringing on anyone's private property rights.


----------



## toto (Feb 16, 2000)

Here's the real problem with determing navagability, first off, just because it's low during summer does not make it non nav. IF it were high enough in spring, due to natural causes, and is capable of floating a log at that time of year it would be navigable. In fact prove that they ever did float logs there ever, than it is deemed navagable. Secondly, you, me, the neighbor, or the DNR can not designate a stream either way that is up to the michigan supreme court to decide, but again, prove it ever floated logs.... third, and this my be easier to prove, show that DNR has ever planted trout in said stream and one of two scenarios apply: 1) these fish were planted with public funds therefore, especially if not adjudicated, fish away, just don't step on soil above the high water mark, and 2) If said stream has been stocked, and for whatever reason you can't fish cuz you dont want the hassle, or the courts tell you otherwise, the property owners are NOT allowed to fish it either. So, in the latter case, you win either way.


----------



## mattawanhunter (Oct 30, 2011)

Best bet is northern MI or the UP on state or federal land then you have no worries, I've fished the West Branch of the Escanaba and connecting streams in Dickinson county, some of the most beautiful country you'll ever see, you'll likely never see another fisherman, and you'll almost always be on state land!


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

toto said:


> Here's the real problem with determing navagability, first off, just because it's low during summer does not make it non nav. IF it were high enough in spring, due to natural causes, and is capable of floating a lot at that time of year it would be navigable. In fact prove that they ever did float logs there ever, than it is deemed navagable. Secondly, you, me, the neighbor, or the DNR can not designate a stream either way that is up to the michigan supreme court to decide, but again, prove it ever floated logs.... third, and this my be easier to prove, show that DNR has ever planted trout in said stream and one of two scenarios apply: 1) these fish were planted with public funds therefore, especially if not adjudicated, fish away, just don't step on soil above the high water mark, and 2) If said stream has been stocked, and for whatever reason you can't fish cuz you dont want the hassle, or the courts tell you otherwise, the property owners are NOT allowed to fish it either. So, in the latter case, you win either way.


 Right


----------



## strmanglr (Sep 23, 2015)

Talked w my brother this last week who has been a county police officer for 25 years. 

I ask him if he ever gets calls for trespassing on creeks in the county. 

He says, "yeah, we usually take our time getting out there, usually the person is gone by the time we get there. We ask the homeowner if they got a plate or a name. The homeowner usually responds 'no'. Then we tell the homeowner it's legal for them to wade the creek. Homeowner, 'really?', yes they can."


----------

