longsilver

diggyj... what kind of business is it you run?

That would definately be a sweet career setup.

What kind of work Jose?

I spent my fishing budget on ice fishing gear, only to have CT put it on at 50% off this week.

I agree, you would not be able to navigate those obstacales! I am also sure that they, as a club, would not overlook the ownership of the creek bed before opening a club there.

I mainly bring this up though because fishing north of the club, I doubt that owners have the bed rights.

It does make you think though that if any other situation, elsewhere, were to occur like this wheather the person claiming a right would be legit.

Also, I like the statement of how the rich hoard while the poor share!

You've piqued my curiosity, I'm going to look into this in more detail. The park above it gets a lot of fishing pressure and I'm sure that it helps scare the rainbows downstream to hold in the less? fished club stretch.

Interesting articles, I've read through them in detail and there's a couple of interesting points;

Crown land grants which specifically include rights to the streambed are rare, and were/are usually made in relation to places where mills, power dams or hunting/fishing clubs were/are to be established. These places are usually pretty obvious and are usually posted. That being said, the best way to satisfy yourself that your exclusion from a waterway is legitimate is to head off to the Registry Office and look at the original Crown grant to see if such rights were specifically granted.

The myth of the “highwater mark”
Many people believe that the public has a right to use land up to the highwater mark of a navigable waterway while traversing the course of the waterway. Except for a very brief period in time (between 1940 and 1951, when an earlier version of the Beds of Navigable Waters Act provided that the Crown owned the beds of navigable waterways to the highwater mark of the waterway) the law in Ontario has always been that the boundary between a waterway and the abutting land is the waterline. In other words, if you are out of the water, you could be on private property.

Generally, the public has no right to enter on to private property abutting a waterway unless consent of the landowner has been granted. You can be liable to penalties if the land is posted against trespassers (i.e a “No Trespassing Sign” or a red dot painted on objects along the boundary of the property).

The public's right to use a navigable waterway (and the bed of the waterway) does not include a right to enter upon private property to portage around a natural obstacle in the waterway, or a legally constructed obstacle in the waterway. Unless there is a recognized right (at law) to portage, you need permission to travel overland. What this means is that although you have a right to use a navigable waterway, your right may not be able to exercise that right in some circumstances. Without permission to use the abutting land as a portage, you run the risk of facing trespass charges.

The creek to the north of the park is fenced off by chainlink spanning from one side of the creek to the other rendering this impassible.

The southern edge where it borders the 'wilmont club' is signed against trespassing. There used to be fences but from the look of it they've been trod into the mud. The signs are enough though. There's also bridges built across the creek just above water level, these cut off your access as well, unless you have scuba tanks.

You need true chest waders and lots of patience to even navigate down that far, and that's assuming they don't have a special grant allowing ownership of the riverbed.

That's good information, I'd gone looking for it before but have had no luck as I was also told something similiar. I notice it doesn't say anything about the shore on either side.

If you're interested in fishing that area when the season opens let me know, I live 10 minutes away.

Cheers,
Shaun.