Re: Ready to Lose the Right to Wade and Fish Upper Sac and McCloud Rivers?

[Bulletin Board]

Posted by L Kenney on 2007-10-08 10:24:08 in reply to Ready to Lose the Right to Wade and Fish Upper Sac and McCloud Rivers? posted by Tom Chandler on 2007-10-07 15:56:34

Supervisor Armstrong responded to my point about navigable river determination being the responsibility of the state and not individual counties with the following:

"That is correct. They may be determined to be navigable in fact. However, the "navigable in law" determination is one of property ownership of bed and banks. This list appears to have fixed in time - Act of March 11, 1891, chap. 92 (Political Code, 2349), an enumeration was made of all the navigable rivers of the state. This is held by the supreme court of that state to be exclusive, so that no other rivers are navigable under the laws of California. Cardwell v. Sacramento County, 79 Cal. 347, 349, 21 Pac. 763

The reason this is even on the policy statements is because of people trying to trespass on agricultural areas - particularly the Scott and the Shasta Rivers. (There are issues of liability and biosecurity.) These have long been held to be non-navigable and all the agencies respect that and formally request access. The public is not as knowledgeable. I was unaware of the issues on the McCloud and Sacramento. We could have just changed it to make a statement that the Scott and Shasta were considered non-navigable and left it at that. It was a draft out for comment. Until now, these have been friendly offerings in a collaborative spirit. Don't know if we can do that now with all the attention and accusations that have been made."

Follow ups:

Post a Followup:


Use the space below to compose your message: