Private Property

[June16]

I have only joined this forum to politely ask how to have a geocache removed from our property. The other night we had 2 people walk onto our property just before dark to try to find a cached spot in a cemeteray that wasn't actually even on our property. Through researching all of this, I actually did end up finding another one on our property. After looking at the logs of the cache that IS on our property, I was alarmed to read that about 70 people had cached the site and not ONE single person has EVER come to our house to ask if they could be on the property. I have e-mailed the person who it seems has created the cache to have it removed, but I haven't had a response yet. How can this geocache be removed from our private property?

[+Jackalgirl]

I have only joined this forum to politely ask how to have a geocache removed from our property. The other night we had 2 people walk onto our property just before dark to try to find a cached spot in a cemeteray that wasn't actually even on our property. Through researching all of this, I actually did end up finding another one on our property. After looking at the logs of the cache that IS on our property, I was alarmed to read that about 70 people had cached the site and not ONE single person has EVER come to our house to ask if they could be on the property. I have e-mailed the person who it seems has created the cache to have it removed, but I haven't had a response yet. How can this geocache be removed from our private property?

 

Just shoot a message to contact@geocaching.com and, if you can, include the geocaching waypoint (GCxxxxx).

 

I don't know that you can get the cache in the cemetary removed (assuming it was placed with permission), but you could put in a word with Geocaching and with the cache owner letting them know about the problem you're having with trespassers. The cache owner should be willing to add something to the cache page that says "stay away from x area, that's private property" -- and if it continues to be a problem after that, I'm sure the powers that be at Geocaching would consider archiving the cache.

 

I'm sorry that this has been a problem, I really am, and I hope this helps you get it fixed!

[+briansnat]

Try to contact the cache owner through his profile. If that fails write contact@geocaching.com

 

Being that it is your property you are within your rights to remove the cache yourself, but that won't stop people from searching until the online listing is archived. You can remove it and leave a note at the site so people know that it isn't there so they don't search.

[+Rustynails]

What is the cache name, number ? Or link to this cache. That way we can see where it's located.

[+geodarts]

The guidelines state that caches are to be placed with the permission of the land owner/manager. I assume that the owner thought that the land was public and that subsequent visitors either thought the same or believed that permission had been obtained. But I am sure that cachers everywhere would apologize to you for any inconvenience that the cache entailed.

 

This has happened a few times in my area, and generally the owner has responded very fast and removed the cache. Some people may be out of town this time of year, others may not always check their email. If the cache is old, it is also possible that the owner is no longer participating in the game -- you may want to see when he or she last logged on to the web site by looking at the owner's profile.

 

If you do not get a response, you could contact the reviewer who approved the cache and ask that the cache be archived. Generally, these days, the first log entry indicates who approved (published) the cache. Thank you for your patience and wanting to work with us to resolve the issue.

Edited August 21, 2009 by Erickson

[+Knight2000]

Is the hide on your property bordering the cemetery? I have seen this where some cachers have put them on the edge of a cemetery but actually go pretty far back.

 

Keep in my when cachers go to find the geocache they assume that permission has been received and that is why they would not ask you about it. The owner said that they adequate permission to hide the geocache.

 

I am sorry for the trouble. I would remove the geocache and put a sign in its place saying that they are on private property and they are trespassing. The listing will be removed from this site and your troubles should end.

 

Please don't hold anything against all cachers when it was this hider that erred.

[June16]

The cemetery cache is actually NOT on our property after I researched it, but during that research, is when I found the other one. I'm doing this on behalf of my landlords who asked me to have it removed. I brought it to their attention since it's their property, but they want it removed, so when I say "MY" property, I mean it's for them, but it comes down to them not wanting it. The geocache is called "Brindle Crossing" in Chambersburg, PA. I have contacted the poster and I'll give it a few days as he may not check his e-mail that often. I appreciate all the responses already and hopefully this can be removed without any issues. Thanks again. Geocaching seems like a fun thing to do, but I was just amazed at how many people were on the property and then just disappointed that not one person ever asked to be on it.

[+chrisrayn]

The cemetery cache is actually NOT on our property after I researched it, but during that research, is when I found the other one. I'm doing this on behalf of my landlords who asked me to have it removed. I brought it to their attention since it's their property, but they want it removed, so when I say "MY" property, I mean it's for them, but it comes down to them not wanting it. The geocache is called "Brindle Crossing" in Chambersburg, PA. I have contacted the poster and I'll give it a few days as he may not check his e-mail that often. I appreciate all the responses already and hopefully this can be removed without any issues. Thanks again. Geocaching seems like a fun thing to do, but I was just amazed at how many people were on the property and then just disappointed that not one person ever asked to be on it.

 

Yeah, that's the thing about geocaching.com...If someone places a cache on a piece of property, and that placement is approved by the geocache placement reviewer, then it is assumed by all who visit there (and the reviewer) that permission was obtained from the landowner by the person who wanted to place the geocache on said property.

 

So, in the best of circumstances, he would have asked you, and then your landowners, before obtaining permission, THEN placed the cache, and all of the people showing up on your property might not have seemed so out of place. That's how it's supposed to work.

 

Sorry this has been a problem for you!

[Clan Riffster]

The cache: Brindle Crossing GC148G6

Hidden 07-10-07 by gnbrotz whose last visit was 08-08-09.

The map shows it along a defunct railroad bed?

[+Knight2000]

If you are renting the land than it is your property.

 

but I was just amazed at how many people were on the property and then just disappointed that not one person ever asked to be on it.

Again, geocachers thought appropriate permission was received for this cache. This is why no one asked. Geocaches should never be placed without permission.

[GreenLantern5000]

Sorry for your troubles June16!!!!!

 

hopefully the cache will be removed soon. It doesn't look like the cache has been found more than a few times in the past few months.... Luckily it hasn't received more traffic!!!

 

It's been there since 2007?.....

 

One option could be: when you see cachers searching at night, go running at them w/ a chainsaw and a mask over your head.....

 

 

kidding......... kidding.........

[+Rustynails]

If you are renting the land than it is your property.

 

but I was just amazed at how many people were on the property and then just disappointed that not one person ever asked to be on it.

Again, geocachers thought appropriate permission was received for this cache. This is why no one asked. Geocaches should never be placed without permission.

 

CO has been caching since 2001. I'm thinking he knows what he's doing.

[+zoltig]

Looking at the Google Earth Sat view, the area at the coords show what appears to be pull offs on the road at the RR crossing/bridge. The CO may has assumed that the land was not owned. Also it may well be with in the high water mark / high water mark of the stream. If that is the case, (I may be mistaken here) then there is no control over that area of land a a person could technically travel the river and retrieve the cache with-in the high water marks of the stream.

Not trying to raise an argument and if the cache is indeed on PP or people are crossing PP to get to it, then the cache owner needs to go through the proper proceedures.

Edited August 21, 2009 by zoltig

[+Cardinal Red]

Obviously we have to take seriously any claim that a cache is locted on private property. If there is any doubt it is best to err on the side of removal, but lets not forget that some land owners have been known to exagerate the extent of their holdings. This cache is placed on an old railroad line. Was this land taken to build the railroad? Did the land revert back to the original property owners (or current owner) when the line was abandoned, or is it actually now available for public access? In the end I suspect that just the claim that we are tresspassing (true or not) will get this removed.

 

It's strange that the VETERAN cache owner was on the site two weeks ago, but lasn't logged a find in over a year. I would like to hear his take on propery ownership in this case.

[+Knight2000]

Again, geocachers thought appropriate permission was received for this cache. This is why no one asked. Geocaches should never be placed without permission.

CO has been caching since 2001. I'm thinking he knows what he's doing.

Just because you have been caching a long time does not mean that you follow the guidelines. Similarly just because you have had a drivers license for a long time does not mean that you follow the traffic laws.

 

Sometimes railway property ownership is transferred back to the original property owner once the railroad is gone. I'm not saying that is the case. The owner may assume it is his. If he hasn't rented there long than they may not even be aware that there was a rail there at one time.

Edited August 21, 2009 by Knight2000

[+Knight2000]

If the cache has had that many visitors and there have been no problems why not allow the cache to stay? If you are the renter than you should have permission to make that decision.

[+J-Way]

Satellite view shows a couple of small parking lots at near that spot, with what appears to be 8 vehicles parked at the time of the photo. While I couldn't find this trail on the rails-to-trails website, this really does look like a public trail access point.

 

Have you personally wandered down there to see what you can find? If there is a public trail there, then the 60 people who have logged the cache (57 found + 3 DNF) are a probably VERY small fraction of the total pedestrian traffic.

 

- If there is a public trail, the cache is on the railroad ROW, and the cache complies with the guidelines of whoever manages the trail, there's nothing you can do.

- If there is a public trail but the cache is off the RR ROW and on your property, then you can request it be moved or removed.

- If there is NO public trail, you can request it be removed.

 

The quickest way to get it moved or removed is to go to www.geocaching.com, log on with your usename and password, and enter GC148G6 into the Waypoint field. From the cache page click "Log your visit" in the upper right corner, then select a log type of "Needs Archived". Give your reasons in the box, and a reviewer will take it from there.

[+Rose-Hulman]

I believe that since you are now a member of Geocaching.com you can go the cache listing and add a "should be archived" log. This will bring it to the attention of the local reviewer and cache owner. Once it is archived, the searchers should dwindle down and then stop.

[+Renegade Knight]

I have only joined this forum to politely ask how to have a geocache removed from our property. The other night we had 2 people walk onto our property just before dark to try to find a cached spot in a cemeteray that wasn't actually even on our property. Through researching all of this, I actually did end up finding another one on our property. After looking at the logs of the cache that IS on our property, I was alarmed to read that about 70 people had cached the site and not ONE single person has EVER come to our house to ask if they could be on the property. I have e-mailed the person who it seems has created the cache to have it removed, but I haven't had a response yet. How can this geocache be removed from our private property?

 

Confiscate it and tell the cache owner they can pick it up. Give them a chance to stutter and stammer out an appology. Then use this account to contact the reviewer who approved it. (should be in the published log which is the first log). If not this post in the forums will get the attention of someone who can do something.

 

Also you can use your account to log the cache with an Should Be Archived log. A simple. "I own the property, there is no permission" would do the job.

[+Renegade Knight]

Again, geocachers thought appropriate permission was received for this cache. This is why no one asked. Geocaches should never be placed without permission.

CO has been caching since 2001. I'm thinking he knows what he's doing.

Just because you have been caching a long time does not mean that you follow the guidelines. Similarly just because you have had a drivers license for a long time does not mean that you follow the traffic laws.

 

Sometimes railway property ownership is transferred back to the original property owner once the railroad is gone. I'm not saying that is the case. The owner may assume it is his. If he hasn't rented there long than they may not even be aware that there was a rail there at one time.

One purpose of rails to trails system is to preserve the ROW for future use. They also make nice trials so it's a good system. Where railroad ROW has been given to adjoining land owners it's almost always a mistake. The Treasure Valley used to have an interurban rail road. They gave it up. Now they would like to do it again...except now they have no land to do so making it uber expensive.

[+Knight2000]

I'd like to hear back from the land owner about this. Maybe this is a misunderstanding.

[+Renegade Knight]

The cache: Brindle Crossing GC148G6

Hidden 07-10-07 by gnbrotz whose last visit was 08-08-09.

The map shows it along a defunct railroad bed?

 

You have two things going on here. Riparian land which typically is under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers to a certain point (normal high water in a lot of cases). Many such lands have a sportsmans easement along them so folks can hunt and fish. Owners seldom own the ground under the river. Sometimes nobody owns the land and it's federal as a result. I bumped into that on a project of mine. It didn't stop the adjoining landowner from claiming it all, but the survey didn't lie.

 

You also have the RR ROW which you pointed out.

 

The county assessor map would clear up some of the questions.

 

My family owns land on a river with an abandoned roadway and a recreational easement on it taken via threats of eminent domain as part of a hydro plant that was built on a portion of our property. The issues can get tricky. The power company takes liberties beyond their easment. Recreational users abandon equipment (anyone need an 80's Ford Bronco that needs a transfer case?) and can be a nuisance becasue of a lack of respect for the land and the owners.

Edited August 21, 2009 by Renegade Knight

[+TexasGringo]

<Keep in my when cachers go to find the geocache they assume that permission has been received>

 

I have seen caches stuck to those green power transformers, Hi-Power towers, Cell phone towers, power meters....etc.

 

All of which I doubt had permission to place there.

[+Knight2000]

All of which I doubt had permission to place there.

I know the reality is that a fair amount of cachers do not have explicit permission. It's just what we face. When stopped I just say that all geocaches are supposed to have permission.

Edited August 21, 2009 by Knight2000

[June16]

I appreciate everyone's responses. The reason there are a lot of cars in the satelite picture is because people come there and fish. I've asked several people (politely) to leave and most do. After trash piling up from fisherman and a very rude hunter, I posted NO Treaspassing signs at the request of our landlords. The spot where people park for the railroad geocache is where I put up one of the No Treaspassing signs. Within a month, it had been torn into pieces and left at the base of the tree. This is NOT public land, there is no rail to trail. It has been overgrown for years.

 

To J-Way, yes, I have been there and I know what Rail-to-Trails are and this is definitely not that. We have been there for 3 years (2006), so someone obviously made no attempt to contact us or the landowners before posting this, which is what is disappointing. I understand geocachers love to do this and I don't want to ruin it for anyone, but not asking permission is a complete lack of respect which is irritating.

[June16]

Edit

Edited August 21, 2009 by June16

[+Castle Mischief]

I appreciate everyone's responses. The reason there are a lot of cars in the satelite picture is because people come there and fish. I've asked several people (politely) to leave and most do. After trash piling up from fisherman and a very rude hunter, I posted NO Treaspassing signs at the request of our landlords. The spot where people park for the railroad geocache is where I put up one of the No Treaspassing signs. Within a month, it had been torn into pieces and left at the base of the tree. This is NOT public land, there is no rail to trail. It has been overgrown for years.

 

To J-Way, yes, I have been there and I know what Rail-to-Trails are and this is definitely not that. We have been there for 3 years (2006), so someone obviously made no attempt to contact us or the landowners before posting this, which is what is disappointing. I understand geocachers love to do this and I don't want to ruin it for anyone, but not asking permission is a complete lack of respect which is irritating.

 

I appreciate that you are being incredibly understanding considering the amount of traffic that is crossing the property line. Most folks in my neck of the woods would have started firing warning (or not) shots. I sincerely hope that you are able to resolve this issue in a peaceful manner and that it won't continue to be a problem.

[+uxorious]

Owners seldom own the ground under the river.

 

This is not exactly true. I own property that is bordered on one side by a creek.

The property line on that side is described on the deed as the center of the creek. However, even though I own that properly, I cannot keep anyone off of the creek bed. (Not that I would even want to. ) The public has a right to access to the creek as a waterway. I do think I would have the right to stop someone from placing anything on the creek bank even below the high water mark.

[+Renegade Knight]

Owners seldom own the ground under the river.

 

This is not exactly true. I own property that is bordered on one side by a creek.

The property line on that side is described on the deed as the center of the creek. However, even though I own that properly, I cannot keep anyone off of the creek bed. (Not that I would even want to. ) The public has a right to access to the creek as a waterway. I do think I would have the right to stop someone from placing anything on the creek bank even below the high water mark.

 

Good clarification.

[+Ms.Scrabbler]

Now that you have an account and know what not to do, why not join us? From what I've seen, 95% of cachers are very courteous, respectful and don't want to infringe on others lives. You will find this cache is far from the norm.

 

If you don't have a GPS you can find a subject here about caching without a GPS.

 

Why not give it a try!

[+uxorious]

The reason there are a lot of cars in the satelite picture is because people come there and fish. I've asked several people (politely) to leave and most do.

 

Most creeks, rivers and waterways in this country are considered navigable waters. If a fisherman enters the creek or river from a legal access, and stays within the banks of the creek, you would have no legal right to chase them out. If they step out of the creek for natures call or a smoke, they would be trespassing.

 

Of course, when I was reading about this, it was pointed out if you are in a creek, and a farmer with a shotgun tells you to leave, that is not the time to argue it.

[June16]

Castle, I felt relieved that you posted that. I don't want to be the bad guy here and I don't think I should be. The landowners don't want people on the property and I'm doing them a favor by doing the leg work to get it done. If it is the case where the railroad bed is some sort of public access, then I was never told about it and the landowners probably don't know either, because they certainly didn't tell me. I'm trying to handle it as tactfully as possible, and see both sides. Just dealing with this, has piqued my interest in geocaching, but I would NEVER EVER consider going onto someones property without asking unless there were signs all over the place stating it's public property. I'm a hunter and I asked a neighbor if we could hunt on her property. She politely said no and that was that. I respected it. No dead animals in her mailbox or spotlighting her house at night. I shouldn't have to fear retailation if I ask someone to leave my property or not come on it at all. I think it comes down to a few bad apples spoiling the bunch. I'm sure it will turn out fine and as recommended I have logged on and asked that it be archived.

 

I have all but given up on asking the fisherman to leave as well because if you ask one to leave, 2 more come back. It's a never-ending battle.

[+zoltig]

With the help of Google regarding Pennsylvania High Water Mark:

 

Who owns public waters?

The title to the beds of public waters is held in trust by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the benefit of the public. In case of rivers and streams, the Commonwealth’s ownership extends to ordinary low water mark, and the adjacent riparian landowner owns above the high water mark. An easement exists in favor of public between high and low water marks. That easement includes the right to fish. In case of lakes, Commonwealth’s ownership encompasses the mean pool of lake.

[+Renegade Knight]

...We have been there for 3 years (2006), so someone obviously made no attempt to contact us or the landowners before posting this, which is what is disappointing. I understand geocachers love to do this and I don't want to ruin it for anyone, but not asking permission is a complete lack of respect which is irritating.

 

I wonder if your county is one where the assessors maps are online.

 

Respect runs both ways. I see your concern, but I'm not seeing that you have done your own legwork to see if your landlord even owns the land. Asking to remove a cache that has some doubt as to it being on your land? Time and again I see where what folks think is their land isn't.

 

You have the tools to get the cache removed and determine the land ownership, plus the ablity to follow up on sportsmans rights on the creek and ownership of an overgrown rail line (which doesn't mean it's not an unused trail, or still actually Railroad ROW.)

[June16]

This is about 30 feet above a stream on an old railroad bridge and is hundreds of feet from a waterway.

[+zoltig]

Castle, I felt relieved that you posted that. I don't want to be the bad guy here and I don't think I should be. The landowners don't want people on the property and I'm doing them a favor by doing the leg work to get it done. If it is the case where the railroad bed is some sort of public access, then I was never told about it and the landowners probably don't know either, because they certainly didn't tell me. I'm trying to handle it as tactfully as possible, and see both sides. Just dealing with this, has piqued my interest in geocaching, but I would NEVER EVER consider going onto someones property without asking unless there were signs all over the place stating it's public property. I'm a hunter and I asked a neighbor if we could hunt on her property. She politely said no and that was that. I respected it. No dead animals in her mailbox or spotlighting her house at night. I shouldn't have to fear retailation if I ask someone to leave my property or not come on it at all. I think it comes down to a few bad apples spoiling the bunch. I'm sure it will turn out fine and as recommended I have logged on and asked that it be archived.

 

I have all but given up on asking the fisherman to leave as well because if you ask one to leave, 2 more come back. It's a never-ending battle.

There is no good guy / bad guy here. Just a mis-understanding, I am sure. Ya done Good!

[+Cardinal Red]

If there is no trail there I have to wonder what assumptions made this area qualify as geocache friendly to gnbrotz. I would have liked to hear if he had anything to say about this.

 

I do appreciate the frustration of torn down No Trespassing signs and trash left behind (often by Hunters and Fisherman). We've all seen this far to often. If this is private property, I don't blame you for wanting to banish the perpetrators of such disrespectful behavior. I would like to think Geocachers were not involved in any of it, but I understand that you just want everyone gone. This was published by my local Reviewer. I am not surprised to see that he has already acted on the SBA, and it's gone.

 

The Geocachers will stop coming, but I see you understand the "sportsman" will be a never ending battle. Good luck.

Edited August 21, 2009 by Cardinal Red

[June16]

I see your concern, but I'm not seeing that you have done your own legwork to see if your landlord even owns the land. Asking to remove a cache that has some doubt as to it being on your land?

 

I hope you're not serious about this comment? The farm has been in their family for 5 generations.

Edited August 21, 2009 by June16

[+Castle Mischief]

 

I wonder if your county is one where the assessors maps are online.

 

 

Looks like http://www.emapsplus.com/ does not cover PA at all. Are there other resources for on-line propety maps?

 

Semi-off topic: I'd be kind of ill if my landlord was having me do all the leg work in regards to keeping out the fishermen and "defending the realm" as it where. Hope your in an agreement that you still find... agreeable.

[+Renegade Knight]

This is about 30 feet above a stream on an old railroad bridge and is hundreds of feet from a waterway.

 

Excellent. Now we know the question's answer is on who owns the rail road ROW. If your landlord you have your own overgrown walking trail to allow or not allow caches as you see fit.

 

My families land includes an hold highway bridge we use for irrigation. It's old and rotting with holes throug the timper and a 75' drop to the river below. You will get hurt if you fall. We don't want anyone on that bridge for their own safety. Heck I don't like being on it. Years ago some "morons" took our irrigation pipe and threw it into the river. I'd love to give selective permission to only the folks who are respectful of their surroundings. It's easier to just ban everone. On the flip side of that coin, I hate being banned with the riff raff. It makes it tough to keep the balance.

 

Good luck.

[+uxorious]

This post has got me to look back into some stuff I read years ago. (I was searching the info because of fishing, I didn't live on a creek then.)

 

I think the way my deed reads is slightly wrong in this state, as I found the following.

Adopted November 11, 1889.

Washington State Constitution

ARTICLE XVII

TIDE LANDS

SECTION 1 DECLARATION OF STATE OWNERSHIP. The state of Washington asserts its ownership to the beds and shores of all navigable waters in the state up to and including the line of ordinary high tide, in waters where the tide ebbs and flows, and up to and including the line of ordinary high water within the banks of all navigable rivers and lakes: Provided, that this section shall not be construed so as to debar any person from asserting his claim to vested rights in the courts of the state.

 

Before you get too aggressive pushing the fishermen out of the creek, you may want to check the laws in your own state.

[June16]

Wow, that was very quick and very much appreciated. Thank you everyone, for your comments (even the ones who didn't take my side ). I looked and it has been taken down. Yes, the landlords are actually wonderful people who are very sensitive about liability. So much so that we can't have any animals like goats or anything with a gas engine stored in the barn. However, being the type of person I am, I see their side of it. They own the property and can do whatever they want, we're the ones who chose to rent from them. I don't mind doing the legwork on this because they are such nice landlords who just prefer that people are not on their property and I have to respect that. The rent is outstanding too

[+Cardinal Red]

I see your concern, but I'm not seeing that you have done your own legwork to see if your landlord even owns the land. Asking to remove a cache that has some doubt as to it being on your land?

 

I hope you're not serious about this comment?

 

You are entirely convinced your landloard owns this property and there is no right to public access. You could very well be right. But please understand how many times we hear from/about "landowners" who try to remove visitors from public access land with false claims. It makes us more cynical than we should be and doesn't win us any popularity contests when we question legitimate owners.

[+sbell111]

I see your concern, but I'm not seeing that you have done your own legwork to see if your landlord even owns the land. Asking to remove a cache that has some doubt as to it being on your land?

 

I hope you're not serious about this comment? The farm has been in their family for 5 generations.

True, but the railroad bed has not. The question is whether the land (and bridge) formerly used by the railroad now belongs to your landlord, the State, the railroad, or some other organization.

[June16]

This post has got me to look back into some stuff I read years ago. (I was searching the info because of fishing, I didn't live on a creek then.)

 

I think the way my deed reads is slightly wrong in this state, as I found the following.

Adopted November 11, 1889.

Washington State Constitution

ARTICLE XVII

TIDE LANDS

SECTION 1 DECLARATION OF STATE OWNERSHIP. The state of Washington asserts its ownership to the beds and shores of all navigable waters in the state up to and including the line of ordinary high tide, in waters where the tide ebbs and flows, and up to and including the line of ordinary high water within the banks of all navigable rivers and lakes: Provided, that this section shall not be construed so as to debar any person from asserting his claim to vested rights in the courts of the state.

 

Before you get too aggressive pushing the fishermen out of the creek, you may want to check the laws in your own state.

 

That is something I should look into. If I don't have the authority over the banks, then it's not my place to ask them to leave, but they have to park on the property and cross the property to even get there.

[+Renegade Knight]

I see your concern, but I'm not seeing that you have done your own legwork to see if your landlord even owns the land. Asking to remove a cache that has some doubt as to it being on your land?

 

I hope you're not serious about this comment? The farm has been in their family for 5 generations.

 

I'm very serious. A hand shake agreement 5 generations ago that made sence could shift who uses what land for what purpose outside who actually owns the land. If the next generation isn't specificly told what the deal is "we farm this but don't own it, it belongs to the neighbor, and the neighbor farms a piece of our ground in exchange" you could have folks thinking they own something they don't.

 

This is fairly common.

 

However in your case you said it's on the Railroad Right of Way so that's the answer. Whoever owns that is the person who's permission needs to be had.

[+zoltig]

See if this link can be of some help.

[+Renegade Knight]

...That is something I should look into. If I don't have the authority over the banks, then it's not my place to ask them to leave, but they have to park on the property and cross the property to even get there.

 

It is your place to ask them to pick up their crap and maybe some of what their buddies left behind.

 

Most of them would be happy to do it, and start thinking about about leaving litter behind themselves.

 

My wife gets annoyed at the abandoned Bronco on our land. It's a pain to deal with.

[+Jackalgirl]

This post has got me to look back into some stuff I read years ago. (I was searching the info because of fishing, I didn't live on a creek then.)

 

I think the way my deed reads is slightly wrong in this state, as I found the following.

Adopted November 11, 1889.

Washington State Constitution

ARTICLE XVII

TIDE LANDS

SECTION 1 DECLARATION OF STATE OWNERSHIP. The state of Washington asserts its ownership to the beds and shores of all navigable waters in the state up to and including the line of ordinary high tide, in waters where the tide ebbs and flows, and up to and including the line of ordinary high water within the banks of all navigable rivers and lakes: Provided, that this section shall not be construed so as to debar any person from asserting his claim to vested rights in the courts of the state.

 

Before you get too aggressive pushing the fishermen out of the creek, you may want to check the laws in your own state.

 

 

That is something I should look into. If I don't have the authority over the banks, then it's not my place to ask them to leave, but they have to park on the property and cross the property to even get there.

 

Question to the general populace: I'm correct in understanding that the fisherfolk could still use the creek as long as they get to the creek by the creek (or using some other public access)?

 

A suggestion to the OP -- I don't know anything at all about the grounds, so take this for what it's worth, but you might want to consider having the landlord do some landscaping that prevents people from parking their cars there. Or a fence or something. That way, you don't have to take the trouble (and risk) of direct confrontation with people who for the most part seem to be okay, but some of whom also seem to think that they are entitled to use the area (and are aggressive about it).

 

Perhaps, also, the landlord might want to consider putting a complaint into the local law enforcement to report that people are regularly trespassing on and across the land and have destroyed "NO TRESPASSING" signs posted to alert them that the land they're using for parking or otherwise crossing to get to the creek. I've never been in a situation like that, so I'm not sure what the law enforcement can or would be able/willing to do, but it's worth a shot.

[+Cardinal Red]

Perhaps instead of No Trespassing signs, you need No Parking signs (which could possibly have the same effect). And if you are on solid legal ground, perhaps you need to put a Tow Truck operator on speed dial.

 

I would appreciate hearing back from you if you get any definitive clarification on legal access or lack of it to this area.

Edited August 21, 2009 by Cardinal Red