The Navigable Waters Act governs usage of all waters deemed "navigable." This includes bodies (creeks, rivers etc...) which are navigable by canoe... so the answer is... you "probably" have legal access to hunt the river. As far as retrieving game which has been shot and killed OR shot and wounded... the Fish and Game Act "REQUIRES" you to recover said game with "all due diligence," including if this means crossing onto private land to do so. The suggestion is made that you should obtain permission to pursue or recover game from private property whenever possible and where it is "expedient."
Hunting from a river surrounded by private land in Ontario
- Thread starter Radiohead
- Start date
I believe the use and the rules about rivers and lakes changes from east to west, Because the Atlantic provinces are much older they have older rules where you can literally own rivers or section of rivers, From Manitoba west the high water + 15 foot rule applies. Ontario and Quebec might have a patchwork as older places like Quebec City might fall under the old rules where as newer settlements will fall under the new rules
Edit Navigatable waters: From working in Construction I know virtually any creek even temporary spring creeks are considered navitagable waters, trust me I have heard from many a municipality whine about it
Edit Navigatable waters: From working in Construction I know virtually any creek even temporary spring creeks are considered navitagable waters, trust me I have heard from many a municipality whine about it
Last edited:
I have a Cousin that owns both sides of the land bordering a spring creek in Ontario. He has had enumerable issues with people trespassing for the purpose of fishing. I personally picked up 2 black garbage bags of trash from the river banks in past years. He has sucessfully posted his property & the police & MNR have charged people for trespass. Apparently, since he owns the property on both sides of the creek, he owns the bottom of the creek too. If someone wanted to take him to court on the issue of right of way, they would have to prove that the creek was navigable water. Here is an interesting ruling on Bronte creek in Ontario. http://home.interlog.com/~erhard/navib.htm
George
George
Tresspassing across private land to "GET TO" navigable water is a totally seperate issue... and is NOT supported by the act... as I understand the OP's situation... he HAS LEGAL access to launch on the river, but does not have permission to be on the private land surrounding the river... this right is supported by the act for all Canadian citizens. As far as slobs leaving garbage or spent hulls or otherwise not repecting private property, that is also a seperate and SADLY TOO COMMON occurence.
I looked in to it too, something about "navigable waterway" that supports some of the previous pasters remarks. What defines that though? Are you willing to run into the land owner and have a debate about this?
My father owns a small farm in southern Ontario, there is a small creek that meanders around on the farm. Sometimes in a dry year it dries right up, other years I have seen and caught pike in it in my muskrat nets both spring and fall. If someone were to come canoeing up that creek, I would think my father and I would have an issue with such activity.
Plus, what about fencing? Often times in shallow areas a farmer will allow his livestock access to the river for water. These areas are often fenced right across the waterway. How do you navigate around that with out trespassing?
My father owns a small farm in southern Ontario, there is a small creek that meanders around on the farm. Sometimes in a dry year it dries right up, other years I have seen and caught pike in it in my muskrat nets both spring and fall. If someone were to come canoeing up that creek, I would think my father and I would have an issue with such activity.
Plus, what about fencing? Often times in shallow areas a farmer will allow his livestock access to the river for water. These areas are often fenced right across the waterway. How do you navigate around that with out trespassing?
That is defined in the Navigable Waters Protection Act. Now, whether or not you want to have that debate with a landowner on the fly is a separate action.
If the water is considered navigable according to the Act above, then you would be having an issue with a perfectly legal activity. They aren't on your land.
These fences would be illegal, if the waterway was determined to be a navigable waters. Note that navigable waters have the same public right of use that a highway does. You can't be putting a fence across the 401 to keep your cows in. Of course, if it's not considered a navigable waterway, then there is no issue.
Just doing some looking into this. The public right to navigate the waters is common law. The Navigable Waters Protection Act deals with ministerial regulation of works (construction, etc) that interfere with said right. So the right to navigate does not arise out of said act.
I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, to be considered "Navigable" a water way has to have legal access to get on to it in the first place. Example, a small lake completely surrounded by private property-in fact all the same property, this I don't think would be considered navigable.
And as far as fences are concerned, I don't keep cattle and never have. But that practice goes back a long ways legal or not, there are fences out there across creeks, streams and rivers. What about the safety factor? Do you really want to come around a bend in the river under swift current and find a fence blocking your path? Ouch!
The best info you will ever get, is to research each and every piece of property, one at a time.
I am part owner of property in British Columbia that extends some ways out into the navigable course of a large river. That was how it was done at the time the boundaries were laid out. Those property boundaries predate BC entering into Confederation, FWIW.
Depending on how the Land Act or whatever it was called at the time allowed the boundaries to be defined, such may or may not apply in the particular case in question.
The reasonable thing to do would be to save yourself the grief, and approach the landowners and ask permission. Ahead of time.
A landowner calling the police over gunshots being fired and bullets going by, isn't going to cause the landowner any long term headaches.
There are probably a lot of better places to hunt.
Out here in AB, and was the case in SK, shooting game that landed for one reason or another on private property, was/is not a free pass to trespass. Dunno how much more than was provided, may be in the Ont. Regs. Not my bum gonna be inna sling, so I am not gonna filter through them.
Cheers
Trev
I am part owner of property in British Columbia that extends some ways out into the navigable course of a large river. That was how it was done at the time the boundaries were laid out. Those property boundaries predate BC entering into Confederation, FWIW.
Depending on how the Land Act or whatever it was called at the time allowed the boundaries to be defined, such may or may not apply in the particular case in question.
The reasonable thing to do would be to save yourself the grief, and approach the landowners and ask permission. Ahead of time.
A landowner calling the police over gunshots being fired and bullets going by, isn't going to cause the landowner any long term headaches.
There are probably a lot of better places to hunt.
Out here in AB, and was the case in SK, shooting game that landed for one reason or another on private property, was/is not a free pass to trespass. Dunno how much more than was provided, may be in the Ont. Regs. Not my bum gonna be inna sling, so I am not gonna filter through them.
Cheers
Trev
I do not think, even if it is legal, it would be good PR if you started blasting away from some waterway. Even if legal, the press and the anti-gun folks would have a field day and set us back decades in the fight for our rights.
I have to agree with the folks that say even if it is legal it is not a good idea.
If it was a large enough body of water where your pellets would not land on the private land then, sure. But if your shot is landing on the private property then that is disrespectful to the land owner not to mention potentially very dangerous.
If it was a large enough body of water where your pellets would not land on the private land then, sure. But if your shot is landing on the private property then that is disrespectful to the land owner not to mention potentially very dangerous.
No In manitoba, every body of water is considered to belong to the queen and the land owner can have land expropriated so that the public can gain access. And secondly if you can push a Canoe down it, it is considered navigable. Which has nothing to do with access and everything to do with what can occur on, in or adjacent to that body mostly in regards to construction and the potential release of silt into the waterways
the spank
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Planet Earth Wearing My Tinfoil Hat
Yes it absolutely is, in fact the laws say you can hunt Navigable waters so in other words if you can travel on it you can hunt it. And by law you can hunt to the high water mark! Therefore if you are on a river, lake, pond that the water is low on and you can identify on a map the high water mark you can legally hunt to that mark. In other words if there is exposed ground that is between the low and high water marks you can access it. In Ontario waters are owned by the crown and there is no jurisdiction for a private landowner to stop you from using navigable waters no matter where they flow as long as you can access them without trespassing.
Turkeyslayer 1300
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Russell, Ontario
Glad the folks in this thread live where they do and not near me.
If it's rural acreage the river runs through and you know where any houses or land users may be,hunt it.
We hunt many , many rivers that run through private property. Be Safe and who cares who owns what. Don't shoot at birds that will land on shore and don't worry, getting access to the river use a public launch or road allowance.
Small wonder people get out of hunting with all the mumbo jumbo being tossed around.
If it's rural acreage the river runs through and you know where any houses or land users may be,hunt it.
We hunt many , many rivers that run through private property. Be Safe and who cares who owns what. Don't shoot at birds that will land on shore and don't worry, getting access to the river use a public launch or road allowance.
Small wonder people get out of hunting with all the mumbo jumbo being tossed around.
To the original poster
Be carefull of any advice given by anyone outside of Ontario. Well meaning, but almost 100% that it does not apply to you. Rules change from Province to Province, from river to river, from Township to Township, and even from property to property.
I spent over twenty years as a senior survey tech in a Land Survey office in Ontario, and have done literally thousands of title searches of properties fronting water, and what you need to know with respect to whether or not you can access a shoreline is this:
Every situation, every property is unique.
The shoreline reserves, or, in some cases, shoreline road allowances that may or may not be fronting a piece of property can only be determined on an individual basis.
I have seen properties with a ten foot shoreline reserve beside a property with no shoreline reserve which is beside a property with a 66 foot shoreline reserve.
I have seen properties with a 66 foot reserve for "fisheries purposes" I have seen properties extend to the centreline of a navigable river, but reserving the bed for the crown.
As well meaning as they might be, don't let anybody here tell you what you can or cannot do. They do not know.
A local Surveyor is probably best able to answer your questions, but you may have to pay for his time
Be carefull of any advice given by anyone outside of Ontario. Well meaning, but almost 100% that it does not apply to you. Rules change from Province to Province, from river to river, from Township to Township, and even from property to property.
I spent over twenty years as a senior survey tech in a Land Survey office in Ontario, and have done literally thousands of title searches of properties fronting water, and what you need to know with respect to whether or not you can access a shoreline is this:
Every situation, every property is unique.
The shoreline reserves, or, in some cases, shoreline road allowances that may or may not be fronting a piece of property can only be determined on an individual basis.
I have seen properties with a ten foot shoreline reserve beside a property with no shoreline reserve which is beside a property with a 66 foot shoreline reserve.
I have seen properties with a 66 foot reserve for "fisheries purposes" I have seen properties extend to the centreline of a navigable river, but reserving the bed for the crown.
As well meaning as they might be, don't let anybody here tell you what you can or cannot do. They do not know.
A local Surveyor is probably best able to answer your questions, but you may have to pay for his time
