"New" canoe route

[doug]

My dad says that he recently (within the last 3-5 years) read of an Adirondack river canoe route that was newly opened to paddlers after the state gained recreation easements from the private land owners that had previously blocked it. Does anyone know what he's referring to?

Thanks

[Adirondack_hunter]

Yeah, you can do a search at the DEC site for this but it is now legal to paddle
and even portage, within limits, on water that crosses privately owned property.
The landowners of course will have things to say about this though and may give you a load of the stuff (that lays out in the barnyeard). Every ECO knows about this being legal. Blowdowns and beaver dams do not prohibit you from go on shore. You can legally do such to avoid these obsticles.

http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dfwmr/sportsed/posting.html

Q. May a person travel in a boat or canoe on a waterway which is posted?

A. Yes, but travel may not include fishing. A person in a vessel has a right of passage on a navigable waterway, even if the bed of the waterway is privately-owned and is posted. A waterway is navigable if it is capable, in its natural state and ordinary volume of water, of transporting, in a condition fit for market, of floating logs or manufactured or agricultural goods to market. A navigable waterway need not be navigable in both directions, nor need it be navigable 12 months of the year. Furthermore, a waterway's navigability is not destroyed by rapids or other temporary obstacles so long as the rest of the waterway is otherwise navigable. Where such obstacles exist, the right to public navigation authorizes a boater to get out of the vessel and walk alongside the boat to get around such obstacles, or to portage around such obstacles, even over private property above the mean high water mark, so long as the portage is by the most direct and least intrusive safe route possible. The right to navigation does not otherwise authorize the public to go on private land above the mean high water mark, even for access to or egress from a navigable waterway. A 1997 ruling of the New York State Court of Appeals indicates that the public right to navigation does not include the right to walk on the bed of a waterway to fish, or to anchor for the purpose of fishing where the bed of the waterway is privately-owned; or to fish while navigating through privately-owned waters.

[Adirondack_hunter]

If there is anything new it would be news to me. I've been out of this loop for a few years and have been stuck on land a bit more.

[Wldrns]

My dad says that he recently (within the last 3-5 years) read of an Adirondack river canoe route that was newly opened to paddlers after the state gained recreation easements from the private land owners that had previously blocked it. Does anyone know what he's referring to?

Thanks

You may be thinking of this case. Google Adirondack League Sierra Club for more articles. Or there are other much less contentious passage openings you may be referring to.

[Old Rivers]

Correct me if I', wrong, but 1 exception I think is if the watwerway "Deadends" on private lands. (For example Little Forked Lake) or Follensby Pond.

[ALGonquin Bob]

Maybe Doug is referring to the Northern Forest Canoe Trail?

http://www.northernforestcanoetrail.org/

[Wldrns]

Maybe Doug is referring to the Northern Forest Canoe Trail?
http://www.northernforestcanoetrail.org/

Maybe it is. Mostly it is on already public land/waterways. I paddled the entire NY section to Plattsburgh a couple of years ago, actually starting from Boonville. I can't think of any portions of the route that would have required new negotiation of rights for passage, not even all the way back from Boonville. What the organization is working on is for more places to camp along the Saranac River below SL village.

[bridgeman]

could it be the route up the Beaver River to Lake Lila? I remember that section being closed off years ago and I thought I read an article that the state was trying to secure easements across this section.

The article stated that this was the most important canoe route of it's time.

[WaterRings]

Little Forked Lake

So what is the status of Little Forked Lake? Public access or not? It is an intriging patch of blue on the USGS map that I would like to see. Thanks
Jim C.

[fisher39]

So what is the status of Little Forked Lake? Public access or not? It is an intriging patch of blue on the USGS map that I would like to see. Thanks
Jim C.

Closed for now by the Whitney's, and I think there is even a fence across the entrance. The main Whitney camp is on the lake. It is a "keyhole" waterbody, so there is no question as to whether it is "navigable-in-fact" (it isn't).

[WaterRings]

Thanks

That's what I was thinking also. I remember a fence from years ago when I went up that direction from Forked Lake. I guess it was never a "through" route therefore it doesn't fit with the historic navigation idea.

[fisher39]

Yeah, you can do a search at the DEC site for this but it is now legal to paddle
and even portage, within limits, on water that crosses privately owned property.
The landowners of course will have things to say about this though and may give you a load of the stuff (that lays out in the barnyeard). Every ECO knows about this being legal. Blowdowns and beaver dams do not prohibit you from go on shore. You can legally do such to avoid these obsticles.

http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dfwmr/sportsed/posting.html

Q. May a person travel in a boat or canoe on a waterway which is posted?

A. Yes, but travel may not include fishing. A person in a vessel has a right of passage on a navigable waterway, even if the bed of the waterway is privately-owned and is posted. A waterway is navigable if it is capable, in its natural state and ordinary volume of water, of transporting, in a condition fit for market, of floating logs or manufactured or agricultural goods to market. A navigable waterway need not be navigable in both directions, nor need it be navigable 12 months of the year. Furthermore, a waterway's navigability is not destroyed by rapids or other temporary obstacles so long as the rest of the waterway is otherwise navigable. Where such obstacles exist, the right to public navigation authorizes a boater to get out of the vessel and walk alongside the boat to get around such obstacles, or to portage around such obstacles, even over private property above the mean high water mark, so long as the portage is by the most direct and least intrusive safe route possible. The right to navigation does not otherwise authorize the public to go on private land above the mean high water mark, even for access to or egress from a navigable waterway. A 1997 ruling of the New York State Court of Appeals indicates that the public right to navigation does not include the right to walk on the bed of a waterway to fish, or to anchor for the purpose of fishing where the bed of the waterway is privately-owned; or to fish while navigating through privately-owned waters.

This, including the text above apparently from the DEC site (it seems that it has been updated though), is pretty much totally wrong for all practical purposes. The current "guidance" on the DEC site can be found here: http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/8371.html

And it starts off:

Q. May a person travel in a boat or canoe on a waterway which is posted?

A. Even if a waterway is posted, the public has a right to navigate on any freshwater waterway that is "navigable in fact." A waterway is navigable in fact if, in its natural state and ordinary volume of water, it has practical utility to the public as a highway for trade, travel or transport....."

The problem is that determining whether or not a waterway is "navigable-in-fact" (and whether or not a paddler is legally protected from charges of trespassing) can only be done in court (and therefore the Q&A is useless for all practical purposes). On one of the disputed waterways an ECO won't arrest you on the spot for trespassing because without a court decision they don't know whether or not it is NIF, but a landowner certainly could drag you into court to settle the issue if they were so inclined. Given all the publicity the issue has gotten lately, I think the probability of this happening is much greater than it was a year ago.

[ALGonquin Bob]

Given all the publicity the issue has gotten lately, I think the probability of this happening is much greater than it was a year ago.

And we can "thank" Adirondack Explorer for escalating the situation by aggravating a landowner with a well-publicized canoe trip without the periodical being willing to follow-up and take the matter to court for a final resolution.

[MikeT]

And we can "thank" Adirondack Explorer for escalating the situation by aggravating a landowner with a well-publicized canoe trip without the periodical being willing to follow-up and take the matter to court for a final resolution.

Agree with ALGonquin Bob that the Adirondack Explorer needs to follow through, and help facilitate court action and/or some sort of mediation on the issue.

[Avacal]

After talking with a DEC person on Lake lila, I plan on attempting the route from Lila to Nehasane and on to Stillwater this year. Anyone try this yet?