A right to trap question

[Tfng]

I've wondered about this as well but have never looked into the legality. I thought navigable waters were crown though.

[MathewsArcher]

Originally Posted by TFNG

I've wondered about this as well but have never looked into the legality. I thought navigable waters were crown though.

Don't necessarily have to be navigable.

[Tfng]

Originally Posted by nube

I thought of this the other day. What is stopping a guy from floating down the North Saskatchewan River and shooting a few beaver outside city limits? There is no trapline and your on a river.....

I know a guy in Saskatchewan who shoots lots of beaver this way. Can you shoot ducks anchored off in the river?

[antlercarver]

If the trapper has permits for that location, not much land owner can do.
As for the crown owning the water, are they responsible for damage by their water flooding my fields or home as in High River.

[300magman]

Mathews Archer is correct on all accounts on this one.....I deal with access to water on a fairly routine basis, and all water is crown owned. When obtaining water (say for the purposes of drilling activities), payment is made to the land owner for access to that water source, not for the purchase of the water itself. It doesnt matter if it is a natural water body or dugout, the water itself is crown owned. To put it into perspective, if you were so inclined as to fish in a small water body that is completely surrounded by privately owned land which you could not gain access through, you could theoretically chopper yourself and a belly boat in there, fish all day and chopper out again and be completely legal in doing so, as long as you never went above the high water mark of the waterbody (at least as far as being there goes, I have no clue about flying regulations, but that isnt what this discussion is about, lol).

[300magman]

Originally Posted by antlercarver

If the trapper has permits for that location, not much land owner can do.
As for the crown owning the water, are they responsible for damage by their water flooding my fields or home as in High River.

No more than they are responsible for forest fires that start on crown land, but spread and damage private property. Its too damn bad they arent though, would have made some flooding that took place on our land alot easier to deal with too.

[300magman]

Originally Posted by TFNG

I know a guy in Saskatchewan who shoots lots of beaver this way. Can you shoot ducks anchored off in the river?

This one depends on the situation.....as per the regs:

It is unlawful to: hunt any wildlife or discharge any firearm on or over occupied land or enter on to such land for the purpose of doing so without the consent of the owner or occupant of the land.

So, as long as no shot went over land you didnt have access to, you would be good. I guess if the regs were taken straight to heart, you would have to set up and only shoot in a way that your shot was only over/landed in the water or land you had permission to hunt.

[Kyle Watson]

Your not selling the water to a oil company your selling the access to the water and the oil company still has to take permit out to use the water.

[HunterDave]

Size matters IMO. What people in Alberta call rivers are nothing more than creeks or ditches in a lot of cases (ie. The Sturgeon River). On a river like the Athabasca or the North Saskatchewan I don't think that you'd have an issue, but if you start setting traps on a small river running through someone's land it's going to cause you heartache if the landowner doesn't want you there, regardless of whatever the law says.

I was talking to a landowner yesterday that lives downstream of a neighbour that has beavers that dammed up the river and it's stopped flowing through his land. He wants the dam/beavers out and the neighbour wants it to keep his cattle in water. I don't think that it would work out well if I walked down the creek, and started trapping the beaver and dismantling the dam.....lol.

[Daslogster]

I had a similar inquiry with SRD (Now environment and parks) as I was looking to trap on a river passing through private property, road allowance access. Crown owns the river up to the high water mark and it was legal for me to trap and they suggested I contact the landowner to inform them of what was happening. I did and the landowner lost their mind and swore to destroy every set etc so I did not choose that route but any navigable flowing body of water is crown and they went on the record to state that with me. It also has to be not in a registered line unless its yours or you are a jr etc but outside of those areas, this was my experience.

[molly]

Here is a link to some facts!!

http://environment.gov.ab.ca/info/library/6364.pdf

http://aep.alberta.ca/lands-forests/...oundaries.aspx

Also, I agree with Cat. If there is a dispute with the adjacent landowner in the works, F&W should be involved or at least notified to get their opinion.

[antlercarver]

Thanks Molly for the info.
Access on ice is one thing but access rest of the year is on foot or boat only not on ATVs which rip up enough country.

[kingrat]

Originally Posted by TFNG

I know a guy in Saskatchewan who shoots lots of beaver this way. Can you shoot ducks anchored off in the river?

Lots of guys around here float the north sask River myself included and shoot and trap beavers, and of course you could shoot ducks anchored of drifting.

[norwestalta]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

The water in the dugout is owned by the province but you can sell it to an oil company???

Seems strange

I don't think you can sell the water but you can sell access. When the drilling rig wanted water they didn't pay me per load just a flat fee for access.

[Big Grey Wolf]

I know our registered trapline borders the Athabasca river. Any maps I have show the border is high water mark of river. The actual river would be a no go trap zone.

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by norwestalta

I don't think you can sell the water but you can sell access. When the drilling rig wanted water they didn't pay me per load just a flat fee for access.

I've always paid per load when purchasing water. But I'm sure all deals are structured differently.

[norwestalta]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

I've always paid per load when purchasing water. But I'm sure all deals are structured differently.

Oh ok. If a rig ever comes this way again I'll try this. Thanks.

[Tfng]

Originally Posted by Big Grey Wolf

I know our registered trapline borders the Athabasca river. Any maps I have show the border is high water mark of river. The actual river would be a no go trap zone.

I sure didn't expect that Big Grey Wolf. I would have assumed your border would have been the middle of the river. There's a lot of fur below the high water mark. I learned something today.

[Birchcraft]

Does your title to the property have any caveats for the water course? Private property only covers above the high water mark, anything below that is crown, including the water, bed, and much of the shoreline.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by molly

Here is a link to some facts!!

http://aep.alberta.ca/lands-forests/...oundaries.aspx

Well, I guess that answers the legal question. WRT the high water mark.....The second link that Molly posted states that from the high water mark to the shore is not always owned by the Crown. I happen to know someone at Lac Lanonne who owns the land that goes out 100 feet into the lake. I suppose that at one time, before putting in a weir, the lake was much lower and that land was not covered with water. He does not allow quads to use the land up to the high water mark and he is legally allowed to deny that access.

"Public Access to Public Water Bodies

Access to the beds and shores of a river, stream, lake or other body of water is subject to legal access. For example, fishermen can access a stream through public roads, road allowances (developed or undeveloped), and commonly at bridge locations.
If uplands must be crossed to reach a Crown-owned water body or watercourse, the permission of a private landowner or Crown land leaseholder should be sought. Where the adjoining land is public land under lease, recreational users can obtain access information from the department's Recreational Access website at:
Recreation on Agricultural Public Land
The beds and shores of a river or stream that are bounded by private land may generally be traversed below the ordinary high water mark without fear of trespass.
At all times, users of beds and shores should "Use Respect" of the land. Be mindful of fence lines and gates that are required to keep livestock confined."

[mark-edmonton]

Originally Posted by Big Grey Wolf

I know our registered trapline borders the Athabasca river. Any maps I have show the border is high water mark of river. The actual river would be a no go trap zone.

Same here!

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Big Grey Wolf

I know our registered trapline borders the Athabasca river. Any maps I have show the border is high water mark of river. The actual river would be a no go trap zone.

It wouldn't be a no go trap zone, the trapline owner just wouldn't have the sole rights to trap it and he'd be able to trap it just like anyone else. I trap crown land that isn't part of an RFMA all of the time.

[mark-edmonton]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

It wouldn't be a no go trap zone, the trapline owner just wouldn't have the sole rights to trap it and he'd be able to trap it just like anyone else. I trap crown land that isn't part of an RFMA all of the time.

I don't understand Dave, how? I thought you had to be registered line or resident on private! Pm me if you don't want to post public! Cause I am in the same situation

[Tfng]

Originally Posted by mark-edmonton

I don't understand Dave, how? I thought you had to be registered line or resident on private! Pm me if you don't want to post public! Cause I am in the same situation

F&W can give you a permit for crown land not part of a RFMA Mark. I'm quite surprised that the rivers are not part of registered lines. I doubt that was the intent when the lines were originally worked. The river would have been a major travel route.

[nube]

I found this in my file. Hope it helps. It seems like a lot of work to legally trap a crown land area

[HunterDave]

I trap muskrats on a large slough that is surrounded by Crown lease land and there is a road allowance right up to the slough. I went through the district ESRD and the process was painless and didn't cost a cent. There are no RFMA's in this area so that research wasn't required nor was the status of the slough, Crown property right? For any trapping activity on the Crown lease I need permission from the lease holder. This area is pretty straightforward to determine the land status on, basically just look at a county map, so they didn't charge me anything. I suppose though they'd charge you something if it was more complicated and they had to spend a bit of time on it.

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

I trap muskrats on a large slough that is surrounded by Crown lease land and there is a road allowance right up to the slough. I went through the district ESRD and the process was painless and didn't cost a cent. There are no RFMA's in this area so that research wasn't required nor was the status of the slough, Crown property right? For any trapping activity on the Crown lease I need permission from the lease holder. This area is pretty straightforward to determine the land status on, basically just look at a county map, so they didn't charge me anything. I suppose though they'd charge you something if it was more complicated and they had to spend a bit of time on it.

So to trap on the crown grazing lease you just had to make sure it wasn't part of a RFMA and you were good to go ?

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

So to trap on the crown grazing lease you just had to make sure it wasn't part of a RFMA and you were good to go ?

No, I need the signed permission of the leaseholder. I don't trap on the Crown lease though, I trap in the slough that is surrounded by Crown lease. The district office told me that as long as I have access to the slough, to fill my boots and trap away.

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

No, I need the signed permission of the leaseholder. I don't trap on the Crown lease though, I trap in the slough that is surrounded by Crown lease. The district office told me that as long as I have access to the slough, to fill my boots and trap away.

That's what I meant Dave. With the permission of the lease holder of course.

I wasn't sure if you needed permission from F&W too because it was crown land.

[bill9044]

To the OP... if he is not crossing your property there is very little you can do about it. I'm not sure why you want the beavers? If you want them so it creates a good dugout system to water cows it is healthy to remove some every year to maintain a steady population. If allowed to keep populating there are 2 senarios. 1. They mow out all the trees from around the area leaving nothing left for other animals to inhabit. Or they continue to build larger dams and cause flooding to take place.

Where I'm at there are mostly beaver in the river but there are some in the drainages here and there. One farmer liked the beaver in his coulee and didn't let people trap them. Well they ended up eating every last poplar in the coulee and left then the dam rotted out and they were gone for good.

Honestly it sounds like the trapper has all the proper paper work and is allowed to be there taking care of an issue others are having.