05-26-2013, 04:25 AM
I don't know how many of you got the post register today, but on the front page it had an article stating that Judge Tyngey ruled that Gem Lake Harbor is "private property". Now I will admit that I have not read the entire article personally (yet), but as I've been told it basically says that since there is not an entry point that a boat can access, and an outlet, that portion of water is not navigable. Therefore since Becc owns the land under the water, it can be deemed private.
After researching it some myself, the definition of navigable waterways in Idaho is that a log 6 inches in diameter can float through an area at high water or at high water a recreation watercraft, including canoes or kayaks can access either by paddle or motor. Since a boat can get access to, motor around and then back out, even if it is via the same point, wouldn't it still be navigable? There are also several points on the federal level that would support this view. Here are a couple links to them.
http://www.nationalrivers.org/states/id-law.htm
http://www.americanwhitewater.org/resour...tatute.htm
There are many others. I don't know about you guys, but I'm putting together a couple emails to send out to the Fish and Game, the State Attorney Generals office (they ruled on this 5 years ago on this body of water), and I also found that Idaho Department of Lands has a Navigable Waterways Program with several regional contacts, the local one I've already sent an email to (Heath Hancock hhancock@idl.idaho.gov 208-525-7167). Anyone else have insite on this issue or willing to let your voice be heard by our representatives on this?
[signature]
After researching it some myself, the definition of navigable waterways in Idaho is that a log 6 inches in diameter can float through an area at high water or at high water a recreation watercraft, including canoes or kayaks can access either by paddle or motor. Since a boat can get access to, motor around and then back out, even if it is via the same point, wouldn't it still be navigable? There are also several points on the federal level that would support this view. Here are a couple links to them.
http://www.nationalrivers.org/states/id-law.htm
http://www.americanwhitewater.org/resour...tatute.htm
There are many others. I don't know about you guys, but I'm putting together a couple emails to send out to the Fish and Game, the State Attorney Generals office (they ruled on this 5 years ago on this body of water), and I also found that Idaho Department of Lands has a Navigable Waterways Program with several regional contacts, the local one I've already sent an email to (Heath Hancock hhancock@idl.idaho.gov 208-525-7167). Anyone else have insite on this issue or willing to let your voice be heard by our representatives on this?
[signature]