Silver Creek question

[e_dog4]

Tom I have never fished there, nor do I see myself probably EVER fishing there. But it kind of pushes my buttons how you of all ppl would say that it is ILLEGAL when you know it is NOT!! IMMORAL possibly, but ILLEGAL NOOOOOOO!!

[knucklehead]

E-Dog, before you start slammin folks I would encourage you to contact any of the Local conservation officers regarding this issue. I had a nice visit with one of them just last week and was informed that the waters in question are off limits and anyone fishing them is indeed trespassing. At that time the CO had calls into the city and county attorney's regarding prosecution of the violators. Just offering the information that was given to me before someone has a negative experience. Gotta go fish on!!!

[Down to Earth]

This has to be the most controversial body of water around Rochester. Interpretations of the trespass laws by commonfolk probably should not be tested before consulting with with local law enforcement. I can pretty much guarentee you that you will not find a member of law enforcement that will tell you that accessing Silver Creek Res. is legal.

The topic had some big discussion last Spring with the Havervill township. There are many in the Rochester area who would like to see this opened up for full public use. I'm willing to bet the more those wanting to keep it closed see people out there "skirt-tailing" the law will be that much more against opening it up. From what I've read this body of water was created with the sole intent of holding back water for the Rochester Flood project a while back. I think the best thing for people to do is to respect the signs, look for fishing elsewhere and if they want to see change in the land around it work through the city or townships involved.

Andy

[g'eye pilot]

One thought to ponder... If a person has landowner permission to access via private property, would that be legal? I know some folks who have been granted access from a land owner, and have accessed the water.

Hey Knucks, what's up dude?

[Down to Earth]

g'eye pilot,

I don't live in the Havervill township, but last Spring when this was brought up it seems to me that even the landowners around the water don't have access. That said, I'm not sure how the property lines run out there. Let me do some investigating and I'll report back what I find out.

That said, I assuming that people are most likely questioning the accessibility of Silver Creek Res. via the small feeder creek.

[Crickschop04]

I kind of started this mess with my first post and I would like to hear everyone's point of view, but until I hear first person from someone in the know I will choose to fish one of the many other bodies of water in the area. My first post was made after hearing secondhand info, and the article in the paper. By the way, I found the article to be very confusing. They stated that tresspassing (which is illegal) will not be inforced, but then go on to say that people were legally accessing through the creek. I agree that until it is made abundantly clear that it is legal to access I will be staying clear.

[Down to Earth]

Crickschop04,

I remember reading that article in the Post Bulletin back in the Spring with confusion as well. I have never fished it as well, but have driven around a bit out there and notice the feeder creek as well and the issues surrounding it. As I mentioned I'm not a property law expert and would not dare test my interpretations of the the law, without consulting law enforcement first nor would I encourage anyone to access the water without first consulting and getting the OK from local law enforcement.

That said, even if you can access it legally there is so much controversy on this body of water I think those accessing it, even if it is legal, are doing more harm than good. There is a good number of people around Rochester who would like to see this area opened up much like Chester or Willow and if there is any chance of that happening in the future I think people should stay off, legal or not. Seeing people on the water now, I believe, will only make those involved in the decision making process more reluctant to change.

Seems to be only controversy during hard water times. Doesn't anyone try and access it during summer? Personally, I think the best thing the law enforcement community could do to deter access is to post "No Parking" signs up and down the road for about a mile in each direction.

Andy

[fishonmn]

This is definately a hot topic. A week ago I contacted the sheriff's department about the legality of accessing Silver Creek. This is a direct quote:

"I am not going to officially tell you it is okay to trespass and fish at this location. I have been telling people to call City Hall as the no trespassing signs are still up. I am pretty sure they are going to say they don’t care. Just make sure you stay on City property as the neighbors are not happy and will complain."

Tom, according to the local authorities it looks like the CITY is the...."true power in here".... and not the township. I guess my next step is to check with City Hall and see what they say. If any of you do venture out there whether to fish or just to peek I'd encourage anyone driving by to pick up any sort of trash that you might see. The trash not only enfuriates the residents but should also enfuriate sportsman. I'll let everyone know what kind of response I get from City Hall. If anyone is scepticle of the quote I encourage you to check for yourself with the local sheriff's department. Once again I'm sure this won't be the last that we here about this subject.

[carlcmc]

I'd love to go and fish it sometime. Either take a float out or just walk the shore doing some cpr on bass. My daughter and I could have a whee of time with a bag of senkos out there.

But... i've been having such good luck lately on chester woods on my pontoon with such little trafic at times I may just continue out there.

[fishonmn]

I want to make it perfectly clear that I do not condone anyone to break any laws. I just wanted to pass along some information that I recieved from local law enforcement.

[Down to Earth]

Fishonmn,

I may end up being corrected from my first post in the thread, and as your first post indicates you could be on the right path here. I actually stopped by the Olmsted County Sheriff Office after work and was told by a deputy sheriff, the county is no longer prosecuting those who access the lake via Rochester land. Whether this means it is completely legal to access it or it simply means it is still illegal, but they are not prosecuting remains to be seen. I hope to go back some time this week and talk with the sheriff(who was out) and get some more definitive answers to some questions I have. I will post what I find out. And like you I will make it clear that I DO NOT condone breaking tresspassing laws until I get a clear definitive answer from either the county or City saying it is legal to access it, I will not access it nor tell others to simply because they won't be procecuted.

I will let you know what I find out.

Andy

[merganser]

Here is what the 2005 fishing regs say on page 6. "What is lawful access? A stream or lake is lawfully accessible if there is a public access, or if public land or a public road right-of-way borders the surface of the water, or if you have permission to cross private land to reach the surface of the water. This includes walking in the water or on the ice in connection with such activities regardless of who owns the land beneath the surface of the water.

What waters are open to recreational use? A stream or lake is open to recreational use over its entire surface if it is capable of recreational use and if it is lawfully accessible. Any water that will float a conoe is capable of recreational use, but other waters may also qualify depending upon the circumstances."

Clear as mudd if you ask me. The body of water is ringed by a county owned strip of land marked with no tresspassing signs... that rules out crossing private land as one would have to cross county land to actually get onto the water. But, what about the crick that runs under the public right of way. Doesn't it seem that the crick would legally allow access to the res as per the mn. tresspass laws as stated above. As far as the township goes, I don't blame them for not wanting this area opened to the public. All one has to do is go to any open body of water and look at all of the trash we, yes we leave behind. One look at how people were parking out there this past weekend and it is obvious how the local authorities might be a little miffed too. It sure would be nice to fish on this water if we all had a fair and legal opportunity to do so.

[magicstix]

As of last week the city said there was no agreement made at the meetings this past year between the city and haverhill and it's still off limits to the public, including the people of the township, period. The clause of accessing via the creek is probaly just going to ruffle more feathers with township/city. hope this helps.

[CrappieJohn]

To whomever....

This land in question is in Haverhill Township, NOT in the City Of Rochester. Control over how that parcel is maintain lies in that township's hands. Period.

Landowners adjecent to this property are trespassing if they cross the fences and have no power to grant permission to enter. Period.

Until some formal accord is met in which the townsip and the joint powers is met, people entering there are tresspassing, as the signs indicate. Period.

This site's policy of NOT condoning or allowing posting that may encourage illegal activity stands.

[Down to Earth]

Here is what I found out from talking with county and city officials today.

I started out talking with local autorities and adminstrators and here is the latest scoop on Silver Creek Res.

The land surrounding the water is owned by the city of Rochester, even though it is in Havervill Township. That being said there is a Joint Powerboard who is responsible for its operations. In talking with the county sheriff who told me the county will not prosecute those walking in on land, I then called the City Administrators to get clarification on what I was told. The fact is, that even though the county is not persecuting IT IS ILLEGAL to access the water via land access. My next question then was since it is owned by the city was would an individual be able to go down to the city and seek permission to access the water by land and was told "NO". Even though they own the land the Joint Powerboard who as I mentioned is responsible for its operations is not giving permission.

While we talked about the land issues he did tell me that legal access could be gained by walking in the creek, but if at anytime you stepped foot on the land you are again ILLEGALLY TRESSPASSING. That being said I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE those out there to simply leave this body of water alone until the Joint Powerboard grants land access for the following reasons:

1. Even if you do access it legally I think it can give the impression to other sportsmen that land access is ok, even though it is not and encourage them to break the law.

2. It can give the impression to township and other area residents that local sportsmen don't respect the laws.

3. There are still those in the area who would like to see this area opened up for legal land access and if people continue to access it through a loophole in the law, it will only discourage those in power to change their minds.

Hope this clears things up a bit.

Andy