• RECEIVE THE GIFTS MEMBERS SHARE WITH YOU HERE...THEN...CREATE SOMETHING TO ENCHANT OTHERS THAT YOU WANT TO SHARE

    You know what we all love...

    When you enchant people, you fill them with delight and yourself in return. Have Fun!!!

Recommended Posts

crazyice

Just thought I would pass along some info I heard today. No parking is being allowed anymore along county rd 11 apparently on sunday about 50 vehicles were parked on BOTH sides of the road and traffic could not meet. I heard that some vehicles were towed, but now no parking will be inforced by the police.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NW angler

So is the inevitable end to Silver Creek fishing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crickschop04

I guess that those who were fishing there illegally will just have to be happy that they were able to fish there as long as they did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
crazyice

I drove by it today along county 11, there are now no parking signs up along the road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bugman

It looks like if you park anywhere along 55th Ave, be prepared to recieve a ticket. Each time I drove by on Sat. and Sun. a sherriff was there writing them. Has anybody had any problems on the side roads?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fatcat45

It's too bad we can't fish a lake that was paid for by taxpayer's.... mad.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
smg04

i was not there last wkend when all the problems were happing but i did talk to one of the officers that was there the other day,apparantly some yahoos were parked on each side of the road out far enough that it was down to a one lane road and traffic couldnt get through, not only that but there were 2 1/2 cases worth of beer cans and bottles left in the ditch, and also a few of these "sportsmen" decided to get lippy and act like a bunch of A-holes to the officers when they were there just to ask people to move there cars and trucks in the first place,so thats when they decided to start enforcing the no parking signs, i guess enough was enough, and honestly i dont blame the cops one bit, we can thank a small few of our fellow "fishermen" for this, not only have we lost a great resourse that i for one really enjoyed, but we left a huge black eye on the face of all fishermen in the roch. community, i hope these few punks and f@#$ups are very happy with themselves!!! mad.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
penguin

'Open rebellion' at Silver Creek Reservoir

Mon, Jan 22, 2007

E-mail this story

Reader Comments

You must be a subscriber to comment on this story.

If you are a subscriber, you need to login.

For information on subscribing to PB Online click here.

By Jeff Hansel

The Post-Bulletin

Property owner Martha Bowman calls it trespassing.

Fisherman Dean Sinnwell thinks it's great fishing that should be shared with the public.

Property owner Chris Manahan says taxpayers paid for it, so it's public. The DNR and Olmsted County Sheriff's Department say it ought to be open.

But the wife of a deceased Halverhill Township board member, along with the unanimous township board, say keep out.

Who's right when it comes to Silver Creek Reservoir?

At issue is whether it's legal for anglers to climb a fence, scale the dam and access the manmade lake, or if their only legal recourse is to walk or boat in through Silver Creek.

On a recent bitterly cold Saturday, the ice was 6 inches thick -- and the parked cars and pickups were thicker; 22 vehicles lined Olmsted 11 at about 2:30 p.m. on Jan. 13.

"It's open rebellion," said Pat Carr, a Rochester city councilman and South Zumbro Watershed Joint Powers Board member.

One thing is clear: The water itself is public, as are all Minnesota waterways. The Department of Natural Resources says if a roadway crosses over a creek or river, the public has "riparian rights" to park legally and walk from the roadway down to the water.

Silver Creek Reservoir also is public because Silver Creek flows into it after abutting Silver Creek Road.

But parking and access to the water are divisive issues and opinions on both sides are strong.

Haverhill Township Board members and many landowners say they were promised the land surrounding the reservoir would remain private.

Joan Flores says her late husband, Richard Flores, was on the Haverhill board when the reservoir project was first proposed.

"I was opposed, and Richard was opposed, to putting the dam there, period," she said, "... and it was promised, that it would not be a public area."

But a public area indeed it is, in practice if not legally. Ice houses dot the reservoir and anglers come and go as if the area is open for public fishing.

Often, anglers stop first to get permission from Manahan to get to the water. Going in with permission from a landowner, said Sheriff Sgt. Fred Czekanski, is legal -- and so is crossing public land to reach the reservoir.

"We put the question to the attorney general and the attorney general says it's a public waterway. You can not restrict access to it," Czekanski said. But the attorney general's office denies ever offering an opinion.

"The property out there is owned by the South Zumbro Watershed Joint Powers Board, managed by the city of Rochester, so the city of Rochester would have to be the complainant on any enforcement that goes on out there," said Sheriff Capt. Mark Darnell. "They have stated that enforcement is not a priority."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bogsucker

The permit issued by the State of MN DNR to construct the dam specifically states that the waters impounded by the dam are to be open and unobstructed to public use. The township and county have the right to restrict parking as a safety concern however there was at one time a parking lot at the Haverhill WMA adjacent to Silver Creek Reservoir area though there is no drive approach to the parking area. The city has proposed a lot on the west side of the dam but apparently Haverhill Township is not being cooperative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
smallieobsession

Maybe an enterprising landowner out there would like to offer up parking and lake access out there. Say $5 per access or some kind of season/annual pass. Just an idea...they do it on Mille Lacs and other places. This would be a 100% legal way to access. Maybe have to look at zoning to see if something like that could be done out there but I bet it could.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
icemac33

There is begining to be enough gray matter in this subject to choke a horse.There is a little more in the paper that isn't here. An agreement between the township and the city or county that no one can now find? A Sheriff with an opinion from the Attorney General that is now being denied as ever being offered? What is going on here? It sure is a big mess for some fishing rights. It doesn't sound like there is much of an issue with the straight-forward legal issues here. It can legally be fished and the South Zumbro Watershed Joint Powers Board (City of Rochester) doesn't have a problem with people parking(unless they are parking like idiots) . I personally have a problem with my government, city,state, or federal, doing public works projects, while making promises that they don't keep. You or I could be next in this account. Joe Soucheray calls it "getting wind-milled".I wouldn't want a bunch of hunters or fisherman showing up in my backyard flaunting a legal loophole. My belief is that good sportsmen should stay out of this area until someone can get something in black and white. We are our own best ambassadors on this subject, and others like it, and it is always going to be an iffy prospect until these wishy-washy government officials can sit down and hammer out an agreement. If this agreement was made as the township claims it was, there are two options here.1) Offer some compensation and get it open. 2) STAY OUT. I would sure like to have another great fishery close to Rochester but I will stay out until this clears up. I would ask others to do the same. Lets get this cleared up and then work on opening up the west half of Upper Red. grin.gif All personal opinion,no offense meant to anyone, and 'nuff said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
crazyice

Amen to that! I agree that it isn't worth getting fishermen a bad name by pushing the limits of this. I think that it will all work out in the end and hopefully everyone involved will be happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bogsucker

It's not just the reservoir that access is being restricted. The Haverhill Wildlife Management Area Haverhill WMA which is open to public hunting is adjacent to the reservoir. We have 2 public recreation areas that Haverhill township is denying reasonable access to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bogsucker

Quote:

. I think that it will all work out in the end


That the problem, when will it end; it has been going on for years!!! I have seriuously considered filing a lawsuit to force haverhill TWP to cooperate with the city and DNR to provide access to the PUBLIC areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
icemac33

I don't know the specifics of the Haverhill WMA in the original agreement, but it doesn't seem like there should be any questions as far as a WMA that has been designated officially by the DNR. I am also not a fan of lawsuits.I don't foresee any firm action taking place out there in the foreseeable future with out some legal action though.Waiting it out may be the only action on this one.If the lawyers get involved, it is going to be strung out for years, at best. Best case is a parking lot and moral-dilemma free fishing in a few years. Worst case is that things come out of the woodwork and the original agreement shows up as stated by the Haverhill board. By that point there are two distinct teams all steamed at each other and the landowners and the board shut it down to any activity for time eternal. Screwed huh? How many landowners are involved on this on the township side? Has the city of Rochester made an honest effort to reach out to these landowners specifically? Does the township have a problem with this if the landowners are happy? Seems like the Manahan gentleman was already fine with this.Has there been an orchestrated effort by the sportsmen affected by this issue to talk to these landowners, either on this site or others? Lots of questions .I would love to fish this but I see both sides here. I realize our tax dollars went to build this, but I wouldn't be welcome to set up climbing equipment on the side of the government center just because it was there and I saw it as a recreational opportunity. Hunting geese at Silver Lake Park? Sorry, not allowed.Rules are rules and someone is not being honest here.That is the heart of the matter. It would be my opinion that the city of Rochester needs to make more of an effort to come together on this and get it over with instead of waiting for the attorney general or DNR to step up and do something definitive. That would be the best use of our tax dollars in this situation, as far as I'm concerned.Once again,personal opinions. Anyways, heres to good fishing. smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DuaneW

Drove by Silver creek Res Sat after fishing Chester Woods. No luck either I might add. The sheriff was ticketing only the 3 cars that were parked on Cty 11.There were 4 cars parked in front the OPEN gate 5 cars were parked across the street in acorn field and 4 more were parked up at Silver Creek RD. I guess if you park legal you can fish there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tyler Holm

The only legal way to access Silver Creek Res is by walking/swimming/canoeing up the creek on the SE corner. Just because they are not ticketing certain parked cars, does not make it legal. That body of water has not officially been open to public fishing. Sorry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gust35

I was talking to a guy last thurs. night. He talked to a C.O. The C.O. said that it was legal to fish Silver Creek Res. So I believe the DNR and I went fishing there last afternoon and did fairly well. Caught some nice crappies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bogsucker

The permit issued to construct the dam contains the following language;

"Any extension of the surface of said waters resulting from work authorized by this permit shall become protected waters and left open and unobstructed for use by the public."

Note the words "unobstructed for use by the public". I've yet to see any reference to this permit by any of the "officials", I am sure they must have been aware that a permit was issued to construct the dam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C&R Guy

You guys have to consider the land owners. If it's their wish to keep their property private, then it should be just that. Wait until this is settled in a court of law, then you may have the right to fish there, until then stay away, please!!! Keep the honor of Anglers strong!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gregh

This whole thing needs to be put to bed!! Do you ever wonder why its getting harder to get permission from land owners to hunt and to just get out in the outdoors? This is a perfect example. We as outdoorsmen need to consider more then whats happening NOW whats it going to be like for your younger generations.Think about it before you push the limits for some personal satisfaction. Theres a bigger picture here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reservoir Dawg

Ok, I have to add my .02 cents here. I have talked to both Olmsted County deputies and a CO about accessing Silver Creek Res. Its perfectly legal as long as you don't park in the posted areas. I don't have any idea about the original agreement with Haverhill township but as stated the one person quoted who lives on the pond,Chris Manahan, is for the fisherman. Now as to the two women quoted in the paper they are well known activists, one lines a 1 1/2 miles to the east and the other lives on Hadley valley road so they are not living near the water.One of the women went to city council meetings to fight where a water tower was being built by Century HS,because it ruined her view of the city on the way to work.

The CO told me at the township meetings these women and their relatives showed up but, no fisherman.

Personaly, I don't fish there, to much of a pain to get to the water.But these are the facts I've dug up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crickschop04

I guess it depends on who you want to believe the govt. or the land owners. Hearing something from the DNR or Sheriff doesn't do a lot for me considering that they are the one opposing the land owners. Thats about the same as me saying "I talked to a land owner and they said it was illegal." I caught some nice crappies too. At about 3 different places within 15 min. of Silver Creek that are not in the middle of a legal dispute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gust35

IF THEY DO NOT WANT ANY PEOPLE ON THAT RES. THEN WHY IS THE FRONT GATE OPEN FOR ANYBODY TO ENTER THE LAND. SUNDAY THE FRONT GATE RIGHT OFF COUNTY ROAD 11 WAS WIDE OPEN AND A TRAIL WHERE PEOPLE WHERE PULLING THEIR SHACKS WENT RIGHT OVER THE DYKE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gregh

As a haverhill landowner,I would love to see it opened up completely without any bickering!! but as it stands now the people (some people) of haverhill are just digging there feet in to fight this!!)The people going out there are not helping the situation at all. This whole thing just seems pointless, I'm glad I dont have to figure it out.To each there own but I'm staying out of there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this