|
^^^^ what Glatt said.
But, in Oregon, the other side of such issues is this.
Property boundaries can extend into the middle of a stream or river,
and some property owners try to keep people off their "water".
Then, some fishing clubs have bought property on both sides of the stream in valleys,
so they end up controlling access to ALL the property upstream of their own.
For fishermen, this is an outrage and viscously contentious
... charges of trespass vs all levels of physical fights.
It's in the courts and gradually changing over. Since 2005,
the rights of property owners have been reduced on "navigable" waterways,
so anyone can boat on the water and can walk along the shore up to the high-water boundary.
The issues on non-navigable streams and ponds is coming soon,
either as a result of something like the Occupy movement, or some sort of ridiculous tragedy.
Back in the 70's, Governor Tom McCall pushed through legislation
that all Oregon ocean beaches are State (public) property,
so property owners can not put fences from the road down into the surf.
There are some negatives effects of this too, but it's better than what was happening in some places.
I feel that, for Lake Oswego, the best route would be to have a legal decision that the water is public,
and then to have the City government work with the State Marine Board to hold public hearing and sset rules of conduct.
This has been done elsewhere and works out well, for the most part.
Of course, the wealthy L.O. property owners will not have their isolation.
|