Mountain Buzz banner
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Anybody following this? Incredibly important issue that the courts (and the media) are finally acknowledging has never been settled in Colorado.

The Colorado Court of Appeals opinion is attached. Here is a highlight (pages 16-17):

If, as Hill alleges, the relevant segment of the river was navigable at statehood, then the Warsewa defendants do not own the riverbed and would have no right to exclude him from it by threats of physical violence or prosecution for trespass. In support of his claim, Hill proffers numerous factual allegations that the river was used for commerce at or near the time of statehood, including floating beaver pelts, logs, and railroad ties down the river. We certainly cannot, at this early stage, know whether Hill will be able to establish that the river segment was navigable at statehood. But we cannot say it is not plausible.

Moreover, as noted, the question of whether, and to what extent, the public trust doctrine should apply to the bed of a navigable river has never been resolved — or, as far as we can tell, even addressed — in Colorado. Nor has Hill’s claim that he is entitled to access to the riverbed based on English common law been resolved or addressed. Thus, it cannot be said that the law as it stands now unequivocally bars Hill’s claim.


 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
533 Posts
Andy H. started the thread below (same subject) 11 day's ago in the River Access & Safety Alerts!


 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top