How are waterways defined?

[MacLawn]

Good, square. Old Mammy Nature can sometimes straighten herself out okay.

 

[Ken45101]

When I was on the HazMat team if the storm drain or dry ditch that only had water after a rainstorm eventually fed into a navigable waterway, regardless of the distance, the Coast Guard considered it part of the navigable waterway. It was considered the headwaters. All storm drains and ditches, creeks, etc. in my city eventually drained into the Trinity River, which fed into the Gulf of Mexico, about 600 miles away. If there was a spill it had to be cleaned up.

The Coast Guard, or the EPA?

Everything in the USA , including your lawn, eventually drains into a navigable waterway and the ocean (except those that feed Death Valley or The Great Basin).

I thought the federal definition (Army Corps of Engineers) was that it had to be navigable (even by a canoe) to come under federal jurisdiction. But at that point, you might own the land under the waterway, but you could not prevent people from using the waterway as long as they didn't touch your land.

Of course, the EPA does their own thing and they want to be in charge of everything...

I had heard that a "river" had to be 30 miles long. But it probably varies. There are "creeks" around here that are longer than 30 miles. Perhaps we are missing something here, the difference between a name, and the classification. Probably something with "creek" in the name could still be a river, and vice-versa.

 

[WM75Guy]

We dealt with both. They used the same criteria. It was the "laterally over the entire surface of the waterbody" which came into play where they called our area part of the headwaters.

"Navigable waters of the United States are those waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide and/or are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. A determination of navigability, once made, applies laterally over the entire surface of the waterbody, and is not extinguished by later actions or events which impede or destroy navigable capacity."

 

[Bigfoot62]

I'm confused on what defines a waterway designation. For example, what is the difference in a creek and a river. Or a river and a bayou, etc.?

I do understand the difference in the Order of waterways, but not the designation. I've seen bayous that were many times larger than rivers. and sometimes rivers that are smaller than creeks. Is there some logic to the naming of waterways as branches, creeks, rivers, bayous, etc.? . . .

Being from GA, I thought you would understand. It's a classic Yankee-vs-Southerner thang. What they call a river, we call a creek. What they call a creek, we call a ditch.

Seriously, I don't know. As stated earlier, it may just depend on who is (or was) doing the naming.
I have a 1.3 acre farm pond. Just a little ways over into TX, it would be called a "stock tank." In CO, where water is scarce, it would be a private "lake."

 

[tallyho8]

My friend bought a piece of property that had a low spot on it where the rain water went after a rain and this low spot extended over others land also for over a mile before emptying into a larger area of water. He didn't know whether to call this a drain, a slough, a ditch, a wash, a brook, a channel, a stream or a creek. :confused3:

He also didn't know whether it emptied into a lake, a pond, a bay, a bayou, a lagoon, a sound, a basin or a pool.

But every time he asked someone about it, they would come up with a new name for it that he had never heard before.

 

[Jstpssng]

The first time I was ever involved in planning a timber harvest, we were sent out to lay in a buffer along a perrenial stream through the woodlot. Problem was that said stream didn't exist, except in some cartographer's dream. (The map must have been made on a Monday or a Friday. ) Yet because the zone was on a LURC map we had to plan around it.

That was 34 years ago next month, and things certainly haven't gotten any simpler.

 

[Larro Darro]

I don't know too much about judging rivers and creeks. I do know that up north the lakes were made by God, but in the south they were made by Democrats

Larro

 

[gmccall]

A neighbor trespassed onto my property when I was away and diverted a stream to feed his pond. Another neighbor tipped me off that they had heard heavy equipment operating on my property while I was absent. I investigated and then reported I what I discovered to the Dept. of Natural Resources. The agent they sent out to meet me puffed his chest all up and said "I don't care if it's a river or a mud puddle, NO ONE can IN ANY WAY alter a body of water or waterway in Michigan !" He then marched over to the neighbor to confront him. The neighbor lied, saying he had diverted 7 years ago. The big chested agent returned to me with the news the diversion work was done more than 5 years ago, was outside their jurisdiction period, and nothing could/would be done to it. I said "Then there's no problem with me undoing what was done on my property". His response "NO ONE can IN ANY WAY alter a Michigan body of water / waterway!".

So to answer your question, it doesn't matter from a legal perspective what it's called. Wait, that wasn't your question was it?

hm.........Can someone not see that a recent earth movement is quite visible and thus obvious ? Just saying

 

[square1]

hm.........Can someone not see that a recent earth movement is quite visible and thus obvious ? Just saying

You know the story about the USDA Inspector, the Farmer, the Bull, and the Badge? The inspector that came out to investigate my complaint makes the one in the story look like a genius...just sayin'

 

[/pine]

I'm confused on what defines a waterway designation. For example, what is the difference in a creek and a river. Or a river and a bayou, etc.?

I do understand the difference in the Order of waterways, but not the designation. I've seen bayous that were many times larger than rivers. and sometimes rivers that are smaller than creeks. Is there some logic to the naming of waterways as branches, creeks, rivers, bayous, etc.?

Do all rivers run perennial, i.e. must they have running water year around?

This seems to be very clear to lawmakers stating what we can and can not do with water from our streams, but I sure haven't seen anything that makes it clear as to what waterways the law effects. I'd sure appreciate someone clearing this befuddling question up for me.

Not really germane to your question but here are some GA landowner rights (GA code)

O.C.G.A. ｧ 44-8-1 (2014)

ｧ 44-8-1. Ownership of running water; right to divert or adulterate water

Running water belongs to the owner of the land on which it runs; but the landowner has no right to divert the water from its usual channel nor may he so use or adulterate it as to interfere with the enjoyment of it by the next owner.

?ｧ 44-8-2. Nonnavigable streams -- Rights of adjoining owners; principles when stream is boundary; accretions

The beds of nonnavigable streams belong to the owner of the adjacent land. If the stream is a dividing line between two parcels of land, each owner's boundary shall extend to the thread or the center of the main current of the water. If the current changes gradually, the boundary line follows the current. If from any cause the stream takes a new channel, the original line, if identifiable, remains the boundary. Gradual accretions of land on either side accrue to the owner of that side.

O.C.G.A. ?ｧ 44-8-3 (2014)

?ｧ 44-8-3. Nonnavigable streams -- Exclusive possession by owner; interference by legislature with lawful use of stream

The owner of a nonnavigable stream is entitled to the same exclusive possession of the stream as he has of any other part of his land. The legislature has no power to compel or interfere with the owner's lawful use of the stream, for the benefit of those above or below him on the stream, except to restrain nuisances.

O.C.G.A. ?ｧ 44-8-5 (2014)

?ｧ 44-8-5. Rights of adjoining landowners in navigable streams


(a) As used in this chapter, the term "navigable stream" means a stream which is capable of transporting boats loaded with freight in the regular course of trade either for the whole or a part of the year. The mere rafting of timber or the transporting of wood in small boats shall not make a stream navigable.

(b) The rights of the owner of lands which are adjacent to navigable streams extend to the low-water mark in the bed of the stream.

Under common law. By the common
law the right to take fish belongs essentially
to the right of soil in streams where the tide
does not ebb and flow. Bosworth v. Nelson,
170 Ga. 279, 152 S.E. 575 (1930).

If the riparian owner owns both sides of
the stream, no one but the owner may come
within the limits of land and take fish. The
same right applies so far as land extends to
the thread of the stream, where the owner
owns upon one side only. Within these lim-
its, by the common law, the owner's rights of
fishery are sole and exclusive. Bosworth v.
Nelson, 170 Ga. 279, 152 S.E. 575

[citation]
GA codes , LexusNexis LexisNexis® Custom Solution: Georgia Code Research Tool