WOODRUM BILL'S LOSS BODES ILL FOR FISHING

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: MONDAY, February 10, 1992                   TAG: 9202100176
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-10   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium
WOODRUM BILL'S LOSS BODES ILL FOR FISHING
I AM WRITING to protest the naive editorial Jan. 28 concerning public waterways, and the equally naive action of the urban delegates in defeating Mr. Woodrum's bill.
Let me pose a few questions that this can of worms presents.

My neighbor has property with a small stream passing through it. He has had line fences across the stream for years. Does this now mean that a fisherman can cut his fence and let his cattle out because the stream is a public right of way?

How far up the stream does the public's right extend? Title 62 says that ownership extends to the mean low-water mark. Does this mean that if a baby can walk in the stream without touching these marks, it is a public right of way?

Many streams cross industrial property to which public access is denied because of hazardous operations. Will these sites have to close because fishermen have the right to fish in the stream?

Title 62, that part of the state code that has taken private streams from all but those who are royally endowed (and you thought this was America), also protects the bottom of streams. Does this mean that I can have the game warden arrest fishermen I catch ripping up rocks trying to find hellgramites and other bait? Does walking in very small streams with hip boots destroy the habitat of the sad tom muck perch?

I now pay taxes on the streambed. Does the state owe me a rebate?
In summary, Del. Woodrum's bill would have solved these problems and many more that the state Game Commission will have to face. Private ownership of non-commercially navigable streams has been understood or thought to be the law by most Virginians for years, and sportsmen have not been denied access to that much land.
As a result of the defeat of Del. Woodrum's bill and the accompanying publicity, I predict a further shrinkage of stocked trout streams, because the state won't stock within a half mile of posted land, and I think a lot more land will be posted. Right down to the mean low-water line. KENNETH C. SISSON SHAWSVILLE

by Bhavesh Jinadra by CNB