# north fork licking river.



## Anth (Aug 16, 2004)

I know there are carp in the spring and small mouth bass all year round but what other fish are there? 
I've never seen a small mouth over 6in,there are lots of minnow's. 
The carp i've seen look big.how or where did the carp come from?

I cant find as many crayfish as i have in the past. I went looking for some this year and found a small black fish under a rock,it looked like a catfish.


----------



## Toolman (Jun 8, 2004)

Anth,

The Licking River holds a variety of game fish. You already mentioned 2 of them. There's also LM bass which will be found in some of the deeper holes, Rock Bass, 'Gills a few Crappie, Catfish, and maybe a stray Saugeye. I don't fish it as much as I used to, but it holds some excellent SM Bass. 

The Licking Co. Water Conservancy did a shock study last spring, right by my house. They shocked up all of the above mentioned, and a Grass Pike, too! 
I helped these same people in a stream study involving the 6th grade class 3 years ago and they gave the Licking a "Good" water quality rating.

BTW-I probably know you, no bigger than the town of Utica is.

Tim


----------



## Anth (Aug 16, 2004)

That makes me want to go fishing.!

lets say i live between Utica and Homer.


----------



## Anth (Aug 16, 2004)

what is the main source of water that feed's the licking?


----------



## River Walker (Apr 7, 2004)

That's a very good smallmouth stream,up in your neck of the woods near Homer used to hold many large smallies.Whenever I fish it now,I fish around St.Louisville off of Rt.13.Actually,the source would be the Otter Fork(which is what runs through Homer),joins with Sycamore Creek near Arrington Rd.These two streams are what make up the North Fork.Otter Fork has it's origins up near Centerburg,while Sycamore Creek begins near Milfordton.Some people believe the N.Fk.of the Licking River actually starts at Robbins Lake on Johnstown Rd.I've never caught any saugeye from the river up near Utica,but I have taken a few nice LM bass and crappies up that way from time to time,especially from a couple tributary streams namely Lake Fork along Reynolds Rd.


----------



## Toolman (Jun 8, 2004)

RW-I've lived in this area all my life and I've never heard of many of those trib names! Guess I never really researched it though. Tuma Run is the main trib from the north that joins at the "Low water Bridge". Regardless, there are lots of small creeks and farmland drainages that feed the NF of the Licking River. The stretch of river near me can raise 10-12' during times of major runoff! You are correct about the good SM fishing in the tribs. Lots of them don't look large enough to hold fish, but they do.

Anth-I'm pretty certain that carp are found in almost all waters in North America. There definitely are some bigguns' in the Licking.

Tim


----------



## River Walker (Apr 7, 2004)

TM
Tuma Run is actually the Lake Fork,and it does offer good bass fishing.Sycamore Creek crosses under Rt.661 just south of Brandon,and the Otter Fork joins the N.Fork just west of Homer near Homer Rd.The Otter Fork from where it joins the N.Fk.,going maybe a mile upstream from that point also is a good bass stream.I've never really researched streams either,I just spent about 10 years or so doing nothing but fishing smaller streams all over Ohio.I seriously doubt if there's a stream in Ohio that I haven't fished at least once.You may be referring to the small little creek that flows into the N.Fk. north of Utica(near Rt.13) as Tuma Run,that actually is Tuma Run,but a lot of the locals that fish the Lake Fork also refer to that as Tuma Run also.Vance Creek north of Melick Rd. is also a tributary worth mentioning,although there are few holes,smallies do stay in that creek.All this talk makes me want to jump in the waders and do a little creek fishing,maybe on a little bit warmer day.


----------



## Toolman (Jun 8, 2004)

RiverWalker,

Good stuff!

Tim


----------



## River Walker (Apr 7, 2004)

Call me crazy,but I'm going to get out and do a little creek wading tomorrow morning for a couple hours.Warpath and I,and maybe JBJ too,are going to hit a couple local creeks and dodge the snowflakes.We'll be in search of the elusive saugeye,and hopefully a bass or two.Toolman,do you ever fish Racoon Creek around Johnstown? Years ago,that used to be a top-notch smallie stream,then there's another one I used to fish a lot a few miles east of Utica called Wakatomika Creek,that one is also a very good bass stream.South of Martinsburg I used to fish a smaller stream there called Rocky Fork,it's not all that wide,but there's a lot of nice pools in there that some real nice bass call home.I was just wondering if you've ever been on any of these.


----------



## Toolman (Jun 8, 2004)

RW,

I've never fished any of those creeks you mentioned personally. A buddy of mine used to fish Raccoon Creek in the Granville area and caught good SM. I used to wade the Rocky Fork as a kid at Camp Ohio 4-H Camp, but never fished it. 

BTW-You are crazy if you're wading/fishing today!

Tim


----------



## River Walker (Apr 7, 2004)

We fished a couple of streams this morning amidst all the snow and winds.We didn't land too many fish,but it was a lot of fun.Check out C.Mill Dam post.


----------



## Anth (Aug 16, 2004)

when you walk rivers and stuff do people ever say your trespassing or stuff like that?


----------



## Toolman (Jun 8, 2004)

Anth,

You could probably do an I-net search and find some old discussions from other sites on this topic. The fact is if you are wading in a river running through private property-you are trespassing, even if you don't climb the banks or get out of the water. Arguably, you can float a river, in a canoe or other craft, without getting out to portage, etc. and be legal. If you want to start one of the longest, most controversial posts in OGF history, repost your question with the title "Trespassing while wading" or something similar. 

Toolman


----------



## WINNER (Apr 7, 2004)

I didn't read the thread...I've seen millions of threads just like it I'm sure. 

RW is correct in that property owners' deeds' stake a claim to their property to the middle or the river both banks surrounding the river.  

ALL waterways considered "navigable" connecting to a river system are fair game up to the "high water mark" so long as you are engaged in a trade.

Check out this site...http://www.adventuresports.com/river/nors/us-law-menu.htm

Case Closed,
Winner


----------



## wader (Dec 9, 2004)

Hey fellers,

I had a run in with the law due to wading on "private property" with a buddy this past summer. I feel like we were railroaded. We started out on public property (downstream side of a bridge) and had worked our way upstream to a sandbar. We were almost ready to leave when here comes the game warden. He informed us we were "fishing without permission" on a very irate landowners stream bed. Here's the kicker: there is a huge, busy parking area on this guy's property, and he doesn't mind if you park and walk on his land as long as you are launching a canoe or boat, but you aren't allowed to wade on his property, according to Mr. Game Warden. So he wrote us up, and we had to appear in court. The guy on the docket before us shows up in sweat pants and a dirty shirt and gets off scott free, we show up looking like decent guys who have jobs and the judge gives us a nice fine and 30 days suspended. Needless to say I avoid that strectch of river now, the fishing was lousy anyways.


----------



## River Walker (Apr 7, 2004)

The landowner owns both banks and the bottom.You can legally fish a stream from a boat if it's considered a navigable stream,there's a lot of gray area involved in that though.If you're fishing private property from say a canoe,if the boat touches bottom,you're trespassing,if you happen to bump a rock,you're trespassing,and when you're paddling,if your paddle touches bottom-trespassing! It sounds pretty stupid,but technically it's the law,and it can be enforced.Best bet,find someplace else where you can enjoy yourself,and avoid the hassle's of greedy landowner's.Yes,I do feel people that have a problem with a guy wanting to wade up a creek and do a little fishing are greedy.But,what are you going to do?


----------



## Toolman (Jun 8, 2004)

RW,

The "greedy landowners" also have the right to keep people from their land due to the fact that they own the land. Beer bottles, cans, and other trash left behind, and other forms of property distruction are major factors in why many landowners feel this way. If you were to ask permission to wade/fish, a vast majority of farmers that I know would grant it, but a few would not-which is their right as the land owner. Much like the vast majority of fishermen who wouldn't leave their trash strewn along the riverbanks, a few do, thus giving all a bad rap. 
To give an example. The NF of the Licking River runs through a large portion of my Father-in-Law's farm. I can say pretty confidently that he has never been asked for permission to fish (wade) by anyone, though many people fish it-they are trespassing. Often there are bottles/cans and other trash left behind by these "fishermen". I wouldn't hesitate to call the Sheriff (on his behalf) on anyone I saw on his land without permission (same goes for hunters-especially during deer season). If you were to ask him, he would not only likely grant you permission, but let you know areas where you could access by vehicle (other than the obvious) and possibly some that he wouldn't want used, due to field conditions, crops, etc. 
The laws were created to protect the rights of landowners. To put it another way-if you had 10 or 100 or 1000 acres-would you want it "open to the public"? Just stating another viewpoint.

Tim


----------



## River Walker (Apr 7, 2004)

First off,on ALL of the streams I fish,or have fished I do get permission first,unless the stretch I happen to be fishing is on public land.I would never expect a landowner to grant permission to everybody,or allow"public access",I'm only referring to the rare (rich) property owner that feels that just because he has the resources to own prime real estate,the hell with eveyone else.These individuals aren't usually a problem when it's a bass stream though,they like to buy up all available land around lakes and what not.I used to wade the north shore of Kelley's Island for smallies and walleye's,did so for years.This spring some billionaire bought up nearly the whole north shore,absolutely no fishing! I asked for permission one time,and it was like I was asking to date his wife! He rudely said "No,now please get off my land"! As far as the N.Fk.,if your relative owns land along one of the stretches that I used to fish,then I'm sure I had permission to fish there.Mostly,I fished the stretch from behind the cemetary in Utica up to the next bridge,and once in awhile off of Rt.661 near Homer.The guy I had permission from on that stretch actually allowed me to park alongside his outbuildings.If I owned a pond,I probably wouldn't allow that many strangers to fish it,but if I owned property with a large amount of forest land,I wouldn't have a problem with people hunting it,as long as they asked first.


----------



## Toolman (Jun 8, 2004)

RW,

I sent you a PM. 

Tim


----------



## WINNER (Apr 7, 2004)

This is from the site I mentioned earlier. I have also spoke with public game officers and I have taken several classes regarding the issue at OU. More thoughts below...


Misconception: A court, or government agency, designates rivers as legally navigable. If a river isn't officially designated, it isn't legally navigable. 
Fact: The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that "rivers that are navigable in fact are navigable in law." If a river is physically navigable, it is legally navigable. No court or agency has to designate it as such. 


Misconception: Only certain large rivers, capable of navigation by motorized ships carrying commercial freight, are legally navigable. Other rivers, where they flow through private land, belong to the surrounding landowners. The public may be allowed to run such rivers in some cases, but may not touch the banks. 
Fact: Even rivers that are physically navigable only by canoe, kayak, and raft are still legally navigable. (The courts have also ruled that commercial recreational river trips qualify as commerce). *Because they are legally navigable, such rivers are held in trust for the public by the states, for navigation, recreation, and fisheries. The land along them is public land up to the ordinary high water mark (which can be quite a distance from the water--it's the land where the vegetation and soil show the effects of water.) The public can use this land for walking, fishing, resting, camping, and other non-destructive visits. * 


Misconception: If a landowner's property deed includes the land around a river, and makes no mention of the river being public, then the river is private. 
Fact: Public ownership of physically navigable rivers, including the land up to the ordinary high water mark, pre-dates property deeds. What the property deed says or doesn't say about the river is irrelevant. 


Misconception: Rivers that flow through federal land (National Parks, National Forests, etc.) belong to federal agencies, whose "river management plans" can determine when, and if, navigation and recreation will be allowed. 
Fact: Physically navigable rivers that flow through federal lands are still held in trust for the public by the states. River management plans must preserve the public's paramount rights to navigate and recreate on these rivers. 


Misconception: Since the state "owns" the river and the land up to the ordinary high water mark, the state can sell or give away the river to private owners for various projects or private uses. 
Fact: The state does not actually own the river, it holds it in trust for the public for navigation, recreation, and fisheries. The state is obligated to preserve the river for these public benefits. 


Misconception: Public ownership of physically navigable rivers varies from state to state, as do the public's rights to canoe, kayak, raft, walk along, and otherwise visit such rivers. 
Fact: Public ownership of physically navigable rivers is the same in all states. It's a U.S. Supreme Court standard, and it includes those rivers that are physically navigabale by canoe, kayak, and raft. The public's right to visit additional non-navigable streams (those too small for even canoes, kayaks, and rafts) does vary from state to state, but this variation only applies to those small streams. 


The law is quite clear. 
Wader, I feel sorry for you bud! In no way should you have been hassled by the game warden or property owners.  
I will personally _never ask for permission from anyone to fish a stream._ I don't have to so long as I enter the streambed through a public right of way. I will ask to park on a landowners property if I can not find a suitable ditch to park on.

Winner


----------



## Toolman (Jun 8, 2004)

Winner,

While you are correct on several of your points, as I understand them, you are wrong on several others. The "navigability" designation does vary from state to state, probably due to the different interpretations held by state courts of the laws. (scroll down to "state test of navigability")
http://www.americanwhitewater.org/archive/article/18#_Toc491144256

The "ordinary high water mark" and the various "flood plain" encompassed areas are two different animals. The ordinary high water mark is within the banks of the river itself. Thus the idea that "The public can use this land for walking, fishing, resting, camping, and other non-destructive visits" really doesn't hold water. 
http://www2.lakecountyohio.org/soil/Identifying Ordinary HWM.prn.pdf

Here's some more good reading on riparian rights:
http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/water/pubs/fs_st/stfs02.htm

This is an age old arguement with the sides usually being divided by landowners vs non-landowners. My take is that if you access a stream from a public area and leave by the same you have the right to use waters flowing through private property. (BTW- a public area is not pulling the car off the side of the road). 

JMO-for what it's worth.

Tim


----------



## River Walker (Apr 7, 2004)

From working with the DNR,and having issues such as this come up from time to time,my viewpoint on it is different from yours.In Ohio,regardless where the stream is where you access it,if you enter private property you are trespassing.The landowner owns both banks,and the bottom,high water marks have no validity whatsoever on streams that flow through private property.You actually believe that you can park on a public roadway,get out and start wading up a stream,or walk within a few feet of the bank on private property? Here's a misconception,streams such as the Kokosing,or Mohican you can legally canoe them or wade them even though they flow through private lands,know why? These are recreational rivers,and the state has purchased stream eastment leases through the landowner's,granting the public access within a few feet of the banks.Smaller stream's,like the majority of good bass stream's DO NOT fall under this category.If you're wading up a stream,and the landowner see's you and calls the law,you'll find out what is misconception,and what is fact.


----------



## wader (Dec 9, 2004)

Hey fellas,

RW is right. Although Winner brings up some interesting topics, i guarantee if you were to take that before a judge, he would not recognize it, and maybe even go harder on you for ignoring the laws on the books in Ohio, and trying to one up him in his courtroom. When I was fined, there were no signs up, and the landowners property butts against SW Ohio Conservancy District property, but I was still in the wrong and I know it. I was just mad at having been caught when I didn't know I was trespassing in the first place. So here is another thought, how much burden is there on landowners to clearly mark their property lines? I really made an honest mistake, and if I had known better, I would have saved myself a trip to court.


----------



## River Walker (Apr 7, 2004)

Wader
You bring up a very good point,landowner's who don't want people to access their land should take the time to post it,especially streams.A real good idea(at least I think so)would be to post areas around bridge access points with fishing with permission only signs,that way the landowner can personally see who wants to go on his property,or deny access to whoever he see's fit.I've always seeked out whoever owned the land along whatever stream I wanted to fish,not only does it create a bond between the landowner and the sportsman,but it also let's you enjoy fishing without having to look over your shoulder.I've only been denied access to a stream once ever,it was on the Huron River.The guy never really gave any reason,but he said he appreciated the fact that I asked anyway.He said that he has called the law on people parking at the bridge by his house,and had them arrested for trespassing.The bridge is easily visible from his house.A lot of guys do think that you can just park along the road at any stream that look's promising,and get out and fish,but that's just not the case.


----------



## WINNER (Apr 7, 2004)

Guys,
Ohio law has no bearing on the situation...Ohio rivers(all rivers in the USA) are held by the states in trust to the general public(you and I). We own them collectively.([email protected]## Communists)  

What you guys are describing is the property rights of rivers in Europe. In England, the people own the rivers free and clear. They don't have the same history as us...

If you think about how Ohio was settled by white folks, they needed the rivers and streams to travel. The settlers used all of these streams for navigation. Later on, lakes such as Grand, Loramie, Indian, Buckeye were created to feed canals, thus making trade and travel easier for the settlers.
It is inter and intrastate commerce that we're talking about. All of these rivers and canals were used for commerce at one point.

As for the high and ordinary water mark issues, I may be wrong. In my mind it makes sense that the highest point the water has been is ok, because commerce would have occured at some point throughout the years.

I'm not trying to cause trouble...in fact, I rarely leave my kayak or get out of the water while wading...I would consider myself a steward of the earth...I pick up trash and leave only footsteps...I am strictly catch and release...for these reasons I also think no one should have the right to restrict me from enjoying God's beautiful earth.

Will I get the book thrown at me if I get busted and have to go to court, probably(if I am wrong). But I will happily take the punishment. Call it civil disobidience or stupidity, your choice.  

Winner


----------



## River Walker (Apr 7, 2004)

Call it a first,but I'm speechless on that one! I'm all for sharing the land too,but dude,c'mon.A judge probably won't buy into the old song line "you put up a fence to keep me out,but to keep mother nature in".Nobody hates to see prime country fenced up and posted more than me,but you still can't access somebody's land (with or without a creek) without permission.I am with you on one thing though,we should all be able to enjoy the lands that Mother Earth bestowed upon us,as nature intended-but then reality sets in and tells me-it's 2004!


----------



## WINNER (Apr 7, 2004)

So you called me crazy....fair enough!  

Winner


----------



## River Walker (Apr 7, 2004)

No,not crazy-daring maybe!


----------

