The fish in the waters of a state and the game in its forests are the property of the people of that state in their collective, sovereign capacity[i].  The state has the right to regulate and control the taking and disposition thereof[ii].

As a general rule, all the members of the public have a common and general right of fishing in public waters, such as the sea and other navigable or tidal waters[iii].  Also, the public has a right to use the navigable waters for boating, fishing, trapping and hunting purposes, if access is gained without committing a trespass[iv].

The citizen has no private right to take fish or game, except as such right is expressly given by the state[v].  Private persons cannot claim an exclusive right to fish in any portion of public waters, except in so far as s/he has acquired such right by grant or prescription[vi].

Also, recreational hunting is not a fundamental constitutional right and states have a legitimate interest in regulating the taking of wildlife and fish within its boundaries[vii].

The general ownership of wild game and fowl is vested in the State for the use of the public, but when wild game or fowl are upon the private grounds of an individual, a qualified or special right of property of the individual attaches to it, with the exclusive right to hunt, kill or capture while there[viii].

Although a landowner does not own the fish in a river on his/her property, s/he and all other persons who can obtain access to the river have the right to take fish therefrom and dispose of them at pleasure[ix].

Further, the owners of land adjoining a river has an exclusive right of fishery opposite to their land, to the middle of the river, and the public has an easement in the river as a highway, for passing and re-passing with every kind of water craft[x].

In addition, the landowner has the right to permit or exclude others from obtaining access to the river over his /her property and to grant permits therefor on his/her own terms[xi].

When a riparian owner has an exclusive right of fishery upon his/her own land, s/he must so exercise that right as not to injure others in the enjoyment of a right upon their lands upon the stream above and below[xii].

A fishing privilege that has a pecuniary value is a property right[xiii].  For destruction of such a right, damages are recoverable[xiv].  Maritime statutes provide for recovery for damage to natural resources, but this recovery is only in favor of the state[xv].

A plaintiff cannot recover purely economic damages resulting from a negligent act without physical damage to a proprietary interest[xvi].  However, there is an exception to this general rule for commercial fishermen.  Commercial fishermen may recover for pure economic harm resulting from negligent acts[xvii].

The owner of a land has a right to recover damages from those who trespass.  When the owner posts on his/her land a warning to persons that they may not hunt or trespass thereon and they do hunt or trespass, they are subject to criminal prosecution.  An injunction is a proper remedy for the protection of an exclusive hunting privilege[xviii].

[i] State v. Snowman, 94 Me. 99 (Me. 1900).

[ii] People v. Stafford Packing Co., 193 Cal. 719 (Cal. 1924).

[iii] State ex rel. State Game Comm’n v. Red River Valley Co., 51 N.M. 207 (N.M. 1946).

[iv] Johnson v. Burghorn, 212 Mich. 19, 30 (Mich. 1920).

[v] State v. Cramer, 167 Wash. 159 (Wash. 1932).

[vi] State ex rel. State Game Comm’n v. Red River Valley Co., 51 N.M. 207 (N.M. 1946).

[vii] Minnesota v. Hoeven, 370 F. Supp. 2d 960, 972-973 (D.N.D. 2005).

[viii] Schulte v. Warren, 218 Ill. 108 (Ill. 1905).

[ix] Masonite Corp. v. Steede, 198 Miss. 530 (Miss. 1945).

[x] Schulte v. Warren, 218 Ill. 108 (Ill. 1905).

[xi] Masonite Corp. v. Steede, 198 Miss. 530 (Miss. 1945).

[xii] Griffith v. Holman, 23 Wash. 347, 359 (Wash. 1900).

[xiii] Hodges v. Pine Product Co., 135 Ga. 134 (Ga. 1910).

[xiv] Masonite Corp. v. Steede, 198 Miss. 530 (Miss. 1945).

[xv] Slaven V. Bp America, Inc., 786 F. Supp. 853 (C.D. Cal. 1992).

[xvi] Golnay Barge Co. v. M/T Shinoussa, 841 F. Supp. 783 (S.D. Tex. 1993).

[xvii] Blue Gulf Seafood, Inc. v. TransTexas Gas Corp., 24 F. Supp. 2d 732 (S.D. Tex. 1998).

[xviii] Council v. Sanderlin, 183 N.C. 253 (N.C. 1922).