Bill intended to clarify access to Georgia’s rivers and streams heads to governor’s desk

A proposal meant to ease concerns from the business community and property owners along Georgia’s rivers is awaiting the governor’s signature after receiving a final vote in the Senate Tuesday night.

The bill, sponsored by Waycross Republican Rep. James Burchett, is a follow-up measure to a bill passed in the final hours of last year’s session in response to a surprise legal settlement that gave a landowner exclusive fishing rights along a popular stretch of the Flint River.

Supporters say this year’s bill is needed to better balance the public’s freedom to enjoy Georgia’s rivers with the private property rights of landowners. Agriculture industry groups have also expressed concerns that last year’s bill made them vulnerable to lawsuits.

But opponents argue the measure undermines last year’s effort to protect fishing and hunting access. They say anglers will lose access if they cannot wade on the streambed or drop an anchor on the river bottom where landowners hold a pre-1863 land grant. They say the proposal represents a step toward privatizing Georgia’s rivers, since they argue other landowners can and will follow suit and close off more public access to the state’s rivers.

Paddling groups have also raised concerns that the measure will indirectly limit their access to smaller streams.

The bill passed the Senate with a 34-to-18 vote that largely fell along party lines as this year’s legislative session winds down. Thursday is the last day for a bill to clinch final passage.

Sen. Elena Parent, an Atlanta Democrat, argued the bill creates ambiguity and confusion over what Georgians are allowed to do on the state’s navigable rivers, including routine activities like water quality monitoring. 

“It is much more unclear whether anglers, hunters and paddlers can touch privately owned streambeds. It’s very nearly impossible to do those activities without touching the streambed,” Parent said. “And we should not set up a system where people can no longer use these navigable rivers that they have used for decades if an adjacent property owner all of a sudden decides the public can’t drop an anchor or use fishing lures on the bottom.” 

Burchett said after Tuesday’s Senate vote that the concerns about the bill are overblown, and he rejected claims his bill could lead to the privatization of Georgia’s rivers. 

“I think this is the best way you can thread the needle for private property rights that are on a river and our public right to fish, hunt and pass,” he said. “This is a very good compromise.”

He boiled it down to two scenarios: one where a landowner has a pre-1863 land grant and one where they do not. If the property owner has a land grant predating 1863, then the public’s access may be limited when it comes to those streambeds. 

“You have the absolute right to fish, hunt and pass, so you can float down the river, you can fish there, and you can hunt there, but you cannot stand on somebody else’s land,” Burchett said.

Supporters of broad public access were alarmed last week when Burchett said at a legislative committee meeting that standing on a streambed could be trespassing under his proposal if the landowner has a land grant dating back to before 1863. 

But Burchett said Tuesday night that he is leaving room for the discretion of law enforcement.

“A landowner says, ‘Hey, this guy’s trespassing.’ Well, if the guy is out there drinking beer and throwing trash all over the place, and he’s clearly not hunting and he’s clearly not fishing and clearly not passing. He’s standing on the streambed and the owner of the property has a pre-1863 deed,” Burchett said.

“Then the enforcement agent can say, ‘See you later, guy. You’re not either hunting, fishing or passing,’” he said. “Now in the same scenario, when someone calls and says, ‘Hey, these folks are out here paddling or they’re hunting or they’re fishing.’ That enforcement agent goes out there he looks and he sees clearly they’re hunting, they’re fishing or they’re paddling, and they have that right here.” 

The issue is a complex and emotionally charged one that involves centuries of legal history surrounding who owns what in Georgia.

Last year’s law started a new chapter. It asserted that the state became the owner of all navigable streambeds when Georgia became a state back in 1788. And while it also conceded that a private party can own a streambed in some cases, such as when there is a long-standing state grant to the property, the 2023 law said that those public rights to the flowing stream remain.

But the reaction to last year’s law was so intense that Gov. Brian Kemp issued a special statement defending his support and countering some of the concerns, like the fears over potential lawsuits. He directed those with concerns to participate in a study committee process led last year by Burchett.

This year’s bill says Georgians continue to have “an inherent right to use for passage and for hunting and fishing all navigable streams from low-water mark to low-water mark” even when the adjoining landowner holds a pre-1863 land grant. But their rights are limited to those three activities.

Even if Burchett’s bill becomes law, this will not be the end of the issue. Burchett had a companion bill that attempted to spell out which waterways are navigable, but it has stalled. A new study committee has instead been proposed.

If a stream is deemed non-navigable, then the landowner can claim exclusive rights out to the center of the waterway. If they own both sides, then the entire stream bed is theirs. 

“We’ve defined the right right here,” Burchett said of this year’s bill. “And we now want to define where that right can be used. So essentially, we can put a map up. And then I think that clears up most of the ambiguity, where people are not clear as to where they can hunt, fish and pass.”