Outsiders Fishing in Retention Pond

We are a 55+ patio home community. Our main street was designed with several curves in it but even so, it has become an easy route for outsiders to travel between two main city streets. A large retention pond and a very pretty gazebo are about mid-way on our street and easily accessible by a sidewalk.

I just learned today that not only are outsiders (non-residents) fishing in the pond, but at times have slept overnight in the gazebo (seems a bit unsavory, doesn't it). Our board meeting is next week, and I'm sure we'll discuss this situation. What comes to mind is strongly worded signage and the possibility of speed bumps to deter the through traffic. Those who live near the pond and are aware of unauthorized fishers/sleepers can call the police to remove the offenders, but I'm not sure that it top priority for the police.

Anyone have any other thoughts or suggestions?
Thanks, Marianne

Robert G

The city owns the street. The gazebo and pond are part of the common area in the community.

Tresspassers SHOULD be a priority, also LOITERERS. You need signs, someone to monitor who is using your private property and lots of cooperation from the local enforcement people.

Susan, they (trespassers) SHOULD be, but for various reasons and police-talk technicalities, the police won't get too excited about asking people for IDs, where they live etc etc etc and then booting them out or running them off until we post some very visible signs giving public warning about the privacy of the area.

Oh, I forgot, we did do one more thing (the police requested this too). We signed a statement that only our HOA residents are allowed in that area (the retention pond and various other common areas), and that we gave permission for the police to enforce trespassing.

The reason this is needed is because when the police encounter a person on private property (which the retention basin is), they have to get permission or have a direct request from the owner of the property to charge someone with trespassing. Because it would delay the situation by having to contact a board member each and every time to get specific permission and validation of "trespass," we were asked to provide a blanket waiver so that they could do so without getting the permission each time, especially since the trespassing statutes here require that the owner of the land specifically requests the trespasser to leave. This gives the police the authority, on our behalf, to do that.

It's actually called a "Trespass Waiver" and is worded like this:

AUTHORIZATION OF PROPERTY OWNER (Lessee or person in charge)

In order to promote Public Safety and Health and to insure the protection of private property, I, ________,President of ______ give the following authorization to the Louisville Metro Government and the Louisville Metro Police Department.

1. I, ______, residing at _______ am the owner-lessee or the person in charge of the real property located at ________(address of the retention basin, the "Lake"), Louisville, KY.

2. I, ______, hereby give my permission and authority to the Louisville Metro Police Department and its agents and officers to act as follows:

A) To enforce any trespassing violations on my property located at ______ (address of retention basin).

3. I, _____, further authorize the Louisville Metro Police Department and its agents and officers for the purpose of enforcing laws against trespass (KRS Chapter 511) to order, on my behalf, persons to not enter or leave the land and property located at ______(the "Lake").

4. I, _____, relieve the Louisville Metro Police Department, its officers and agents of any liability in connection with actions under the terms of this authorization. I further do not hold them in any way responsible for incidental damage to my property and land which may occur as part of their enforcement actions.

If your budget can afford it you could also use private security to monitor the area. those that do not belong will likely find another place to hang out

Thanks AnnJ

Good suggestion, but unfortunately, our budget will not allow private security at this time.

Easy. They "escort" them to their homes. If they live in the subdivision, they are fine. If not, their parents are given a warning.

Darn, just remembered one more thing right after I hit "submit."

This "extra" bit of police activity need only occur early on in the season.

Word will get around pretty quick that the police are on top of it and checking IDs and fishing licenses.

That alone will give a significant drop in uninvited guests.

Marianne, I believe they do.

Ellen,

Fake cameras. Sounds good to me. I'm open to anything that will work and be a deterrent. Thanks for your input. Marianne

Be careful with fake cameras or stating there is a camera. Unlike others here I can't quote case law as I do not remember them but I do take from them what is needed. And in a case there was a statement that there were cameras and fake ones mounted. A young girl was attacked and believed that someone behind the camera was watching. there was not. she did not fight back and ended up raped. there was a suit and the association lost. Because of this we recommend that associations not use the fake camera route as the benefit is not worth the potential exposure. but it is always a decision of the board. Even if you ahve real cameras up, who will monitor? if not monitored who will watch all the hours of tape?

Well, you may not know anything about fish, other than how tasty they are, but you I bet you know a little bit about your retention basin!

If the retention basin is connected in any way to a larger, public body of water, fed by it, say, then the fish in your retention pond likely migrated from that public body of water.

If it is a stand-alone body of water, as ours is, not fed by a public stream or such (only our run-off ditches), then no worries.

But, you did bring up one interesting phrase ". . .or from private waters still covered by these regulations."

Not sure what that means, but that could put you back in the fishing license game.

Most of the time "private waters" are ponds and such on private property (which a retention basin is), that the land owner owns and therefore can give or withhold fishing permission as preferred.

However, at least here in Kentucky, we (the HOA) own the land but NOT the "retention basin." It's property of the Metropolitan Sewer District -- we are just obligated to maintain it.

Given that, I wonder. . . .does that mean that it does require a fishing license (if this were Indiana - I already know the answer for here -- yes it does!).

You might want to contact your local county extension agent for a more legitimate answer!

I don't know what county you are in, but here's a site that could help you: http://www.infarmbureau.org/NewsRelease.aspx?id=3190

private waters still covered by these regulations would be any private stock-pond, pond, lake, or body of water into which the state has placed fish stock, or otherwise improved for the purposes of stocking fish for recreational or other purposes.

In other words, if the state paid or placed fish in your private pond, then people who fish in it must have a license. It's not private anymore, if you get government assistance.