From a legal perspective, there’s a lot of interesting ways some of this could play out. Not all of the risk necessarily lies with the alleged “trespasser” in the case of a stream that has not been validated one way or the other through the courts already.
In order to get the ball rolling, the “trespasser” likely has to be caught more than once by a landowner. Assuming everyone is being civil and polite, I think most (not all) of the time when law enforcement is called out for an alleged trespassing violation for the first time, they typically (again, not all of the time) handle the situation via a conversation both with the landowner and the “trespasser”, but don’t issue any citations. If called again for the same alleged violation, I think it’s likely the “trespasser” gets a citation, even if they make the “public streambed” argument. Most law enforcement officers aren’t aware of that doctrine, but they do understand the rather simple trespassing laws in PA. They already warned the “trespasser”, so this time they get a citation. There’s other ways this could play out, but I think this is the most likely course most of the time. Ron is probably right I think that the private property argument wins out, at least initially.
The “trespasser” then has to challenge the citation. This is where things get pricey, and most normal people will just punt and pay the fine and/or see if the local DJ/magistrate will drop the charge, and everyone moves on. If the “trespasser” does challenge however, things could get interesting. If there is support from the state, and other pro public land sportsmen groups there could be funding for the “trespasser” to move forward. If the state becomes involved, I think one possibility is that the state sues the landowner for improperly enforcing posted property (the streambed) on what the state believes is public property…hence the list they’ve published. If it hasn’t been validated via the courts, it’s gray, to varying degrees. Things could get messy and expensive for the landowner here too is the point.
FWIW - I don’t recall any cases that have gone through the courts where the landowner’s private property argument won out over the public streambed argument. Are there examples of this anyone knows? With every one that makes it through as the streambed being public, there’s increasing precedent for this outcome on future cases.
Who wants to deal with this mess though?…I don’t think most anglers, or landowners want anything to do with this. Anglers just want to fish and be left alone, and can do so in countless stretches of clearly public land in PA, without the potential of a hassle. Landowners just want to enjoy their property without intrusion. I get it.
