Thread: Beautiful creek wrecked

Originally Posted by rar110

Maybe it’s only creeks and minor rivers. Our place was originally surveyed in mid 1800s and one boundary was the middle of the river. The surveyor said that was the norm originally (at least in Qld).

The Council knew it too as made us take care of declared weeds oblong the bank. The place across the river got subdivided and 1/2 went back to crown. Same happened when we subdivided.

Interesting, maybe that's the case with some older land titles, like what you get with general law land titles that haven't converted to Torrens titles.

Originally Posted by rar110

Maybe it’s only creeks and minor rivers. Our place was originally surveyed in mid 1800s and one boundary was the middle of the river. The surveyor said that was the norm originally (at least in Qld).

The Council knew it too as made us take care of declared weeds oblong the bank. The place across the river got subdivided and 1/2 went back to crown. Same happened when we subdivided.

No biggy if you don't want to but would you mind PMing me the address or property description i.e. Lot # and RP # of the original survey plan and the SP# or #s of the subdivion, as I like to dabble in Land Surveying history in Qld.

There is an old term 'Ad medium filum aquae' which was a vague representation of a watercourse central flow but I don't think it is applicable in Qld and open to debate, with some set conditions, in NSW.

All future correspondence in this matter will be by PM, at your discretion.

Steve

Originally Posted by TheEntertainer

No unfortunately I did not, next time I hear them mucking around I will ask them in a kind and respectful manner to wreck their side and perhaps look after the environment a bit better.

Photographs would be a better idea.

Originally Posted by trout1105

Cut some steel posts up to about 50cm and bang them into the ground so that they still stick out about 50-100cm, That will deter those vandals

After all of the threads that go around on this and other forums about finding this sort of thing out in the bush and how despicable it is, I have trouble understanding how a member of this forum could actually even suggest this.

Originally Posted by barney

After all of the threads that go around on this and other forums about finding this sort of thing out in the bush and how despicable it is, I have trouble understanding how a member of this forum could actually even suggest this.

If you do this on your OWN land to deter hooligans from doing this sort of damage I personally don't see a problem much like putting a fence or gate up to prevent entry, If it is done on crown land or in the bush then YES it is definitely the wrong thing to do.

Originally Posted by rar110

I agree with Simon above.

Traditionally, the boundary was ordinarily set along the middle of a river or creek separating two properties.

Not in Queensland! River or creek bank is accepted as the boundary hence the existence of riparian and accretion rights.

Creek Bdy.jpg

Originally Posted by trout1105

If you do this on your OWN land to deter hooligans from doing this sort of damage I personally don't see a problem much like putting a fence or gate up to prevent entry, If it is done on crown land or in the bush then YES it is definitely the wrong thing to do.

Problem is that it's called setting a man-trap and it doesn't matter if it's on your own land, you're still responsible for the safety of visitors to the land.

My original plan, dated May 1915 states "Original plan indicate bank is the portion boundary". Of course, this begs the question "which part of the bank?" From the plan it looks like the edge of the normal watercourse - the creek has never had more than a foot or two of water in it even in the wettest years and after the catchment was burnt off.