Spruce Creek land dispute pits owners against state

(The Center Square) – A property dispute spanning several years between the state of Pennsylvania and a group of homeowners along a renowned trout fishing creek could soon be resolved through the courts.

The area in question is a half-mile stretch of land along Spruce Creek, located in the community of the same name in Huntington County. It borders Rothrock State Forest, which spans over 96,000 acres across Centre, Huntingdon and Mifflin counties.

The state claims their boundary lies in the middle of the creek, while the homeowners say they own both sides.

Stephan Nelson has lived on Spruce Creek since 1961. He told The Center Square he remembers a spot about 150 yards from his home that was used for picnics and fishing for many years. At the time, he noted, the landowners had no objections. However, in the 1970s, “a new generation of fishermen started coming through.”

Nelson said homeowners began posting signs after encountering garbage, beer cans and property damage. He said the state’s proposal to open the area to the public adds new concerns about littering and disturbances.

According to a recent op-ed written by two of the affected homeowners, in February 2022, the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, or DCNR, sent letters to homeowners asserting ownership of the land on the bank opposite their homes – land they say they had “maintained, posted, and paid taxes on for years.”

They claim that despite property markers delineating the state forest’s boundaries, and Right to Know requests revealing that DCNR employees had informed their superiors the state did not own the disputed land, the agency continued to pursue its claim.

After what they call “months of fruitless negotiations,” the DCNR announced their intention to open the creek to the public for the 2024 fishing season, prompting them to seek an emergency injunction.

According to a court document, the residents are asking for a permanent injunction until DCNR obtains a final determination from the Pennsylvania Board of Property showing it has proper title to the disputed area.

In addition, the state is citing Pennsylvania law that says the commonwealth holds a navigation easement across all waterways for the benefit of the public to allow passage any time a waterway can be floated.

Nelson has a survey map showing his property line extending well beyond the opposite bank. He said he is thankful for his neighbors who took the lead and are continuing the fight in court, as many of them are on fixed incomes, and the cost of legal fees and proving property ownership would create a financial burden.

One of the issues, he said, involves language in the chain of title the state is interpreting to support its position, as boundaries have changed over time.

Another concern from residents, should the state prevail Nelson said, is the fear their property value will be significantly reduced, negatively impacting local government revenue as well.

The current stay expired on Dec. 30, 2024. Since then, the state has filed preliminary objections.

A representative from McNees Wallace & Nurick – the firm representing the landowners – told The Center Square their legal team has 30 days to respond. The state then has a 30-day window to reply, followed by a 14-day period for the legal team to submit a final response. Once these filings are completed, the court may hear arguments on the case’s merits.

Meanwhile, the injunction against the state remains in effect, preventing them from removing fencing and ‘No Trespassing’ signs from along the creek.

While testifying at a House Appropriations Committee budget hearing on Feb. 27, DCNR Secretary Cindy Adams Dunn responded to concerns about government overreach, overspending, and transparency with communities and landowners, including the property dispute in Spruce Creek.

Although her response was limited due to the pending litigation, she stated that the area “used to be Coleraine State Park and the commonwealth is simply defending our property ownership up to the creek.” She added, “That’s a really important creek for fishing, so we’re defending a land ownership issue there in the courts.”