Sorry, @Elendil_s_Heir no idea!
I’m from Saskatchewan. What do I know about navies?!? 
You should know at least as much as a Nebraskan.
Nebraska Admiral (formally, Admiral in the Great Navy of the State of Nebraska ) is the state of Nebraska’s highest civic honor, and an honorary title bestowed upon individuals by approval of the Governor of Nebraska, a triply landlocked U.S. state.
Oh, sort of like those Kentucky colonels that aren’t really colonels then? (And as I understand it Col. Sanders was neither a real colonel nor the Kentucky kind, nor even a Kentuckian for that matter, but he did fry chicken.)
Both Russia and Iran have substantial fleets on the Caspian Sea, possibly including midget submarines, iirc.
Here’s a cite for the Iranian Northern Fleet, and one for the Russian Caspian Flotilla.
A little table near the bottom of the Iranian page gives the strengths of the Azerbaijani, Kazakhstan & Turkmenistan forces (mainly patrol boats)
But, your province is like 60% water!
I mean, not all at once…
The portages are a killer!
WW 1 happenned on Lake Victoria of course.
See https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00253359.1985.10656023?journalCode=rmir20
And there was a second african battle lake too
Its a lake a bit south of Lake Victoria in Africa, it drains into the Congo . Similar to Lake Victoria, its on/at/is an international border.
Going back to the basic question, well, it’s a matter of why would navies not operate in navigable inland lakes? Sure, the USA has its Coast Guard be a full military service in its own right and it has internal waters jurisdiction, but that is by no means an established norm worldwide. In some countries their coast guards are strictly rescue or maritime safety outfits with no useful fighting function, or are subordinate units of the respective navy or gendarmerie equivalent.
Seems to me you would only put a navy in a lake if another country also has access to that lake and they put navy there.
And that assumes those two countries are not friendly.
The US and Canada share some really big lakes and, AFAIK, they have no navy on there. Just lake police/coast guard (nothing you would really call a military presence). Their purpose being to interdict criminals and help those in distress on the lakes. They have no role in attacking/threatening anything other than criminals.
That’s because by treaty, the Great Lakes are démilitarised:
And because the US and Canada are friendly enough with each other that treaties like that are honored. I imagine that a lot of the lakes where battles were fought, the relevant nations had similar treaties, which they immediately ignored as soon as it was convenient to do so.
I’d say it was the other way around: the Rush-Bagot Treaty helped to ensure the development of peaceful relations on the Lakes, and by extension between the two countries. (That little Caroline affair notwithstanding.)
I thought you would at least know about pirates…
Yes, but that was on the River Saskatchewan!
Screw the GST!
Von Trapp was a captain in the navy of the old Austro-Hungarian Empire, which included the Dalmatian Coast along the Adriatic Sea.
Gosh, if only we’d mentioned that treaty a couple of times already in this thread! 
Told you, I don’t do navy stuff!
I’m impressed my little thread, typed on my phone while I was getting my teeth drilled (I’m not kidding!) has proved so popular and even fractious.
You typed it while getting your teeth drilled? Kudos, I can’t even think in this situation.