- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Any successful cases against the Fed or State government over property with wetlands??
Posted on 7/23/24 at 7:50 am to FlaTiger25
Posted on 7/23/24 at 7:50 am to FlaTiger25
I find that code funny considering all the homes on the various lakes near the Gulf in South Walton
Hope you get it sorted....
Hope you get it sorted....
0
Posted on 7/23/24 at 7:58 am to X123F45
quote:
I bought wetlands this past year at under 1000 per acre. The restrictions greatly secrease the value.
That is his point. If the government didn’t classify it as a wetland it would probably be very valuable. If it wasn’t classified as a wetland he could drain it and build on it. If the government is going to restrict your use of land you should be compensated for it.
Posted on 7/23/24 at 8:13 am to FlaTiger25
quote:
but I’m stubborn enough to at least bring suit if there was an angle to try an play regarding these rules and regulations being overreach or unlawful if done by an agency that doesn’t have the right to create a law.
See recent Chevron decision.. But make sure the agency created the law and not congress.
Posted on 7/23/24 at 8:15 am to FlaTiger25
you can replace the wetlands. you do that by buying credits from a mitigation bank. Credits vary in price depending on which basin you're in. The core will tell you how many are what percentage of 1 credit you'll need.
Posted on 7/23/24 at 8:28 am to FlaTiger25
Pacific Legal Foundation is your friend
Posted on 7/23/24 at 8:40 am to joseywales1
quote:
you can replace the wetlands. you do that by buying credits from a mitigation bank. Credits vary in price depending on which basin you're in. The core will tell you how many are what percentage of 1 credit you'll need.
this
quote:
find a lawyer...
and this...any real estate lawyer should be able to help you.
You can do work, however there is a requirement that you have to "bank" your credits.
Posted on 7/23/24 at 9:22 am to FlaTiger25
quote:
I’ve researched online unsuccessfully but am curious if anyone has seen a case successfully brought against a local, state, or federal government for the following:
Based on the fact that you stated the "county" is trying to screw you, it is unlikely that any federal case is going to help. There is a recent US Sup. Ct. decision from last year, Sacket v. EPA, that deals with the reach of the Clean Water Act and what lands fall under its provisions, however, it does not apply to state or county laws/ordinances.
quote:
With this said, if I can’t touch or have anything in the buffer or wetlands, then I really don’t own it.
This is is a dumb take. You still own it. The restriction may be dumb, but there are lots of laws and other things limiting what you can do with your property (e.g., zoning laws, setbacks, easements and building restrictions) and they don't change the fact that you own the property.
quote:
I’d like to challenge in court to force the government to purchase the land that I can’t touch at fair market value which would be a pretty nice amount.
It is at this point that I should point out that different states have different laws and while this is almost certainly not possible, no one can tell you for certain if you don't say what state you are in.
quote:
I’m curious if anyone has seen a similar type case where someone has fought over owned land they couldn’t touch and forced the government to purchase said land? I’m curious if any of these rules / restrictions could be traced to unlawful bureaucratic agency’s?
What state again? Forced condemnation or forcing the government to pay you for taking your property is certainly not unprecedented. It is VERY unlikely to apply to you. But, if you find the right lawyer, he will be happy to take your money and lose that case for you.
quote:
Sorry for long post, but everything I’m finding online is about eminent domain cases.
That is because forcing the government to purchase your property fall squarely in the subject of eminent domain.
Posted on 7/23/24 at 9:33 am to FlaTiger25
We had a 100 year flood a few years ago (LSU fans may remember it because our game had to be moved to BR because Columbia was flooded ... as was most of the state.).
Anyways, I had two pond dams overflow .... EPA stepped in and immediately declared the overflowed runoff area protected wetlands while, at the same time, closing both dams to traffic (which were vital routes to other parts of my farm).
I hired an attorney and told them to frick off. It was a somewhat expensive battle ... to the tune of around $17k by the time all was said and done, but we won in the end.
I hate those EPA fricks up in Raleigh.
Anyways, I had two pond dams overflow .... EPA stepped in and immediately declared the overflowed runoff area protected wetlands while, at the same time, closing both dams to traffic (which were vital routes to other parts of my farm).
I hired an attorney and told them to frick off. It was a somewhat expensive battle ... to the tune of around $17k by the time all was said and done, but we won in the end.
I hate those EPA fricks up in Raleigh.
Posted on 7/23/24 at 9:37 am to FlaTiger25
As others have said, the recent overturning of Chevron may be your best bet. A lot of environmental regulations expanded because of that ruling and now may be open to challenge.
Not sure how it is in Florida, but here in most of LA (especially south of I-10) you can pretty much spit on a piece of land and it qualifies as a "wetland" due to how the government can make/interpret their own rules.
Not sure how it is in Florida, but here in most of LA (especially south of I-10) you can pretty much spit on a piece of land and it qualifies as a "wetland" due to how the government can make/interpret their own rules.
Posted on 7/23/24 at 9:44 am to FlaTiger25
This is the type of shite Chevron deference getting overturned should help you and will hopefully slow down some of this government overreach.
Why is the word “may” allowed here. It either does or it doesn’t. It should already be defined and you should have been notified in your disclosures if it did upon purchase of the property
Again, does it lie within the buffer, or does it not. IMO (not an attorney), if they have not already defined these 2 you should not have the restrictions imposed on you. After the fact rulings should not be allowed to be imposed
quote:
a 25’ wetland buffer may apply to this location.
Why is the word “may” allowed here. It either does or it doesn’t. It should already be defined and you should have been notified in your disclosures if it did upon purchase of the property
quote:
appears to lie entirely within a Coastal Dune Lakes Tributary Buffer.
Again, does it lie within the buffer, or does it not. IMO (not an attorney), if they have not already defined these 2 you should not have the restrictions imposed on you. After the fact rulings should not be allowed to be imposed
Posted on 7/23/24 at 9:44 am to FlaTiger25
You basically have 4 options:
1. Pay a fine and revert the property back to what it was before.
2. Challenge the flood map to assert that the affected property is not/shouldn’t be included as a wetland/buffer on the map, thus the restrictions do not apply to you.
3. Agree to mitigation by purchasing wetlands mitigation credits from a mitigation bank. The amount will depend upon how much wetland is being impacted and what rate the government expects you to mitigate (1:1, 2:1, 1:2, etc). Basically, you pay a landowner to plant trees to restore wetlands to compensate for the wetlands you “destroyed”.
4. Agree to mitigate on site. If you have wetlands on your own property, you can sometimes get permission to basically make yourself the mitigation bank. You plant the trees and maintain them to restore wetlands to counter what you “destroyed”. Be mindful that this approach requires following a lot of rules and insuring a certain survival rate for the saplings you plant. This may be the cheapest option money wise, but it will also require some significant sweat equity.
With that said, you will likely need an environmental lawyer to flesh out the details and effectuate any of these options.
1. Pay a fine and revert the property back to what it was before.
2. Challenge the flood map to assert that the affected property is not/shouldn’t be included as a wetland/buffer on the map, thus the restrictions do not apply to you.
3. Agree to mitigation by purchasing wetlands mitigation credits from a mitigation bank. The amount will depend upon how much wetland is being impacted and what rate the government expects you to mitigate (1:1, 2:1, 1:2, etc). Basically, you pay a landowner to plant trees to restore wetlands to compensate for the wetlands you “destroyed”.
4. Agree to mitigate on site. If you have wetlands on your own property, you can sometimes get permission to basically make yourself the mitigation bank. You plant the trees and maintain them to restore wetlands to counter what you “destroyed”. Be mindful that this approach requires following a lot of rules and insuring a certain survival rate for the saplings you plant. This may be the cheapest option money wise, but it will also require some significant sweat equity.
With that said, you will likely need an environmental lawyer to flesh out the details and effectuate any of these options.
This post was edited on 7/23/24 at 10:02 am
Posted on 7/23/24 at 10:16 am to FlaTiger25
quote:
With this said, if I can’t touch or have anything in the buffer or wetlands, then I really don’t own it. I’d like to challenge in court to force the government to purchase the land that I can’t touch at fair market value which would be a pretty nice amount.
So you want to sell the state it's own land at FMV? Yea good luck with that
Posted on 7/23/24 at 10:20 am to kingbob
Here's the real deal. Without doing a proper COE wetland delineation, the County is just guessing at where the Wetlands are and therefore the buffer zone. Pay to have a proper delineation done (it should be to bad on just the back end of a residential lot.) Most of the time, a good delineator can find you a couple of feet....
This post was edited on 7/23/24 at 10:35 am
Posted on 7/24/24 at 5:54 pm to FlaTiger25
There are no tributary buffers anywhere near the bay, or even north of 98 for that matter. Was that a response from the county?
The Walton county GIS maps show the buffers and approximate wetland locations, but you will need a wetland study by a licensed engineer to determine if they are on your lot.
The Walton county GIS maps show the buffers and approximate wetland locations, but you will need a wetland study by a licensed engineer to determine if they are on your lot.
Posted on 7/24/24 at 6:02 pm to FlaTiger25
Sounds like reverse condemnation.
They could be "damaging" your property, or the use there of, without compensation. Similar to a highway that backs rain runoff onto an adjacent property.
They could be "damaging" your property, or the use there of, without compensation. Similar to a highway that backs rain runoff onto an adjacent property.
Posted on 7/24/24 at 6:09 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:He should hire an independent consultant, I.E. one that is not in the wetland credit selling business, and have them conduct a wetland determination which is a private report that in my experience will be the basis for a USACE delineation if he decides/or has to have the USACE delineate.
wetland delineation,
A private determination will identify the landowners position-which might be worse than what the county is telling him.
Buffers etc should be on his survey play?
Posted on 7/24/24 at 6:15 pm to FlaTiger25
quote:Read biggerbear's post and ignore any references to Chevron, Sackett etc. This will be a State specific issue and you might find out a lot with a properly worded Google search. Hell, it's gotten to where I used Google more than WestLaw these days.
Now county is stating part of my decking and fill dirt is sitting in a 25 foot buffer zone and are apparently trying to figure out how bad they want to screw me.
Posted on 7/24/24 at 6:42 pm to White Bear
quote:
He should hire an independent consultant, I.E. one that is not in the wetland credit selling business, and have them conduct a wetland determination which is a private report that in my experience will be the basis for a USACE delineation if he decides/or has to have the USACE delineate.
A determination does the OP no good because we're talking about buffers and their relation to wetland boundaries. A determination is just a yes/no if there are wetlands on a property. A delineation draws a line and that's what the OP needs. It will be submitted to the ACOE for their approval. They don't do the delineation themselves. This will include a survey of the property.
FYI, I was in the Wetland determination/delineation business for years. As one of the folks that worked for the USACOE told me once upon a time, "A wetland boundary often isn't a distinct line, but often a wide area where any location within it could be considered the correct delineation." This is why I said earlier that a good delineator can often buy a landowner a couple of feet. The scale of what the County is trying to do cannot be determined off remote sensing.
This post was edited on 7/24/24 at 6:48 pm
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News