Mixing Oil and Water [public domain runs amok]

Weather.com ^ | N/A | Katy Reckdahl

[huldah1776]

The state of Louisiana says it has a public duty to seize private land that sinks underwater. Families who have lived off that coastal marshland for 300 years say the state is using oil company research to grab millions of dollars in oil royalties from lands it failed to protect.

***snip*** For more than 200 years, the Thibodeaux family has hunted and fished the area where this pump hums.

***snip*** But 200 years of property taxes mean nothing to the state of Louisiana. Not when the water rises by a few feet, and especially not when oil money is on the line.

[huldah1776]

I am conservative, but that doesn't mean I would allow big business or government to take from the individual.

[thackney]

This doesn’t match my family experience with Louisiana Government and submerged land.

When Toledo Bend Lake submerged the family farm, the state paid for the land but the mineral were left in perpetuity to the family. This is a specific change from normal Louisiana law where mineral rights revert to the surface owner after 10 years if a mineral production is not in place.

[TexasGator]

Good article. Long but interesting.

[rktman]

Your land is never your land. Anybody that pays property tax should know this. Miss your payments and the city/county/state will be there to take it over. As to the Thibodeaux family and their concerns, if the epa gets involved, they could lose just about everything based on the soon to be enacted rules on “bodies of water”. I think the new definition declares anyplace water could stand for more than 3 minutes will be considered a “body of water” and they are in charge of all “bow”. Sure would like to go to a Thibodeaux crawfish boil.

[GladesGuru]

The state known as LouseyAna operates under a form of French Civil Law, not English Common Law.

‘Nuff said.

[Milton Miteybad]

As a general rule, submerged lands beneath navigable waterways are deemed to be public, managed by the state for the benefit of all the citizens of the state. The problem in South Louisiana is that subsidence is causing previously dry or intermittently marshy land to be more or less permanently covered by water, thereby subjecting said land to claim by the state. The article quotes a fellow from LSU who said that nobody has accurately mapped what lands are in private hands and which are submerged state lands. While that may be true, such a series of maps made today would have little relevance tomorrow, since subsidence is an ongoing problem. A clearly dry tract owned by a private owner today can become completely inundated by water with the next hurricane the following year.

Same thing happens along the Texas coastline. In the 1920s, developers were selling beachfront lots on Bolivar Peninsula to individuals, who were able to own and enjoy their property until 1960, when Hurricane Carla struck. Said hurricane ate away the coastline so that many of these subdivision lots were now 300' out in the Gulf of Mexico, permanently covered by water. Those lots are now owned by the State of Texas.

[Milton Miteybad]

Edited to add:

In all such instances, and as highlighted by the linked article, it is often difficult to determine what is a "navigable waterway" and what isn't. Is it "navigable" if it's covered by water three months out of the year, so that during that time you can paddle a canoe across it, but dry the rest of the year? Where there is any doubt, the state will usually claim to have an interest, so as to protect any rights they may have acquired by virtue of operation of natural processes.

There is a risk of loss associated with owning land situated on a waterway. I have seen at least one instance where a tract on a river was surveyed to contain 40 acres in 1900, then resurveyed 80 years later and found to contain 27 acres. While survey error in the 1900 survey could explain part of the difference, it's usually safe to say that part of the loss is attributable to erosion along the river. What happened to the other 13 acres? To the extent that it became inundated by a "navigable waterway" (the river), the state got it.

[KoRn]

I’m a zealot when it comes to private property/land. I’m even TOTALLY against property taxes!

Having said that, if a body of water somehow overtakes your land, it ISN’T ‘land’ anymore. It’s now at the bottom of the lake/river/ocean or whatever. If it’s a public waterway, you’re just screwed. Sometimes people get screwed, tough luck, shit happens.

[GeronL]

The Supreme Court ruled that the state can take your property and give it to those who would pay more taxes.

Kelo or something.

It was a stupid ruling.