waterfront ownership

[John A. Birdsall]

I should know by now how to start a new thread, but I don't soooo....

We had a celebration this summer, our family has owned a cottage on the lake for 100 years, and we have enjoyed it, and most of our neighbors. We had always lived on the notion that the State of NH owned the lake up to high water mark,
We had a wall built on that premise in 1956, On Labor Day weekend we were told by Officer Skivise of the Alton Police Dept, that was not true, that in fact lake front property extends ten feet out into the lake. We tried to ask about the Deeds and surveys done, but apparerntly this does not matter.

Does anyone else have a feel for this. I think that the Alton Police Department is giving away state property.

Webmaster Note: This post has been moved to its own thread.

[upthesaukee]

I should know by now how to start a new thread, but I don't soooo....John, from the forum home page, where there is a list of all the different forums, select the forum in which you want to start a new post, and and the top of the list of threads in that forum, there is a link to "thread starter". click on that and you will have a blank posting to start your thread.

regards

[Woodsy]

High water mark is the rule.... the Alton PD obviously got it wrong!

Woodsy

[Skip]

As Woodsy stated, there is no "10 foot rule".

You own to the high water mark. There are a number of RSAs that define the high water mark, and if in doubt the Department of Environmental Services is the keeper of record and has final say.

Without listing them all out again, you can find information under the 270 section of the boating laws and the 483 section environmental laws.

Look at the bright side....would you really want to pay the taxes on that extra ten foot buffer???? :)

Hopefully the officer was confused or misunderstood the question....wouldn't want someone in a position of authority like that spreading improper information that may cause a landowner undue confusion, or possible legal issues! :eek:

Skip

[moose tracks]

I agree with Skip, you own to the high water mark.

[RLW]

With all that being said below. You have to keep everyone out past the 150' mark or headway speed so your property doesn't get washed into the lake.:)

[Airwaves]

Originally posted by John A. Birdsall
On Labor Day weekend we were told by Officer Skivise of the Alton Police Dept, that was not true, that in fact lake front property extends ten feet out into the lake.
Why did the good officer make that judgement call in the first place?

When I was a child we used to put our drinking water hose into the lake. In order for it to be drinkable, 40 years ago, it had to be 10 feet underwater. Could that be what he was talking about?

[Argie's Wife]

Why did the good officer make that judgement call in the first place?

When I was a child we used to put our drinking water hose into the lake. In order for it to be drinkable, 40 years ago, it had to be 10 feet underwater. Could that be what he was talking about?

Since when did Alton PD start being part of the Alton Zoning Board?

I wonder if this was the same guy who tried to tell me, when I reported someone had damaged the side of my old Porsche that it was an old dent (was he an autobody expert or something? I had "before" photos!) and he wasn't going to write a report for an old accident!!

I'm not an expert but your wall should be a grandfathered variance. I can't imagine the new act requires everyone to move existing structures. It might do you good to talk with the maybe the town's assessor (Alton Planning Dept.). I'd go straight to an expert... :)

[Merrymeeting]

So if the officer is correct, you could build your wall 10' into the lake, and backfill it. Then your land is now 10' from the wall. Build a new wall 10' out. Next thing you know, you're in Center Harbor! :rolleye2:

[John A. Birdsall]

First thank you for telling me how. Now as if I was Paul Harvey "for the rest of the story"...We have a neighbor who thinks he owns a right of way, a ten foot stretch to the lake, which four families have the same right of way, not just him. My dad has a twenty-six foot pontoon boat tied to the peir which is attached to our boat house. The officer, answering a call from a neighbor who said we have parked our boat on his right of way, and the officer ordered us to move the boat or he was gonna have it towed. If we did not move the boat, the officer skivies, was gonna have a trailer called and tow the boat away at our expense. Our neigbor is upset with us because we will not allow him use of our dock to tie up his boat. This is a guy that if you give him an inch, he will take a foot.

This officer is the supervisor of the police dept while the chief goes thru the court battle over his job. This officer said he is the police and he knows the law. Alton better look out, he is very well versed. I would hate to see what would happen if a crime was committed.

[RLW]

First thank you for telling me how. Now as if I was Paul Harvey "for the rest of the story"...We have a neighbor who thinks he owns a right of way, a ten foot stretch to the lake, which four families have the same right of way, not just him. My dad has a twenty-six foot pontoon boat tied to the peir which is attached to our boat house. The officer, answering a call from a neighbor who said we have parked our boat on his right of way, and the officer ordered us to move the boat or he was gonna have it towed. If we did not move the boat, the officer skivies, was gonna have a trailer called and tow the boat away at our expense. Our neigbor is upset with us because we will not allow him use of our dock to tie up his boat. This is a guy that if you give him an inch, he will take a foot.

This officer is the supervisor of the police dept while the chief goes thru the court battle over his job. This officer said he is the police and he knows the law. Alton better look out, he is very well versed. I would hate to see what would happen if a crime was committed.

Now you really have this reader confused more especially regarding the highlighted part. This chief is a brand new chief and I didn't know he was in trouble and if so why isn't captain Heath handling the chiefs affairs. Something just doesn't jive. Guess I'll have to go into the Alton police department site and just see who is who and what they all look like. :)

[NightWing]

That doesn't make sense. Boundary issues are civil and the police have no authority because no crime is involved.

This issue could probably be settled with a look at your deed and the town tax map. It might take some digging at the registrar of deeds, too. If there is a shared ROW, it will be shown or noted on those documents.

On the other hand, if the strip of land is indeed a communal ROW, the pontoon boat may be partially blocking it which reduces the ability of others to use it as intended. You didn't say if the boat was beached.

[Argie's Wife]

Now you really have this reader confused more especially regarding the highlighted part. This chief is a brand new chief and I didn't know he was in trouble and if so why isn't captain Heath handling the chiefs affairs. Something just doesn't jive. Guess I'll have to go into the Alton police department site and just see who is who and what they all look like. :)

I can help you there...

They all kinda look like this:

http://cache.eb.com/eb/image?id=98354&rendTypeId=4






(I will say there's some very good, capable officers with Alton PD and I wouldn't want to be in their shoes at any time!)

[RLW]

I can help you there...

They all kinda look like this:

http://cache.eb.com/eb/image?id=98354&rendTypeId=4


I just love it and it gave this reader a good chuckle. :laugh:

[RLW]

J. Birdsall there is a PM sent to you regarding info requested. :)

[Airwaves]

This is absolutely a civil matter, NOT a police issue. I'd call your lawyer and fill him in because it sounds like you are in for a fight. If Officer Skivvies tries to get involved again call the State Police and/or NH Attorney General.

[John A. Birdsall]

That doesn't make sense. Boundary issues are civil and the police have no authority because no crime is involved.

This issue could probably be settled with a look at your deed and the town tax map. It might take some digging at the registrar of deeds, too. If there is a shared ROW, it will be shown or noted on those documents.

On the other hand, if the strip of land is indeed a communal ROW, the pontoon boat may be partially blocking it which reduces the ability of others to use it as intended. You didn't say if the boat was beached.

The boat was tied up at the dock, We tried to tell Officer Skiba that was on the deed, but he could care less, he was tired of it and he is the law. Move it or I'll tow it is what it came down too. If it was my boat, he would have towed it, and I would have sued him and the town of Alton for grand theft.:eek:

[RLW]

The boat was tied up at the dock, We tried to tell Officer Skiba that was on the deed, but he could care less, he was tired of it and he is the law. Move it or I'll tow it is what it came down too. If it was my boat, he would have towed it, and I would have sued him and the town of Alton for grand theft.:eek:

I see you found the site that was sent to you. :)

[Patiently Watching]

Just because your neighbor has a right of way over your property to the water, does not mean that he has any claim to rights extending into the water. The question is, who owns the land under the right of way? They are the only ones who could have any argument in court about your boat extending beyond the imaginary boundary line. Do these 4 neighbors actually own the tiny strip?
I have seen this tons of times. They are usually old cattle paths to the water. When lakefront property began becoming popular and the farmers would sell it off in lots, but keep their acreage. They usually kept a crossing to the lake for water. So, if they own it, they could challenge you in court as owners, but if not they have no claim to those rights.

[Merrymeeting]

I've experienced my own share of lake waterfront skirmishes. Unfortunately, sometimes common sense and courtesy are missing with many of these instances.

The law is very clear about the water. The state, and all of us, own it.

I also assume that in this instance, your dock has been there for a long time and is grandfathered on it's location. I assume this because from your description, it sounds like it is right on the edge of your property line, rather than set back from the property line as current rules require, and the fact that your family has been there for 100 years. (Can we also assume that the 10 foot right of way has been there all along too?)

I would ask that you not take this the wrong way as I am not trying to take sides here, nor condoning what appears (from your account) to be bad dealings between you and this one neighbor. But my first reaction to your "rest of the story" update was to think of this from your neighbors point of view.

While I believe that legally you are within your rights, it did seem to me that placing a boat within ~20' of the right of way that 4-5 families share was not the best action on your side (assuming your dock is ~20' from shore).

In doing so, their views and swimming area are somewhat blocked, and while legal, it does strike me as somewhat inconsiderate. As I said, this was my first reaction, and I know nothing about the other families, configuration, past history, etc. But it would be good to understand the story from all sides, and consider other points of view.

Have the other 4 families weighed in on this topic?

[Just Sold]

John - Sent you an e-mail as well.

A Right of Way to the lake is not in your deed but must be referenced in another property owners deed - right?. So there is no issue with your property and structures located on your land which are yours. The boat house including the attached docks is attached to the land on your property and no other owners land. You have been there for so many years that you have established your use of the land to the point of the high water mark including the boathouse. Based on that you do have certain legal rights and the police officer was way off base on this one.

The owner of the land on which the right of way is located is the only one who can take issue with an abutter (you). An owner of a deeded Right of Way can only deal with the property owner of that land as they do not legally own the property.

I do see Merrymeeting's point but unfortunately he has not been to the property as I have and yes the neighbor is being a real jerk and more in this case.

You could have some legal right for "Adverse Possession" (20 years in NH) to the lot next door because of where the boat house is and that you have your dock attached to it but only if it is over the property line .... and I doubt it is. It is obviously grandfathered based on when it was built.

Good luck and let us all know how it comes out.

[RLW]

J. Birdsall-I'm glad you got the info you requested and you are welcome.:)

[Bear Islander]

Adverse possession rights are not enforceable until you have proven them in court. The police are not interested in legal theories, and rightfully so.

As I understand it the dock is close to, or on, the property line. If you tie up a boat and it is in front of someone else's property then you are blocking their right of access. I would expect the police to tell you to move it. State ownership of the water has nothing to do with it.

You can't park you car in a way that blocks your neighbors driveway. It doesn't matter if you are parking on public land. And the police, if called, will not be interested in legal theories about who owns what. They will tell you not to block the driveway.

I know someone that has a 10 foot wide waterfront lot on Alton Bay. They have a dock but can only tie up to one side of it. If they tie up to the other side they are in front of their neighbors waterfront.

[John A. Birdsall]

I've experienced my own share of lake waterfront skirmishes. Unfortunately, sometimes common sense and courtesy are missing with many of these instances.

The law is very clear about the water. The state, and all of us, own it.

I also assume that in this instance, your dock has been there for a long time and is grandfathered on it's location. I assume this because from your description, it sounds like it is right on the edge of your property line, rather than set back from the property line as current rules require, and the fact that your family has been there for 100 years. (Can we also assume that the 10 foot right of way has been there all along too?)

I would ask that you not take this the wrong way as I am not trying to take sides here, nor condoning what appears (from your account) to be bad dealings between you and this one neighbor. But my first reaction to your "rest of the story" update was to think of this from your neighbors point of view.

While I believe that legally you are within your rights, it did seem to me that placing a boat within ~20' of the right of way that 4-5 families share was not the best action on your side (assuming your dock is ~20' from shore).

In doing so, their views and swimming area are somewhat blocked, and while legal, it does strike me as somewhat inconsiderate. As I said, this was my first reaction, and I know nothing about the other families, configuration, past history, etc. But it would be good to understand the story from all sides, and consider other points of view.

Have the other 4 families weighed in on this topic?

The boat/house with dock has been there at least 98 years, Nobody that has the right of way owns the property, but have the right of way on their deeds, Three of the four (including us) have waterfront property other than what is in question. While I agree that putting a boat in front of their right of way is not the best thing to do, there are reasons at times for putting the boat there to work on.

The ten foot right of way has been there for all times as I understand it, and we have permission from the owner to park on the 10' right of way, but this one person has objected to that and claims that because his deed says he has a right of way he owns the the right of way. He has also tried to lay claim to the public boat ramp owned by the town of Alton on the other side of Echo Point, but that is another story.

This use to be a logging road for the old Barr Farm.

[Bear Islander]

The owner of the property can not give you permission to block someone else's easement.

It seems clear from your description that the purpose of the 10 foot easement was to allow access to the lake for those holding an easement. If you park a boat in such a way as to block that easement then you are denying the easement holder his right of access.

It is not uncommon for a driveway to pass over someone else's property with an easement. The property owner can not block that driveway or give anyone else permission to block the driveway.

In many ways holding an easement is better than owning the property. You have the right to use the land but you don't have to pay the taxes or insurance. And even if the owner sells, you still have the easement.

[RLW]

The boat/house with dock has been there at least 98 years, Nobody that has the right of way owns the property, but have the right of way on their deeds, Three of the four (including us) have waterfront property other than what is in question. While I agree that putting a boat in front of their right of way is not the best thing to do, there are reasons at times for putting the boat there to work on.

The ten foot right of way has been there for all times as I understand it, and we have permission from the owner to park on the 10' right of way, but this one person has objected to that and claims that because his deed says he has a right of way he owns the the right of way. He has also tried to lay claim to the public boat ramp owned by the town of Alton on the other side of Echo Point, but that is another story.

This use to be a logging road for the old Barr Farm.

The hightlighted sections are confusing to this writer. Which one is correct or am I missing something???

[TomC]

In your blue text, I think Mr Birdsall is saying that the those granted the right of way are not the owners of the parcel (makes sense - an owner wouldn't need a ROW granted to himself).

In the red text Mr Birdsall is stating that the legal owner of the parcel - none of the people above - has granted him permission to dock his boat in front of this specific area of waterfront.

[NightWing]

Sounds as if this has been an issue for some time. It might be worthwhile to involve an attorney to research the deed(s) involved and perhaps write a letter to the neighbor, explaining your rights.

[John A. Birdsall]

In your blue text, I think Mr Birdsall is saying that the those granted the right of way are not the owners of the parcel (makes sense - an owner wouldn't need a ROW granted to himself).

In the red text Mr Birdsall is stating that the legal owner of the parcel - none of the people above - has granted him permission to dock his boat in front of this specific area of waterfront.

I do not know about permission of parking the boat in the water needing a permission from the land owner. I was referring to the 10' wide peice of property we drive on leading to the waterfront. We have permission from the owner to park our vechicles on this strip of land. However, to appease Mr. Cavello, we now park off that right of way so we won't block his right of way.

This problem comes and goes for the last seven years with this one neighbor and we have been using a lawyer and this has been explained several times in writing to both his lawyer and Mr. Cavello, but neither seems to understand the difference between ownership and right of way.:confused:

[Woodsy]

The easement extends ONLY to the high water mark of the lake, regardless of who owns what. You don't have a right to block someones access. Parking a car on the easement would constitute blockage regardless of if you have permission from the landowner or not.

However, as far as the boathouse/dock is concerned, unless access/usage of the boathouse/dock are specifically granted in the deed, your neighbor has no leg to stand on in regards to where you park your boat. His rights extend only to the high water mark.....

Woodsy

[Bear Islander]

The easement extends ONLY to the high water mark of the lake, regardless of who owns what. You don't have a right to block someones access. Parking a car on the easement would constitute blockage regardless of if you have permission from the landowner or not.

However, as far as the boathouse/dock is concerned, unless access/usage of the boathouse/dock are specifically granted in the deed, your neighbor has no leg to stand on in regards to where you park your boat. His rights extend only to the high water mark.....

Woodsy

I disagree

The purpose of the easement is clearly to provide access to the LAKE.

Waterfront property owners and easement holders have common law rights that extend into the lake. That is why they can have docks, swim rafts, moorings etc. in the lake but others can not. These rights are limited, but very real and well established in law.

You can't anchor your boat right in front of a launch ramp and thereby prevent boats from being launched. You can't place your boat in front a someones slip in a way that blocks their access to or from their slip. You can't tie up you boat in a way that blocks your neighbors easement.

The way this case has been described the property owners and other easement holders all have waterfront property. Therefore they have other places to park their boats or gain access to the lake. This one person has access only by their 10 foot wide easement. This makes this easement very important and valuable to this person. It is unfair and illegal to block this persons only lake access no matter how big a jerk he may be.

If you owned property that had only a 10 foot wide easement as your lake access you would look at this differently. You would believe anyone that blocked this access was in the wrong. And you would be correct.

[Skip]

...The purpose of the easement is clearly to provide access to the LAKE.

Waterfront property owners and easement holders have common law rights that extend into the lake. That is why they can have docks, swim rafts, moorings etc. in the lake but others can not. These rights are limited, but very real and well established in law...

Bear Islander is correct.

The littoral rights that are granted to waterfront property owners are not absolute, but conditional based on a number of legal concepts based in actual law, case law and common law.

One of the fundamental concepts is that when you are excercising your littoral rights to the adjacent waterway, you cannot interfere or obstruct the littoral rights of an abutter.

[SIKSUKR]

I'm with BI on this one.

[Woodsy]

I do agree with the littoral rights of waterfront property owners. However, we are discussing an easement....

It seems to me, that we have in this instance is a person who is relatively new to the neighborhood, that doesnt like the fact that the people who own the dock actually use it to tie up thier boat.... and don't grant him any dock access.

So the question remains, how does using one's legal dock/boathouse interfere with a persons lake access via easement? The easement only grants access to the lake. Unless it is clearly spelled out otherwise in the deed.

Does this lake access easement automatically infer littoral rights? If it does, do these littoral rights trump those of the dock owner who also has well established littoral rights. Do the rights of the property owner trump those of the easement holder?

IMHO, the property/dock owner would trump the newcomer... for these reasons.

1. I do not think an easement grants you littoral rights... for example, I don't think that just because you have an easement to the water, you can put in a mooring or a dock... although its well established that property owners can. What happens if an easement holder wants to put in a mooring, but the property owner already has one? or a dock? Does the property owner have to give up one of his moorings or dock spaces? I dont think the rights of the easement holder trump those of the property/dock owner.

2. When was the easement deeded/granted? Was the easement granted after the boathouse was built? or before? If the boathouse was built prior to the easement being granted, then I would think the dock usage would certainly favor the dock owner... not the easement holder.

3. A case for adverse posession could be made if the dock/boathouse was built after the easement was deeded. If the Birdsall family has been using the dock since it was built, and can prove it...

In this instance, I think it will probably take a judge to decide...

Woodsy

[NightWing]

This thread would be enhanced if a drawing of the properties/easement/dock in question were scanned and inserted as an attachment.

[pats fan]

I would have to see and hear the whole situation in order to give an educated opinion, but I have heard a number of people bring up "adverse possession." Adverse possession can only be claimed if it is done without permission. If there is an easement granted there is no adverse possession. Adverse possession must be: open, notorious, exclusive, hostile and continuous. If there is an easement there is permission, no longer hostile.

[ITD]

This thread would be enhanced if a drawing of the properties/easement/dock in question were scanned and inserted as an attachment.

Thank you , I agree, a picture is worth a thousand words, probably ten thousand in this case.

[Woodsy]

I would have to see and hear the whole situation in order to give an educated opinion, but I have heard a number of people bring up "adverse possession." Adverse possession can only be claimed if it is done without permission. If there is an easement granted there is no adverse possession. Adverse possession must be: open, notorious, exclusive, hostile and continuous. If there is an easement there is permission, no longer hostile.


Pats Fan...

Adverse posession can occur when indifference is shown by the property owner in regards to the usage of the property. Usually there is a long period of time involved as well. It does not have to be hostile. Just ask the folks building Akwa Vista and the folks on Centennial Ave...

I was referring to the Birdsall family being able to claim adverse possession in regards to the docking of thier boat. If they have been docking thier boat there for XX years with no issues, all of a sudden a piece of property changes hands and the new owner has an issue with the boat docking, a case for adverse possesion could be made. The Birdsall's could claim they have always docled thier boat there with no issues since the granting of the easement. If the origianl owners of the property didnt complain about the boat docking, one could argue the intent of the easement.

If I was the Birdsall family, I would seriously look into getting the property surveyed... just to be absolutely sure of the location of the property lines & easement. This might help alleviate some of the headache.

All in all its a big mess and its too bad they cant solve it with a beer and a handshake.


Woodsy

[Audiofn]

Woodsy: Make mine a Grey Goose and Ginger please :D:D

[ITD]

Advanced CAD drawing attached.

[John A. Birdsall]

I think your light on the subject in the form of art work is funny, I tried to draw this on paint brush yesterday and got frustrated.

The ROAD is on the wong side, However the neigbor on that side of the cottage has a right of access or way on the road, We have, and the Stevens have. Also the person creating the problem who has a house on sawmill brook rd has.

[chipj29]

I know this is a serious subject, and I apologize that I can't add anything of value to the discussion. But I just have to tell ITD that his CAD drawing got me giggling quite a bit here at my desk. I love the mad neighbor...good stuff man!! :emb::emb:

[Bear Islander]

I love that drawing!

However if the R.O.W. is 10 foot that means the boat is only about three feet wide on that scale. Actually a 26' Pontoon boat will be about 8'6" wide and block about 85% of the R.O.W. assuming the other dimension are correct.

[NightWing]

Half the drawing on my screen is swallowed up by the right margin. I will say that now I have a clearer understanding on the ROW. Somehow, I imagined it running horizontal to the shoreline with all abutting neighbors sharing frontage with it.

On the other hand, the drawing, at least the part that I can see, doesn't indicate the location of the neighbors who share the ROW, in particular, the location of the man who says it is his.

[Bear Islander]

I think your light on the subject in the form of art work is funny, I tried to draw this on paint brush yesterday and got frustrated.

The ROAD is on the wong side, However the neigbor on that side of the cottage has a right of access or way on the road, We have, and the Stevens have. Also the person creating the problem who has a house on sawmill brook rd has.

I checked Mr. Cavallo's deed, this is what it says about his right of way.

I also checked the Birdsall deed, it mentions the "wood road" but I can't find any right of way to the lake.

[Argie's Wife]

Bear Island -- I mean this in the nicest sort of way (honest)... but you're a little scary, you know that? :D:coolsm::laugh:

[bilproject]

Bear Islander definitely has a lot of time on his hands! This thread does point out that you can never do enough legal research when buying water front property. A lot of buyers find out to late about problems like this one.

[Bear Islander]

New Hampshire deeds and plot plans are online. If you know the last name and county its a simple search then drag & drop. Takes two minutes.

They also show mortgages, who is defaulting on taxes, liens etc.

[wifi]

There are too many online databases, pretty soon there will be online cameras in your shower :emb:

Seriously tho, lots of food out there for stalkers.

/EOH (end of hijack)

[RLW]

New Hampshire deeds and plot plans are online. If you know the last name and county its a simple search then drag & drop. Takes two minutes.

They also show mortgages, who is defaulting on taxes, liens etc.

Thats very true as I use it all the time, but how did you copy/print it out. If you care to share you may PM me. I have always had to send for the print that I wanted and pay a fee for it. It is an excellent system more especially for people who are looking at piece of land to possibly purchase and want to find somethings out about it before proceeding and getting lawyers involved.:)

[Bear Islander]

I used a screen capture. I drag open a box on the screen and capture what is inside as an image. You can also capture the entire screen but that is a large image you will have to crop. I use "Paint Shop Pro" but there are many applications that can do this.

[HUH]

Your pontoon cannot extend beyond the property line period. The water is state property. Just because your dock is grandfathered too close to that ROW does not mean a boat can extend over in front of it.

[Just Sold]

In reading the deed the only right associated with the easement is for a ROW to use the 10' wide "bathing beach". No other right is described. There is a second easement on page 2 of the deed that gives rights on another parcel, 13" feet wide, but that is not in this discussion and that easement has very detailed restrictions and rights. From what I read in the deed the only right is for access and use of the beach for bathing. Nothing more.

So was the boat blocking access to the beach as part of the easement or the ability of someone to go swimming in the lake? The pontoon boat in question is not 10' wide.

This is the boat house from the oposite side last winter. Wish I had taken one of the other side too. The dock on the other side is the same as the one seen here.

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/photopost/data/510/medium/3-2-08_N_of_Echo_Pt.jpg (http://javascript<b></b>:;)

[Bear Islander]

... the only right is for access and use of the beach for bathing. Nothing more. ...



The deed does NOT say the beach can only be used for bathing. It says he can use the bathing beach. That is a completely different thing.

He certainly can do all the things that people normally do at a bathing beach, like sit in a chair and look at the water. In which case a big pontoon boat in front of you would interfere with your right to the peacefully enjoyment of your easement.

Item #5 of page 2 says Mr. Cavallo can't leave a boat unattended on the beach. That clearly indicates he CAN use a boat at the beach. However I assume he must pull it up onto the right of way and off the beach when not in use.

[Just Sold]

BI I accept your definitions of use of the bathing beach and without saying it that is what I would have interpreted the easement granted. The owners of easements must be allowed access to the water is also stated in the deed. Swimming is specifically mentioned. But once you are past the high water mark the NH stautes are the governing laws not the deed or any easements in them.

Having been to the property I believe that the situation has been blown way out of proportion by Mr. Cavallo. I agree with others here that a survey would be best and could benefit both sides in this issue. Remember Mr. Cavallo wanted to use the boat house dock and was told that he could not...then this situation with the police happened thru Mr. Cavallo's actions.

The deed does say that a boat may be moored off shore (not on the beach) but not for an unreasonable period of time. Obviously docking at the boat house dock (not a part of the easement) is allowed for the owner of that boat house and no one else. And we have to remember that the Birdsall's do not have the easement rights in their deed but they do own the boat house and land adjacent to the easement.

In this case reasonable and neighborly understanding is needed but what do the RSA'a (waters owned by the state and land owner rights) say regarding this type of situation? The use of the boat house & docks is long standing by the Birdsall's and that could set some precedence in this situation. There has been a boat docked on this side for many, many years. Time for an Atty.!

[EricP]

BI I accept your definitions of use of the bathing beach and without saying it that is what I would have interpreted the easement granted. The owners of easements must be allowed access to the water is also stated in the deed. Swimming is specifically mentioned. But once you are past the high water mark the NH stautes are the governing laws not the deed or any easements in them.

Having been to the property I believe that the situation has been blown way out of proportion by Mr. Cavallo. I agree with others here that a survey would be best and could benefit both sides in this issue. Remember Mr. Cavallo wanted to use the boat house dock and was told that he could not...then this situation with the police happened thru Mr. Cavallo's actions.

The deed does say that a boat may be moored off shore (not on the beach) but not for an unreasonable period of time. Obviously docking at the boat house dock (not a part of the easement) is allowed for the owner of that boat house and no one else. And we have to remember that the Birdsall's do not have the easement rights in their deed but they do own the boat house and land adjacent to the easement.

In this case reasonable and neighborly understanding is needed but what do the RSA'a (waters owned by the state and land owner rights) say regarding this type of situation? The use of the boat house & docks is long standing by the Birdsall's and that could set some precedence in this situation. There has been a boat docked on this side for many, many years. Time for an Atty.!


I would basically think that noone should be tying a boat to that side of the boat house. Those who have an easement have the right to enjoy the water without a boat in the way. The Birdsalls' would be violating that right by tying up a boat there. the guy who thinks he should be able to tie his boat there dioesn't get it. It's not his boat house or dock and therefore he has no right to tie up there. BI is right, you can't block access to the easement and I would think that means from land or water.