« ▪ Shifting Sands of Shoreline Definitions | Main | ▪ More on Shoreline Definitions »

October 26, 2006

▪ What is 'Artificial' Vegetation?

Continuing this post on the Diamond shoreline certification case, one of the most interesting aspect of the opinion is the court's attempt to distinguish "artificial" from "natural" vegetation:

The utilization of artificially planted vegetation in determining the certified shoreline encourages private land owners to plant and promote salt-tolerant vegetation to extend their land further makai, which is contrary to the objectives and policies of HRS chapter 205A as well as the public policy we set forth in Sotomura.  Merely because artificially planted vegetation survives more than one year does not deem it "naturally rooted and growing" such that it can be utilized to determine the shoreline.  We therefore reconfirm the public policy set forth in Sotomura and HRS chapter 205A and reject attempts by landowners to evade this policy by artificial extensions of the vegetation lines on their properties.      

Aside from the obvious issues of proof, any rule attempting to distinguish "artificiallly" planted and grown vegetation from "natural" vegetation seems nearly impossible to apply.  Will the mere touch of man anywhere in the planting or growing process be sufficient to qualify vegetation as "artificial" under the court's new rule? 

Does this mean all the veggies in my dinner salad are now "artificial?"

   

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/1062290/6570713

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference ▪ What is 'Artificial' Vegetation?:

Comments

ultimately, this is a non-issue. If the debris line is below the vegetation line, artificial or not, the debris line control. If the debris line is above the vegetation line, artificial or not, the debris line controls. In the former case, the owner is planting his own property (and not illegally, since the plantings are not a structure that affects beach movement); in the latter, the planting is probably illegal, but mother nature will take care of it in the long run.

The more interesting question is what is are "storm waves?" Technically, all big waves are the result of storms somewhere, so when people (as in Diamond) say they saw water run up to "x", is that the real line or one that can be ignored?

PAUL

Post a comment

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

this blog is...

  • devoted to recent developments and commentary on regulatory takings, eminent domain, inverse condemnation, property rights, and Hawaii land use law

Author

Subscribe

Search


  • web
    inversecondemnation.com


May 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Disclaimer

  • This blog is not legal advice. But you knew that already. Reading this blog does not make you a client, nor are any posts or comments on this blog subject to the attorney-client privilege. For legal advice, please retain an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.

    This blog is not sponsored by the author's firm, and the views expressed by the author are just that; they are not the views of his clients, his firm or its clients, or anyone but for the author.

    © 2005-2008. All rights reserved.

Blog powered by TypePad