Comments on: State Wiggles but Does Not Bend on Land Ownership Claim

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 13:49:52 +0000

Right on the money type gov. Does the DES really have authority over past legal rulings, regardless of whether or not the subject is enviromentally connected? Just asking.

By: George

George — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 21:01:50 +0000

A few years ago while looking for my mooring anchor, I came across a ring of rocks similar to a fire pit under about 5 – 6 feet of water. I assumed that they may have been placed there before the dam was built.
2. How about this for a thought –between the 410 high water mark and the 407.25 summer water height, I have abought 30 ft. of sandy beach. Could I expect boaters to drop anchor, come onto the beach and party? Or, if your property line borders a “Right of Way” to the water what’s to prevent back lot owners from using the beach in front of your property?

By: type gov

type gov — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 20:45:45 +0000

some day…maybe…we the people will take back our country from this insane bureaucracy we call government. It truly has grown out of control and we just keep letting the system roll over us. There is no way we should be taxed on land we do not own…but here we sit hoping and now waiting to see if the state will throw us a crumb…absolutely asinine.

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 18:43:07 +0000

Seems like private property ownership should go to 407.25′ , 410′ should prevail for septic system siting and the high water mark before the dam was built is irrelevant.

By: Ray

Ray — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 17:02:06 +0000

I sure hope that there are no septic systems between 407 and 410.

By: freedom resident

freedom resident — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:50:17 +0000

Owners beware. If the state changes the mark to 407, those of you who have septic systems between 407 and 410 could be held liable for pollution when the water rises. Think this one through before any wholesale changes are made.

By: Don MacLeod

Don MacLeod — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:32:37 +0000

Banks & Mortgage Companies likely hold more the a few property deeds and some percentage of those are currently upside down. When the banks start looking to the title insurance companies for a remediation settlement for what is now a flawed title NH real-estate is going to get universally screwed. Even with a State fix properly owners likely be the ones on the hook to clear up and make current their deeds. Bend over owners..

By: freedom resident

freedom resident — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 13:40:05 +0000

If the high water mark is reduced to 407 ft could the state then require people to install retaining walls? Could a land owner be responsible for erosion between 407 and 410 ft when the dam is not opened properly as happens at least once a year? Hopefully this will be addressed as well.

By: Tom

Tom — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 11:11:47 +0000

I know I am being taxed on three acres. Last summer I believe the water level was close to 410 in July and that put at least half of my lot underwater. I will have to look at the deed to see how it defines the boundary but I believe it actually gives a measurement from the stake at the road.

By: Dick

Dick — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 10:02:04 +0000

For information only. My deed states that we own our waterfront property on Broad Bay only from the road to the two high water mark stakes near the beach area. I do know that these stakes were still in placel last summer and appeared to be at least two or so feet higher that the normal summer level. Not sure however when these metal stakes were installed but we have owned the property since 1984.