Winnipesaukee Forum - View Single Post

jrc · 08-22-2010, 01:19 PM

At the risk of beating a sidetracked dead horse, I think Shore Things and I agree on a lot but we have different definitions of the word "right".

So if a land owner has riparian rights to "wharf out into the water", then he has that right. The goverment should not make make him explain how he wants to use the right and argue with them about whether or not that's a good use. You don't need permission to use a right.

Sure the gov can tax a right through permit fees and property taxes. I can limit the scope (size) of a right, to prevent interfering with abutters and general navigation. Through building codes it can limit a right to protect the public safety.

But the removable dock rule goes beyond that, it says we don't think you need a permanent dock. Prove you need one. Prove you need to use your right.

08-22-2010, 01:19 PM	#24
jrc Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: NH Posts: 2,689 Thanks: 33 Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts	At the risk of beating a sidetracked dead horse, I think Shore Things and I agree on a lot but we have different definitions of the word "right". So if a land owner has riparian rights to "wharf out into the water", then he has that right. The goverment should not make make him explain how he wants to use the right and argue with them about whether or not that's a good use. You don't need permission to use a right. Sure the gov can tax a right through permit fees and property taxes. I can limit the scope (size) of a right, to prevent interfering with abutters and general navigation. Through building codes it can limit a right to protect the public safety. But the removable dock rule goes beyond that, it says we don't think you need a permanent dock. Prove you need one. Prove you need to use your right.