# Lakeshore Cattails



## Guest (Jul 30, 2002)

I live in a subdivision that borders a small private lake that is mostly surrounded by cattails, then leads to higher ground where the homesites are. Most of the people that live on the lake have a docks that access the lake by going through the cattail marsh areas without destroying those areas. A new neighbor had recently leveled the cattail marsh area in front of his home (about 50 ft x 150 ft). and I assume his next step would be to make a beach in front of his home. Is this legal?? What about laws protecting wetlands?


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

Nothing in the law prevents a person from cutting vegetation, by hand on their own property. As far as placement of sand (fill) the he would have to have a permit through Land and Water Management of the Dept. of Evironmental Quality (DEQ). It's difficult for me to say if what your neighbor is doing would be a violation or not without actually seeing it. The best advise I can give you is to contact DEQ and have them check it out.


----------



## FREEPOP (Apr 11, 2002)

A friend of mine got in trouble for cutting water lillies in front of his house, because he wanted a beach.


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

Got into troble by who and what kind of trouble? I can tell you I have received complaints of cutting down trees, and removing cattails many times and there was no violation and verified by DEQ.

Again, that's why I say contact the DEQ.


----------



## ytlabs (Jul 21, 2002)

Where alot of people get into trouble with the removal of vegatation, is along the great lakes shorelines, or in the protected marsh zones.

Along the great lakes you can remove vegatation if it is ABOVE the high water mark of the beach. the big problem is when same is done below the high water mark.

In Michigan all land exposed due to low water levels is considered Public land, and therefore is owned by the state, and taxpayers have the right to use it. If the vegatation in this zone is removed it can lead to fines and court rooms. 

I will also add this is being chalenged in the courts right now as I write this. there are several land owners and developers in the state that are looking to try to get the laws changed to allow them to use the now exposed land ( due to the low water in the lakes) 

So even with this watch what you do, and be sure by checking with the DEQ.

Oh the confusion


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

> _Originally posted by ytlabs _
> *Where alot of people get into trouble with the removal of vegatation, is along the great lakes shorelines, or in the protected marsh zones.
> 
> Along the great lakes you can remove vegatation if it is ABOVE the high water mark of the beach. the big problem is when same is done below the high water mark.
> ...


In the Great Lakes and removal of vegetation that is true because the bottomlands of the Great Lakes is not your property. Of course the first post indicated a "small private lake" so the Great Lakes are not an issue here.

However, talking about the Great Lakes:
As far as the low water in the Great Lakes exposing land, that all depends on what land you are talking about. If you are talking about low water that basically exposes an island area, yes that land would be public. If you are talking about the shoreline being further out than the ordinary high water mark, that land is NOT public as the adjacent property owner controls all the land for trespass purposes to the waters edge, no matter where the waters edge is, at the high water mark or 1/4 mile lakeward from the high water mark.

I also wouldn't count on the court ruling in favor of the land developers taking public land and making it private since changing laws is not a judicial process, it's a legislative process and the courts will not touch that unless they can find the law unconstinutional. I don't see that happening because of federal court rulings in the past dealing with Great Lake Shorelines and Wetlands.


----------



## ytlabs (Jul 21, 2002)

Ah thank You Boehr for the Very good clarification.

As I was led through articles I have read to be under the impression that anyhting below what is considered to be the standard high water mark, which is what the DEQ, and corp of engineers have been useing as the mark as to who is in violation along Saginaw Bay shorelines for removal of said vegatation.

It was also written that the land below that waterline that is currently exposed is Public. There has been a big debate here on that, and many of the land owners in the area of the Bay CIty State rec area, are finding they have no ability to press the tresspass laws upon those who are walking the newly exposed shoreline.

There was even an eppisode a year or so ago about a person hunting geese out off the newly exposed land, and a land owner and officers all being in a very long discussion over who was right. 

Just still a little confused, yet I will definatly practice the aspect it is private until it is all staright. LOL


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

Here is the law:

Great Lakes and Lake St. Clair

The boundary line is the ordinary high water mark. The riparian owner controls the exposed soil between the ordinary high water mark and the water's edge and may, therefore, prevent the public from trespassing on this exposed soil if he so chooses. The public does, however, have a right of passage in any area adjacent to riparian land covered by water. OAG, 1977-78, No. 5327, p. 518, (July 6, 1978).

A riparian owner owns to the ordinary high water mark *but controls and has exclusive use of the exposed soil between the ordinary high water mark and the water's edge.* Donohue v Russell, 264 Mich. 217; 249 NW 830 (1933). The ordinary high water mark is set by statute through Part 325, 1994 PA 451, Great Lakes Submerged Land, MCL 324.32501 et seq; MSA 13A.32501 et seq. Submerged lands above the ordinary high water mark are subject to the right of navigation. 

This site has been posted many times and also addresses the subject at hand too.

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/publicrights_22525_7.htm


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

On White Lake I was ask to provide this USACE information to the White Lake Association concerning altering the exposed habitat of the lake bottom during the present low water condition.  It refers to Saginaw bay, but also covers other lakes as well.

USACE ENGINEERS JURISDICTION OVER THE CONTROL OF EMERGENT VEGETATION
http://155.79.127.190/functions/rf/html/sagbay.html


----------

