tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post5650723644838918760..comments2024-03-28T17:55:31.180-04:00Comments on The Gossips of Rivertown: No Trespassing?Carole Osterinkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16010623982526286408noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-44893948834805440422010-06-02T18:04:25.301-04:002010-06-02T18:04:25.301-04:00The fallacy in your argument is this: SLC owns all...The fallacy in your argument is this: SLC owns all the land around the South Bay and you can't boat into the South Bay, so you would have to trespass across SLC land to get into the South Bay. Maybe there is a right to navigate in the South Bay, but you can't legally get there to navigate.Louie Monkey-Pesthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08799506926111742528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-3282354046038080612010-06-01T15:15:28.828-04:002010-06-01T15:15:28.828-04:00Thanks everyone for this remarkable information. ...Thanks everyone for this remarkable information. I hope that it has all been brought to the attention of Mr. Ken Faroni of O & G. And that the continued vigilance of Save the South Bay and Gossips of Rivertown<br />and the people of Hudson will result in the navigable waterways becoming even moreso.Jenniferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14147241257381928706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-16031935279126696552010-05-31T14:17:18.524-04:002010-05-31T14:17:18.524-04:00At the City's website, one can download Save t...At the City's website, one can download Save the South Bay's comments; or poke around www.hudsonwaterfront.org to find a copy there. Either way, the document includes lengthy excerpts from legal briefs we put together summarizing land title issues in the Waterfront area. It is remarkable that the City would "negotiate" with Holcim for lands that Hudson may already own...Sam Pratthttp://www.sampratt.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-7551471888426514822010-05-31T09:32:14.747-04:002010-05-31T09:32:14.747-04:00This is an excellent post Carole!
Now, furnished ...This is an excellent post Carole!<br /><br />Now, furnished with this quotation from the Heermance underwater grant, I am more confident that the South Bay is also "navigable in law." The difference - based on the question of a waterway's tidal nature - is negligible, but even more ironclad than New York State's already generous common law practice of "navigable in fact." <br /><br />(An aside: The LWRP comments have already yielded measurable results on the DEC's delineating process for the South Bay - 38 years late! - on which the "navigable in law" designation may not depend after all. We'll see ....) <br /><br />Aside from the potentially "grandfathered" nature of the dike as private property, your blog states something that the anonymous poster above prefers to ignore: it is a fact that citizens fully in their legal rights can and do approach the hazardous culverts regularly, and without setting foot on land.<br /><br />I am terrified by the culverts, but many times I am right next to them as I study the South Bay from my kayak. I can assure everyone that they are large enough, and the suction powerful enough, to swallow an adult. <br /><br />The anonymous poster is also ignorant of the fact that entry onto the East Basin's waters is legally accessible from the bank along Route 9G, no matter who owns that land. That fact is yet another privilege of the public's right to navigate the South Bay.<br /><br />Don Christensen's research is really paying off, and speaking for myself, I owe him a great thanks for that. <br /><br />The wording of the Heermance grant removes the last doubt from my mind that the South Bay may have been one of the rare exceptions in our state where a "jus privatum" was originally issued.<br /><br />On Friday, I located the earliest reference to the John Graham grant at the County deed office (from when he resold it five years after its initial purchase in 1836). That grant covered the East Basin, which included the waters that are now in L&B's possession. I can report that there was nothing specified as jus privatum in that underwater grant either, though there was no reference to the kind of generous language which was a condition we see in the Heermance grant.<br /><br />For a superb compendium of case law in New York State, see John Humbach's "Public Rights in the Navigable Steams of New York," address below. (A note on Humbach's paper, there have been many developments since its publication in 1989.)<br /><br />http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1093&context=lawfaculty <br /><br />T. O'ConnorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-11200161720455923542010-05-31T08:00:44.957-04:002010-05-31T08:00:44.957-04:00The anonymous poster above seems to have missed th...The anonymous poster above seems to have missed the point of Carole's post -- that Holcim may not have the right to tell people to stay out of South Bay. Indeed, there is ample evidence (much of it submitted nearly a decade ago now to the Department of State, thanks to Don Chrstensen) that the company does not have clear title to many of the waterfront "lands" it claims, as they were built on illegal fill or in contavention of the deeds to the property. This matter has been raised to the State and the current City attorney many times, without any action.Sam Pratthttp://www.sampratt.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-74070139022390896832010-05-31T07:29:19.367-04:002010-05-31T07:29:19.367-04:00that's true but they are telling you to stay o...that's true but they are telling you to stay off their lands. Real Estate courses also teach you what no trespassing means.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5723709701684173708.post-72753702724175055832010-05-31T04:17:03.504-04:002010-05-31T04:17:03.504-04:00Great post Carole. Anyone who has taken the Real ...Great post Carole. Anyone who has taken the Real Estate course understands the issue of Riparian rights. Bodies of water and the beaches/land that surround them are not private property. They belong to the people.victorinhudsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00727070764427725170noreply@blogger.com