Hi all,

not sure if this is the forum to post this, but I need some helpful advice.

We built our pond last fall by digging in a low spot on our property, and collecting snow melt and runoff. The pond is great. Our neighbor live down flow from our property. Water in the spring naturally flows from the woods and fields across our lot, and then across our neighbors to her pond, on its way to a wetland. it follows a course that has flowed this way for years.

Our neighbor does not want us to have a pond, and has done much to stop the construction (which she failed at). She is now putting up a berm that will block the water flowing out of our lot and onto hers. When we built the pond, we did not change the inflow or outflow to and from our property, and we created a catch basin (our pond) to help control the water onto her lot. she is convinced that we will flood her lot.

Fortunately, our pond will not overflow until next spring. With her new berm, however, our whole lot will flood, and make it impossible to build. Has anyone else gone through this? we are trying to talk to her again, but don't hold out much hope that she will listen.

CoachB, you have an interesting situation. There are state laws that very clearly address what one can & can't do regarding water flow onto and out of private properties. You may very well be able to do an internet search for Michigan's laws. Otherwise, I would suggest contacting an attorney. For instance, in Texas, you can't build a pond that backs water up on an ajoining property without some kind of deeded consent. du

Coach, did you check with the Michigan Dept. of environmental Quality?
http://www.michigan.gov/deq/0,1607,7-135-3313_3682_3712---,00.html

Coach

Wow, what a bummer...I'm sorry to hear about this. Bruce had a similar situation with his neighbor, but it's not my story to share and I don't know the details or how things ended up. Might be worth a PM to him - but David's right it probably all ends up coming down to state laws.

I don't suppose a bouquet of flowers, a nice Chardonnay and BG fillets would soften her stance?

If you haven't already started, get going with picture documentation. You will need all the evidence of before and after that you can get.
This sucks, but it is imperitive that you discover your rights. I would start with the folks at your county NRCS (div of USDA). They will get you pointed to the correct folks in the guv to feel out your property rights. I imagine an attorney will also be in your future.

Thanks for the suggestions. I really like the fillet idea! We are trying to talk with her again to see if we can come to some sort of working terms. I think, however, we will end up in court. Please keep sending the ideas, I need all of the suggestions I can get! My next step is to sic my wife on her! She is much more diplomatic than me.

So If her berm gives out will this flood her own pond? Post pictures when you get some

I will post some pictures tomorrow. I have got to get out there and document everything. thanks for the picture ideas. these are the things I need to be reminded of. They make perfect sense, but i don't always think of it.

Are we related?

That's a difficult situation, Coach.

I don't know Michigan's laws, so I can't help with any specific advice. I will say this: When you say that the water flows on a natural course into "wetlands," you could be opening up a completely different can of worms.

The feds can control water use that affects "wetlands" as defined by federal statutes. I'm not sure if the water course going through your land would apply, but it's worth finding out.

CoachB, Are there any field tiles you could tap into or is there a way you could build a swale (like a mild ditch) to run out to a drainage ditch?

He probably can't change the path of flow if it feeds a wetland. I am sure she will have to destruct her berm if its going to back up water on coaches land its just not right.

I am having that experience now, only I am her.

As a suggestion, try looking at it from her perspective and working through it on her end before you really have another sit down with her. What would you do if you were in her position to work it out with you in your position?

Going to court is not the best option, not even a good one, in reality not even a poor one, neither is involving the government, on any level. Those are avenues of the very, very last resort.

She has some fears, real or imagined, they need to be identified and addressed. The fears maybe based on unknowns or what ifs, if that is the case then you might want to help her thorough them with facts, best guesses and reassurances. If it turns out both of you are exercising your property rights, as it looks like in my case, then you are in trouble.

If her case is similar to mine, the biggest fear is that the water flow has been changed and not in a good way. The same amount of water that was flowing through her property 5 years ago is the same amount as it is today. Is the difference that the flow has been diverted by the pond? That is what is happening to me.

So far both of your fears are more emotional than empirical. This creates a difficult atmosphere for problem resolution. You might try finding a common ground, get to know the person, she is going to be your neighbor.

Being right or wrong is less important than fixing the problem to both of your satisfaction.

Coach:
No fun at all is it? MDEQ is short on funding, the Wetlands portion of what they do might be taken over by a county office, probably Oakland, at least that is what they are talking about. What ever happened to live and let live? I wish I had some advice for you.

I can see her point of view: You are building a pond up stream from hers and, in her mind, potentially taking away the water that used to go straight into her pond. Sounds like her pond is upstream from the wetlands and her berm would keep water out of her pond and the wetlands at least some of the time. "Cutting off her nose to spite her face" sort of thing. I don't see how she could consider all of the water upstream from her pond "hers" unless she owned all of the land. Even then she would need to consider downstream uses, at least she would in Texas. Keep it out of court, even a lawyer will tell you to settle out of court or get some kind of binding arbitration. Cheaper and a whole lot quicker.

actually, she thinks that we will cause more water to flow onto her property, not less. She wanted us to sign a letter that absolves her from any liability if the 400+ acre wetland down from her floods because of our 1/2 acre pond. We, of course, did not write sign the letter.

I know she is scared, and this is how she acts. We have tried to talk to her about her concerns, but all she says is that she is just trying to protect her property value. I told her that I understand and that we didn't want to hurt her property either. she then suggested that we not do the project, and that has been her stance ever since.

We are trying to see it from her view, but lots of her responses seem to be irrational (like building a berm that completely blocks all water flow).

Thanks for all of the input. This is giving me lots to think about. Keep it coming! I will post pictures this evening.

Often times, these things are dealt with without either party knowing what the true laws & land owner rights are, and this is not helped by the same often being very vague and subjective.

When entering into "negotiations" with her, you must know the legal backstop. Even if you play that part close to the vest, you still have to know what it is.

Some money spent now to know that is worth it.

Coach, out of curosity where does your pond outlet and emergency overflow flow to?

When I built my pond, my county said I needed an outlet pipe and emergency overflow. At the time, I only had one option for an overflow pipe: 150' through my neighbors cow pasture to a deep county ditch/creek. I asked my neighbor about putting in the pipe and he said it was fine but when I brought up an easement, he said he wouldn't sign but he had no problem with the plan. When I spoke to my county soil and water dept. they said that if there was a tile that ran from my property though his, that there was an "implied easement" giving me access for repairs and maintenance. We found a 4" clay tile about 6' down. Problem solved.

Most soils perk to some extent. Obviously, ponds are constructed so they don't. Here, if a company moved in next door and installed an acre parking lot that drained onto your property, they would be required to remedy the situation if it was causing you problems. I can't see how a pond would be any different.

Warning!! I got an idea . Ask your neighbor if she would be interested in the two of you hiring a consultant. You might be surprised what a third party “pro” can do when it comes to bringing two opposing party’s together for the common good of all involved.

I am not a lawer, but will offer advice anyway based on my knowledge of Indiana rules. You cannot legally back water up onto your neighbors property without permission. Thus, your neighbor is breaking the law. Your pond will actually reduce the variability of water running downstream by acting as a buffer. During floods, your pond will absorb some of the water and slow its passage down stream. Your pond will also pass some water down stream (through leakage) during droughts keeping your neighbors pond at a more consistent level. Call your fish and wildlife department and see if they will explain this to your neighbor. Her ignorance of how this works is very common. You do not need to accept her flooding your property.

Is there anyway that you can divert the water elsewhere without legal or government action?

Is there anyway that you can divert the water elsewhere without legal or government intervention?

I'm probably just asking the obvious but CoachB, when you constructed your pond did you go through all the required regulations/permits/red tape to get your pond approved? In my mind this has a major impact on how to approach your situation. If your pond was not legally obtained/built/permitted then you have an entirely different set of problems.

If your pond is "legal" then here's my two cents:

If you can solve this through a non adversarial method then you will be happier in the long run. That being said, IMHO I would prepare for battle first. There is no substitute for knowledge. Find out what rights you have and what rights the neighbor has, determine how the wet lands may play into this picture. If it were me I'd engage an attorney at least for a consultation. Outline the facts as best as you can and discuss this with an attorney that specializes in this area of law. Even if it costs you a few hundred bucks for a consultation, IMHO it will be well worth it.



Rad has an excellent point here. IMHO, after meeting with an attorney, then sit down with her (and if your wife has a better rapport with the neighbor then let her do it) find out what her concerns and fears are. DO NOT be confrontational with her AT ALL, Do not mention that you have discussed this with an attorney. Simply meet with her, perhaps walk through the area and find out what her concerns and fears are. Don't attempt to problem solve at this point, be nice, smile, do not threaten, do not show your hand as to what you do or do not know.

Although this may not get the popular vote, I'm recommending that you meet with the attorney and determine what legal ramification may come into play first for several reasons. Over my 29 years in public accounting, I've been involved quite a number of successful business negotiations and court cases. One thing that I've learned is that knowledge is power in a negotiation.



This quote leads into second important lesson that I have learned which is that how you apply that knowledge/power will affect the potential outcome. Do not become a "right" fighter. Just because you can take a particular legal action doesn't mean that taking that action will ultimately help you solve the problem.

IMHO, a good attorney will be able to provide you with:

1 - a overview of what the law is (probably in general terms) related to your issue. Several branches of government may be involved in these types of issues (water impoundment and surface water diversion) - federal, state, and local law could ALL apply. As a layman you may not even know all of the regulatory agencies that could come into play. An attorney that specializes in this WILL know.
2 - a plan of action that should be taken immediately (taking photos, perhaps video, etc, etc).
3 - advice on how to proceed with the neighbor, perhaps pointers on what to say and as important if not most important - what NOT to say.
4 - A discussion on what legal course of action will have to occur if the issue cannot be solved in a "friendly" discussion format.
5 - The attorney will be familiar with you and your situation and therefore is more likely to be available quickly should the need arise.

Know this, if JHAP were your unhappy neighbor then I'd have already taken these actions, that's not a threat, it's just a fact. Please note CoachB, I'm in no way criticizing you, nor am I suggesting you did anything wrong. I'm just offering some friendly advice that I learned in my very brief stint in the Boy Scouts. "Be Prepared."

I'd rather go into a peace negotiation with a sheathed sword than go in empty handed.

See the following link for situations where a permit for a pond is needed in Michigan. I copied the text following the link below from the info at the link.

http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cache:h_M...n&ct=clnk&gl=us

A permit from the DEQ is required
(under Part 301 and Part 303 of the
Natural Resources and Environmental
Protection Act, 1994 PA 451) prior to
construction of a pond if the pond will be:
Within 500 feet of a lake or stream, or
connected to a lake or stream;
‚ Within a regulated wetland;
ƒ Within the 100-year floodplain of a river or
stream;
„ Five surface acres or more in size; or
… Created by construction of a dam across a
river or stream. Dams with a height of six
feet or more and which impound five acres
or more, will require a plan prepared by a
licensed engineer. Height and surface area
are determined based on design flood
conditions.
________________________________________

Coach, sorry to hear about this issue. You are getting a lot of good advice though. JHAP, good advice regarding the legality of the pond construction in the first place. You certainly don't want to raise any flags around an illegal pond.

A couple of thoughts that spring to my mind.

1. Riparian water rights- Riparian Rights: Riparian rights are those where water is extracted for use on lands that directly boarder the stream. Any owner of a parcel immediately adjacent to a water course has the right to take water for domestic and agricultural use at any time unless specific deed restrictions are stated in the title to the land. Riparian rights do not require a permit from the SWRCB, however, the SWRCB requests that riparian water users file a statement of diversion and use.

Water may be diverted from upstream areas for delivery to downstream riparian lands as long as agreements are in place with the land owner at the point of diversion and no damage is inflicted on intervening land owners. Riparian rights are not superior by virtue of prior use, so proposed new reasonable use and streamflow diversions have equal standing under the law. Because of these statues, the SWRCB can not resolve differences between holders of riparian water rights. If insufficient water is available for all riparian users, ultimate recourse is in the courts. Water taken by virtue of riparian water rights cannot be impounded for deferred use. Riparian water rights also cannot be transferred to non-riparian owners.

Things may be different here in California (land of the enviro-nazi's) than in your neck of the woods, but find out about your water rights, they may give you leverage or perhaps make the battle not worth fighting.

2. Dealing with wetlands is dangerous business. Be careful who you even mention the word wetland to as this will raise flags with a whole slew of different state and federal regulatory agencies.

i think dave's suspicions are right on...especially if this situation was in CA. coach if as you say you did not change or alter the flow from your property to her property, and yer pond was legally built, and the surface flow feeds a wetlands via yer neighbors property, she might be the one who could get in trouble by having built the berm. it would be worth a check to determine the EPA regs for yer area. out here the federal law often trumps state and other local laws when it comes to affecting "the nations" waterways and wetlands. and it is a can of worms....

another item you could help her realize is a watershed yields only as much water as its size. having a 1/2 acre pond in the middle will not change the amount of water leaving yer spillway and entering her property (assuming the dam was constructed properly and wont fail).

Wow, all of this advice is great! Once again (I say this weekly to my wife), I am so glad I found PB!

there is no other way for us to run the outflow other than over her property (which is where it has flowed for the last 10 years). Ryan, I guess I could run about 400' of pipe across her yard (and through some woods) and have it empty out into the wetland directly, but I can't imagine the cost. What did your 150' pipe cost?

Luckily, we obtained permits when we built the pond, and had the pond and berms designed by a local environmental wetland company. We are not part of a wetland (we checked the designation before building), nor are we connected at any stream or the like. We just had a low spot that collected water. The soil here is full of clay, so surface water sits.

I have contacted a lawyer to help us with some initial discovery. I like the idea of seeing if she would agree to an independent evaluator. She does not trust the company we worked with, because we paid them. there seems to be lots of trust issues.

We contacted her last night via email to see if she wanted to meet out at the property. We could then discuss her and our concerns, and see if we could come up with a plan the we both can agree on. I have not heard back from her yet, but I am hopeful.

Until then, we continue to read about Michigan water law and learn as much as we can. The only blessing in this is that we don't need the water to run out of the overflow until next spring, so we have time.

On a happier note, I got my non trained BG to eat pellets today for the first time. What a rush watching them smack the surface!

I would say that Brian has the situation well under control. I like your entire approach. Well done. Of course, keep us posted so we can all learn.

One other thought. If you do as Jeff says, and I think it is good advice, and meet with her, write everything down after the meeting. Immediately after the meeting.

One other thought. If you do as Jeff says, and I think it is good advice, and meet with her, write everything down after the meeting. Immediately after the meeting. Document, document, document everything.

Dang Guv! Why you gotta say everything twice these days?

...and especially with afterthoughts incorporated into the second coming.

(just trying to up my post count now)

I'm on your heels Sunil, better triple post I'm catching up!

Hi everyone! this is Coach's wife! =)

I've just been reading all the posts and we appreciate all the wisdom you have offered. Thank you!

I've reached out to one of my attorneys (I run a business and have routine interaction and good relationships with several law firms.) and will post some more info when we have a chance to get his views next week for all to contemplate. One thought I had as a result of all the good advice is that it might be a good first step to just write down all the facts as we understand them so that the attorney can give us the best possible perspective. Coach and I will work on that this weekend.

We did not hear back from our neighbor today. We would really like to find a way (without going to court, but while knowing all the options!) to have a amicable relationship with her. Keep the thoughts coming. It is great to have people to talk about this with!

Coach's Wife

She Hijacked my computer!! She uses big words!! That is why she is is so successful.

CoachB, a banked swale can divert a lot of extra rain water!!!

And its not hard to mow...

Good idea. I like to present two documents to attorneys (can be incorporated into one if you prefer). A time line of events as you know them: When you purchased your property, when you received the permit for your pond, when you built your pond, when you had contact with the neighbor regarding the building of the pond, when the neighbor built the berm, etc. And a second document (or as I said it can be interlaced with the first) that describes in detail all of the contact between you and the neighbor regarding the pond issue. Don't sugar coat it, write down all the contact regarding this good or bad (even if you have acted badly, which I'm not saying you did). Print out several copies of the document for the attorney.

Documentation is what I live for. You can't believe the messes I've avoided through documentation.

Please keep us posted.

What little I have learned from the 2+ years I have been in court with a neighbor is;

If your pond causes problems on her property from unnatural water flow, or if her berm causes an unnatural backing up of water, either, or both of you have commited tresspass.

Here are some pictures of what is going on.

This is a shot of the pond. the berm I am standing next to is the south edge of my property and the line of river birches on the left side is her property. The channel with grass at the right side of the picture is the inflow from the woods and field behind me (total acreage about 50 acres). To the left of the pine trees on the far side of the pond is where our exit is. This is where the low spot drained before we built the pond.


Here is a close up of the outflow with the start of her dam.


and a closeup of her work and the route to her pond beyond.


The water would just flow through her grass and under her driveway to her pond, and then out to the wetland.

I hope that clarifies out situation a bit. We have still not heard back from her. I am hoping it was because she was away for he long weekend. My wife tells me not to worry, that we will work through this. This pond is my baby, and I get concerned when someone threatens it.

So, in a nutshell, you inserted your pond in between the drainage and her pond (and, legally, I might add). ...correct?

That is correct. here is an earlier picture of the area before we put our pond in (this is when we bought the property).



You can see in the upper left where the water was leaving the area and flowing across her lot (this was two summers ago).

It was not designated as a wetland (we checked through multiple sources). It just help water for part of the year. It used to be a farm field (10 years ago).

You, sir, have a neighbor with a bad case of sour grapes. Quite frankly, it is every pondmeister's nightmare. No pond owner wants to suffer any level of control of valuable drainage. It is also a classic example to all newbies looking for potential pondsites; make sure nobody can cut you off....or at least, be as sure as possible.
-
I wonder if she might have a glimmer of a case for your direct effect on her "pre-existing" water feature...???

If she's getting the same "amount" of flow +/-, and the path hasn't changed due to the pond you built, then it's likely she has very little chance at a case. However, if her use of the berm backs up water on to your land and/or altering normal flow, she could be in for a legal awakening... and possibly a costly bill.

Unfortunately, the amount of water that actually reaches her pond is never "the same" unless Coach's pond is always brim full. I still wonder what legal legs she might have regarding the effect on her water feature.

If you want to build on your land, you need to file a lawsuit now. If you are reasonably smart, you do not need a lawer. I have not been in court a lot, but I also have never lost a case. Your situation is simple. You simply want the water to exit your property as it has in the past. While most posters have advocated a gentler approach, I guess that I disagree. You have a neighbor that does not realize that your pond is both legal and actually an advantage to her, but also built an illegal blockage of drainage from your land. Stupid can't be fixed! Protect your property.

I worded that terribly, sorry. The neighbor appears to be concerned about INCREASED waterflow onto her property (supposedly) from the new pond, which is why she claims to be constructing this berm. Since the water has not actually changed its entry point onto her land due to the new pond construction (same outflow and entry point now as was there pre-pond), and the same amount of "flow" will occur when pond is at full pool (additional watershed does not appear to be funneled into this area due to dam), she really has no legal basis (as far as I can tell).

If this new pond had diverted additional watershed acres onto her property (creating the possibility of flooding or massive washouts for instance), then she'd likely have a strong case. That doesn't appear to be the situation here at all. However, this actually can be a huge issue for others building ponds these days.

This pond isn't really a dam, but this is probably worth mentioning. A dam can potentially combine several watershed areas that USED to have unique and seperate surface drainage paths carved out (storm creeks, typical surface run off, field drain tile, man-made ditches and canals, etc.) that were relatively safe and effective before the dam, and instead end up concentrating them into one raging and highly dangerous RIVER during a rain event. A pond/dam isn't ALWAYS a buffer. This could lead into this lady's fear of the new pond, but as I said, that just simply doesn't appear to be a risk here at all.

Now when it comes to this neighbor backing up water on your land (aka flooding your land), you've likely got an extremely strong case against her, UNLESS there is an existing agreement between you two that allows such a thing and outlines it quite specifically.

I would go the route of trying to get a friendly understanding between each other first. The berm isn't acceptable to you. Say it exactly like that, and explain why that's the case. Be nice. Don't fight with her even if she refuses to yield. If need be, let the lawyers do that. It will likely take just one well worded letter from your lawyer to get things corrected.

I'm with ya, Weissguy. I mis-read the entire issue faced by Coach and the complaints by the neighbor. I reached the conclusion that the complaint (by the neighbor) was the new management of drainage that feeds her pond. My bad.

I fail to see any use of logic by someone who is afraid of a dam causing more water to enter their property that responds by building another dam below the first one. What the heck does she think will happen when the water reaches her berm, backs up, and breeches it?

Some people, you can't tell anything. Except "See you in court."

I must admit that one of my solution strategies was to just let the spring rains blow her dam up and wash it away, But I am sure that she would find this as evidence that I am flooding her lot further.

We are going to wait a little while longer to see if she responds to our communication attempts. We have started preliminary talks with a lawyer. it pains me that we can't just sit down and hash it out.

Sometimes you can't expect the other side to be rational at all.

I play with dynamite alot,it seems to keep the nieghbors in line pretty well.

That is the best advice I have heard so far.

Its always nice when things can be worked out and making no enemys in the process.

Just saw this post. I have a confession to make. I'm a lawyer. At risk of violating a professional code of never giving away any useful information for free, in true Pond Boss forum spirit, I'll share my thoughts.

Although I practice in Missouri, I do have some familiarity with problems of this type. Under the common law (the starting point for all state laws--well, all but Louisiana), water was considered a "common enemy". In general, this meant that anyone could do anything they wanted to water on their property. This included just routing it onto their neighbor. Over the years, most states have whittled away at this basic notion by applying various exception. If a Wal-Mart parking lot goes in next door, for example, they usually cannot these days simply dump all of the rainwater into your residential city lot. The details of how states get to this point vary. Although I am not licensed in your state or familiar with the details of its laws on this issue, I will be very surprised if you do not have the right to do what you have done. In general, building a pond to detain groundwater flow does nothing to make the situation any worse for neighbors (unlike the parking lot example above).

For the record, I STRONGLY recommend taking a "friendly first" attitude in dealing with the neighbor. It is always best (even if you later end up in litigation) starting by trying everything possible to work things out amicably. If someone has to be the bad guy, let it be the guy you overpay.

Right on TheMoMule. I completely agree. Once you start a fight with a neighbor, they often don't end until one of you moves away... or "disappears".

This thread is getting long so just let me make sure I understand the basics.

Did this lady build a berm on her land that would not allow the water to flow onto her land, as it once used to, and now it will build-up on CoachB's land? All this happening after CoachB built his pond?

Sunil, you are correct in your conclusion. She believed that the addition of a pond would cause her yard to flood, even though the natural flow of the water was maintained. I did not increase the watershed, nor did I divert water from any other place to increase the amount that entered my lot, which would increase the amount onto her lot. She is starting to build a dam (might eventually be a berm) across the location where the water flows from my lot onto hers. this berm will cause the water level on my lot to rise by about 2 feet, which will flood some major areas of my lot. My lot is pretty flat.

If you look at the pictures, the point where my dock is is slightly swamped when the pond is at max level and starting to flow over her lot. Another two feet would cause flooding to the woods.

Just a quick update. We have contacted a lawyer and made arrangements with them just in case. Like many of you have said, we have a pretty strong case. My wife is supposed to meet with our neighbor next week and see if they can come to some sort of decision that we can both live with. I am not counting on that. She has piled up another couple of feet on the dam that will block the water from leaving our lot (I will post pictures later). Barring a miracle (which I do believe in), it sounds like we will head to court.

the lawyer said that it will take about 6-10 months for this to work through the court system, so I am glad I took your advice and contacted a lawyer now. He said that we would need to submit materials by mid July if we wanted this corrected by next Spring. Man, I don't want to go down this path!

Coach I hope you can resolve this before next spring, otherwise you might be showing them flooding pictures in court.
If Michigan is anything like NY, the courts move at a snails pace, all they seem to do is delay, reschedule, and postpone.

If you have anything, including trees, that may be damaged by the water backed up on your property, you should consider suing for damages to encourage her to remove the dam before the court case. If not, plant some trees. I am not in favor of ever suing, but this situation is ridiculous, and should not cost you money or time to resolve. A little risk/cost on her part may help with further disputes, and from your discription of this situation, I expect you will have futher clashes unless you nip it in the bud. In Indiana, we can contact the county surveyer to get faster action.

well, we met with the neighbor and go absolutely nowhere. Her only solution was that we completely remove our berms and return it so that her yard could drain into our pond. We again tried to tell her that her yard is dryer because of the berms and that the pond was helping control the water on her lot. She claims that we are in violation of a county ordinance, so she can build the dam. She did not name anyone that she talked to, but felt that she had the upper hand.

I checked with our township, contractor, and the environmental company that designed the pond and water flow, and all agreed that we are in full compliance. The next step is probably a lawyer's letter. I'll keep you posted as we continue.

I am so glad that we documented everything, and worked with reliable people who got the right permits.

One line that the township zoning supervisor stated will really help us, I think. He said that she cannot block our access to the wetland. she can redirect the water once it hits her land, but she cannot keep our water from leaving our lot.

Best of luck Coach... It's a shame your neighbor is not more reasonable.

At the end of the day, some people just can't be talked to.

Now you can rest assured knowing that at least you tried to be civil.

It's always comforting to have first taken the polite, ethical high road before you get as nasty as you legally can.

I'm sorry but I guess I don't see much of a major issue. Perhaps the picture is deceiving but that little berm she thru in front of your outflow isn't going to hold back much water. It appears to be far below the elevation of your berm and even lower than your pond elevation. From what It appears to be in the pictures the berm is going to do nothing but slow the outflow from your pond and spread it out. Your outflow is already starting to channel some, it might even benifit you by spreading the water and stopping the cutting effect or erosion. It certainly doesn't appear as if it is going to back up any significant amount of water on your property. Forgive me if I just ain't seeing the real picture.

I appreciate the thoughts. Since those first pictures, she has raised the dam by 2-3 feet. The angle of the picture is deceiving. Her original dam top was about a foot over the outflow. Her dam still will probably get washed out by the spring rains, but if it doesn't, it would fill our lot a couple of feet over the top. Our lot is pretty flat above the water line, and this would cause some major problems.

I meet with the township super on Friday, and will decide what to do after that point.

As much as I hate to say it, until what she does actually impacts your property, there is not much you CAN do at this point.

Keep us informed how this goes. It seems to me that if it is clear that your neighbors berm will back water up onto your lot, then you do not need to wait until this actually happens to get the berm removed.

As she builds her berm higher, build your lot higher. One of you will run out of money eventually and you'll at least have a deeper pond (;

Good luck Coach, it's ashamed that you have to go the legal route, you will probably win but your wallets gonna be alot lighter, maybe a flash flood damaging her home, caused by the berm she has put in will convince her.
Sometimes Karma happens.

What amazes me is how people can bring on their own problems by being ignorant and bullheaded. Coach it sounds to me like your neighbor has some personal issues included.

I once attended a public comment county meeting where the county wanted to make our local river into a straight ditch for the local farmers. Honest to God a family in front of me blamed algae for all the flood problems! I wanted to ask them if they flunked high school biology but I bit my tongue.

I second the notion that your neighbor has some issues. And, I also second the opinion that you're not obligated to wait until she has inundated your property to take legal action. It would seem to me - not a lawyer - that it's pretty demonstrable if her dam really will flood your lot, and that, if that's established, it would be pretty open and shut to legally force her to remove it or alter it to the point that it won't.

There's a proverb in the Bible that says not to throw pearls before swine. In this case your attempts at civility and decency constitute the pearls. Time to take the gloves off - she won't respond to anything else.

Update???

Sorry, I should have updated after the 4th weekend.

Not much has happened. I talked to the township zoning commissioner who agreed with us that she cannot deny us access to the wetland. He will meet with the township supervisor and get him involved. We had a heavy rain a couple of weeks ago that damaged part of her dam.

She has also put her house up for sale (this is the second time she is trying to sell). If anyone wants to move to Ann Arbor and live by agreeable neighbors with a great pond, let me know!

Thanks for the updates CoachB. Sounds like a positive report.

How much is she asking,and how much land is there?

Hey Coach, this bit of sage advice may be a bit late but here goes. Like everyone else has said, take pictures, document the progress of her berm as it relates to your orperty, but here's the advice: Everytime you communicate with her, either 'over the fence', phone, up close and pesonal, what ever - always, always -- document your conversation on paper or via email to her. Ex: "Thanks for visiting with me yesterday when we discussed xyz." Then close with YOUR understanding as to the conclusion of that dialog. If she doesn't reply back disputing your conclusion, it could then be implied that she agreed with it. Just sayin --- better to have it in writing or email, for the reasons stated above.

Great advice jimmydee. Also remember to never put anything in writing that you don't want to hear in court.

When using the phone, never assume that a recorder isn't attached to the other side. Hook one up for yourself and always try to manage the conversation. In Texas, it is not illegal to record a conversation if one party to the conversation knows and approves.

DOCUMENT EVERYTHING. It is self defense.

In PA, it is illegal to record a phone con. w/out the consent or knowledge of the other party (I'm pretty sure).

Oh.

For the record, Sunil, every time we talk on the phone, can you just assume I'm recording?

You just made the list.

Not 'til now?

In Mo., as long as one person knows it's being recorded, you're good to go. But, if the other party asks, you're obligated to divulge. That's usually followed by, "Kiss my back side." Click.

"If anyone wants to move to Ann Arbor and live by agreeable neighbors with a great pond, let me know!"


Only if you don't mind a former Buckeye football player

I think that is why there is the intermittant beep when you're being recorded----the standard warning.

Jeez, didn't you people learn anything from the Nixon fiasco?

This might add an entirely new meaning to the "Watergate Tapes."

I'll much rather have a Buckeye than a crazy nut!!

Tom, she is asking a mill for 9 acres with woods and a small pond. it is a big house, perfect for Pond Boss parties!

It better be a BIG house...get it...the big house...in Ann Arbor...



nevermind.


Seriously, though, that's a chunk of change for 9 acres. It better be a big house.

It is big. All brick. with a garage that is bigger than my whole house.

wow, that's alot of money, it better be bigger than a big house for that price and have the status of being a mansion. Having it haunted with Casper would also help in that high monetary stratosphere.

CoachB, How much without the pond. jk

If TomG moves in, I am sure that he can take care of that burm real quick. Maybe even make the pond larger in the process.

Well, our local township supervisor, after telling me he would get involved and help us settle this, has backed out. He said there is nothing that she can do, according to the township zoning (we have done nothing wrong). He also said that we should pursue legal avenues to get her to lower her dam. It looks like we might have to go the way of the lawyer. Her house is still for sale, but no one is looking at it (so says my friend the real estate agent).

Thanks for the update. Sorry to hear the bad news.