Posts: 1,674
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2003
(07-20-2023, 05:49 AM)fixtureman Wrote: If the slope was there before it is a natural water way
Yes – that might be true depending on the natural condition of the property.
The general rule of thumb is that an adjacent owner must except drainage that occurs as part of the “natural” condition of the topography (common enemy rule). However, I believe the owner cannot modify their property/grade in such a manner that changes the natural flow of water from their property in a way that “harms” the adjacent homeowner – which is how I understood the OP’s question (I.e., his neighbor regraded his property to include a slope).
Some argue so long as the
amount of drainage/water has not increased over that of the natural condition then they have not “harmed” the adjacent owner. On the other hand, even modifying the direction or location of the natural water flow could be viewed as “harm”.
Like I stated in my first response – it just depends on how far you want to take this.
Posts: 46,029
Threads: 6
Joined: Sep 2000
I would add Velocity to Don's OTOH note.
“The windows are open and I'm wearing pants.”
- Fire Wood
Posts: 839
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2007
When I was farming my land sloped to just off center to the west and I maintained a nice waterway. I got a lot of bales off it for the cattle. Neighbor 1 just continued on with the waterway and I got to bale it also. He didn't have any livestock and the natural flow was on to neighbor 2. He plowed out the waterway and built a berm sighting erosion control. We talked to him and he told us to pound sand. Went to the county and they cleared the matter up quick. He couldn't block the natural flow.
We offered to put in tile and he said no. When our ground was wet he was even wetter. There is only 14 inches of drop in 1 and 3/4 mile. Pretty flat land but the lower areas have some peat and it stays wet longer. We could not put in tile and have dump out on his land it had to be controlled on where it went after discharge.
