Mostly in Texas we use the Gradient Boundary method to determine water boundaries. A point where the natural water level leaves its bank and flows into the affluent. It also changes as nature takes it course. At any given time it is always a constant distance from the water level.
Not trying to make any point, I always mention that mother nature is in control of her elements in that water will make its own level and if you try to nail it to any point, she will rise up and change your mind soon enough.
Thanks Jerry for bringing to light what ordinary high water mark actually is by defining the terminology to connect our thoughts.
For terminology's sake, when you mention the OHWM being a horizontal boundary, is that the same as level?
Mr. Harris,
My understanding is that the OHWM, the horizontal position of a boundary, varies in elevation depending on the shape of the bank, the vegetation and other criteria used to make the determination. I would not use the word 'level' in that connection.
Think of the waterward boundary of an upland parcel. If there is a vertical cliff with water against the base of the cliff then the position where the surveyor would make the determination of the extent of the upland lot would be at the top. If there is a sloping bank then the horizontal position of the upland lot would be nearer to the elevation of the water. A single boundary line at the OHWM could conceivably go along both locations. Nothing level or constant elevation about it.
The gradient boundary is a different animal. While I have studied about it and read court cases on it, I have never actually surveyed a boundary line using that method. If I ever get to Texas I will have to enlist the assistance of one of you.
Jerry
:good: :good:
Thank you, Jerry. Different words for entirely different situations.
JBS
Sounds like your attorneys got valid info from engineers and thought that translated to boundary application.
Under certain circumstances (reservoirs, a few natural lakes affected by dams placed on outlet streams) the OHWM is defined by an elevation and therefore it's at the same level around the lake regardless of the impression the water may leave upon the bank.
In most cases on non-tidal waters, both lakes and streams, the OHWM is found per the definition thay Jerry Knight cites.
A couple of years ago in a (subdivision) map vs monument discussion, a colleague said he had posed the question to his attorney. The attorney was absolutely certain that the subdivision map would control because of the review process, expressed intent, agency approval per the map, blah, blah, blah...
Many attorneys are quick to fire off an opinion without knowing the real answer because they think they are supposed to know it and are smart enough to give the right answer while faking real knowledge, not unlike many surveyors.
I'll suggest to you the same thing I suggested to that other surveyor, ask your attorneys if they can provide case law to support their opinion. I'll bet you get the same result, very frustrated attorneys who cannot find any supporting law but who will also not admit that they were mistaken. It can be somewhat comical.
Your statement has a lot of merit for cases where a bit of error or discrepancy or disagreement in the level doesn't cause a big problem. In some areas a foot vertical can mean a mile horizontally.
