boaters, and these charges become an- 

 other burden on people trying to enjoy 

 public trust areas, says Don Kirkman, 

 director of the Carteret County Eco- 

 nomic Development Council. 



"Marinas, contrary to popular be- 

 lief, are not cash cows," he says. 'They 

 are expensive to build and maintain, and 

 they are not in many instances signifi- 

 cantly profitable. They change hands so 

 much because people in the business are 

 not making a go of it. The expense will 

 be borne by the users. It would be naive 

 to think that somehow the owner of the 

 business is going to absorb all of those 

 costs." 



Private docks, unlike marinas, are 

 not required to pay compensation in 

 most states, including North Carolina. 

 This is partly because they've tradition- 

 ally been considered not-for-profit uses 

 of public bottomlands. 



North Carolina has no plans to 

 make the regulatory leap from marinas 

 to dock developments, Henderson says, 

 although some environmentalists argue 

 that perhaps it should since docks are 

 often financial investments. 



Farren is championing the fair mar- 

 ket fee for marinas and similar exclu- 

 sive, commercial users; other not-for- 



profit private users could pay across- 

 the-board charges. This plan would slow 

 the spread of private docks and encour- 

 age joint uses of public facilities, he 

 says. 



"This is consistent with the state as 

 trustee to protect public trust assets and 

 seek a return to the trust," Farren says. 



A case raising these points is al- 

 ready in the South Carolina court sys- 

 tem. 



In the case of Kiawah Resort Asso- 

 ciates v. Sierra Club, the South Carolina 

 Sierra Club argues that KRA should not 

 be allowed to build docks on Kiawah 

 Island public bottomlands because the 

 developer stands to reap substantial 

 profits from their construction. 



"If you are truly interested in ripar- 

 ian access, and you want to build one 

 dock, I think it's all right," says Sierra 

 Club attorney James Chandler. "But if 

 you want to exploit trust areas for profit, 

 that is fundamentally different." 



Yet property owners note that any- 

 one who builds a dock will probably 

 make money from it. A dock will almost 

 always enhance the value of a water- 

 front lot. Thus, if developers with mul- 

 tiple docks could not benefit financially 

 from appreciation of their property, then 



individual landowners couldn't either, 

 says KRA's attorney Trenholm Walker. 



Property advocates note that the 

 profit motive cannot be eliminated from 

 public areas. People fish and harvest 

 shellfish, for example, in public waters 

 and sell their catch for profit. 



Traditionally, 

 environmentalists 

 have trumpeted public 

 trust fees as essential 

 to state stewardship of 

 its natural resources. 



"I have a concern about the impact 

 on commercial fishing," Kirkman says. 

 "The two (North Carolina) court cases 

 deal with marinas, but if one takes the 

 argument that the state must be compen- 

 sated for the fair market value for usurpa- 

 tion of public trust waters for private use, 

 the same argument will apply to anyone 

 who uses public trust waters. 



"It could have a significant impact 

 on the fees paid by shellfishermen, by 

 recreational fishing piers, on commercial 

 gear such as crab pots, nets and the ex- 

 traction of fish." 



Only for-profit, exclusive users must 

 apply for easements and pay fees, as the 

 law is written now. Fishermen, for in- 

 stance, won't be charged fair market 

 value on public trust areas because they 

 don't use any stretch of water exclu- 

 sively, Farren says. But that's not to say 

 that fees on other private uses won't 

 eventually be explored, he adds. 



As North Carolina wrangles with 

 these issues and the legislators enter the 

 fray, environmentalists and property 

 advocates can agree on one thing. Charg- 

 ing one group for private uses of public 

 waters raises questions about how others 

 can use them, and where state decisions 

 are made on this slippery slope of stew- 

 ardship and accountability will have far- 

 reaching consequences for how we treat 

 our public trust properties in the future. □ 



Tibbetts is a staff writer for Coastal 

 Heritage, a publication of the South 

 Carolina Sea Grant College Consortium. 

 He explored public trust issues in the 

 newsletter's Spring 1994 issue. 



COASTWATCH 15 



