Israel to declare Dead Sea shore state land: Peace Now

[Scurrilous]

<snip>

"The Israeli government has decided to register as state property West Bank land that has emerged as a result of Dead Sea shrinkage, an anti-settlement group said on Tuesday.

"Israeli authorities have announced that they intend to declare as state land some 138,600 dunums (34,650 acres) that has appeared along the Dead Sea in the occupied West Bank due to the drop in the water level," Hagit Ofran of the Peace Now group told AFP.

The government published its decision in the Arabic-language press on June 28 and the public has 45 days from that date to file any objections. The land is located along the shore of the Dead Sea in the West Bank.

The group said that based on public announcements, the amount of land involved may go beyond the shoreline that has been exposed as a result of the drop in the sea's water level, an estimated metre (yard) every year.

"It would appear that the primary purpose of registering this area as 'state land' is to prevent Palestinian use of the land or any Palestinian assertion of ownership over it," the group said in a statement.

The move goes against statements by hawkish Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as recently as mid-June that the state did not intend to expropriate any additional land in the occupied Palestinian territory."

more

[bemildred]

1. I expect they will be building settlements there soon.

Nothing like a salty mudflat to make you home on.

[azurnoir]

3. but it said beach front in the brochure n/t

[imdjh]

2. One of the oldest battles in history; who owns new land?

Right here in Florida we have several cases of this from time to time. Recently, some millionaire waterfront homeowners were the targets of extortion by a creep that goes to county tax sales and purchases obscure small tracts for next to nothing and then extorts adjacent property owners. In the waterfront case, he demanded $100,000 per homeowner for his deed to "submerged lands" which US Steel had neglected to properly deed to the community or to the homeowners, or perhaps USX itself intended on extorting homeowners itself at some point.

In another case, a person who owned an "island" (sandbar with some vegetation and pilings) lost all claim to the island when it up and moved during a large storm. She now owns adjacent submerged land and pilings which she can continue to pay tax on if she likes, or forfeit to the county.

IN the case of Belair beach gulf front property owners, who have very old deeds which go to the high water mark, wherever it may be, property had been lost because they refuse to allow public access to a new beach which would be created by "renourishment" which is, in and of itself an environmental mistake.

And in other cases where new land is created by changes in currents, the county or state are the ones who now own waterfront property in front of existing and former waterfront property.