sec.104Current adopted natural feature rule (non-tidal) exception provision

### sec.104 Current adopted natural feature rule (non-tidal) exception provision This section provides for the location at law of the non-tidal boundary (watercourse) if the current adopted natural feature rule (non-tidal) provision does not apply or can not practicably be applied to establish the location. The non-tidal boundary (watercourse) is, at law— the natural feature that to the greatest practicable extent complies with the requirements of the non-tidal boundary (watercourse) location criteria; or if it is not practicable to identify a natural feature under paragraph (a) —located where it could most reasonably be expected to be located, under subdivision 3 , if the first new plan of survey were to be registered for the land. To decide where the non-tidal boundary (watercourse) is located at any time, there must be taken into account the application of the ambulatory boundary principles to any natural feature that locates the non-tidal boundary (watercourse) under subsection (2) . Without limiting subsection (1) , the current adopted natural feature rule (non-tidal) provision can not practicably be applied if all of the following apply— there is an old plan of survey that is the most recently registered or that is otherwise currently authoritative in relation to the land; the plan, together with any associated material for the plan, adopted a natural feature (other than the notional middle line separating the lands of owners on opposite sides of the watercourse) for representing the non-tidal boundary (watercourse); either— it is not possible to make a meaningful correspondence between the evidence on the plan of the adopted natural feature and evidence on the ground of any natural feature; or the adopted natural feature is currently located in a substantially different location than it would have been if it had been the subject of only gradual change since it was adopted in the old plan of survey. Without limiting subsection (2) (b) , it is not practicable to identify a natural feature under subsection (2) (a) if, for example, the watercourse has been significantly modified over time because of the installation of walls, jetties, ramps, revetments or other structures. s 104 ins 2010 No. 12 s 215 (sec.104-ssec.1) This section provides for the location at law of the non-tidal boundary (watercourse) if the current adopted natural feature rule (non-tidal) provision does not apply or can not practicably be applied to establish the location. (sec.104-ssec.2) The non-tidal boundary (watercourse) is, at law— the natural feature that to the greatest practicable extent complies with the requirements of the non-tidal boundary (watercourse) location criteria; or if it is not practicable to identify a natural feature under paragraph (a) —located where it could most reasonably be expected to be located, under subdivision 3 , if the first new plan of survey were to be registered for the land. (sec.104-ssec.3) To decide where the non-tidal boundary (watercourse) is located at any time, there must be taken into account the application of the ambulatory boundary principles to any natural feature that locates the non-tidal boundary (watercourse) under subsection (2) . (sec.104-ssec.4) Without limiting subsection (1) , the current adopted natural feature rule (non-tidal) provision can not practicably be applied if all of the following apply— there is an old plan of survey that is the most recently registered or that is otherwise currently authoritative in relation to the land; the plan, together with any associated material for the plan, adopted a natural feature (other than the notional middle line separating the lands of owners on opposite sides of the watercourse) for representing the non-tidal boundary (watercourse); either— it is not possible to make a meaningful correspondence between the evidence on the plan of the adopted natural feature and evidence on the ground of any natural feature; or the adopted natural feature is currently located in a substantially different location than it would have been if it had been the subject of only gradual change since it was adopted in the old plan of survey. (sec.104-ssec.5) Without limiting subsection (2) (b) , it is not practicable to identify a natural feature under subsection (2) (a) if, for example, the watercourse has been significantly modified over time because of the installation of walls, jetties, ramps, revetments or other structures. - (a) the natural feature that to the greatest practicable extent complies with the requirements of the non-tidal boundary (watercourse) location criteria; or - (b) if it is not practicable to identify a natural feature under paragraph (a) —located where it could most reasonably be expected to be located, under subdivision 3 , if the first new plan of survey were to be registered for the land. - (a) there is an old plan of survey that is the most recently registered or that is otherwise currently authoritative in relation to the land; - (b) the plan, together with any associated material for the plan, adopted a natural feature (other than the notional middle line separating the lands of owners on opposite sides of the watercourse) for representing the non-tidal boundary (watercourse); - (c) either— (i) it is not possible to make a meaningful correspondence between the evidence on the plan of the adopted natural feature and evidence on the ground of any natural feature; or (ii) the adopted natural feature is currently located in a substantially different location than it would have been if it had been the subject of only gradual change since it was adopted in the old plan of survey. - (i) it is not possible to make a meaningful correspondence between the evidence on the plan of the adopted natural feature and evidence on the ground of any natural feature; or - (ii) the adopted natural feature is currently located in a substantially different location than it would have been if it had been the subject of only gradual change since it was adopted in the old plan of survey. - (i) it is not possible to make a meaningful correspondence between the evidence on the plan of the adopted natural feature and evidence on the ground of any natural feature; or - (ii) the adopted natural feature is currently located in a substantially different location than it would have been if it had been the subject of only gradual change since it was adopted in the old plan of survey.