Who Has to Approve Your Dock on Ono Island's Canals?

In October 2019, a contractor started work on a boat shelter on a small, unnamed island where two of Ono Island's canals meet. The owner had a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit, issued that May. Within days, the contractor received a stop-work order from the island's Architectural Control Committee. It said that construction inside the canal system wasn't allowed without the committee's approval and the approval of the Ono Island Canal Owners Association.

That stop-work order led to six and a half years of litigation and two appellate opinions. For anyone looking at a canal-front home or lot on Ono Island, the case sets out the order of approvals better than any brochure. On these canals, the federal government, the island-wide property owners association and a second association made up only of canal owners each have their own say over what goes in the water. Approval from one doesn't count as approval from the others.

The permit that didn't settle it

The parcel at the center of the dispute is an "intertidal mound" at the intersection of Canal B and Canal B-1. It was created when the canals were dug. The Property Owners Association of Ono Island's position was that the mound was built on purpose as part of the canal system and that its rules barred building on any of the mounds. The owner, F Family South, LLC, sued the POA in Baldwin Circuit Court in November 2019. Its argument was that the POA had no jurisdiction over the parcel.

The record shows how the federal approval fit in. According to the later appellate opinion, the owner never applied to the POA or the Canal Owners Association. The owner's own representative acknowledged that the Corps permit "did not excuse him from obtaining any other necessary approval."

In its May 17, 2024 opinion, the Supreme Court of Alabama held that the mound is bound by implied restrictive covenants governing its use. It also upheld the trial court's finding that "the canal system is subject to the control of the POA and the COA." The court explained that a different outcome "would permit a single property owner to destroy the common development scheme to the potential detriment of other similarly situated property owners."

The canals were built under a federal permit

The canals were engineered, and the rules come from how they were built. Ono Development Company began turning the barrier island into a single-family subdivision in 1969. In 1981 it got a Corps permit to dig inland canals so that interior lots would have water frontage. A surveyor whose firm did most of the island's survey work testified that the canals were designed "to increase the value and number of lots available." He also said they work as one system connected by piping, not as a set of separate subdivision waterways.

An environmental consultant described what the original permit required. Corners were rounded, intertidal mounds were placed at the canal intersections, and about nine miles of shoreline edge were planted with marsh vegetation so the system would flush and keep its water quality. After follow-up testing around 1990, regulators handed ongoing monitoring to Ono Island's owners and recommended that the covenants be used to protect the shoreline. Maintenance then passed to the POA and the Canal Owners Association.

So the owners who live along the canals took on responsibility for keeping them working. That shared responsibility is why every boathouse, slip and shoreline change on a canal lot is treated as something that affects the whole system.

Two associations, plus the federal layer

Every property owner on Ono Island is a member of the POA. Owners whose lots front a canal are also members of the Canal Owners Association. The COA was organized in 1998 to "maintain and improve" the canal system. Ono Development assigned it the administration of the canals and transferred to it a trust originally set up for that purpose.

At trial, the POA's administrator testified that the committee reviews repairs and new construction across all of Ono Island and the canal system, including areas left off a subdivision plat, and that the POA "possesses the sole discretion to approve any proposed improvement." When either association learns of prohibited activity on a mound, the same testimony says it typically issues a stop-work order.

The POA's owner portal is behind a login.

Where the Corps' general permits stop at the Ono canals

The federal side has its own exception for these canals. In Alabama, the Corps issues general permits for common shoreline work. These are standard authorizations with preset conditions that projects can use without a full individual review. The Corps' Alabama General Permits page names the man-made canals on Ono Island as an excluded area in two of them:

• ALG01-2011, construction or modification of boat slips. Excluded areas are listed as waters fronting the Gulf of Mexico, Pelican Bay, the Weeks Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve "and the man-made canals on Ono Island."
• ALG11-2011, riprap, bulkheads and other shoreline protection. The bulkhead section says bulkhead installation "is specifically excluded from areas fronting the waters of Weeks Bay and Ono Island man-made canals." The permit's excluded areas list the Ono canals again.

According to the Alabama Department of Environmental Management, some projects, including residential piers and work with minimal wetland impacts, may fall under a pre-certified Corps general or nationwide permit. Seawalls, bulkheads, major dredging and similar shoreline stabilization generally need an individual Corps permit, which the Corps and ADEM review together. ADEM's review normally begins when the owner applies to the Corps.

On most Baldwin County shorelines, a new boat slip or bulkhead may qualify for a general permit. On Ono's man-made canals, those two general permits expressly don't apply. Neither the Corps page nor ADEM's says which authorization a specific canal project will need. That question goes to the agencies.

What the courts decided about the land, and what they left alone

The mound had been assigned a tax parcel number by at least 1991. It was sold at a 1995 tax sale after the 1994 taxes went unpaid, and it later passed to F Family South through private sales. At trial, testimony showed that the POA was prepared to redeem the parcel for $734.58. The Supreme Court ruled that Alabama's 20-year rule of repose barred the POA's challenge to the 1995 tax sale. It reversed the part of the judgment that had given the POA title. On remand, the trial court let the POA redeem the parcel. In a decision dated March 20, 2026, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals held that the rule of repose barred that redemption claim too, and it reversed and remanded.

The courts treated who owns the mound and what can be built on it as separate questions. The March 2026 opinion reversed the judgment that had made the POA the owner through redemption. The 2024 holding that the mound is bound by implied covenants, and that the canal system is under POA and COA control, was affirmed.

Questions buyers ask about Ono canal lots

Does every canal-front owner belong to the Canal Owners Association?

The COA's articles of incorporation, as described by the Supreme Court, define its membership as all owners with fee-simple title to a lot contiguous to one of the canals.

Are there parts of the canals where building isn't allowed at all?

Testimony in the case put the number of intertidal mounds at somewhere between five and about ten, depending on the witness. The POA's rules, as described in the record, prohibit building on the mounds. The POA's administrator also mentioned "spoils areas" where building isn't permitted.

Do existing canal boathouses cause problems for water quality?

The POA's environmental consultant agreed that existing boathouses along the canals had not harmed water quality. She linked that to their design: they didn't require dredging, they were shorter than the shelter in dispute, and they were set back from the shoreline so a shelf of marsh grass could remain.

Is Ono Island's bridge public?

No. The POA's portal describes the island as a gated community reached by a private bridge owned by the POA.

This post is general information, not legal advice. If you're planning a canal-front purchase or project, confirm the requirements with the POA, the Canal Owners Association, the Corps, ADEM and your own attorney.

When we work with buyers on Ono canal property, we treat the boathouse or slip they have in mind as part of the purchase decision. That means getting the association documents early and building the approval steps into the timeline before closing. If you have a specific canal lot in mind, Leigh McPherson and our team can help you line up the right documents and the right people to answer your questions before you commit.