133 S. Ct. 511 (2012)
The Arkansas Game and Fish Commission owns and manages the Dave Donaldson Black River Wildlife Management Area. This area consists of 23,000 acres of forested land along both banks of the Black River in northeast Arkansas.1
The Area supports hardwood timber species, primarily nuttall, overcup, and willow oaks.2 It serves as a wildlife habitat and hunting preserve where the Commission conducts regular timber harvests.3
In 1948 the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers constructed the Clearwater Dam 115 miles upstream from the Management Area.4 The Corps adopted a Water Control Manual that prescribed seasonally varying rates for water releases from the Dam while allowing for planned deviations to accommodate agricultural, recreational, and other purposes.5
From 1993 through 2000 the Corps authorized annual deviations from the Manual in response to requests from downstream farmers.6 These deviations involved slower water releases during the fall months.7 The slower releases caused water to accumulate behind the Dam and necessitated extended high-volume releases that produced flooding on the Management Area during the April-to-October growing season at levels substantially above historical averages.8 The Commission lodged repeated objections to the deviations during this period.9
In 2005 the Commission commenced an action against the United States in the Court of Federal Claims.10 The Commission asserted that the cumulative impact of the flooding from 1993 to 1999 had destroyed more than 18 million board feet of timber and required costly reclamation.11 Following a trial the Court of Federal Claims issued detailed findings of fact and awarded the Commission $5.7 million.12 The Federal Circuit reversed that judgment.13 The Supreme Court granted certiorari.14
Whether a taking may occur, within the meaning of the Takings Clause, when government-induced flood invasions, although repetitive, are temporary?15
The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment bars the Government from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole.16 Government-induced flooding can constitute a taking, and a taking need not be permanent to be compensable.17 Recurrent floodings, even if of finite duration, are not categorically exempt from Takings Clause liability.18
Yes. The Corps' annual deviations from the Water Control Manual caused repeated flooding of the Management Area during the growing season over six consecutive years.19 This flooding was both foreseeable, given the Commission's repeated objections, and severe in its cumulative impact.20 The flooding destroyed more than 18 million board feet of timber.21 It altered the character of the land from a bottomland hardwood forest to a headwater swamp.22
Because government-induced flooding can constitute a taking even when temporary in duration, and because the flooding here substantially interfered with the Commission's property rights, the deviations effected a compensable taking under the Fifth Amendment.23
A taking may occur when government-induced flood invasions, although repetitive, are temporary.24