Consider each of the following laws as potential regulatory takings:

$($a$)$ A new Texas Open Beach Act permits public easements $-$ a right of

passage$-$over dry sand beaches that are privately owned. Beach erosion

or sea level rises can cause those easements to move further and further

inland, often closer to beach homes. Severance v$.$ Patternson, $566$ F$\mathrm{.}3$d $490$

$(5$th Cir. $2009).$

$($b$)$ Erosion threatens about $60$ percent of Florida's beaches, and under a $1961$

law, the state dredged sand from one area and moved it to a threatened

area, extending the width of an eroding beach $80-100$ feet. This new stretch

of beach would then be publicly accessible. Six property owners, calling

themselves Stop the Beach Renourishment Inc., claimed their deeds enti$-$

tled them to the waterfront, and that members of the public should not be

permitted to use the additional space. Stop the Beach Renourishment Inc.

v$.$ Florida Dept. of the Environment, $998$ So$\mathrm{.}2$d $1102($FI$.2008).$

$($c$)$ SWEPI LP is a subsidiary of Royal Dutch Shell and operates oil fields. In $2010,$

the company paid some $$216,200$ for $36$ oil and gas leases in Mora County,

New Mexico. Four years later, the Mora County Board of County Commis$-$

sioners made it unlawful for corporations to engage in the extraction of

oil, natural gas, or other hydrocarbons anywhere within the county. At the

time, the company had made no attempts to drill for oil or gas, there were

no producing oil and gas wells in the area around its leases, and the county

claimed it was not economically feasible to drill. Was this an unconstitu$-$

tional taking? Research: Read the Mora County declaration explaining its

actions. SWEPI, LP v$.$ Mora County, N$.$M$.,81$ F$.$Supp$\mathrm{.}3$d $1075($D$.$N$.$M$.2015).$