The scenario has played out on the Vineyard for decades.

Someone spends a lot of money to buy an expensive waterfront home and expects to be able to build a dock to go with it. The dock is denied by a local conservation commission. The decision is appealed, denied again, appealed again. The cycle continues, this time in court.

In 1987 Oak Bluffs put a 21-month moratorium on new piers in Lagoon Pond, but not before seven property owners filed plans for new docks just under the wire, leading to a drawn-out legal battle that involved the Martha’s Vineyard Commission and state Department of Environmental Quality Engineering.

In the early 1990s two seasonal home-owners on Chappaquiddick waged legal battle to build a 308-foot pier in Cape Pogue Pond; the battle went on for 10 years. The owners were denied at every turn, and sued the conservation commission, planning board and department of environmental protection before losing a final battle in the Massachusetts Appeals Court.

The list goes on.

Fifty years ago, it was relatively easy to build a dock on the shore of a waterfront property on the Island, and usually involved only getting a simple approval from the town.

But now it’s difficult, if not impossible, to build a new dock on the Vineyard due both to state and federal environmental regulations and local restrictions enforced by the town conservation commissions. The rules have become more stringent as more knowledge is gained about the impact piers have on fragile wetlands, shellfish and other marine life.

Piers can damage critical shellfish habitat and destroy eelgrass beds. Among other things, piers create shading, which slowly deprives plants like eelgrass of valuable sunlight.

But tension continues to build around the topic of piers: as they become more difficult to build, their value in connection with a waterfront home has skyrocketed. On top of that, the number of recreational boats has also spiked in recent years. According to the U.S. Bureau of Transportation, the number of recreational boats in this country climbed from 10.9 million in 2000 to 12.8 million in 2007, the last year figures are available.

Battles over pier projects on the Vineyard have been largely concentrated in the three down-Island towns of Edgartown, Oak Bluffs and Vineyard Haven. More common in the 1990s, the legal fights tapered off after 2000.

But in Oak Bluffs a new battle is brewing over a plan by Allyn and Pamela Ryalls to build a 60-foot dock at their summer home at 9 East Chop Drive.

In 2006 the previous property owner, Ann Brownell, applied for and was denied a permit to build a 65-foot pier off the property. She then sold the property to Mr. Ryalls, who submitted a notice of intent to the town conservation commission for a seasonally installed float system with a 50-foot pier and two 6-by-16 foot floats.

Later that year, after a neighbor complained the new pier system would cut off access to his pier, Mr. Ryalls reduced the length of the pier and eliminated one of the floats. The conservation commission again denied the proposal, and Mr. Ryalls appealed to the Department of Environmental Protection and Dukes County superior court under the town wetlands bylaw.

In a complaint filed on July 20 of last year, attorney Martin V. (Skip) Tomassian 3rd said the conservation commission had exceeded its authority by denying the proposal and failing to conduct a hearing within the required period of time. The complaint ordered the commission to allow Mr. Ryalls’ pier and demanded payment for attorney fees and other costs.

In October the DEP issued a superseding order of conditions, which among other things required Mr. Ryalls to use pressure treated timbers, banned him from using heavy construction equipment, and required the piles to be buried below the mean low water line.

The order also required Mr. Ryalls to receive approval from the local shellfish constable and purchase shellfish seed that had to be spread in adjacent areas, the quantity of seed to be determined by the constable. Most important, the order did not relieve him of complying with the requirements of the town wetlands bylaw.

Mr. Ryalls did not immediately agree to the conditions and instead filed new plans earlier this year for a smaller pier system expected to have less of an impact on nearby shellfish beds. A hearing on the new plan was opened last month and was continued until August.

Meanwhile the situation has been complicated by allegations that Mr. Ryalls hired someone to remove several pilings at a neighbor’s property.

Harbor master Todd Alexander told the Gazette this week he was called to the property earlier this year by a neighbor who said workers hired by Mr. Ryalls were pulling out his pilings.

“He and his lawyers later claimed the pilings were a foot over his property line. Which you can’t really determine because you can’t draw a line out into the ocean. He and his lawyers said the town had no jurisdiction to make him put the pilings back, and the town argued he had no jurisdiction to take them out in the first place,” Mr. Alexander said.

The neighbor’s pilings have since been put back into place.

Joan Hughes, chairman of the Oak Bluffs conservation commission, said the Ryalls pier situation is complicated, but she said the matter may be resolved by the end of the summer. “It’s in the hands of the lawyers now. But a hearing is scheduled to resume in August, at which time anything could happen,” she said.

But speaking generally about piers, she said much more is known today than 20 years ago. “You saw a lot more before we knew their cumulative effect. The maritime regulations now are based on current science; they require a much more comprehensive review,” Mrs. Hughes said.

She said a proliferation of piers several years ago nearly ruined the inner tidal areas of many coastal ponds around the Island. “Nobody understood their impact on the eelgrass; nobody thought about pollution from boats and gas. People would store gas and oil cans right on the dock. It was a different time,” she said.

Ms. Hughes said there have been relatively few pier applications in recent years, although the number shot up briefly after several newspaper articles appeared in national publications extolling the virtues of a home with a pier. One was in the Wall Street Journal in 2007 headlined “When the Dock Is Worth More Than the House;” another appeared in The New York Times in 2005 headlined “Homes With Boat Slips Sell at a Premium in Florida.”

“I don’t know if those articles had anything to do with it, but the applications started flooding in. All of a sudden the towns were feeling pressure from people who just had to have a dock at their home,” Mrs. Hughes said.

The trend is ongoing, she said; at least two other Oak Bluffs property owners have submitted plans to build piers off their waterfront homes. It is unclear if these proposals will be approved, but language in the town wetlands bylaw suggests it will be difficult.

While it discourages piers for environmental reasons, the bylaw does encourage homeowners to consider joint pier projects.

Jane Varkonda, conservation agent for Tisbury and Edgartown, said she too has witnessed legal battles over pier proposals in recent years. But she is optimistic they might subside in the coming years.

“The waterfront lots, for the most part, are maxed-out already,” Mrs. Varkonda said. “And I think people are highly aware where piers are allowed and where they aren’t allowed. The challenges of building a pier are well known at this point.”

Alan Schweikert, owner of Ocean Park Realty, took a different view.

“Homes with piers are in high demand; they will continue to be in high demand. They add value to a home,” he said.

“If a property owner has a neighbor five houses down with a pier, then they are going to want one, too. That’s just the nature of the game. And if they want to build [a pier] that is tastefully done, considerate to neighbors, and environmentally appropriate, why wouldn’t we let them?”