|
|
 BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25352
  
Location: Bastrop, Texas | So this Wyoming rancher builds a stock pond and the EPA fines him $37,000 a day. So far he owes them something like $16,000,000.
It looks like he dug out the stock pond for his livestock, and dammed up a creek, with an outflow tract. The water going out is said to be cleaner than the water going in. He's taking them to court. When I saw this on the news last night I wanted to throw my shoe through the TV. |
|
| |
|
 Accident Prone
Posts: 22277
Location: 100 miles from Nowhere, AR | Read up on WOTUS. We have a temporary delay of implementation on it for 13 states as of last Thursday. It's seriously bad news. |
|
| |
|
Sideways Riding Expert
Posts: 11371
Location: ND--it snows, it floods, it snows, it floods | The WOTUS is a joke. If it would get passed it would be bad news for everyone, not just agriculture. The EPA is getting to big for their britches as it is. |
|
| |
|
Accident Prone
Posts: 22277
Location: 100 miles from Nowhere, AR | docschic - 2015-09-01 11:33 AM The WOTUS is a joke. If it would get passed it would be bad news for everyone, not just agriculture. The EPA is getting to big for their britches as it is.
It's done tho. The rule was finalized last spring and due to be implemented last Friday. The comments were overwhelmingly against the rule as written, but the EPA did what they wanted anyway and the Corps let them. The House has passed a resolution to stop it, but the senate hasn't taken it up yet. |
|
| |
|
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 372
| Three 4 Luck - 2015-09-01 11:28 AM
Read up on WOTUS. We have a temporary delay of implementation on it for 13 states as of last Thursday. It's seriously bad news.
all of this.
WOTUS is bad news
|
|
| |
|
 Expert
Posts: 2457
| This is a giant MESS ... the EPA has started crap like this in Washington, where my parents are. I'm just thankful that the current "inspectors" that they brought out to "inspect" the creeks and stock dam/ fire dam are not smart enough to realize they were standing in a pasture used for lambing ... but was currently un-occupied. So, they said we had "fenced off the waterways".
I hope the rancher gets his local NRCS involved to help justify stock dams as part of conservation and natural water cleaning. The EPA has too much power in my opinion.
|
|
| |
|
Sideways Riding Expert
Posts: 11371
Location: ND--it snows, it floods, it snows, it floods | Three 4 Luck - 2015-09-01 11:39 AM docschic - 2015-09-01 11:33 AM The WOTUS is a joke. If it would get passed it would be bad news for everyone, not just agriculture. The EPA is getting to big for their britches as it is. It's done tho. The rule was finalized last spring and due to be implemented last Friday. The comments were overwhelmingly against the rule as written, but the EPA did what they wanted anyway and the Corps let them. The House has passed a resolution to stop it, but the senate hasn't taken it up yet.
I don't have a lot of good things to say about the Corps either.... |
|
| |
|
BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25352
Location: Bastrop, Texas | One word: Tyranny. |
|
| |
|
 Expert
Posts: 4121
Location: SE Louisiana | I would think some of this depends on the state laws. In Missouri, while the land-owner owns the stream-bed, the state owns the water flowing over it. The land-owner may not alter or interrupt the natural flow without permission.
Out west, water rights in places where water can be hard to come by, are adjudged differently. Range wars were fought over this very thing. |
|
| |
|
 Hugs to You
Posts: 7551
Location: In The Land of Cotton | You control water, you control everything. |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 4121
Location: SE Louisiana | 3canstorun - 2015-09-01 2:07 PM
You control water, you control everything.
So, if land owners wanted to, they could dam up headwaters to rivers like the Snake and the Yellowstone? |
|
| |
|
Accident Prone
Posts: 22277
Location: 100 miles from Nowhere, AR | komet. - 2015-09-01 1:46 PM I would think some of this depends on the state laws. In Missouri, while the land-owner owns the stream-bed, the state owns the water flowing over it. The land-owner may not alter or interrupt the natural flow without permission. Out west, water rights in places where water can be hard to come by, are adjudged differently. Range wars were fought over this very thing.
Nope, this is federal and over rules state law. States rights is partly why the federal judge agreed to delay implementation in the 13 states that sued the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers. |
|
| |
|
Accident Prone
Posts: 22277
Location: 100 miles from Nowhere, AR | komet. - 2015-09-01 2:21 PM
3canstorun - 2015-09-01 2:07 PM
You control water, you control everything.
So, if land owners wanted to, they could dam up headwaters to rivers like the Snake and the Yellowstone?
Navigable waterways and what is a "significant nexus" by definition is the crux of the problem with the way the EPA wrote the rule. As it stands, drainage ditches, mud puddles, and other sometimes holds water areas are subject to the clean water act. We can't function. There's a farmer in California being sued for shallow tilling and planting a wheat field 8 MILES from the Sacremento River. |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 4121
Location: SE Louisiana | Three 4 Luck - 2015-09-01 2:27 PM
komet. - 2015-09-01 2:21 PM
3canstorun - 2015-09-01 2:07 PM
You control water, you control everything.
So, if land owners wanted to, they could dam up headwaters to rivers like the Snake and the Yellowstone?
Navigable waterways and what is a "significant nexus" by definition is the crux of the problem with the way the EPA wrote the rule. As it stands, drainage ditches, mud puddles, and other sometimes holds water areas are subject to the clean water act. We can't function. There's a farmer in California being sued for shallow tilling and planting a wheat field 8 MILES from the Sacremento River.
Do you mean they have taken control of the ENTIRE watershed in the USA? Wow.... I bet they won't float THAT law for very long. |
|
| |
|
Hugs to You
Posts: 7551
Location: In The Land of Cotton | komet. - 2015-09-01 3:21 PM 3canstorun - 2015-09-01 2:07 PM You control water, you control everything. So, if land owners wanted to, they could dam up headwaters to rivers like the Snake and the Yellowstone?
Basically, I was talking about the new ruling. How now the EPA (the gov) is now in control of the water.
From mud puddles on up. Don't think the gov didn't think of this before quietly sneaking this ruling in. We (a few of us on here) have been talking about it for a long time. Other people thought it would never happen and stuck their head in the sand so to speak.
You talked about water rights out west. Unfortuantely, in the past, yes that used to be true. However, a judge ruled against century old rights. |
|
| |
|
Accident Prone
Posts: 22277
Location: 100 miles from Nowhere, AR | komet. - 2015-09-01 2:38 PM
Three 4 Luck - 2015-09-01 2:27 PM
komet. - 2015-09-01 2:21 PM
3canstorun - 2015-09-01 2:07 PM
You control water, you control everything.
So, if land owners wanted to, they could dam up headwaters to rivers like the Snake and the Yellowstone?
Navigable waterways and what is a "significant nexus" by definition is the crux of the problem with the way the EPA wrote the rule. As it stands, drainage ditches, mud puddles, and other sometimes holds water areas are subject to the clean water act. We can't function. There's a farmer in California being sued for shallow tilling and planting a wheat field 8 MILES from the Sacremento River.
Do you mean they have taken control of the ENTIRE watershed in the USA? Wow.... I bet they won't float THAT law for very long.
Yes, that's exactly what they've done. |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 2457
| Three 4 Luck - 2015-09-01 3:02 PM komet. - 2015-09-01 2:38 PM Three 4 Luck - 2015-09-01 2:27 PM komet. - 2015-09-01 2:21 PM 3canstorun - 2015-09-01 2:07 PM You control water, you control everything. So, if land owners wanted to, they could dam up headwaters to rivers like the Snake and the Yellowstone? Navigable waterways and what is a "significant nexus" by definition is the crux of the problem with the way the EPA wrote the rule. As it stands, drainage ditches, mud puddles, and other sometimes holds water areas are subject to the clean water act. We can't function. There's a farmer in California being sued for shallow tilling and planting a wheat field 8 MILES from the Sacremento River. Do you mean they have taken control of the ENTIRE watershed in the USA? Wow.... I bet they won't float THAT law for very long. Yes, that's exactly what they've done.
Google "Waters of the US Act" and you'll get the skinny ... this stuff is CRAZY and the worst part is that most people don't even know that it is happening. |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 4121
Location: SE Louisiana | Three 4 Luck - 2015-09-01 3:02 PM
komet. - 2015-09-01 2:38 PM
Three 4 Luck - 2015-09-01 2:27 PM
komet. - 2015-09-01 2:21 PM
3canstorun - 2015-09-01 2:07 PM
You control water, you control everything.
So, if land owners wanted to, they could dam up headwaters to rivers like the Snake and the Yellowstone?
Navigable waterways and what is a "significant nexus" by definition is the crux of the problem with the way the EPA wrote the rule. As it stands, drainage ditches, mud puddles, and other sometimes holds water areas are subject to the clean water act. We can't function. There's a farmer in California being sued for shallow tilling and planting a wheat field 8 MILES from the Sacremento River.
Do you mean they have taken control of the ENTIRE watershed in the USA? Wow.... I bet they won't float THAT law for very long.
Yes, that's exactly what they've done.
Let's take this one step farther.
Rain falls on the roof of your home, and runs off. That makes your home part of the watershed and puts it under the jurisdiction and control of the EPA. The implications of this are mind-boggling. |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 1561
| Bear - 2015-09-01 12:52 PM
One word: Tyranny.
What happened to the laws are laws stance? Does that only apply to inner city blacks? |
|
| |
|
Accident Prone
Posts: 22277
Location: 100 miles from Nowhere, AR | Itsme - 2015-09-01 5:02 PM Bear - 2015-09-01 12:52 PM One word: Tyranny. What happened to the laws are laws stance? Does that only apply to inner city blacks?
Edited by Three 4 Luck 2015-09-01 5:31 PM
|
|
| |
Folks on-line