Fed wants to oversee all water everywhere - The Firearms Forum

Blackhawk Dave · 12-15-2009, 07:44 AM

The House and Senate are working to change the Clean Water Act to remove the word "navigatable" so that the EPA, etc can govern ALL water, including the ponds on your site, runoff, mudpuddles, etc. No BS, actual fact. Call/write.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s787/show

rentalguy1 · 12-15-2009, 08:00 AM

I hate to tell you this, but they already do, and they have for a loooonnngggg time. The feds write the law, and it is enforced by the state level environmental entities. I was a (potable) water treatment plant operator and had to deal with TDEC daily. I had to hold three different licenses from the state to do that job. In all honesty, you would be surprised what something that seems small and petty to us, can cause when hundreds of others that think the same way.

GMFWoodchuck · 12-15-2009, 08:32 AM

They regulate the quality of water. But they don't regulate the ownership of water. For example, the colorado isn't owned by the people who live on it. It's mostly owned by the state of California even though they have no land rights. And most bodies of water, especially rivers, are like that in the west. Here in the east it's a totally different. The creek going through my parents property, and the pond on a neighbors land is theirs. The natural gas under my parents property belongs to my parents. There is no "mineral" ownership rights like that to any great degree east of the Missippi. The same with any major resource.

A bit of a separate point, but I'm not totally opposed with the feds telling people that they can't dirty my drinking water just because they live upstream and therefore it was theirs at the time they dirtied it. The same with time of ownership. If I buy land from a company without being told that it was contaminated, who's fault is it? Sure some of it's mine because I should have tested it, but what about the polluters themselves? Especially if they knew that it was toxic.

But, as long as my pond is my pond. I'm fine with it. I'm okay with the federal government telling me I can't dump toxic crap into it.

rentalguy1 · 12-15-2009, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GMFWoodchuck

But, as long as my pond is my pond. I'm fine with it. I'm okay with the federal government telling me I can't dump toxic crap into it.

Your post is right on. I just want to add that your pond ceases to be your pond when heavy rains cause it to swell beyond its banks. The reason tighter regulations may kick in at this point is because the excess water from the pond can then travel downhill, collecting fertilizers, e. coli., etc., which then would either end up in another body of surface water, or, to a lesser degree, in a body of ground water. The reason that it would be to a lesser degree is because while the water can pick up contaminates as it runs off, the ground is also the best filter ever created. Man has yet to create something that can filter out impurities while leaving vital nutrients in the water.

Talking about this makes me miss my job. Man, I wish I could still work. You ever have a job that just fit like a glove? That's the way I was with water treatment. I was very good at it. I lived and breathed it. Oh well, too late to feel sorry for myself now...

GMFWoodchuck · 12-15-2009, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rentalguy1

Man has yet to create something that can filter out impurities while leaving vital nutrients in the water.

What about Brita?

Quote:

Originally Posted by rentalguy1

Talking about this makes me miss my job. Man, I wish I could still work. You ever have a job that just fit like a glove? That's the way I was with water treatment. I was very good at it. I lived and breathed it. Oh well, too late to feel sorry for myself now...

I know what you mean. I did treework for almost 10 years. I miss it sometimes. Nothing will ever replace the feeling of carrying a Husky 372 or a Stihl O66 and cutting down timber. Or driving a skidder on a steep hillside. Or being 70 feet in the air in a bucket, or being 100 feet in the air hanging by a rope. Or any of that stuff really. It's one of those "toughman" jobs. But, I was getting a little older and injury free and I wanted it to stay that way.

I ended up with a pretty good rep in my area and would still be able to get a job on a moments notice with almost any tree company. But I needed to do something else.

But lucky me, I like my job now.

It's not the best, but I get along with everyone and the customers seem to like me.

GMFWoodchuck · 12-15-2009, 09:38 AM

Am I the only one who thinks that the black plastic sediment fences should be placed uphill of construction sites to divert the water around the bare dirt rather than pretending that it will stop an entire hill side of water filled with mud?

Trouble 45-70 · 12-15-2009, 12:04 PM

I'm sure this bill will be innocuous as it's regulations will be written by Obamas Czars. they have the best interests of this country at heart. Wonder if they want control of our water wells. Then they would really have us by the short hairs.

the morning light · 12-15-2009, 03:15 PM

I was talking to my State Sen. this morning about the permanent closing of the mill at which I used to work and the conservation swung to a possible mine opening in the area and he made the comment that if the Clean Water Act passes we would not be able to open a gravel pit let alone a mine!

12-15-2009, 07:44 AM	#1
Blackhawk Dave Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Denton, TX Posts: 593	Fed wants to oversee all water everywhere The House and Senate are working to change the Clean Water Act to remove the word "navigatable" so that the EPA, etc can govern ALL water, including the ponds on your site, runoff, mudpuddles, etc. No BS, actual fact. Call/write. http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s787/show -->

12-15-2009, 08:00 AM	#2
rentalguy1 Former Guest Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: The mountains of NE TN. Posts: 884	Re: Fed wants to oversee all water everywhere I hate to tell you this, but they already do, and they have for a loooonnngggg time. The feds write the law, and it is enforced by the state level environmental entities. I was a (potable) water treatment plant operator and had to deal with TDEC daily. I had to hold three different licenses from the state to do that job. In all honesty, you would be surprised what something that seems small and petty to us, can cause when hundreds of others that think the same way.

12-15-2009, 08:32 AM	#3
GMFWoodchuck Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Binghamton, NY Posts: 1,369	Re: Fed wants to oversee all water everywhere They regulate the quality of water. But they don't regulate the ownership of water. For example, the colorado isn't owned by the people who live on it. It's mostly owned by the state of California even though they have no land rights. And most bodies of water, especially rivers, are like that in the west. Here in the east it's a totally different. The creek going through my parents property, and the pond on a neighbors land is theirs. The natural gas under my parents property belongs to my parents. There is no "mineral" ownership rights like that to any great degree east of the Missippi. The same with any major resource. A bit of a separate point, but I'm not totally opposed with the feds telling people that they can't dirty my drinking water just because they live upstream and therefore it was theirs at the time they dirtied it. The same with time of ownership. If I buy land from a company without being told that it was contaminated, who's fault is it? Sure some of it's mine because I should have tested it, but what about the polluters themselves? Especially if they knew that it was toxic. But, as long as my pond is my pond. I'm fine with it. I'm okay with the federal government telling me I can't dump toxic crap into it.

12-15-2009, 09:38 AM	#6
GMFWoodchuck Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Binghamton, NY Posts: 1,369	Re: Fed wants to oversee all water everywhere Am I the only one who thinks that the black plastic sediment fences should be placed uphill of construction sites to divert the water around the bare dirt rather than pretending that it will stop an entire hill side of water filled with mud?

12-15-2009, 12:04 PM	#7
Trouble 45-70 Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: NE Ar. W. of Black River Contributor Posts: 2,703	Re: Fed wants to oversee all water everywhere I'm sure this bill will be innocuous as it's regulations will be written by Obamas Czars. they have the best interests of this country at heart. Wonder if they want control of our water wells. Then they would really have us by the short hairs. Last edited by Trouble 45-70; 12-15-2009 at 12:05 PM..

12-15-2009, 03:15 PM	#8
the morning light V.I.P. Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 288	Re: Fed wants to oversee all water everywhere I was talking to my State Sen. this morning about the permanent closing of the mill at which I used to work and the conservation swung to a possible mine opening in the area and he made the comment that if the Clean Water Act passes we would not be able to open a gravel pit let alone a mine!