To: HerrBlucher
Other neighbors don’t have an inherent right to water that falls on your property.
43 posted on
07/27/2012 8:31:42 AM PDT by
Secret Agent Man
(I can neither confirm or deny that; even if I could, I couldn't - it's classified.)
To: Secret Agent Man
Other neighbors don’t have an inherent right to water that falls on your property.Water rights are far more complicated than that.
47 posted on
07/27/2012 8:44:47 AM PDT by
Navy Patriot
(Join the Democrats, it's not Fascism when WE do it, and the Constitution and law mean what WE say.)
To: Secret Agent Man
Other neighbors don’t have an inherent right to water that falls on your property.You don't have 3 large reservoirs due to rainfall.
I would bet there was streams that ran through his property that he damned up and the neighbors lost their source of water or their supply was vastly diminished.
as the article said this law was in place since 1925 and this was the first time it was enforced.
49 posted on
07/27/2012 8:51:54 AM PDT by
trailhkr1
(Bigamy: Having at least one wife too many. Monogamy: Definitely having one wife too many.)
To: Secret Agent Man
But he is not just taking rainwater that has fallen on his property, he is taking rainwater that has fallen on all the properties upstream of him in the watershed. Water which the downstream users have a right too just as much as he does.
If he were to restrict his storage to ONLY that calculated volume of rain water that fell on his property, and BYPASSED the rest, then that would be more reasonable.
73 posted on
07/27/2012 10:17:24 AM PDT by
HerrBlucher
("The cross opens its arms to the four winds; it is a signpost for free travelers." GK Chesterton)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson