I call BS. The water inside my body is not public water. Hence, one must DEFINE where that "public water," IOW the public CLAIM on the water begins. If it is on his roof, it is still his responsibility. If it is on his land he didn't have to use a well. If it is from rain that fell on his land, ditto. If on the other hand the water came ONTO his property from outside in a seasonal stream, the government has a case. The distinction is all about HOW he acquired the water on his land.
Carry_Okie, my thinking runs along the same lines as yours. As long as this guy captures the rain on the way down, it’s his IMO. That’s not all either.
I do think water flowing onto your property can be debated. If that water happens to flow in a natural collection basin, I still believe it should be yours. If you were to take measures to expand that collection basin significantly, I think other parties should have some voice under certain circumstances. For instance, if previous overflow had traditionally supplied others with water downstream, they have a reasoned vested interest. I do not think water that falls on and collects on your property should be debatable. There couldn’t be a private pond or small lake in the nation if that weren’t true.
I worked up some numbers explaining what the full impact of individual capture systems would look like. You can use this link if you’re interested.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2911470/posts?page=42#42