[rktman]

How many folks have had their lives disrupted/ruined by this "law". Make mud puddles safe again. You know, water that settles on you property after a heavy rain that might make it into some river someplace that leads to the ocean or a large lake.

[rktman]

NON print version:

http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/07/the-clean-water-rule-is-about-federal-authority-not-water/

[antidemoncrat]

Probably most of the Obama EPA regs were about Federal Control, not about making the country better.

[george76]

Globalists do not local communities, families, and individuals controlling their own lives.

Part of the UN Agenda 21.

[george76]

UN Agenda 21 ( Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from the list.)

[Alberta's Child]

To be adjacent, the rule uses the rubric of "neighboring," which can be met by waters in the 100-year floodplain—meaning land which might be wet one out of every 100 days is a water of the U.S. and can be federally controlled.

Articles like this would be much more credible if they can get their basic facts straight. Or maybe I have to go back to engineering school and take my sophomore-level hydrology course all over again.

[jcon40]

I am trying to figure out how to fight whatever agency classified the road side ditch in front of my farm as a trout stream.

Any help appreciated.

It is seriously just a roadside ditch the is completely dry for 6-8 months a year

[PapaBear3625]

We need justices who understand English, and legislators who write unambiguous English.

The long-understood definition of "navigable waters" has been "bodies of water which are deep and wide enough to be usable for shipping". The federal government's alleged authority to oversee "navigable waters" comes from the Interstate Commerce clause, which implies their authority only extends to waters suitable for commercial shipping. Thus, the Mississippi River is navigable water. The Great Lakes are navigable waters. A foot-deep stream running behind my house is NOT a navigable water.

[JimRed]

As a real estate agent, I am ethically bound to tell my clients about anything of which I am aware (or SHOULD be aware) that can affect their property value. Usually it is in written form and saved to my file, so they can not say “you never told me that”. But this one I can’t put in writing because of fear of prosecution.

A buyer or seller of vacant land should carefully inspect it for any signs of “endangered” wildlife, “protected” plant life and any thing that might indicate that it could be a wetland. The presence of any of these factors can render it unbuildable and of little or no value. But never hire an environmentalist to do it; they’ll rat you out to the authorities.

If it is appears to be a wetland, swampy, marshy, muddy without any recent rain, don’t buy it unless you first check to see if there is a perched water table (a shallow clay layer which prevents water from percolating through the subsoil- an in-the-ground mud puddle writ large). If the clay layer is relatively thin you can punch holes in it, fill them with gravel and allow the water to drain away and the ground to dry out. Reseed or plant with upland vegetation that does not do well in a wetland. If it is a true wetland, there is no cure; don’t buy it. Assuming it can be dried, move to the next step.

Relocate or otherwise remove (SSS?) any questionable animal or plant life. Let your conscience be your guide. There are a few truly endangered species that are actually of some value to the ecosystem; try to find them a new home. But there are so many other useless critters on that list... If your property is outed as having them in residence, you’re toast.

I can tell this to a client, but I can’t document it. Come to think of it, maybe posting this isn’t such a smart idea...hope we’re not being monitored by the ecowarriors!