[Carry_Okie]

The federales have a good point that the taxpayers should not be reponsible for cleaning up their mess.

No, they don't. The demand for water for fish is an urban democratic claim on the use of a private asset. It's terrible environmental policy because it ends up being used for the profit of those wishing to use regulatory power to put their competitors out of business. That process distorts priorities, misallocates capital, and destroys the wealth that pays for environmental protection. Takings such as these devalue the resource to the point where land is abandoned and overrun with weeds and pests.

[Still Thinking]

You missed the point of my (sarcastic) agreement with the feds. I "agree" with them that the taxpayers should not be left holding the bag for their incompetence. I feel that there is a fundamental problem with the way such issues are resolved now. The government (or at least staffers) are in an accountability-free situation. They can impose any unreasonable edict they like; if it stands, they win, and if it's overturned, the TAXPAYERS lose. Win-win for them, lose-lose for us, their employers. The potential for PERSONAL liability might make them a little more cautious with their actions. Full, 100% personal liability isn't realistic, as their decisions have the potential for multi-million dollar impact, but it should be enough so that they think twice or three times about the impact their actions have on others and whether the law is behind them.

[Still Thinking]

You missed the point of my (sarcastic) agreement with the feds. I "agree" with them that the taxpayers should not be left holding the bag for their (the feds') incompetence and cavalier attitude to whom is ruined by their actions. I feel that there is a fundamental problem with the way such issues are resolved now. The government (or at least staffers) are in an accountability-free situation. They can impose any unreasonable edict they like; if it stands, they win, but if it's overturned, the TAXPAYERS lose. Win-win for them, lose-lose for us, their supposed employers. The potential for PERSONAL liability might make them a little more cautious with their actions. Full, 100% personal liability isn't realistic, as their decisions have the potential for multi-million dollar impact, but it should be enough so that they think twice or three times about the impact their actions have on others and whether the law is behind them.