Posted on 07/09/2014 1:57:01 PM PDT by george76
Gary Harrington, the Oregon man convicted of collecting rainwater and snow runoff on his rural property, went to jail today.
...
Gary Harrington will be serving in jail until September 2014 for collecting rainwater.
...
“I’m sacrificing my liberty so we can stand up as a country and stand for our liberty,” Harrington told a small crowd of people gathered outside of the Jackson County (Ore.) Jail.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
I did write an error in following. It was vague.
“The water in the streams flows down from snow, mostly, on the peaks—nearly all of it within a few feet of those streams,...”
The surface water flows in those streams, but the snow does melt, and much of it does run over the rocky peaks to the streams. It’s colder and sometimes more humid in areas above 10,000 feet, and many of those places are sheltered from wind. So evaporation doesn’t happen so fast in the higher, rockier peak areas, where ski resorts and scenic facilities are found.
In grasslands and forests around the bottoms of the high peaks (mainly areas lower than 10,000 feet), that’s not the case. In the dry grasslands and forests below 10,000 feet, there’s not nearly as much snow. In those areas, water only moisturizes the top few inches of soil then evaporates soon after it falls. Precipitation is also far lower in the less steep, less rocky areas below rocky peaks.
Ten to fifteen inches of snow and rain combined per year is not much. But the areas above 10,000 feet get much more precipitation in the forms of snow and ice for most of the year.
So go after those places where visitors from around the world go to spend huge sums of money and to control policies in our states with the help of local colluders. The original water rights laws were for another purpose: that of preventing one rancher from stopping a river from running to his neighbor’s property and offering to buy the neighbor out for a small sum.
The large municipals...they can get their water from deep plains aquifers and properly treat it. That would be much easier than the processes needed for treating water for southeast coastal cities (muddy rivers). They don’t need water from the mountain ranges.
Still awaiting your reply to #74 —
That's no lie. Here in CO you can literally watch 3-4 feet of snow evaporate in less than 48 hours in late March or April. A week later the ground will be as parched and dry as a popcorn fart.
You are flat out wrong on this issue and at this point you are arguing for the sake of argument.
Those are your words, aren't they???
Why can't he or you come forth with a reason??
A reason for what?
I’m sorry that the question was too hard for you and the ditchdigger.
My condolences —
Answer the question, it's called having a conversation or dialog.
Q: Why did the Gov pull his permit?
Nothing new under the sun. War on the kulaks.
You answered that question a few posts ago -- the permit was pulled for not having a reason for the ponds.
Don't you read your own posts??
I told you why but you fail to understand. Troll.
If I may, I believe that an important and relevant term - one that could clear up a lot of the confusion and misconceptions in this discussion - has been missing.
That term is “watershed”
It strikes me that the core issue here is that the guy is interfering with a watershed. At least interfering with it beyond what is permitted by law. Limited collection and use is ok. Significant collection is not, because even if 13 million gallons is not a significant (relatively speaking) amount of water, having a dozen or two dozen other people in the same watershed cite him as precedent to accumulate their own 13 million gallons of water will quickly become a significant amount.
Do I have that right?
What do you think his reason was???
He doesn't need a reason. It's his land and as you thrill over his incarceration
at the same time you're supporting Agenda21. That is not Conservatism, that is Liberalism.
You are on the wrong side of the issue and I'm convinced you're a poser.
Any other questions Der Uncle Chip?
Question for you: is the use of one’s own land as one sees fit an absolute right?
YEP --
So you are defending a guy who digs 3 big holes on his property and he doesn’t know why and neither do you —
and you call me irrational???
Of course there are limitations in land ownership just as there are in the 1st
amendment such as yelling fire in the theatre. The intent of ownership
was to give power to the Citizens over the Government as a basic right.
Absolute Right? We certainly do not have Absolute rights to use our land as we see fit.
That's not my belief, it's what our Gov imposes on us.
Where did I call you that? Are you going to start lying now?
Yes, I'm defending the guy for digging three holes that filled up with water from the sky.
Oh the horror!
Ok, then, great. Thanks for the response!
Another question: at what point does the right to impede the free and natural flow of water on one’s property cross the threshold where government can legitimately step in to place restrictions on that right?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.