It's illegal in Colorado to collect rainwater... seriously?

[CDSmith]

Yes, seriously.

To encourage conservation, cities and water agencies in California and other states have begun nudging homeowners to use captured rain for their gardens, rather than water from the backyard faucet.

But Colorado is one of the last places in the country where rainwater barrels are still largely illegal because of a complex system of water rights in which nearly every drop is spoken for.

And when legislators here tried to enact a law this spring to allow homeowners to harvest the rain, conservationists got a lesson in the power of the entrenched rules that allocate Western water to those who have first claim to it. Even if it is the rain running down someone?s roof.

NYTimes Quote of the Day:

"Where does it stop? Does that mean you own the cloud, too?"

JASON STORY, who ran afoul of a Colorado state law when he tried to collect water in a rain barrel for his vegetable garden.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/us...=37692144&_r=0

What a mess. I must say, living in a province that contains 100,000 lakes give or take, thus having zero shortage of water, it's hard to fathom how some people who just want to water their fucking gardens by collecting rain in a barrel deserve a per-day fine of up to $500.

But there are two sides to this issue, and it's a long read, but a good one.

Personally I think it's a stupid law. If I lived there I might seriously think about rerouting water from my rain gutter pipe back into my house and into a barrel in my basement, and do it in such a way that it's nearly impossible to detect from the outside without close inspection. But that's just me thinking some laws need to be flouted, loudly and often.

What about you? Do you feel you own the water that lands on your roof?

[Tom_PM]

Knew about this long ago from a home improvement show that did a house in Colorado and was therefore unable to put in the underground rain cache and grey water system they had planned. Follow the money! Coors Brewing claims lots of that mountain spring water they're so damned pleased about advertising. Saying how it was born in the Rockies or whatever such BS. They, naturally, support the ban on homeowners.

You should be able to BILL the government for any and ALL roofing and water shedding products and services for which you had to pay out of pocket regarding property you "own". It's absolutely moronic!

SUE for any water damage! YOUR water fucked up MY house etc etc. Good luck with that.

[Relentless]

Asshats can't be trusted with open barrels of water. Think about how many dipshits and jerkoffs would allow a standing container of water to gather germs, maggots and whatever else. The use of this sort of thing in many places would lead to Cholera outbreaks long before it lead to any real water savings. You overestimate the intelligence of most people.

When Hurricane Sandy hit New York people had no power for weeks. Some started storing 60 gallon drums of gasoline in their apartments to run generators with a small exhaust out the window... in 30 story apartment buildings. Think about what might happen in that scenario.

I wouldn't let the public collect air if it could be avoided ;)

[L-Pink]

Originally Posted by Tom_PM

Knew about this long ago from a home improvement show that did a house in Colorado and was therefore unable to put in the underground rain cache and grey water system they had planned. Follow the money! Coors Brewing claims lots of that mountain spring water they're so damned pleased about advertising. Saying how it was born in the Rockies or whatever such BS. They, naturally, support the ban on homeowners.

You should be able to BILL the government for any and ALL roofing and water shedding products and services for which you had to pay out of pocket regarding property you "own". It's absolutely moronic!

SUE for any water damage! YOUR water fucked up MY house etc etc. Good luck with that.

Yea, who's water fucked up all the Colorado homes in last years massive flooding?

It's one thing to have old moronic laws on the books, it's another thing to actually enforce them.

.

[baddog]

Originally Posted by Relentless

Asshats can't be trusted with open barrels of water. Think about how many dipshits and jerkoffs would allow a standing container of water to gather germs, maggots and whatever else. The use of this sort of thing in many places would lead to Cholera outbreaks long before it lead to any real water savings. You overestimate the intelligence of most people.

When Hurricane Sandy hit New York people had no power for weeks. Some started storing 60 gallon drums of gasoline in their apartments to run generators with a small exhaust out the window... in 30 story apartment buildings. Think about what might happen in that scenario.

I wouldn't let the public collect air if it could be avoided ;)

Too logical

[Barry-xlovecam]

Doesn't make any sense at all ...

The rainwater you collect ends up back in the ground unless the goal is to ensure run-off

Natural rain water runoff fills rivers. Rivers like the Colorado are shared resources between states and by international agreements with Mexico.

Makes some sense now?

[CDSmith]

Originally Posted by Relentless

Asshats can't be trusted with open barrels of water. Think about how many dipshits and jerkoffs would allow a standing container of water to gather germs, maggots and whatever else. The use of this sort of thing in many places would lead to Cholera outbreaks long before it lead to any real water savings. You overestimate the intelligence of most people.

When Hurricane Sandy hit New York people had no power for weeks. Some started storing 60 gallon drums of gasoline in their apartments to run generators with a small exhaust out the window... in 30 story apartment buildings. Think about what might happen in that scenario.

I wouldn't let the public collect air if it could be avoided ;)

Those who made and back the law want the water to drain off your roof and into the ground, correct? What about those who extend their rain gutters and reroute some of the water into their garden? It's still the ground, after all, is it not?

If drought condition worsened and it meant dying of thirst or collecting and filtering rain water, what then?

Yes, people in general, are stupid. Not all, but many. But so far, from what I know of it, the millions in N America who currently collect rain water in barrels do it quite smartly, and mainly for conservation purposes. You know, the whole "go green" effort going on in recent times? I've heard of exactly zero cases of private rainwater collection causing any outbreaks, germs, etc.

Some in certain areas do forget to keep their barrels properly covered I suppose, which causes increases in mosquito populations. I've heard of nothing more serious than that though.

Your gas/generators/apartments example is of course pure lunacy, but we're talking water rights here, thus I tend to think your objections are a bit extreme.

[brassmonkey]

there are ways to collect they won't even see

[CDSmith]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

Doesn't make any sense at all ...

The rainwater you collect ends up back in the ground unless the goal is to ensure run-off

Natural rain water runoff fills rivers. Rivers like the Colorado are shared resources between states and by international agreements with Mexico.

Makes some sense now?

There is a section in the article that addresses all this. You should read it.

[Relentless]

Originally Posted by CDSmith

Those who made and back the law want the water to drain off your roof and into the ground, correct? What about those who extend their rain gutters and reroute some of the water into their garden? It's still the ground, after all, is it not? If drought condition worsened and it meant dying of thirst or collecting and filtering rain water, what then?

The smart ones will collect rain water anyway, the dumb ones will follow the law to the letter and die of thirst. I call that natural selection.

Yes, people in general, are stupid. Not all, but many. But so far, from what I know of it, the millions in N America who currently collect rain water in barrels do it quite smartly, and mainly for conservation purposes. You know, the whole "go green" effort going on in recent times? I've heard of exactly zero cases of private rainwater collection causing any outbreaks, germs, etc.Some in certain areas do forget to keep their barrels properly covered I suppose, which causes increases in mosquito populations. I've heard of nothing more serious than that though.

If they don't collect water, they might die.
If they do collect water badly and spread disease I might die.
One of those matters more to me than the other.

Your gas/generators/apartments example is of course pure lunacy, but we're talking water rights here, thus I tend to think your objections are a bit extreme.

My example actually did happen.... That makes it very far from being an extreme objection. It is in fact a case study of what idiots do when you give them an empty container with no regulations.

If people want to store water, great. Make sure they have to notify the town they are doing it, have their rain system inspected by a heath official on installation and once a year afterward. Fine the fuck out of anyone not following best practices. There are ways to allow what you want... but the default should be "No, because you might be too stupid and until we see exactly what you have in mind you are more of a risk than we care to enable."

[Barry-xlovecam]

Originally Posted by CDSmith

There is a section in the article that addresses all this. You should read it.

I didn't read it :P
It's just common sense to me.
You cannot overuse water (riparian rights) on your own property. Colorado law includes the sky rainfall also apparently.

[pornmasta]

there is not fluorides in this water, that's the explanation :wehateporn:

[sperbonzo]

Oregon Man Sentenced to 30 Days in Jail -- for Collecting Rainwater on His Property

"Oregon Man Sentenced to 30 Days in Jail -- for Collecting Rainwater on His Property
By Kendra Alleyne | July 26, 2012 | 8:58 PM EDT
30.4K
Shares
FacebookTwitterMore

(AP photo)

(CNSNews.com) ? A rural Oregon man was sentenced Wednesday to 30 days in jail and over $1,500 in fines because he had three reservoirs on his property to collect and use rainwater.

Gary Harrington of Eagle Point, Ore., says he plans to appeal his conviction in Jackson County (Ore.) Circuit Court on nine misdemeanor charges under a 1925 law for having what state water managers called ?three illegal reservoirs? on his property ? and for filling the reservoirs with rainwater and snow runoff.

?The government is bullying,? Harrington told CNSNews.com in an interview Thursday.

?They?ve just gotten to be big bullies and if you just lay over and die and give up, that just makes them bigger bullies. So, we as Americans, we need to stand on our constitutional rights, on our rights as citizens and hang tough. This is a good country, we?ll prevail,? he said.

The court has given Harrington two weeks to report to the Jackson County Jail to begin serving his sentence.

Harrington said the case first began in 2002, when state water managers told him there were complaints about the three ?reservoirs? ? ponds ? on his more than 170 acres of land.

According to Oregon water laws, all water is publicly owned. Therefore, anyone who wants to store any type of water on their property must first obtain a permit from state water managers.

Harrington said he applied for three permits to legally house reservoirs for storm and snow water runoff on his property. One of the ?reservoirs? had been on his property for 37 years, he said.

Though the state Water Resources Department initially approved his permits in 2003, the state ? and a state court -- ultimately reversed the decision.

?They issued me my permits. I had my permits in hand and they retracted them just arbitrarily, basically. They took them back and said ?No, you can?t have them,? so I?ve been fighting it ever since,? Harrington told CNSNews.com.

The case, he said, is centered on a 1925 law which states that the city of Medford holds exclusive rights to ?all core sources of water? in the Big Butte Creek watershed and its tributaries.

?Way back in 1925 the city of Medford got a unique withdrawal that withdrew all -- supposedly all -- the water out of a single basin and supposedly for the benefit of the city of Medford,? Harrington told CNSNews.com.

Harrington told CNSNews.com, however, that the 1925 law doesn?t mention anything about colleting rainwater or snow melt -- and he believes that he has been falsely accused.

?The withdrawal said the stream and its tributaries. It didn?t mention anything about rainwater and it didn?t mention anything about snow melt and it didn?t mention anything about diffused water, but yet now, they?re trying to expand that to include that rain water and they?re using me as the goat to do it,? Harrington

But Tom Paul, administrator of the Oregon Water Resources Department, claims that Harrington has been violating the state?s water use law by diverting water from streams running into the Big Butte River.

?The law that he is actually violating is not the 1925 provision, but it?s Oregon law that says all of the water in the state of Oregon is public water and if you want to use that water, either to divert it or to store it, you have to acquire a water right from the state of Oregon before doing that activity,? Paul told CNSNews.com.

Yet Paul admitted the 1925 law does apply because, he said, Harrington constructed dams to block a tributary to the Big Butte, which Medford uses for its water supply.

?There are dams across channels, water channels where the water would normally flow if it were not for the dam and so those dams are stopping the water from flowing in the channel and storing it- holding it so it cannot flow downstream,? Paul told CNSNews.com.

Harrington, however, argued in court that that he is not diverting water from Big Butte Creek, but the dams capturing the rainwater and snow runoff ? or ?diffused water? ? are on his own property and that therefore the runoff does not fall under the jurisdiction of the state water managers, nor does it not violate the 1925 act.

In 2007, a Jackson County Circuit Court judge denied Harrington?s permits and found that he had illegally ?withdrawn the water at issue from appropriation other than for the City of Medford.?

According to Paul, Harrington entered a guilty plea at the time, received three years probation and was ordered to open up the water gates.

?A very short period of time following the expiration of his probation, he once again closed the gates and re-filled the reservoirs,? Paul told CNSNews.com. ?So, this has been going on for some time and I think frankly the court felt that Mr. Harrington was not getting the message and decided that they?d already given him probation once and required him to open the gates and he refilled his reservoirs and it was business as usual for him, so I think the court wanted -- it felt it needed -- to give a stiffer penalty to get Mr. Harrington?s attention.?

In two weeks, if unsuccessful in his appeals, Harrington told CNSNews.com that he will report to the Jackson County Jail to serve his sentence.

?I follow the rules. If I?m mandated to report, I?m going to report. Of course, I?m going to do what it takes in the meantime to prevent that, but if I?m not successful, I?ll be there,? Harrington said.

But Harrington also said that he will never stop fighting the government on this issue.

?When something is wrong, you just, as an American citizen, you have to put your foot down and say, ?This is wrong; you just can?t take away anymore of my rights and from here on in, I?m going to fight it.?








.

[sperbonzo]

Collecting rainwater now illegal in many states as Big Government claims ownership over our water - NaturalNews.com


"Collecting rainwater now illegal in many states as Big Government claims ownership over our water


Many of the freedoms we enjoy here in the U.S. are quickly eroding as the nation transforms from the land of the free into the land of the enslaved, but what I'm about to share with you takes the assault on our freedoms to a whole new level. You may not be aware of this, but many Western states, including Utah, Washington and Colorado, have long outlawed individuals from collecting rainwater on their own properties because, according to officials, that rain belongs to someone else.

As bizarre as it sounds, laws restricting property owners from "diverting" water that falls on their own homes and land have been on the books for quite some time in many Western states. Only recently, as droughts and renewed interest in water conservation methods have become more common, have individuals and business owners started butting heads with law enforcement over the practice of collecting rainwater for personal use.

Check out this YouTube video of a news report out of Salt Lake City, Utah, about the issue. It's illegal in Utah to divert rainwater without a valid water right, and Mark Miller of Mark Miller Toyota, found this out the hard way.

After constructing a large rainwater collection system at his new dealership to use for washing new cars, Miller found out that the project was actually an "unlawful diversion of rainwater." Even though it makes logical conservation sense to collect rainwater for this type of use since rain is scarce in Utah, it's still considered a violation of water rights which apparently belong exclusively to Utah's various government bodies.

"Utah's the second driest state in the nation. Our laws probably ought to catch up with that," explained Miller in response to the state's ridiculous rainwater collection ban.

Salt Lake City officials worked out a compromise with Miller and are now permitting him to use "their" rainwater, but the fact that individuals like Miller don't actually own the rainwater that falls on their property is a true indicator of what little freedom we actually have here in the U.S. (Access to the rainwater that falls on your own property seems to be a basic right, wouldn't you agree?)

Outlawing rainwater collection in other states
Utah isn't the only state with rainwater collection bans, either. Colorado and Washington also have rainwater collection restrictions that limit the free use of rainwater, but these restrictions vary among different areas of the states and legislators have passed some laws to help ease the restrictions.

In Colorado, two new laws were recently passed that exempt certain small-scale rainwater collection systems, like the kind people might install on their homes, from collection restrictions.

Prior to the passage of these laws, Douglas County, Colorado, conducted a study on how rainwater collection affects aquifer and groundwater supplies. The study revealed that letting people collect rainwater on their properties actually reduces demand from water facilities and improves conservation.

Personally, I don't think a study was even necessary to come to this obvious conclusion. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that using rainwater instead of tap water is a smart and useful way to conserve this valuable resource, especially in areas like the West where drought is a major concern.

Additionally, the study revealed that only about three percent of Douglas County's precipitation ended up in the streams and rivers that are supposedly being robbed from by rainwater collectors. The other 97 percent either evaporated or seeped into the ground to be used by plants.

This hints at why bureaucrats can't really use the argument that collecting rainwater prevents that water from getting to where it was intended to go. So little of it actually makes it to the final destination that virtually every household could collect many rain barrels worth of rainwater and it would have practically no effect on the amount that ends up in streams and rivers.

It's all about control, really
As long as people remain unaware and uninformed about important issues, the government will continue to chip away at the freedoms we enjoy. The only reason these water restrictions are finally starting to change for the better is because people started to notice and they worked to do something to reverse the law.

Even though these laws restricting water collection have been on the books for more than 100 years in some cases, they're slowly being reversed thanks to efforts by citizens who have decided that enough is enough.

Because if we can't even freely collect the rain that falls all around us, then what, exactly, can we freely do? The rainwater issue highlights a serious overall problem in America today: diminishing freedom and increased government control.

Today, we've basically been reprogrammed to think that we need permission from the government to exercise our inalienable rights, when in fact the government is supposed to derive its power from us. The American Republic was designed so that government would serve the People to protect and uphold freedom and liberty. But increasingly, our own government is restricting people from their rights to engage in commonsense, fundamental actions such as collecting rainwater or buying raw milk from the farmer next door.

Today, we are living under a government that has slowly siphoned off our freedoms, only to occasionally grant us back a few limited ones under the pretense that they're doing us a benevolent favor.

Fight back against enslavement
As long as people believe their rights stem from the government (and not the other way around), they will always be enslaved. And whatever rights and freedoms we think we still have will be quickly eroded by a system of bureaucratic power that seeks only to expand its control.

Because the same argument that's now being used to restrict rainwater collection could, of course, be used to declare that you have no right to the air you breathe, either. After all, governments could declare that air to be somebody else's air, and then they could charge you an "air tax" or an "air royalty" and demand you pay money for every breath that keeps you alive.

Think it couldn't happen? Just give it time. The government already claims it owns your land and house, effectively. If you really think you own your home, just stop paying property taxes and see how long you still "own" it. Your county or city will seize it and then sell it to pay off your "tax debt." That proves who really owns it in the first place... and it's not you!

How about the question of who owns your body? According to the U.S. Patent & Trademark office, U.S. corporations and universities already own 20% of your genetic code. Your own body, they claim, is partially the property of someone else.

So if they own your land, your water and your body, how long before they claim to own your air, your mind and even your soul?

Unless we stand up against this tyranny, it will creep upon us, day after day, until we find ourselves totally enslaved by a world of corporate-government collusion where everything of value is owned by powerful corporations -- all enforced at gunpoint by local law enforcement."





.

[aka123]

Originally Posted by Relentless

Asshats can't be trusted with open barrels of water. Think about how many dipshits and jerkoffs would allow a standing container of water to gather germs, maggots and whatever else. The use of this sort of thing in many places would lead to Cholera outbreaks long before it lead to any real water savings. You overestimate the intelligence of most people.

LOL. Seriously? Yes, puddle of water, whether in barrel or on ground is of course very dangerously. As is life in general.

Not to mention that you steal someone else's water, better keep your mouth shut when it rains. Every drop counts.

[georgeyw]

Originally Posted by Relentless

Asshats can't be trusted with open barrels of water. Think about how many dipshits and jerkoffs would allow a standing container of water to gather germs, maggots and whatever else. The use of this sort of thing in many places would lead to Cholera outbreaks long before it lead to any real water savings. You overestimate the intelligence of most people.

When Hurricane Sandy hit New York people had no power for weeks. Some started storing 60 gallon drums of gasoline in their apartments to run generators with a small exhaust out the window... in 30 story apartment buildings. Think about what might happen in that scenario.

I wouldn't let the public collect air if it could be avoided ;)

Guarantee you that the BS you just spun has zero to do with the reason behind the laws.

[Deej]

There was a case here in oregon not too long ago. A guy collected rain water and the city(Or state) started fining him daily until he took it down and stopped using it. Ridiculous.

Dont even mention redirecting water out of a stream for use... even if it comes from your property. Ive heard weird stories about this shit.

[dyna mo]

what makes this even fucking nuttier is how big biz like nestle/arrowhead water have serious first rights to water in california. they even skirt laws by sourcing their water on indian reservations.

[mineistaken]

WTF. So who owns rain water there?

[romeo22]

The water must be very expensive in Colorado

[CDSmith]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

I didn't read it :P
It's just common sense to me.
You cannot overuse water (riparian rights) on your own property. Colorado law includes the sky rainfall also apparently.

I'll help you out. The counterpoint to yours appears in this portion of the article,

I even highlighted it. :D

“Water allocation doesn’t satisfy most people’s norms of fairness,” said Doug Kenney, director of the Western Water Policy Program at the University of Colorado Law School. “A lot of people are clearly surprised to see that it’s a system where some people will get 100 percent of their water, and others will get zero.”

In Colorado, the rain barrel idea was modest: A bill with bipartisan support would allow homeowners to buy two 55-gallon water tanks that, together, would be able to collect about 650 gallons every year — just about what an average American uses in a week.

A few years ago, laws were passed that exempted a small number of people from the rule against barrels — for example, some who are not served by municipal water systems — but legislators wanted to allow everyone with a barrel to collect and use what poured off their roof.

The biggest newspapers in the state got behind the idea, as did several city governments and water officials. Conservation groups said it would cost nothing to carry out and would not take any water out of the streams and rivers that supply users downstream. Most rain soaks into the ground or simply evaporates, long before it can cascade into a storm drain and toward any parched ranch or farmer’s irrigation ditch.

I would tend to agree with that last part.

Frankly I don't see what the fuss would be about anyway. If somone wants to collect rainwater that would end up soaking into their yard anyway, and then attach their garden hose to a spout at the bottom of their barrel and use the water to water their lawn, garden, etc... it's ending up soaking into the damn ground either way.

The law is bonkers.

[Dead]

Pot is legal! Win!!!!

[Barry-xlovecam]

Originally Posted by CDSmith

The law is bonkers.

It is pissy ass but when there is a drought they want to water their grass in Vegas

[SilentKnight]

The system is broke - with no fix in sight.

[RyuLion]

Originally Posted by mineistaken

WTF. So who owns rain water there?

The Gov thinks he's god..

[keysync]

Build garden on roof.