The Briefing Room
State Chapters => California => Topic started by: Elderberry on July 24, 2022, 12:25:58 pm
-
Zero Hedge by 24Richie 7/20/2022
California EPA Asserts Shockingly Broad Domain Over Private Property
Letter: Blumenfeld tells well owners they now must pay for their own water
Legend has it that Jed Clampett “was shootin’ at some food / When up through the ground come a bubblin’ crude.”
The Beverly Hillbillies’ transformation into instant millionaires illustrates one of the oldest conceptions in the western world: What’s on your land belongs to you. This idea predates the founding of America. If you find gold in your backyard, that resource belongs to you.
California wants to change that.
A source near San Diego has shared with California Globe a shocking letter that’s quietly being delivered to owners of private wells.
“California is marching toward a world where those with wells on their own property will be required to put a meter on them and pay the government,” writes the source. “Because in their world, the government owns everything and we’re just renters.”
The letter is signed by Natalie Stork, the Chief of Groundwater Management Program Unit 1, and was sent in late July on the letterhead of California Water Boards, under the authority of Gov. Newsom and Jared Blumenfeld, Secretary for Environmental Protection. Buried beneath the bureaucratic acronyms GSA and SGMA (Groundwater Sustainability Agency and Sustainable Groundwater Management Act) is an extremely aggressive conception of government authority and its dominion over private property.
The letter reads, “Landowners whose property is within an unmanaged area and contains an operating ground water extraction well must report the volume of groundwater extracted from the well. The groundwater extraction volume must be reported as a monthly total. In addition to pumping volumes, reports must include the location of the well and the place and purpose of use of the groundwater. Groundwater extraction reports are not due to the state water board until February 1, 2023. However, if you are required to report, the report must include pumping volumes for each month between the date of receipt of this letter and September 30, 2022.”
More: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2022-07-20/california-wants-you-pay-state-using-your-own-water (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2022-07-20/california-wants-you-pay-state-using-your-own-water)
-
Considering that ground wells typically tap aquifers that underlie a substantial number of different properties, regulating ground wells is not an outrageous exercise of the traditional police power.
-
Considering that ground wells typically tap aquifers that underlie a substantial number of different properties, regulating ground wells is not an outrageous exercise of the traditional police power.
They have already outlawed collecting rain water in many places... denied water rights on flowing water dang near everywhere... Even farmers can't have water which must under every circumstance flow to those mega cities... And now you can't even pump it out of your own ground. You must pay them for water. How long before you must pay them for air?
That ain't right. None of that is right.
-
They have already outlawed collecting rain water in many places... denied water rights on flowing water dang near everywhere... Even farmers can't have water which must under every circumstance flow to those mega cities... And now you can't even pump it out of your own ground. You must pay them for water. How long before you must pay them for air?
That ain't right. None of that is right.
It's not simply being pumped out of the well-owner's own land - it's being pumped out of the aquifer underneath that land, which is also underneath many other parcels of land. Unregulated usage will inevitably lead to a tragedy of the commons problem.
It's similar to the much more ancient common law rules that, for example, a landowner cannot take actions on his own property that would undermine support for adjacent property.
-
It's not simply being pumped out of the well-owner's own land - it's being pumped out of the aquifer underneath that land, which is also underneath many other parcels of land. Unregulated usage will inevitably lead to a tragedy of the commons problem.
It's similar to the much more ancient common law rules that, for example, a landowner cannot take actions on his own property that would undermine support for adjacent property.
I disagree. The aquifer is not a 'common' any more than a stream is. If it is common, it is common to ALL.
Just like rain. It costs very little to the environment to store up water running off roofs. A pittance. Yet through that action when rain is abundant, 10s of thousands of gallons can be reserved for when it is dry. It hurts no one when storm sewers are overflowing and flooded rivers carry it all out to sea. That rain is a gift from God, not the state of Californica. That fell on someone's roof, not everybody's roof. To suggest that rain belongs to Californica instead of the property holder is insane.
Aquifer, the very same. Californica did not put that water there.
-
In Pennsylvania our farmers and golf courses are routinely charged for operating their windmills and water pumps. It does violate a long-standing tenet of real estate law, which is that a property owner has the right to everything above and below the property line, including minerals. But real estate laws are generally governed by the state. California used to have very strong property rights, including water rights, but no more.
This is a very important issue, because all of our other rights are derived from our property rights. By definition, a state with no property rights is a communist state; and you can pretty much determine just how socialist a state is by looking at the degree to which property rights have been eroded.
As we all know, if we give government the power to tax the rain, it will.
-
It's not simply being pumped out of the well-owner's own land - it's being pumped out of the aquifer underneath that land, which is also underneath many other parcels of land. Unregulated usage will inevitably lead to a tragedy of the commons problem.
It's similar to the much more ancient common law rules that, for example, a landowner cannot take actions on his own property that would undermine support for adjacent property.
The air you breathe belongs to all of us. If you exercise, you are using more air because you breathe harder. Therefore, I place an exercise tax on you so that there will be "fairness" in terms of your breathing and to assure that you are paying for your excesses.
-
The air you breathe belongs to all of us. If you exercise, you are using more air because you breathe harder. Therefore, I place an exercise tax on you so that there will be "fairness" in terms of your breathing and to assure that you are paying for your excesses.
Breathing air doesn't reduce the amount of air available to everyone else, and therefore there is no tragedy of the commons comparable to the damage done when one property owner draws down too much on an aquifer.
Yeesh, people, don't let anti-government sentiment become a pavlovian response. Think, first.
Ground-water pumping causes ground subsidence, and is a distinct problem in California: https://www.usgs.gov/centers/land-subsidence-in-california
Drawing down on aquifers is not just some harum-scarum for California lefties, either: https://agecon.unl.edu/cornhusker-economics/2019/irrigation-climate-high-plains-aquifer
-
(https://fos.cmb.ac.lk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/cover-picture.jpg)
-
In Pennsylvania our farmers and golf courses are routinely charged for operating their windmills and water pumps. It does violate a long-standing tenet of real estate law, which is that a property owner has the right to everything above and below the property line, including minerals. But real estate laws are generally governed by the state. California used to have very strong property rights, including water rights, but no more.
This is a very important issue, because all of our other rights are derived from our property rights. By definition, a state with no property rights is a communist state; and you can pretty much determine just how socialist a state is by looking at the degree to which property rights have been eroded.
As we all know, if we give government the power to tax the rain, it will.
Our water rights are drying up. State is trying to claim them for first nation peoples, if you can believe that crap.
But so far, I don't need no damn permit to drive a well... not to mention have a meter on it. I can collect as much rain water as I can hold with it being no business of the state.
When I have to pay for water I will move elsewhere. An else where the state can't go. I will live free.
-
In Pennsylvania our farmers and golf courses are routinely charged for operating their windmills and water pumps. It does violate a long-standing tenet of real estate law, which is that a property owner has the right to everything above and below the property line, including minerals. But real estate laws are generally governed by the state. California used to have very strong property rights, including water rights, but no more.
This is a very important issue, because all of our other rights are derived from our property rights. By definition, a state with no property rights is a communist state; and you can pretty much determine just how socialist a state is by looking at the degree to which property rights have been eroded.
As we all know, if we give government the power to tax the rain, it will.
Land usage law is much, much more complicated and complex than the hoary old claim that the owner of the surface has rights up to heaven and down to hell, even in Pennsylvania. The owner of oil and gas resources, for example, is considered to own the dominant estate, and may develop those subsurface resources without the permission of the surface owner, albeit subject to claims for damages, such as for subsidence, from that development. See, e.g.: https://www.rothmangordon.com/landowner-vs-the-owner-of-the-oil-and-gas/
Furthermore, even under the hoary old common law, one could not do things on one's own property that reasonably presented a danger to adjacent property, such as digging in such a way that the support of the adjacent property was removed.
-
https://agrilife.org/texasaglaw/files/2018/01/Basics-of-Texas-Water-Law.pdf (https://agrilife.org/texasaglaw/files/2018/01/Basics-of-Texas-Water-Law.pdf)
Ownership
Absent an agreement otherwise, Texas landowners own the groundwater beneath their property. Texas courts are clear that a landowner has a vested property right in groundwater. Although a land-owner has the right to capture water from beneath his or her property, this right does not ensure the right to capture a specific amount of groundwater. Like other estates such as minerals, the ground-water estate may be severed from the surface estate of the property. The severed groundwater estate can then be reserved (the seller of the property retains the groundwater ownership and sells his or her remaining interest) or conveyed (a property owner sells or otherwise transfers the groundwater ownership but retains ownership of the rest of the property). If a property owner sells his or her property but retains the groundwater rights, the new purchaser owns the surface estate but not the groundwater. The seller who reserved that interest still owns the groundwater.
-
Breathing air doesn't reduce the amount of air available to everyone else, and therefore there is no tragedy of the commons comparable to the damage done when one property owner draws down too much on an aquifer.
Yeesh, people, don't let anti-government sentiment become a pavlovian response. Think, first.
Ground-water pumping causes ground subsidence, and is a distinct problem in California: https://www.usgs.gov/centers/land-subsidence-in-california
Drawing down on aquifers is not just some harum-scarum for California lefties, either: https://agecon.unl.edu/cornhusker-economics/2019/irrigation-climate-high-plains-aquifer
You should talk to the bureaucrats about the relative abundance of air. They do, in fact, propose to tax it and allocate it according to how much we use. They do so using the same argument you use with water.
The problem with allocating water for the "common good" is that it puts the bureaucrats in charge of the water. The bureaucrats will take control of the science to justify their actions, and politicians will insist on their cut in determining who gets what.
The basic principle behind "first come, first served" is that it rewards the entrepreneur. And what is the entrepreneur doing with the water? Watering crops to feed people, or generally doing something that benefits society as a whole. It is fair, it is easy to understand, and it does not empower a middle man who is corrupt and power-hungry by nature.
-
You should talk to the bureaucrats about the relative abundance of air. They do, in fact, propose to tax it and allocate it according to how much we use. They do so using the same argument you use with water.
The problem with allocating water for the "common good" is that it puts the bureaucrats in charge of the water. The bureaucrats will take control of the science to justify their actions, and politicians will insist on their cut in determining who gets what.
The basic principle behind "first come, first served" is that it rewards the entrepreneur. And what is the entrepreneur doing with the water? Watering crops to feed people, or generally doing something that benefits society as a whole. It is fair, it is easy to understand, and it does not empower a middle man who is corrupt and power-hungry by nature.
Okey dokey, chief.
(https://fos.cmb.ac.lk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/cover-picture.jpg)
I suppose one could leave it to the courts to regulate - as happened previously - or just go laissez faire, and let the guy with the biggest willingness to commit violence in pursuit of his own personal interests win.
-
They have already outlawed collecting rain water in many places... denied water rights on flowing water dang near everywhere... Even farmers can't have water which must under every circumstance flow to those mega cities... And now you can't even pump it out of your own ground. You must pay them for water. How long before you must pay them for air?
That ain't right. None of that is right.
Agreed. Some of that water has been in those aquifers since long before any civilization or government--on the planet--as we know it. Besides, when you buy your property, unless the mineral rights have been severed, those mineral rights are yours, and that would include water.
-
Ground water should be based on land area. The more land you have the more rainwater that land provides. If you want to use more water than your land provides it should come at some cost.
I can tell you what happened to the small towns around the area I lived in California before moving to Arizona. Industrial wineries moved into the area with huge deep wells causing thousands of long-term residential wells in the area to go dry. They had to redrill their wells deeper to get access of to water again - but that is only a matter of time before that repeats itself. It is a major mess.
-
it's kind of disconcerting when people here resort to condescension of others because those others are just to ignorant(apparently) to see the wisdom of their arguments...........it's kind of what I left TOS over.
-
We pay dearly for our water which tastes like crappola and I drink water from sourced springs in the area. We have a water filter on the refrigerated water, but I still don't like the taste. We used to have a well in the first house that we moved into down here and it was a PITA as inevitably it would malfunction in the middle of the night and we'd have to get up and fix it.
We also have reclaimed water which is used to water lawns, wash our vehicles, etc. that is not metered, but we pay a small fee.
I have never heard of not being able to collect rain water; I use it to water my orchids some times, and some around here have rain barrels which in the winter months comes in handy to water gardens. My neighbor has a bucket with a rope that she uses to gather water out of the canal to water her indoor plants.
Once city water is brought to your property you are supposed to cap off your well, but some don't and I don't blame them.
-
We pay dearly for our water which tastes like crappola and I drink water from sourced springs in the area. We have a water filter on the refrigerated water, but I still don't like the taste. We used to have a well in the first house that we moved into down here and it was a PITA as inevitably it would malfunction in the middle of the night and we'd have to get up and fix it.
We also have reclaimed water which is used to water lawns, wash our vehicles, etc. that is not metered, but we pay a small fee.
I have never heard of not being able to collect rain water; I use it to water my orchids some times, and some around here have rain barrels which in the winter months comes in handy to water gardens. My neighbor has a bucket with a rope that she uses to gather water out of the canal to water her indoor plants.
Once city water is brought to your property you are supposed to cap off your well, but some don't and I don't blame them.
I was on city water for a spell... I really think it was the chlorine that finally made me sick - I know it was part of it. Because when I came here to this brilliant artesian well, I began to get better.
It is part of my grudge against town living, and what drove me back to my roots. I will never pay for God's water again. Any place with those kinds of problems has way too many people for me.
-
When the government tries to make you pay them for what you own, and for which they provide no service... rebellion is the appropriate response.
-
By the way... There's many a dry homestead up in here that keeps the water off the roofs. Usually that's at least a couple 2500 gallon cisterns up the hill. Generally, the rainwater is channeled to a dry sump with a pump to send it up the hill (if the tanks say they need it)... Otherwise it drains out to a pond or some such, to be used for gardens and critters. But otherwise, it goes up the hill, where it resides to provide a passive pressured system for the house and yard hydrants.
You would be surprised how quickly 5000 gallons fills up.
-
When the government tries to make you pay them for what you own, and for which they provide no service... rebellion is the appropriate response.
Yeah. They're gonna hang a meter on your well that you paid for, and charge you for the water your pump is bringing. Just what service is provided in that?
-
When the government tries to make you pay them for what you own, and for which they provide no service... rebellion is the appropriate response.
I believe Thomas Jefferson wrote about exactly that.
btw, I'm still mad that the government prohibits a person from shooting down drones flying over his/her property.
-
Yeah. They're gonna hang a meter on your well that you paid for, and charge you for the water your pump is bringing. Just what service is provided in that?
@roamer_1
The same kind of "service" that a bull provides to a cow.
-
@roamer_1
The same kind of "service" that a bull provides to a cow.
Alright... but different... The bull only gets to provide what the cow wants.
And I sure as hell don't want it.
:shrug:
-
Yet another attack on farmers - many of who have wells - and rural people not connected to regulated/municipal water systems.
-
This is the urbanites trying to impose their will over others.
The future holds many more of these conflicts as we descend into urban vs rural society or, as more commonly called, the users vs providers of this country.
-
It's time for the coastal urban centers to build water desalinazation plants and waste water treatment plants.
It's time for the rural areas to cut off the urban areas from rural sources of water.
Mulholland Water Wars II
-
It's time for the coastal urban centers to build water desalinazation plants and waste water treatment plants.
It's time for the rural areas to cut off the urban areas from rural sources of water.
Mulholland Water Wars II
They wanted to, even the moron Noisome was for a private company building a desalination plant but 9 uber morons on the The California Water Commission nixed it because some Gaia worshipers told them it would add to global warming and sea level rise..........yes they really are that stupid. The California government should have been building desalination plants and additional reservoirs decades ago but goobernator Moonbeam wanted a bullet train that no one would ride to nowhere anybody wanted to go for a legacy. Hell even RINO Schwartzhole should have been pushing for more water resources but he was just another Gaia worshiping jackass that did his best to bankrupt the state by driving businesses and jobs out of the once Golden State.
-
So, the Cali gaia-lovers crowd is okay with Mono Lake Owens Lake being drained to supply water to Los Angeles?