Log in

View Full Version : Collecting rainwater now illegal in many states as Big Government claims ownersh



Ponce
27th July 2010, 08:46 PM
Collecting rainwater now illegal in many states as Big Government claims ownership over our water.

Monday, July 26, 2010
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

(NaturalNews) 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.

http://www.naturalnews.com/029286_rainwater_collection_water.html

Apparition
27th July 2010, 08:57 PM
Remember, it's for the "greater good" you needy, unintelligent, and inexperienced commoners.

Don't question, just submit.

Just look at how well our benevolent government has managed the environment so far. :sarc:

Grand Master Melon
27th July 2010, 08:59 PM
Good post I have to say I never saw this coming but I guess I should have.

StackerKen
27th July 2010, 09:04 PM
I read Utah and Colorado....is that all?

Thats not "many states"

Korbin Dallas
27th July 2010, 09:17 PM
I had a retired fire chief tell me that technically it's illegal in California due to "watershed" rights. It isn't enforced, but it won't be long until the commietaxifornia gov't finds a way to got after those who do collect rainwater.

FreeMyLand
27th July 2010, 09:21 PM
I'm really surprised any states have laws against collecting water. It seems these laws have been on the books for a while and need to be fought and rescinded. I know that in Texas rainwater catchment systems are very popular, especially in southwest Texas. We are actually looking at putting a catchment system in on our land for an additional source of water. Town water departments in my neck of the woods have been recommending water catchment systems for use in watering lawns and gardens.

This news was surprising, but it looks like the residents of Colorado and Utah need to act, because I would assume a vast majority of Americans do in fact own the water that lands on their buildings...

zap
27th July 2010, 09:43 PM
Before we put in the new well in, we always collected rainwater, we parked a flatbed truck with 2 four hundred gal tanks on it and hooked up to a downspout, drove it up the hill and pumped it into the big tanks, with a good storm we could have both tanks full about 2000 gal. (but what a pain in the a$$)

Glad the days are over, knock on wood.

ximmy
27th July 2010, 10:46 PM
hey, you know they have to maintain the drought conspiracy to keep water prices high... so be a good consumer and buy all the water you need.

Ponce
27th July 2010, 10:58 PM
In the article they mentioned three states and about a year ago it all began in Nevada and another state

And......one more time......."Learn Spanish and Chinese and buy water stocks"... Ponce

As a matter of fact.......I never owned any kind of stock but in this case I think that I'll follow my own advice and buy water stock......probably in the transportation part of the game.

MNeagle
27th July 2010, 10:59 PM
once again, it's all about control....

johnlvs2run
28th July 2010, 12:02 AM
(NaturalNews)

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.

Diverting means keeping the water off your land and/or diverting it somewhere else, for example so it floods a neighbor's property.

Collecting the water is not the same as diverting the water.

It sounds like some politicians don't know what they're doing - no surprise.

I am me, I am free
28th July 2010, 01:53 AM
http://www.tamu.edu/ccbn/dewitt/adp/resources/images/cometake.jpg

uranian
28th July 2010, 02:38 AM
same thing happened about 2 or 3 years ago somewhere in south america, bolivia i think. a british company took over the national water supply (with government approval), water prices soon went up hundreds of per cent. it was then declared illegal to collect rainwater. there was then a big riot in the capital city, and the british company was forced out.

reminds me to of something i saw icke talk about a while back; at what point is enough, enough? he asked this of people and the general response was, when they come for my children, i will fight back. his suggestion was well, if you do have a line in the sand, why not just push it forward a bit?

Awoke
28th July 2010, 04:55 AM
I read Utah and Colorado....is that all?

Thats not "many states"


I can't access Youtube from here, but if you do a search with some choice keywords you should find some videos. There is one in particular that was posted in GIM which covered this leg of the conspiracy in detail, and it listed many states.

gunDriller
28th July 2010, 05:25 AM
I read Utah and Colorado....is that all?

Thats not "many states"


it's amazing they don't make a distinction between private use and mass public harvesting.

i understand that they don't want someone setting up a square mile of tarps to harvest Utah water & sell it to Beverly Hills JewBillies in a fancy bottle.

but for your own home, and a small amount of land, e.g. 4 acres/ 1 hectare - who needs anyone telling they can't set out a rain barrel ?

Twisted Titan
28th July 2010, 06:48 AM
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,



It has never has or will ever be about CONSERVING.

It has always be been about CONTROLING.



T

horseshoe3
28th July 2010, 07:02 AM
Most of these laws were put in place over 100 years ago. Their purpose was to prevent someone from damming a stream to keep his neighbor's cattle from getting a drink. It was a somewhat common practice for the upstream neighbor to stop waterflow. Then the downstream property became worthless and the owner had to sell out for almost nothing. The laws had a good purpose by insuring that when you settled a property, you would always have access to the water that was there and you couldn't be starved out by an unscrupulous neighbor.

Obviously, the laws are being twisted and abused today.

palani
28th July 2010, 07:15 AM
If they consider the state to own the water then wouldn't the state be responsible for damage resulting from their water falling upon your poor roof? I don't know that I would push this point too far as they then might demand you provide insurance to indemnify them the same way you buy auto insurance to protect their vehicle.

A couple of years ago eastern states were going to tax land owners for water runoff. I would be willing to bet there are a half dozen states pursuing this model.

I am me, I am free
28th July 2010, 07:21 AM
If they consider the state to own the water then wouldn't the state be responsible for damage resulting from their water falling upon your poor roof? I don't know that I would push this point too far as they then might demand you provide insurance to indemnify them the same way you buy auto insurance to protect their vehicle.

A couple of years ago eastern states were going to tax land owners for water runoff. I would be willing to bet there are a half dozen states pursuing this model.


Oh, that's a good one - compelling people to manage the state's (supposed) resource (without compensation). Much like the way folks eagerly line up to act as a sales tax collector for the state without compensation.

General of Darkness
28th July 2010, 07:24 AM
BREAK NEWS - Guberment makes it illegal to take more than 1,000 breaths a day. The guberment has stated that they own the rights to oxygen.

horseshoe3
28th July 2010, 07:29 AM
Kind of like the state owns the deer when you want to shoot one, but hte y conveniently forget that fact when their livestock damages your vehicle.

Phoenix
28th July 2010, 07:52 AM
http://www.harvesth2o.com/

http://www.wikihow.com/Build-a-Rainwater-Collection-System

http://www.rain-barrel.net/

StackerKen
28th July 2010, 08:49 AM
I have never collected rain water in the past...But I'm gonna start this year :)

milehi
28th July 2010, 10:37 AM
If they consider the state to own the water then wouldn't the state be responsible for damage resulting from their water falling upon your poor roof? I don't know that I would push this point too far as they then might demand you provide insurance to indemnify them the same way you buy auto insurance to protect their vehicle.


I worked for a Southern California water district around ten years ago. Whenever a water main broke and flooded someone's property, the water district, who bought and owned the water, was guilty of "trespassing" and paid to repair damages to property. If it was erosion, we would fix the damage ourselves.

Edit- I still live in the community and while we don't get alot of rain, I do collect snow melt.

palani
28th July 2010, 11:16 AM
Kind of like the state owns the deer when you want to shoot one, but hte y conveniently forget that fact when their livestock damages your vehicle.


It is THEIR deer and THEIR vehicle (if it has THEIR license plate displayed).