21 replies to this topic

[Leah G.]

AsteroidX, on 25 January 2013 - 02:52 AM, said:

I drive the I-5 corridor. You can see the direct effect of federal intervention into water rights for what us to be be productive green belt farms. Dams in my own state have decimated the Salmon population. Yes its a major deal.

Fortunately we get enough here that water rights arent an issue. But I get it.

Green yards and fountains abound in Las Vegas. That should be a crime unless its recycled bath water.

I hear ya, I've driven down I-5 it's decimated. Hard to believe a few years back it was healthy. Aren't they blaming that on a little fish?

[lightly]

Water rights being monopolized by a few cooperative giants is a worrisome thing .  So is the simultaneous trend to make water a Publicly "owned' and Managed  resource  ..  because it will be a short step to  "PRIVATIZATION"  from there.

[rashore]

There's more to Gary Harrington’s case than is stated. It has lasted for several years, with a lot of back and forth on Mr. Harrington's and the authorities parts. It has a lot to do with his building the ponds, and permits, and a ton of legal entanglement.

[questionmark]

rashore, on 29 January 2013 - 12:01 AM, said:

There's more to Gary Harrington’s case than is stated. It has lasted for several years, with a lot of back and forth on Mr. Harrington's and the authorities parts. It has a lot to do with his building the ponds, and permits, and a ton of legal entanglement.

And a whole lot with diverting stream flows, whereby he really got the book slapped on him.

[Hilander]

One day as population grows water will be the most fought over resource there is.

[AsteroidX]

Quote

I hear ya, I've driven down I-5 it's decimated. Hard to believe a few years back it was healthy. Aren't they blaming that on a little fish?

yeah. found this. It would appear the Bill is still in commitee in the Senate and being amended in some way. This while one of the breadbaskets of the nation wasted away. Itll take years and years to regrow that land to what it used to be if this Bill ever passes.

http://news.investor...nia-.htm?p=full

http://thomas.loc.go...d112:h.r.01837:

http://www.acwa.com/...on-senate-floor

http://www.leginfo.c...5_chaptered.pdf

http://www.leginfo.c...ded_sen_v93.pdf

Edited by AsteroidX, 30 January 2013 - 01:41 AM.

[Doug1o29]

lightly, on 28 January 2013 - 11:39 PM, said:

Water rights being monopolized by a few cooperative giants is a worrisome thing .  So is the simultaneous trend to make water a Publicly "owned' and Managed  resource  ..  because it will be a short step to  "PRIVATIZATION"  from there.

Before anyone can monopolize water rights, somebody has to sell them those rights.  Of course, if you offer enough cash...

In the western US, water rights are already private and have always been so.  I used to be a forester.  On one of the properties I managed (State Section near Ward, Colorado), there was a small diversion dam.  Years ago, it was blown up in a water war.  The case eventually went to the Supreme Court that ruled that a water owner had the right to divert his water from one drainage to another.

Some "private" rights are actually owned by public entities, like the City of Denver, City of Los Angeles and in some cases, the US government.  From a legal standpoint, they are like any other private owner, with the same rights and responsibilites (except, they don't pay property tax on the water rights.).

The City of Denver bought up water rights to South Park.  That used to be a farming area.  But with the water going to Denver, it has converted to ranching.  Denver has a serious water crisis.  People in that area are taking out thirty-year mortgages in areas that will run out of water before they pay off the mortgage (And the banks are writing those mortgages!).  Home National Bank went bankrupt already because of that.  I'd call that a failure to practice due diligence on everybody's part.

T. Boone Pickes' attempt at building a pipeline so he could send Ogalala water to Texas failed when the court ruled that his "city" was, in fact, not a city at all, but a legal subterfuge he had created so he could use iminent domain to condemn a right-of-way.  The case was not about water law, but rather about what constitutes a "city."
Doug