dcyrilc
Elite Member
IMO, that law is nuts. That would infer that the state claims ownership of any and all water that falls from the sky. My first reaction is to ask if the state has had any aquafers or resivoirs before last year? If so, then technically, they've been breaking their own law.
Laws like that bother me, because under the same type of pretexts they could also claim ownership of the air on your property. I don't see something like this happening, but technically if a state claimed such ownership, it could charge you for breathing it's air.
That's exactly what the state claimed...that they owned the rainwater that may run off your property and into a river, or migrate through the ground to replenish an aquifer. That's the problem with living in a semi-arid state where water isn't as abundant as other parts of the country.
That would explain how the state could use it and you can't. Under a law like that, you would be stealing it from the State. What God giveth, man taketh away. Laws like that shouldn't be legal. I wonder if it was ever challenged in Federal Court.