Had the Wetlands Engineer out to the place

[N80]

Thank you. I have strong opinions about these things. I realize that at times I probably sound like some lifetime subscriber to Soldier of Fortune living in a 'compound' somewhere in Idaho. But I'm not like that. I'm not anti-US, or even anti-government. I strongly believe the government should have a many crucial authorities over its citizens. I also believe that when they assume authorities that they shouldn't that it is usually 'our' fault. 'We the People' have gotten lazy and irresponsible and tend to want to solve any complicated problem by passing a law or creating an 'agency'.

I'm also not anti-'green'. I support several groups that might be considered environmentalists. They tend more toward conservationism but at least one of them uses activist (but legal and ethical) tactics to achieve its goals.

As a landowner I consider myself a steward of the small portion of 'nature' that it represents. I hope to use it responsibly and to protect it. I hope to be considerate of my neighbors and downstream landowners. And as I've said before, the folks who are reading and responding in this thread are not the problem when it comes to wetlands, watersheds and land stewardship. Its corporations, big developers and at least around here, the paper companies who have needed regualtion and more regulation. Problem is, the laws that apply to them, apply to us. And when you over-regulate the people who already desire to be responsible and obediant, then you start turning the good guys into bad guys. I guess all-in-all, that's my biggest concern.

 

[jimmysisson]

N80, do you think the church group paid off the environmental commission (or whatever oversees the stream), as it sounds like you do? Do you disagree that some entity other than yourself should make them take responsiblity for what they did to your waterway? Have you approached them (the church) yourself? You said it's not a big burden to maintain the dam yourself but you don't have the funds to do it right. And your BIL had to drill a couple wells to get back the water he used to have for nothing.
I don't see how it wouldn't be better to have a permitting process or other system to make sure one person doesn't jam up another's life or property. Most people can't or wouldn't take care of such a problem themselves, and I don't think they should have to live with the consequences of someone else making such trouble for their neighbors. It's not assault, but it is robbery.
I might have about the same environmental viewpoint you have, and I live in a maybe more-regulated state (Mass.), but I try like heck not to do anything negative my neighbors have to "live with". I don't think you do either.
Jim

 

[N80]

N80, do you think the church group paid off the environmental commission (or whatever oversees the stream), as it sounds like you do?

No. I'm not suggesting anything technically illegal. I'm suggesting that the conference center represented a substantial tax income for the county and was given leeway for that reason. Such 'exemptions' may even be legal, but that does not make them right in terms of how we treat our downstream neighbors, right? Really makes it worse. Second, the watershed commission went broke and likely had no input into matters in which they were responsible.

Do you disagree that some entity other than yourself should make them take responsiblity for what they did to your waterway?

No, I don't disagree with notion of having an authority assist in such matters. My point is, and this needs to be clear, that in this situation the authority dropped the ball in a manner that lead the situation to become exactly the situation they were there to prevent and therefore, it is not practical or wise to assume that authorities will behave in everyone's or anyone's best interests.

Have you approached them (the church) yourself? You said it's not a big burden to maintain the dam yourself but you don't have the funds to do it right.

I probably didn't make myself clear on this. I don't have the funds to do anything in this matter. I was just saying that the effect of the problem doesn't impact me much. The effects are more significant downstream from me. In that regard, I have not contacted the conference center.

And your BIL had to drill a couple wells to get back the water he used to have for nothing.

Yes. And that's a two sided issue, but cogent to the discussion. The first is concern over not having enough water but second that one of the poorest counties in the US would jeopardize its primary economy (agriculture) by banning cows from the creeks due to e coli concerns. I do not know if he has approached the conference center.

I don't see how it wouldn't be better to have a permitting process or other system to make sure one person doesn't jam up another's life or property.

Well, that's my whole point. Such a process was in place and it utterly failed. Again, my point is not that we can't have any third party oversight. The point is simply that such processes are not the solution most people wish to assume they are.

Most people can't or wouldn't take care of such a problem themselves, and I don't think they should have to live with the consequences of someone else making such trouble for their neighbors. It's not assault, but it is robbery.

Agreed. But this is an example of where oversight has failed.

I might have about the same environmental viewpoint you have, and I live in a maybe more-regulated state (Mass.), but I try like heck not to do anything negative my neighbors have to "live with". I don't think you do either.
Jim

I'm not sure there is a more regulated state on the eastern seaboard than Mass. I just don't believe that 'one more law and everything will be fine' is the formula for achieving the balance that you and I both probably desire. And just for clarity, the situation on my watershed is not dire. No one is angry, there's no feuding, no lawsuits. Folks here tend to go with the flow for a long time before they get to the breaking point. The idea of being ever more self sufficient is appealing to my B-I-L so he likes the idea of his wells as security against rough times.

 

[CDsdad]

The idea of being ever more self sufficient is appealing to my B-I-L so he likes the idea of his wells as security against rough times.

Large govt has hurt this country most in what you just spoke of: self sufficiency. I realize changing times and technological advance have also had a part in this, but dependency upon govt services is at an all time high, at least here where I live. We do need some govt regulation, especially for large, wealthy corporations who would run roughshod over any and everything to make a buck. However, ultimately it is up to ME to protect MY family and MY property as well as provide for MY family.

This was never clearer than in the aftermath of Katrina. I will only speak of where I live locally: If only the strong survive hard times, when the govt is stretched to the limits of what it can do as after Katrina, only about half of us will be left to run the place if it ever gets real bad. The rest will starve from either inability to provide for themselves or just plain laziness.

 

[daTeacha]

N80 -- In many places there is a concept called riparian rights, which can differ in details from locale to locale. Basically, you have the right to work with the the water flowing through your property so long as what you do does not disrupt the water usage of your downstream neighbors. It sounds like the church has violated your riparian rights by substantially disrupting the natural flow the stream. Perhaps they just got some dozer jockey in there building dams with consulting a soil scientist or hydrological engineer to see what impact their dams would have on stream flow. I would think you should be able to convince to at least experiment with keeping their lakes dry one at a time over a summer to see which one(s) cause the majority of flow disruption. You might get a more favorable response if yoru send them a nice letter to that effect with a copy to some official or legal entity such as an attorney or Department of Natural Resources.

You might find that government also serves the function of making sure no is treated unfairly or illegally by their neighbors. If you find out they just had someone pile up dirt to make their dams, ask them who will be to blame if a groundhog or something causes the dam to fail, allowing all that pent up water to come rushing down to your place, overwhelming the county built dam, breaking it and flooding everyone downstream as a consequence.