Pond Boss Magazine
https://www.pondboss.com/images/userfiles/image/20130301193901_6_150by50orangewhyshouldsubscribejpeg.jpg
Advertisment
Newest Members
Shotgun01, Dan H, Stipker, LunkerHunt23, Jeanjules
18,451 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums36
Topics40,899
Posts557,082
Members18,451
Most Online3,612
Jan 10th, 2023
Top Posters
esshup 28,414
ewest 21,474
Cecil Baird1 20,043
Bill Cody 15,110
Who's Online Now
9 members (Freg, Jared015, Justin W, LeighAnn, Donatello, Theo Gallus, Sunil, homewardbound, DenaTroyer), 729 guests, and 217 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979
Likes: 14
S
Ambassador
Lunker
Offline
Ambassador
Lunker
S
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979
Likes: 14
Originally Posted By: Jnarronecu
This is a classic example of the government trying to take more control over things in a round about way. People need to get their heads out of the sand over this and many other things. I don't want to turn this into a political debate so that's all I'll say. It's my land, and if I'm not hurting anyone else I should be able to do exactly what I want to do with it and on it. Period.


And if you're not hurting anyone else, I agree with you wholeheartedly. It's the definition of hurting that wrinkles the bedspread.

We certainly each have our opinions, and strong feelings about the matter. I think it's good that we can listen to each other's viewpoints, without letting our emotions get the better of us. I DO think this is an important subject for discussion, and have stated this in the past. Was it TJ who advocated for discussion on the matter also?

In my opinion it does affect all of us, even if not in the manner we envision. This thread only solidifies that. I think we NEED to have discussions like these, where opinions can be explored without hostility.


"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"

If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1)
And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1)
Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT?
PB answer: It depends.
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,099
Likes: 22
R
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Hall of Fame
Lunker
Offline
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Hall of Fame
Lunker
R
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,099
Likes: 22
Originally Posted By: sprkplug
I hear you Rex. A few further thoughts on the matter.

From the previously listed link:


Substantial Interference The law is not intended to remedy trifles or redress petty annoyances. To establish liability under a nuisance theory, interference with the plaintiff's interest must be substantial. Determining substantial interference in cases where the physical condition of the property is affected will often be fairly straightforward. More challenging are those cases predicated on personal inconvenience, discomfort, or annoyance. To determine whether an interference is substantial, courts apply the standard of an ordinary member of the community with normal sensitivity and temperament. A plaintiff cannot, by putting his or her land to an unusually sensitive use, make a nuisance out of the defendant's conduct that would otherwise be relatively harmless.

"Apply the standard of an ordinary member of the community with normal sensitivity and temperament." As I read this, it's not a case of one person's rights vs. another person's rights, but a reasonable interpretation of what might be considered acceptable by most of the community.

Here are honest examples of how I feel, and tend to look at things. This past Saturday, I took the day off from the shop. One of the things I wanted to accomplish was to use the tractor to grade the driveway that goes back to our other piece of property, and the ponds. There are 4 other houses that share this drive, with our property being the very last one on the lane.

Well, it seems that the first house on the lane, one of our neighbors, was having an outdoor get-together. It was Memorial weekend after all. I could've went ahead with my plans and stirred up clouds of dust, made noise, and generally made a mess of things, and been legal doing so. But it wouldn't have been the right thing to do.

My shop sits on the same piece of property as my current home. We're zoned light commercial. Most of the adjoining properties are zoned agricultural, but are actually residential. I know this, and I maintain a strict cut-off of business hours at 5 pm weekdays. My neighbors deserve to come home and not be bothered by roaring engines and grinding metal half the night. I do not work on Sundays, or Saturday afternoons for the same reason. Even during the spring, when I'm three weeks behind.

I begin my day at sunup, delivering and picking up equipment. Unless the piece is just too large, I push them onto the truck or trailer rather than start an engine at that early hour. Don't have to, just choose to. Out of respect for my neighbors.

This is the same sort of courtesy I appreciate being extended towards me.




Tony, you are in a "zoned" area. Only a relatively small fraction of the contiguous USA is zoned and a 10 million dollar mansion can sit next to a tar paper shack with 50 old rusting washing machines stacked on the front porch and not one thing can be construed a violation or nuisance.

As I said earlier, I know you're a good dude. I would not have disturbed a neighbor's gathering either...That is simply how we were raised, with respect for others.

My point on the nuisance thing is not about common courtesies. It is about EPA zealots and ideologues that have admittedly lied and fabricated "science" to support their personal goals and are now creating regulations WE will have to live by. Are they who you would consider, "good people", interested in what is right or fair? Would or do you trust them to not take advantage of the power to alter every aspect of your life when they state that is what is needed to attain their goal? Those last 2 questions are rhetorical for readers to ponder and decide.

When the BLM tried evicting the Rancher in Nevada over grazing fee's it may or may not have been owed, before any court decided the matter, then sent in Federal agents that aimed automatic weapons at women and children legally protesting the action, that action caused a deep anger in many landowners. Anger to the point of fighting back, however needed. Similar, recent (within the past year) Federal land grabs by claiming a false jurisdiction in Texas and Oklahoma nearly caused the same.

To think the EPA, which has now empowered itself to define it's own powers, in direct defiance to the recent US Supreme Court rebukes will now suddenly NOT grab all it can from landowners, is to me, either very optimistic, naïve, or downright foolish. What check or balance is there left to stop the EPA from anything when it is openly defying US Supreme Court rulings against it?

Last edited by Rainman; 05/29/15 10:32 PM.


Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,086
Likes: 93
S
Offline
S
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,086
Likes: 93
Ditto Rainman.

Some of the bureaucracies have become governments within themselves. They defend their power base. Rules and new laws passed that they like they not only implement but implement with gusto and their own extreme interpretation. Rules or laws they don't like they drag their feet on implementation and make excuses why they can not comply till another election cycle and they get what they want.

I've met a top EPA official in their office in Washington D.C. They smile and tell you what you want to hear, then go about their agenda even if it means they directly lied to you. I would not trust them as far as I could throw one of them.

They are a government agency run amok in the extreme. The phone book just for the EPA in D.C.is inches thick.

Last edited by snrub; 05/29/15 10:46 PM.

John

I subscribe to Pond Boss Magazine
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979
Likes: 14
S
Ambassador
Lunker
Offline
Ambassador
Lunker
S
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979
Likes: 14
Rex, what do you envision them grabbing from landowners, and how will it be profitable for them? Nothing happens without a dollar sign being attached somewhere, so what's the payoff, and how will it benefit the EPA?

Yes, over the last decade my county has begun to take strides with zoning. And it was about time. However, just like the laws and proposals we are discussing this evening, I feel there would be no need for zoning if everyone simply respected each other's rights.

But they don't. So there has to be some teeth added to the mix, somewhere. If there weren't laws to this effect, what recourse would we have after polite conversation went nowhere?

G'night, fellas.


"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"

If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1)
And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1)
Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT?
PB answer: It depends.
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,099
Likes: 22
R
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Hall of Fame
Lunker
Offline
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Hall of Fame
Lunker
R
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,099
Likes: 22
Originally Posted By: sprkplug
Rex, what do you envision them grabbing from landowners, and how will it be profitable for them? Nothing happens without a dollar sign being attached somewhere, so what's the payoff, and how will it benefit the EPA?

Yes, over the last decade my county has begun to take strides with zoning. And it was about time. However, just like the laws and proposals we are discussing this evening, I feel there would be no need for zoning if everyone simply respected each other's rights.

But they don't. So there has to be some teeth added to the mix, somewhere. If there weren't laws to this effect, what recourse would we have after polite conversation went nowhere?

G'night, fellas.


Tony, it is not about money in this case for those creating the rules, it is the power and control, yet the $$$ are literally enough to run modest size countries on. The fines are $37,500 a day, criminal, and $37,500 per day, civil. There are countless instances courts have found "violators" innocent of EPA violations in the criminal courts, yet the EPA, KNOWING it was wrong, still pursues you in civil court. Now, you can spend the hundreds of thousands of dollars to hire an attorney, or you can pay a smaller, 5-6 figure settlement. Power hungry people with agendas do not care about money, they care about their personal goals and being "wrong" is NOT something they will either admit or accept. The threat alone of a $75,000/day fine causes most to run scared and not defend themselves...it is a hopeless cause unless you have billions to spend....the government has no dollar limit, nor any incentive to do what we do naturally, the right thing.

As to what they will grab? All your personal control to do as you wish on your own land. A whole NEW set of rules are going to start flowing out of the EPA, similar to Wildlife Codes, restrictive...meaning unless it is specifically legal as to action and method, it will be illegal.

One has to look no further than the annual, automatic budget increases in every sector of government. Governments collect money from us, they are not a business bound by any constraints they limit us with.

Can you name a single regulation that has saved you money in your business or personal life?



Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 92
D
Lunker
Offline
Lunker
D
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 92
Maybe the EPA will try to enforce the "new rule" in E. Texas. How in the world will they get any law enforcement to support them? Maybe they should re-focus their efforts to reduce the urbanization of rural land and the concrete that goes with it. Concrete is a major contributor to the flooding here in DFW lately. No dirt to soak up the water.

Last edited by DavidV; 05/29/15 11:47 PM.



Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,099
Likes: 22
R
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Hall of Fame
Lunker
Offline
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Hall of Fame
Lunker
R
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,099
Likes: 22
Here is the $$$ motive involved, (and okay, it won't fund a modest country)...2012 was the latest info I could find. The EPA targets "violators" that have the deep pockets to pay for projects they can not get appropriations for through congress.

Of Particular note was Durham Bus company, fined 90,000 in penalties and $348,000 in "projects" for idling diesel bus engines too long. An EPA field agent "noticed" engines idling for up to 2 hours!!! My guess, since it was in Connecticut, it was the dead of winter also. Heaven forbid a diesel engine be warmed up so it can function with children on board...not to mention keep those kids warm.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/epa-levied-record-252-million-fines-2012

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/epa-levi...-bus-contractor



Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,315
F
Offline
F
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,315
As I read this, I think everyone makes good, valid points, and virtually all are right.

This question goes to everyone: How would problems be solved when they arise?... My point is, you can't rely on people/business doing the right thing and treating neighbors correctly, AND THEN AT THE SAME TIME, you can't rely on a big agency to make blanket laws/regulations in some far away place that don't know the details of each case/problem....

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 5,714
Likes: 281
R
RAH Offline
Lunker
Offline
Lunker
R
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 5,714
Likes: 281
I think that the most telling thing is that folks like us, that want to improve the environment, are so opposed to the expanded jurisdiction. I have already put most of my land into programs where I traded a property tax break for the right to develop the land (its in wildlife habitat). We added 2 ponds, 5 wetlands, and tens of thousands of trees to this property before putting it into the program. The chunks that I have not put in the program are those where we have buildings and operate a small vegetable farm (profits fund the wildlife habitat restoration). In addition, I have kept land out where I hope to add more wetlands and ponds. I was told that I could easily get permits for these later, but my experience tells me it will be time consuming and costly if its in a government program. I think the philosophical divide is between those that want the government to take care of them and those that primarily want the government to leave them alone. We are losing this battle.

RAH #413366 05/30/15 07:50 AM
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 113
F
Offline
F
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 113
Originally Posted By: RAH
. I think the philosophical divide is between those that want the government to take care of them and those that primarily want the government to leave them alone. We are losing this battle.


Yes - I think you nailed it there.
But the all knowing government has learned to open proposals for public comment and then spend our tax dollars to get media firms to generate comments favorable to their views. Thats the new way thru social media to control the results.
Make you feel defeated when your tax dollars are being used against your own beliefs isn't it.

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979
Likes: 14
S
Ambassador
Lunker
Offline
Ambassador
Lunker
S
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979
Likes: 14
Originally Posted By: Rainman
Here is the $$$ motive involved, (and okay, it won't fund a modest country)...2012 was the latest info I could find. The EPA targets "violators" that have the deep pockets to pay for projects they can not get appropriations for through congress.

Of Particular note was Durham Bus company, fined 90,000 in penalties and $348,000 in "projects" for idling diesel bus engines too long. An EPA field agent "noticed" engines idling for up to 2 hours!!! My guess, since it was in Connecticut, it was the dead of winter also. Heaven forbid a diesel engine be warmed up so it can function with children on board...not to mention keep those kids warm.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/epa-levied-record-252-million-fines-2012

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/epa-levi...-bus-contractor


Right there...in my opinion that's where the money will come from should this thing ever get any traction. Not from Tony, and his five ponds in Indiana. There are hundreds of thousands of small, private ponds across the country, and no current means to investigate them all, determine whether or not they are in compliance, and/or do followup visits to ensure compliance.

Bigger, highly visible concerns? Possibly. Backyard pond? I just don't see it. Could they put together a system, given enough time and resources? Probably. But by the time they get done in court, get the funding sorted out, stretch it out through numerous administrations, hire and train all the manpower, and hit the ground and eventually find my five ponds, If I'm even still around I will be of an age that it won't matter anyway.

Rex, I respect your opinion. I know you are convinced that dark days lie ahead, but can you tell me how this is going to go down? It's been my experience that in situations like this some folks are absolutely positive that danger is coming, yet when pressed for details they can't supply any. Is it a gut feeling, or do you know their game plan?

I know that some will operate on feeling, or belief, or faith, and I will honor their wish to do so. But I'm just not much on faith these days, preferring hard facts instead. Something tangible, something seen, felt, heard. Show me the money, as they say. Follow the money.

I both appreciate, and admire the strength of your convictions, Rex. I appreciate the courtesy you have extended to me during this discussion, and hope you feel that I have reciprocated in kind. Hope we can meet up, someday.


"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"

If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1)
And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1)
Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT?
PB answer: It depends.
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 996
Likes: 57
T
Offline
T
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 996
Likes: 57
Least we forget........

Wyoming welder faces $75,000 a day in EPA fines for building pond on his property

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/...s-own-property/

Tbar #413370 05/30/15 08:05 AM
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 28,414
Likes: 792
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 28,414
Likes: 792


www.hoosierpondpros.com


http://www.pondboss.com/subscribe.asp?c=4
3/4 to 1 1/4 ac pond LMB, SMB, PS, BG, RES, CC, YP, Bardello BG, (RBT & Blue Tilapia - seasonal).
Tbar #413372 05/30/15 08:12 AM
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979
Likes: 14
S
Ambassador
Lunker
Offline
Ambassador
Lunker
S
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979
Likes: 14
Originally Posted By: Tbar
Least we forget........

Wyoming welder faces $75,000 a day in EPA fines for building pond on his property

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/...s-own-property/




And that's why it's not a good idea to dam up a creek on a navigable waterway, AND fill in a section of said creek with silt and debris. That's NEVER a good idea, irregardless of whether it's your land.

Giant red flag that says "come hither and see", when your downstream neighbor's water supply goes awry.

More to this story, methinks.


"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"

If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1)
And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1)
Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT?
PB answer: It depends.
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 996
Likes: 57
T
Offline
T
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 996
Likes: 57
All we have to do is look at history.......

Can we list historical government over reach/broken promises/abuse of power that resulted from "well meaning laws"......I'll start and y'all add on.

From little things like we won't use your social security number for identification purposes, check that....its a convenient way to keep track of you to the Patriot Act - We won't be spying on Americans, well aside from keeping track of all your phone records.

Tbar #413377 05/30/15 08:35 AM
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 28,414
Likes: 792
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 28,414
Likes: 792
Originally Posted By: Tbar
From little things like we won't use your social security number for identification purposes, check that....


I may be dating myself, but my social security card says right on it "Not to be used for identification purposes". Yeah, right...........


www.hoosierpondpros.com


http://www.pondboss.com/subscribe.asp?c=4
3/4 to 1 1/4 ac pond LMB, SMB, PS, BG, RES, CC, YP, Bardello BG, (RBT & Blue Tilapia - seasonal).
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979
Likes: 14
S
Ambassador
Lunker
Offline
Ambassador
Lunker
S
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979
Likes: 14
Originally Posted By: esshup


I may be dating myself, but my social security card says right on it "Not to be used for identification purposes". Yeah, right...........


Would that be printed on parchment or papyrus? wink grin


"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"

If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1)
And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1)
Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT?
PB answer: It depends.
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 113
F
Offline
F
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 113
I think thats the issue - under the new proposal [ which is now considered law ] all places that puddled water in the last 100 years are considered "navigable water" .
That in definition could include the pothole in your drive way. Sounds unreasonable but it happens when you give one branch of the government the power to be the interpreter, enforcer and judge of the outcome. And with unlimited resources.

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 28,414
Likes: 792
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Offline
Moderator
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Lunker
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 28,414
Likes: 792
Originally Posted By: sprkplug
Originally Posted By: esshup


I may be dating myself, but my social security card says right on it "Not to be used for identification purposes". Yeah, right...........


Would that be printed on parchment or papyrus? wink grin



The latter. grin


www.hoosierpondpros.com


http://www.pondboss.com/subscribe.asp?c=4
3/4 to 1 1/4 ac pond LMB, SMB, PS, BG, RES, CC, YP, Bardello BG, (RBT & Blue Tilapia - seasonal).
Tbar #413387 05/30/15 11:16 AM
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,086
Likes: 93
S
Offline
S
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,086
Likes: 93
This also gets to the issue of exactly who has jurisdiction. The Constitution went to great lengths to limit the power of the federal government and put the power in the hands of the individual states. The state governments being closer to the people being governed. EPA and other federal agencies are attempts to put power in the hands of the federal government, taking said power away from the states, which the framers of the constitution were very afraid of happening because the revolution came about for the very reason of releasing the colonies from burdensome rule.

Notice the guy had permits from the state agencies? They had already evaluated his plan and said it was ok. This is a real problem when people attempt to do the right thing, go through what they believe are the correct channels to get the proper authority to do the right thing, have the papers in hand that say they are doing the right thing, then a federal agency comes in after the fact with threats of fines exceeding what any ordinary person could possibly pay and imprisonment beyond any reasonable amount for what the perceived "crime" would justify. It is nothing but heavy handed "thug" tactics. Thug tactics to scare people into submission. Guilty until proven innocent.

Yet the same government allows rich bankers to commit fraud (admitted to in court)and allows them to pay fines which are paid by the banks shareholders (our pension funds). Different agency, but same federal government.

It is nothing but heavy handed government for the aristocrats against the people. Definitely not by the people, for the people.

Last edited by snrub; 05/30/15 11:17 AM.

John

I subscribe to Pond Boss Magazine
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,099
Likes: 22
R
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Hall of Fame
Lunker
Offline
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Hall of Fame
Lunker
R
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,099
Likes: 22
Originally Posted By: sprkplug
Originally Posted By: Tbar
Least we forget........

Wyoming welder faces $75,000 a day in EPA fines for building pond on his property

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/...s-own-property/




And that's why it's not a good idea to dam up a creek on a navigable waterway, AND fill in a section of said creek with silt and debris. That's NEVER a good idea, irregardless of whether it's your land.

Giant red flag that says "come hither and see", when your downstream neighbor's water supply goes awry.

More to this story, methinks.


The original intent, definition and LIMITATION congress gave the EPA on a navigable waterway, was a river or stream that was used for COMMERCIAL transport of goods. Nothing was said about recreational use, nor feeder streams, nor DRY land within ANY distance of a river/stream. The EPA created those definitions and expanded it's reach. The US Supreme Court has TWICE in the last 2 years said the EPA had extended it's "jurisdiction" beyond the powers it was given, and the EPA continues to ignore that.

If I have Water Rights on my land, I have the power to stop flow of any water on my property, regardless of what is down stream...same as someone up stream of me has that right. If a creek flows, building a pond/small lake would only temporarily stop flow. A normal person would not stop flow if wanting a pond/lake, but could easily reduce it to allow water downstream AND fill a pond/lake.

You have a pond, spark, you altered the "natural" flow of water to any and all downstream of you. By your theory, anyone downstream could sue and make you restore the "natural" flow. Obviously, no one has, but now, the EPA may simply decide from a Google Earth photo that your pond is some violation and order you to restore the land...and, the EPA will dictate to you exactly what they consider restoration to be. You'd either comply, at whatever cost, or be fined $75K a day, from the day they tell you to remove the pond. It happens often!



Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,099
Likes: 22
R
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Hall of Fame
Lunker
Offline
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Hall of Fame
Lunker
R
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,099
Likes: 22
Originally Posted By: sprkplug
Originally Posted By: Rainman
Here is the $$$ motive involved, (and okay, it won't fund a modest country)...2012 was the latest info I could find. The EPA targets "violators" that have the deep pockets to pay for projects they can not get appropriations for through congress.

Of Particular note was Durham Bus company, fined 90,000 in penalties and $348,000 in "projects" for idling diesel bus engines too long. An EPA field agent "noticed" engines idling for up to 2 hours!!! My guess, since it was in Connecticut, it was the dead of winter also. Heaven forbid a diesel engine be warmed up so it can function with children on board...not to mention keep those kids warm.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/epa-levied-record-252-million-fines-2012

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/epa-levi...-bus-contractor


Right there...in my opinion that's where the money will come from should this thing ever get any traction. Not from Tony, and his five ponds in Indiana. There are hundreds of thousands of small, private ponds across the country, and no current means to investigate them all, determine whether or not they are in compliance, and/or do followup visits to ensure compliance.

Bigger, highly visible concerns? Possibly. Backyard pond? I just don't see it. Could they put together a system, given enough time and resources? Probably. But by the time they get done in court, get the funding sorted out, stretch it out through numerous administrations, hire and train all the manpower, and hit the ground and eventually find my five ponds, If I'm even still around I will be of an age that it won't matter anyway.

Rex, I respect your opinion. I know you are convinced that dark days lie ahead, but can you tell me how this is going to go down? It's been my experience that in situations like this some folks are absolutely positive that danger is coming, yet when pressed for details they can't supply any. Is it a gut feeling, or do you know their game plan?

I know that some will operate on feeling, or belief, or faith, and I will honor their wish to do so. But I'm just not much on faith these days, preferring hard facts instead. Something tangible, something seen, felt, heard. Show me the money, as they say. Follow the money.

I both appreciate, and admire the strength of your convictions, Rex. I appreciate the courtesy you have extended to me during this discussion, and hope you feel that I have reciprocated in kind. Hope we can meet up, someday.


Tony, I also respect your point of view on it. We have and continue to see it differently. I don't know what more "proof" you'd need over what is happening with the EPA right now. The "dark days" are not coming soon, buddy, they started a couple years ago when the EPA decided to begin expanding it's jurisdiction blatantly onto areas it has no authority, even after courts said so. The EPA, in this latest rule, has stated that it has sole jurisdiction over it's reach, what constitutes a "navigable" waterway, what a "farm" is (farms were exempt),,,all regardless of ANY other federal agency or entity definition. Read the rule, my friend. Like the ACA, it was passed, now you'll find out what's in it!

There is also no need to hire or train people. Those people are already there. the programming is already in use that uses satellite imagery to compare and locate all surface water. Some desk jockey looks at a picture and mails you a violation notice. That is how they already operate and have been for some years now. The funding is there, and minimal. There is no court or congressional review...The President bypassed that with his pen. The courts have TWICE ALREADY said the EPA does not have the authority to do what it is doing, so please don't say the courts can stop them....it hasn't!

Last edited by Rainman; 05/30/15 12:11 PM.


Joined: May 2009
Posts: 5,714
Likes: 281
R
RAH Offline
Lunker
Offline
Lunker
R
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 5,714
Likes: 281
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

Edmund Burke

Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,086
Likes: 93
S
Offline
S
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,086
Likes: 93
Rex said: "Some desk jockey looks at a picture and mails you a violation notice."

Environmental groups have volunteers that scan satellite pictures for potential violations, then turn them in to EPA. Then EPA sends the notice.

EPA does not even need to hire any more people. They have people do it for free.


John

I subscribe to Pond Boss Magazine
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,099
Likes: 22
R
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Hall of Fame
Lunker
Offline
Ambassador
Field Correspondent
Hall of Fame
Lunker
R
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,099
Likes: 22
Originally Posted By: sprkplug


Right there...in my opinion that's where the money will come from should this thing ever get any traction. Not from Tony, and his five ponds in Indiana. There are hundreds of thousands of small, private ponds across the country, and no current means to investigate them all, determine whether or not they are in compliance, and/or do followup visits to ensure compliance.

Bigger, highly visible concerns? Possibly. Backyard pond? I just don't see it. Could they put together a system, given enough time and resources? Probably. But by the time they get done in court, get the funding sorted out, stretch it out through numerous administrations, hire and train all the manpower, and hit the ground and eventually find my five ponds, If I'm even still around I will be of an age that it won't matter anyway.

Rex, I respect your opinion. I know you are convinced that dark days lie ahead, but can you tell me how this is going to go down? It's been my experience that in situations like this some folks are absolutely positive that danger is coming, yet when pressed for details they can't supply any. Is it a gut feeling, or do you know their game plan?
I know that some will operate on feeling, or belief, or faith,
and I will honor their wish to do so. But I'm just not much on faith these days, preferring hard facts instead. Something tangible, something seen, felt, heard. Show me the money, as they say. Follow the money.



Tony, I think it was in your first post on this thread where you said something like..."at the risk of being seen on the other side"....You're not on the other side! You state your beliefs based on your experiences and do so eloquently....with thought and intelligence! I absolutely respect your opinions and even share most of them. We've not engaged in a whizzing match, and won't. We have also not been insulting or attacked any ideas, thoughts or beliefs...merely stated those things, and tried to back them up as best we can.

Your beliefs are not wrong in any way! What my experience with government has shown is that those directing enforcement in agencies like the EPA, COUNT on beliefs like you have. Beliefs that there is nothing you can do as an individual, that if you try not rocking the boat, you'll stay off their radar, that it will take years before they work their way down to little guys like us...Maybe I am wrong in seeing that as your view on this rule...if so, I apologize.

The EPA sees deep pockets like we would see a large client. We give them "special" attention because they pay our monthly bills and we rely on them. But also like a business, those "little guys", the one time customer, THEY make us money to live better on...they allow us to go on vacation, buy our kids something nicer, to upgrade or landscape our ponds.

WE, the LITTLE guy are who the EPA is coming after. Your do not hear about it in the news, because we do not have the resources to fight the goliath of the EPA. the money is NOT in the few hundred deep pocket violators every year....the "money" is in those hundreds of thousand of little ponds they can charge any amount they want...because they HAVE to pay. Besides, as a business, you do not pay a fine or tax, you collect it from your customer to pay. We, the little guy, pay for Durham, Exxon, Shell, BP and any other deep pocket the EPA goes after in higher prices at every level of a supply chain...THEN, the EPA grabs us directly too.

Maybe we personally will not get targeted right away...does that mean it is your neighbors problem when some thief you stealing from them, something you feel they have enough of, and therefore feel no concern or need to report or stop that thief?



Page 3 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Link Copied to Clipboard
Today's Birthdays
Bob Lusk, GaryK, GrizzFan, PhotographerDave
Recent Posts
Happy Birthday Bob Lusk!!
by Sunil - 03/28/24 12:39 PM
New 2 acre pond stocking plan
by Sunil - 03/28/24 12:39 PM
1 year after stocking question
by esshup - 03/28/24 11:01 AM
Paper-shell crayfish and Japanese snails
by esshup - 03/28/24 10:39 AM
Brooder Shiners and Fry, What to do??
by Freg - 03/28/24 09:42 AM
Relative weight charts in Excel ? Calculations?
by esshup - 03/28/24 08:36 AM
Dewatering bags seeded to form berms?
by Justin W - 03/28/24 08:19 AM
Reducing fish biomass
by FishinRod - 03/28/24 08:18 AM
Questions and Feedback on SMB
by Donatello - 03/27/24 03:10 PM
2024 North Texas Optimal BG food Group Buy
by Dave Davidson1 - 03/27/24 08:15 AM
Freeze Danger? - Electric Diaphragm Pump
by esshup - 03/26/24 09:47 PM
Newly Uploaded Images
Eagles Over The Pond Yesterday
Eagles Over The Pond Yesterday
by Tbar, December 10
Deer at Theo's 2023
Deer at Theo's 2023
by Theo Gallus, November 13
Minnow identification
Minnow identification
by Mike Troyer, October 6
Sharing the Food
Sharing the Food
by FishinRod, September 9
Nice BGxRES
Nice BGxRES
by Theo Gallus, July 28
Snake Identification
Snake Identification
by Rangersedge, July 12

� 2014 POND BOSS INC. all rights reserved USA and Worldwide

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5