Pond Boss Forums INTRO Questions & Observations EPA website concerning clean water rule.

Can be found here: http://www2.epa.gov/cleanwaterrule/clean-water-rule-litigation-statement

Their side, take it or leave it: http://www2.epa.gov/cleanwaterrule/what-clean-water-rule-does-not-do

Sparky, I'll leave it since the EPA has been sued, and ruled it had over-reached, for doing the first 4 activities the site lists it does not do.....(the EPA continuously violates the law, it's authority, and court orders to stop)

What the Clean Water Rule Does Not Do




A Clean Water Act permit is only needed if a water is going to be polluted or destroyed. The Clean Water Rule DOES NOT:

•Protect any types of waters that have not historically been covered by the Clean Water Act.
•Add any new requirements for agriculture.
•Interfere with or change private property rights.
•Regulate most ditches.

Further, after the ND Federal Judge that placed an injunction on the EPA, in favor of the 12 or 13 states that sued the EPA made his ruling, the EPA made a statement that it MAY not enforce the new rules in those 13 states, but will still enforce the new rules in all other states.

Do you own the water than lands on your land? Could one not estimate what water falls yearly on their land and use as much of that as they want.

Who owns the water that falls on your land?

PondBoss quote: It depends?

http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/rainwater.asp

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/or-court-of-appeals/1347290.html

Notice also, that this law has been on Oregon's books since 1925...well before the EPA ever existed. That doesn't mean it's a good or just law, just pointing out that such policies have been in play long before federal intervention in some cases.

In the USA, the EPA wants to define ALL waters on, above and below the geographic borders as being "Waters of The United States".

This thread will probably get locked again, just as the last 2 have. It amazes me that in Colorado, the EPA can force companies to spend millions retaining chemicals they deem toxic, yet when the EPA creates a huge ecological calamity, dumping toxic waste in streams for miles and miles after they breach the retention dam they ordered to be created. the EPA says, it's no big deal and the toxins will be covered up in days...

So I ask, was the mine waste only toxic when the EPA could force other's to do it's bidding, and suddenly safe when the EPA royally screws up?