Author Topic: Water Rights...  (Read 9557 times)

santahog

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1638
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Water Rights...
« on: July 31, 2012, 10:02:36 AM »
Folks, this needs to be paid attention to. Rain Water?!

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/oregon-man-sentenced-30-days-jail-collecting-rainwater-his-property

 – A rural Oregon man was sentenced Wednesday to 30 days in jail and over $1,500 in fines because he had three reservoirs on his property to collect and use rainwater.

Gary Harrington of Eagle Point, Ore., says he plans to appeal his conviction in Jackson County (Ore.) Circuit Court on nine misdemeanor charges under a 1925 law for having what state water managers called “three illegal reservoirs” on his property – and for filling the reservoirs with rainwater and snow runoff.

“The government is bullying,” Harrington told CNSNews.com in an interview Thursday.

“They’ve just gotten to be big bullies and if you just lay over and die and give up, that just makes them bigger bullies. So, we as Americans, we need to stand on our constitutional rights, on our rights as citizens and hang tough. This is a good country, we’ll prevail,” he said.

The court has given Harrington two weeks to report to the Jackson County Jail to begin serving his sentence.

Harrington said the case first began in 2002, when state water managers told him there were complaints about the three “reservoirs” – ponds – on his more than 170 acres of land.

According to Oregon water laws, all water is publicly owned. Therefore, anyone who wants to store any type of water on their property must first obtain a permit from state water managers.

Harrington said he applied for three permits to legally house reservoirs for storm and snow water runoff on his property. One of the “reservoirs” had been on his property for 37 years, he said.

Though the state Water Resources Department initially approved his permits in 2003, the state – and a state court -- ultimately reversed the decision.

“They issued me my permits. I had my permits in hand and they retracted them just arbitrarily, basically. They took them back and said ‘No, you can’t have them,’ so I’ve been fighting it ever since,” Harrington told CNSNews.com.

The case, he said, is centered on a 1925 law which states that the city of Medford holds exclusive rights to “all core sources of water” in the Big Butte Creek watershed and its tributaries.

“Way back in 1925 the city of Medford got a unique withdrawal that withdrew all -- supposedly all -- the water out of a single basin and supposedly for the benefit of the city of Medford,” Harrington told CNSNews.com.

Harrington told CNSNews.com, however, that the 1925 law doesn’t mention anything about colleting rainwater or snow melt -- and he believes that he has been falsely accused.

“The withdrawal said the stream and its tributaries. It didn’t mention anything about rainwater and it didn’t mention anything about snow melt and it didn’t mention anything about diffused water, but yet now, they’re trying to expand that to include that rain water and they’re using me as the goat to do it,” Harrington

But Tom Paul, administrator of the Oregon Water Resources Department, claims that Harrington has been violating the state’s water use law by diverting water from streams running into the Big Butte River.

“The law that he is actually violating is not the 1925 provision, but it’s Oregon law that says all of the water in the state of Oregon is public water and if you want to use that water, either to divert it or to store it, you have to acquire a water right from the state of Oregon before doing that activity,” Paul told CNSNews.com.

Yet Paul admitted the 1925 law does apply because, he said, Harrington constructed dams to block a tributary to the Big Butte, which Medford uses for its water supply.

“There are dams across channels, water channels where the water would normally flow if it were not for the dam and so those dams are stopping the water from flowing in the channel and storing it- holding it so it cannot flow downstream,” Paul told CNSNews.com.

Harrington, however, argued in court that that he is not diverting water from Big Butte Creek, but the dams capturing the rainwater and snow runoff – or “diffused water” – are on his own property and that therefore the runoff does not fall under the jurisdiction of the state water managers, nor does it not violate the 1925 act.

In 2007, a Jackson County Circuit Court judge denied Harrington’s permits and found that he had illegally “withdrawn the water at issue from appropriation other than for the City of Medford.”

According to Paul, Harrington entered a guilty plea at the time, received three years probation and was ordered to open up the water gates.

“A very short period of time following the expiration of his probation, he once again closed the gates and re-filled the reservoirs,” Paul told CNSNews.com. “So, this has been going on for some time and I think frankly the court felt that Mr. Harrington was not getting the message and decided that they’d already given him probation once and required him to open the gates and he refilled his reservoirs and it was business as usual for him, so I think the court wanted -- it felt it needed -- to give a stiffer penalty to get Mr. Harrington’s attention.”

In two weeks, if unsuccessful in his appeals, Harrington told CNSNews.com that he will report to the Jackson County Jail to serve his sentence.

“I follow the rules. If I’m mandated to report, I’m going to report. Of course, I’m going to do what it takes in the meantime to prevent that, but if I’m not successful, I’ll be there,” Harrington said.

But Harrington also said that he will never stop fighting the government on this issue.

“When something is wrong, you just, as an American citizen, you have to put your foot down and say, ‘This is wrong; you just can’t take away anymore of my rights and from here on in, I’m going to fight it.”

With friends like these, who needs hallucinations!..

TAB

  • DRTV Rangers
  • Top Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10234
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: Water Rights...
« Reply #1 on: July 31, 2012, 10:21:25 AM »
I am sure there is more too it then that.   Knowing a little bit about water rights in that part of Or.  There is alot there that is " I don't think so".   I will wait for the other shoe to drop.
I always break all the clay pigeons,  some times its even with lead.

lhprop1

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 415
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Water Rights...
« Reply #2 on: July 31, 2012, 11:18:51 AM »
I am sure there is more too it then that.   Knowing a little bit about water rights in that part of Or.  There is alot there that is " I don't think so".   I will wait for the other shoe to drop.

Too little info.  I agree with you there.  It's not like the guy is just putting buckets under the gutters on his house.  From the sounds of it, he has a little creek on his property that feeds a river when it rains.  If he dammed that, he's definitely doing something shady.
Bravery and stupidity are often synonymous.  So are cowardice and intelligence.

"We Americans have been a rebellious band of freedom loving vagabonds from the very beginning. Our freedom from the crown and tyranny would not exist had it not been for the gun. That's a tradition we like to hold on to.  The same can't be said for the rest of you 'Subjects of the Queen'."--said to a Canadian friend who just doesn't get it.

rojawe

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1071
  • To the Republic for which it stands One Nation
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Water Rights...
« Reply #3 on: July 31, 2012, 11:59:44 AM »
Welcome to the New world Agenda 21 where the UN and Government will control everything and you can pay the taxes but they own all. Water, Land , Natural resources, and were headed there now under obama and the UN. It started back with Bush 1 and his statement on 1 world order and wake up America and defend us from Agenda 21. Just look it up and we are being force by money loaned out to cities . towns, townships and in every state and our nation. No UN :'( :-X :P
EMPLOYERS STOP THE FLOOD E-VERIFY WORKS

jnevis

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1479
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Water Rights...
« Reply #4 on: July 31, 2012, 12:43:09 PM »
Welcome to the New world Agenda 21 where the UN and Government will control everything and you can pay the taxes but they own all. Water, Land , Natural resources, and were headed there now under obama and the UN. It started back with Bush 1 and his statement on 1 world order and wake up America and defend us from Agenda 21. Just look it up and we are being force by money loaned out to cities . towns, townships and in every state and our nation. No UN :'( :-X :P

Yeah, that's it.  The gov't is forcing this guy to dam a section of creek to take over the world.  So if you lived in Medford, or the surrounding area, it's OK for this guy to divert water, rainwater or otherwise, away from the public reservoir for personal use while you can't?  The water the rest of the area uses has to get there somehow.  Did this guy think that the rest of the area water just magically appears in the streams and river used by everybody else?  I know the water in the Seirras I fished/swam in was rainwater/snow melt year round.  Is the way water flows different in OR?
When seconds mean the difference between life and death, the police will be minutes away.

You are either SOLVING the problem, or you ARE the problem.

Sponsor

  • Guest
Re: Water Rights...
« Reply #5 on: Today at 04:25:46 PM »

Tyler Durden

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Water Rights...
« Reply #5 on: July 31, 2012, 12:44:50 PM »

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: Water Rights...
« Reply #6 on: July 31, 2012, 01:03:12 PM »
Too little info.  I agree with you there.  It's not like the guy is just putting buckets under the gutters on his house.  From the sounds of it, he has a little creek on his property that feeds a river when it rains.  If he dammed that, he's definitely doing something shady.

Yeah, that's it.  The gov't is forcing this guy to dam a section of creek to take over the world.  So if you lived in Medford, or the surrounding area, it's OK for this guy to divert water, rainwater or otherwise, away from the public reservoir for personal use while you can't?  The water the rest of the area uses has to get there somehow.  Did this guy think that the rest of the area water just magically appears in the streams and river used by everybody else?  I know the water in the Seirras I fished/swam in was rainwater/snow melt year round.  Is the way water flows different in OR?

You didn't pay attention,.

FTA
Harrington said he applied for three permits to legally house reservoirs for storm and snow water runoff on his property. One of the “reservoirs” had been on his property for 37 years, he said.

Though the state Water Resources Department initially approved his permits in 2003, the state – and a state court -- ultimately reversed the decision.

TAB

  • DRTV Rangers
  • Top Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10234
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: Water Rights...
« Reply #7 on: July 31, 2012, 01:21:46 PM »
Tom having a permit does not mean anything.   if the permit said you could replace a hvac and you built an addition.   they are going to make you tear down the addition.  I have a uncle in bend( stones throw away)  he is a water rights broker/developer.  I have run several water related jobs for him.   building a pond in a low point is no big deal.  Damning a stream will cost you millions in envromental impact studys.  Seeing how by the story he was convicted of this once, then went back to doing it after his probation was over, I would bet he is trying to say bacon is kohser.   
I always break all the clay pigeons,  some times its even with lead.

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: Water Rights...
« Reply #8 on: July 31, 2012, 01:56:48 PM »
Tom having a permit does not mean anything.   if the permit said you could replace a hvac and you built an addition.   they are going to make you tear down the addition.  I have a uncle in bend( stones throw away)  he is a water rights broker/developer.  I have run several water related jobs for him.   building a pond in a low point is no big deal.  Damning a stream will cost you millions in envromental impact studys.  Seeing how by the story he was convicted of this once, then went back to doing it after his probation was over, I would bet he is trying to say bacon is kohser.   

You still aren't paying attention, it was built in 1975 (ish)

MikeBjerum

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11007
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1175
Re: Water Rights...
« Reply #9 on: July 31, 2012, 02:02:35 PM »
As I read this there could be some "he said - she said," but the basics are that the State claims all water as public property.  He is not damming up or diverting any streams or the like.  All he is doing is keeping the rain and snow melt run off on his property.

In Minnesota we are being forced to keep that water on our land.  Businesses are being forced to purchase land to build "rain gardens" and retention ponds.

Based on the news story, I say that government is out of line.
If I appear taller than other men it is because I am standing on the shoulders of others.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk