Environmental roundup

by Walter Olson on August 22, 2012

{ 2 comments }

1 No Name Guy 08.22.12 at 2:46 pm

As I understood it in the Oregon rain water case, the state claimed ownership of the water as it falls from the sky. In which case, I have to ask: Why is the state polluting a persons land with (supposedly) their property? Clearly when TOO much rain falls, it damages a persons property. In some cases, any rain will damage property (say if I left electronics outside). Sorry Oregon, you can’t have it both ways. Either the rain, when it falls on their property, belongs to the land owner (and only becomes state property when it’s run off said property or entered the ground water system), or you have to take responsibility when it damages property.

Oh wait….right…it’s Government. THEY don’t have to follow the rules that apply to use “little” people.

2 Mannie 08.22.12 at 7:33 pm

It’s not so much the government, here, although they are apparently the enforcers. It’s the holders of the water rights. When you buy land, it may have water rights, or they may have been sold off years ago, or lost in antiquity. It’s a lot like mineral rights. In many areas, you buy your land without mineral rights. This sort of policy is pretty standard in Water Rights states. In arid states, water rights are something to go to war over.

OTOH, “We’ve had these ponds for 37 years and they were designed and built for the purpose of water, fire protection.” I don’t know if you can claim adverse possession of water rights.

Comments on this entry are closed.