|
Navagating a gully?
|
06-11-2012, 08:20 PM
How do you think this will play in the fight over the definition of a navigable water way in the battle for right to trespass in Utah?
http://www.humanevents.com/2012/06/11/ep...-property/ I think it will make the Utah legislators dig in harder. [signature]
06-11-2012, 08:55 PM
any chance you could do a copy/paste? i cant access that website here in afghanistan
[signature]
06-11-2012, 09:39 PM
Here ya go :
About Us ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT EPA POWER GRAB TO REGULATE DITCHES, GULLIES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY House Transportation Committee Chairman Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.) speaks on Capitol Hill in Washington in April. By: Audrey Hudson 6/11/2012 08:05 AM 293 Lawmakers are working to block an unprecedented power grab by the Environmental Protection Agency to use the Clean Water Act (CWA) and control land alongside ditches, gullies and other ephemeral spots by claiming the sources are part of navigable waterways. These temporary water sources are often created by rain or snowmelt, and would make it harder for private property owners to build in their own backyards, grow crops, raise livestock and conduct other activities on their own land, lawmakers say. “Never in the history of the CWA has federal regulation defined ditches and other upland features as ‘waters of the United States,’” said Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Rep. Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.), the ranking committee member, and Rep. Bob Gibbs (R-Ohio), chairman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment. “This is without a doubt an expansion of federal jurisdiction,” the lawmakers said in a May 31 letter to House colleagues. The unusual alliance of the powerful House Republicans and Democrat to jointly sponsor legislation to overturn the new guidelines signals a willingness on Capitol Hill to rein in the formidable agency. “The Obama administration is doing everything in its power to increase costs and regulatory burdens for American businesses, farmers and individual property owners,” Mica said in a statement to Human Events. “This federal jurisdiction grab has been opposed by Congress for years, and now the administration and its agencies are ignoring law and rulemaking procedures in order to tighten their regulatory grip over every water body in the country.” “But this administration needs to realize it is not above the law,” Mica said. The House measure carries 64 Republican and Democratic cosponsors and was passed in committee last week. A companion piece of legislation is already gathering steam in the Senate and is cosponsored by 26 Republicans. “President Obama’s EPA continues to act as if it is above the law. It is using this overreaching guidance to pre-empt state and local governments, farmers and ranchers, small business owners and homeowners from making local land and water use decisions,” Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) said in announcing their measure in March. “Our bill will stop this unprecedented Washington power grab and restore Americans’ property rights.” “It’s time to get EPA lawyers out of Americans’ backyards,” Barrasso said. Republicans say the proposal is peppered with loopholes. It suggests that roadside and agricultural ditches will be excluded; however, it also notes several exceptions, such as a connection to navigable or interstate waterways, ditches “that have relatively permanent flowing or standing water,” or a “bed, bank and ordinary high water mark.” The EPA and Army Corps of Engineers drafted the new guidelines to implement Supreme Court decisions in the Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County case in 2001 and the Rapanos case in 2006 after the decisions removed some waters from federal protection and caused confusion about what remained protected. However, the lawmakers say the jurisdictional limits set by the court are being ignored in order to justify the expansion of the agencies’ control. The new language is intended to protect smaller waters that could potentially feed pollution downstream to larger bodies of water, but because it is not a formal rule, it cannot be enforced in the courts. “Although guidance does not have the force of law, it is frequently used by federal agencies to explain and clarify their understandings of existing requirements,” the new guidelines say. Supreme Court cases evaluated EPA powers HUMAN EVENTS: RELATED ARTICLESSPONSORED CONTENT FROM THE WEB 12 Concealed Carry Guns 12 Ounces Or Less Fast and Furious: Eric Holder’s bizarre House Judiciary testimony Zoning the ocean Law of the Sea Treaty becomes war of the words The recall heard round the world Buffett: I Support Obama 100% (Fox Business) Debunking 3 Myths About Paying Taxes (Moneyning.com) Celebrities Who Are Proud To Be Republican (Zimbio) Obama Was Born in Kenya & Wait Until You See the 'Proof' (CafeMom) Does Obama Have a Chance of Beating Romney? Vote Now (Newsmax.com) [?] COMMENTS HUMAN EVENTS READER'S CHOICE POPULARCOMMENTSEMAILED TV Alert: Adam Tragone on NewsTalk with Bruce DePuyt By: Human Events 6/11/2012 10:09 AM EPA power grab to regulate ditches, gullies on private property By: Audrey Hudson 6/11/2012 08:05 AM Fast and Furious: House Oversight votes on contempt charges for Attorney General Holder next week By: John Hayward 6/11/2012 10:26 AM Commerce Secretary cited in hit-and-run accident By: John Hayward 6/11/2012 08:50 AM Obama wins coveted Castro endorsement By: John Hayward 6/11/2012 10:55 AM Obama risks national security to secure his own re-election By: Gary Bauer 6/11/2012 12:13 PM Supreme Court cases evaluated EPA powers By: Audrey Hudson 6/11/2012 06:57 AM TODAY'S POLL QUESTION: If the presidential election were held today and the candidates were Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, who would you vote for? Barack Obama Mitt Romney Undecided BACK TO TOP Human Events Group | Powerful Conservative Voices © 2012 EAGLE PUBLISHING, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Subscribe | Advertise | About Us | Privacy Policy [signature]
06-12-2012, 03:22 AM
Thanks for posting this. This reinforces the point I made a while ago that the scope of navigability law reaches far greater than many people realize. (However, I agree that this is likely an overreach by the EPA and do not approve of their action)
RE "I think it will make the Utah legislators dig in harder." Perhaps, but navigability is decided on the Federal level so sweeping actions of this type might cut them "out of the action", so to speak. [signature] |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
