[OT]: Rainwater Permit: "May I pretty-please have a drop of rain-waterUncle Sam?"

In article , Mark Jones wrote: [...]

No, more like "Uncle Sam may I pretty please sue over the toxic waste being dumped into my farm land. Does the pain and suffering limit of $2.50 apply for each of my children or do they have to split it?"

--
--
kensmith@rahul.net   forging knowledge

I read in sci.electronics.design that Jim Thompson wrote (in ) about '[OT]: Rainwater Permit: "May I pretty-please have a drop of rain-water Uncle Sam?"', on Tue, 18 Jan 2005:

I think you ought to cut off the top 1000 feet of the Grand Canyon, which hasn't seen the river water for umpteen million years, and ship it to Louisiana to stop the Mississippi flooding.

--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. 
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

Rainwater is not clean. It's acutally quite dirty, being laiden with dust, acids, nitrous oxides, pesticides, hydrocarbons, etc. Why a permit in any state? Where is this point going? History shows that as soon as a foot is in the door, it paves the way for further intervention. Haven't we enough intervention already? Selling rainwater on the black market... sheesh! Who's the paranoid one.

"UnKle Sam, may I please use solar cells to collect solar energy and ship this to Kalifornia for hydrogen cars?"

Hmm... maybe that is where this is going... rainwater becoming very valuable as fuel as hydrogen autos become popular... setting the framework for monopoly in motion already...

In article , Jim Thompson wrote: [...]

Only because LA doesn't want it badly enough. (Can you tell that I'm not in LA)

--
--
kensmith@rahul.net   forging knowledge

In article , John Woodgate wrote: [...]

This is easier:

In Lodi California they go to great efforts to flood the fields to grow rice. Along the Mississippi they go to great lengths to prevent the corn fields from getting flooded. Why not just swap farmers.

--
--
kensmith@rahul.net   forging knowledge

use

I knew it!

I posted it because I thought it was a shining example of petty bureaucrat megalomania. I came across the paranoid interpretation and repeated it, but thanks for your explanation.

This is a state of Washington bill, not federal.

Lets quote the whole thing:

Sec. 1 RCW 90.03.250 and 1987 c 109 s 83 are each amended to read as follows: (1) Any person, municipal corporation, firm, irrigation district, association, corporation or water users' association hereafter desiring to appropriate water for a beneficial use shall make an application to the department for a permit to make such appropriation, and shall not use or divert such waters until he has received a permit from the department as in this chapter provided. The construction of any ditch, canal or works, or performing any work in connection with said construction or appropriation, or the use of any waters, shall not be an appropriation of such water nor an act for the purpose of appropriating water unless a permit to make said appropriation has first been granted by the department((: PROVIDED, That)). (2) A temporary permit may be granted upon a proper showing made to the department to be valid only during the pendency of such application for a permit unless sooner revoked by the department((: PROVIDED, FURTHER, That)). (3) Nothing in this chapter ((contained)) shall be deemed to affect RCW

90.40.010 through 90.40.080 except that the notice and certificate therein provided for in RCW 90.40.030 shall be addressed to the department, and the department shall exercise the powers and perform the duties prescribed by RCW 90.40.030. (4) The department may permit by rule, under conditions appropriate to the water resources inventory area, the use of rain barrels and cisterns to collect rainwater intended to be put to a beneficial use on the same property where the rainwater is captured.

The benign interpretation is:

The bill is to prevent 'harvesting' rainwater in Washington state and shipping it to, say, Arizona or Hanford.

If you are not exporting the water it is yours to use as you please, though the govmt. does reserve the right to require you to get a permit in the case of water-smuggling hijinks. RCW's above would also have to read to figure the damn thing out

The paranoid interpretation is:

The Feds are going to steal all your rainwater, and RCW 90.40.030 allows the use of black helicopters in the enforcement of said 'appropriation'.

Now what in blazes is this doing in this newsgroup and why am I perpetuating this idiotic thread.

-- Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics. Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/

Read all about it from the tight-ass who convinced the senator to sponsor the bill:

I can't make head or tail of it.

-- Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics. Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/

Not since 1922.

That's somewhat out of date. I'll have to track down the cases, but CA went to court to up their share and lost the case. IIRC AZ got their apportionment increased.

Also that article is basin-based. The rule now is AZ owns all the water in the Colorado where the Colorado forms the CA-AZ border, independent of the basin rule. So CA has to get their water from Lake Mead.

I guess CA needs a Washington-state-like cistern law ;-)

AZ's big problem is population growth, but CA doesn't have that problem... one of the benefits of the welfare state making living expenses so high... but they're all moving to AZ :-(

...Jim Thompson

--
|  James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
|  Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
|  Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
|  Phoenix, Arizona            Voice:(480)460-2350  |             |
|  E-mail Address at Website     Fax:(480)460-2142  |  Brass Rat  |
|       http://www.analog-innovations.com           |    1962     |
             
I love to cook with wine.      Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Good explanation snipped..

the use

Nothing is so ridiculous that it cannot be true when the daemon of bureaucracy is invoked:

For Example, here in Denmark they use light aircraft and image-processing software to analyse aerial photos of all properties to look for any TAXABLE improvements to your very own Home; there is a value tax on property. ... I worked with the guy who wrote (part of) the software.

perpetuating

Coffee Break?

they

very

or

What I remember was that California wanted the amount of water they had been using historically (way beyond the 1922 allotment, but not a problem as long as Arizona used less than allowed). When the new waterworks opened, AZ wanted their to start using their full share, and lawyers were enriched.

I did not know that. Cna you provide a reference?

The ultimate benefit California will have is the long shoreline: lots of free water, only slightly saltier than the river water we get now.

In San Diego, the city produces tons of clean water by extracting oit from sewage. The water is cleaner than rainwater, and way cleaner than Colorado River water. However, it is politiaclly impossible to introduce it directly into the public water supply. So it is mostly sprayed on golf coures, parks, and freeway landscaping.

People don't want to drink former sewage. I suppose a trip to the Gunnison, Colorado treatment plant is in order.

That's the way it's been done here in AZ, USA for many years. The criterion is (was?) shaded area; shade is a valuable commodity here.

They used aerial photography not for the "stealth" aspect, but because homes were farther apart when it started, and the manpower to inspect outlying properties wasn't available.

Mark L. Fergerson

Well, obviously _all_ water is "former sewage" if you track it back far enough. But people are being trained to be stupid, and it seems to be working.

Mark L. Fergerson

[snip]

I'll try to track that down... it was about 15 years ago.

Here, the Phoenix water system, under youngest daughter's tutelage, introduces it into the groundwater away from direct wells, and recycles it that way. Obviously this is not publicized ;-)

The general population never understands science. In yesteryears we would have all been burned at the stake ;-)

...Jim Thompson

--
|  James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
|  Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
|  Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
|  Phoenix, Arizona            Voice:(480)460-2350  |             |
|  E-mail Address at Website     Fax:(480)460-2142  |  Brass Rat  |
|       http://www.analog-innovations.com           |    1962     |
             
I love to cook with wine.      Sometimes I even put it in the food.

permit

Or, since paragraph 4 allows the governing body to allow (or disallow) barrels and cisterns even for use on your own property, it gives them the ability to force you to buy 'their' water instead of collecting your own. Even for uses where there is no water quality issue, like watering your lawn.

--
Paul Hovnanian     mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
God doesn't play dice. However, He does play a mean game of
3 card monte.

shipping

What's the point in a DVR? The television shows are just going to end up on the TV anyway.

--
  Keith