Woman is denied from using rainwater off her own roof!

page: 11
85
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 07:32 AM
link   
OK. After reading through this thread, I have gone from laughter to outrage to scratching my chin to contemplation. I am somewhere in between my opinion on this. So I have a few questions that might help clear up the issue here.

1. Doesn't property ownership include the rights to whatever one finds on said property? In the case of this woman's situation, if she agreed to a contract that didn't include the rights to the resources under or on top of her property, then I guess this is a moot point.

2. Why is there such a hubub over water wasting? Water evaporates and then comes back down. Everything in between has little bearing on how much water the world actually has. I mean, I just can't get my head around the claim that we could run out of water. In some areas it is harder to come by, yes. But "wasting" water, as if we can actually run out, seems impossible to me. So please, if anyone can give me an actual reason for why I am wrong in that opinion, it would be much appreciated. I try not to be naive, but some things seem simple to me.

3. The technology for desalinization is widely available. If we can build giant expensive fresh-water filters, then why can't we build desalinating plants as a matter of course and then pump the stuff to where it is needed? We do this on a small scale right now. Can't funds be diverted for the globalization of these filters? This would avoid wars over water. Of course, when was the last time our world leaders did a damn thing for the world population that actually Helped them...


So please, other than the local water-tank or aquifer getting low in times of drought, why all the hooha about securing water rights on someone else's property, especially when it's fricken Rain Water?!?

It's either backroom deals, corrupted officials, greedy corporate interests, or a full combo of all of them.




posted on May, 16 2009 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Listen to the excuse our Australian Government gives for taxing rain.

Oh c'mon!

Outcry over tax on rain




EXCLUSIVE: Chris Tinkler January 14, 2007 12:00am

THE Bracks Government is outraged at a leaked federal proposal to tax rainwater collected from roofs.

The idea was revealed in a leaked email seen by the Sunday Herald Sun. Acting Premier John Thwaites yesterday warned that if water was privatised -- as proposed by some federal Liberals -- a tax on rainwater in tanks would follow.

The Bracks Government is furious at the mooted tax -- it pays rebates on tanks as a water conservation measure.

In the email, National Water Commission chief Ken Matthews says, "Legally, all water in Australia is vested in governments."

Mr Matthews' email continued: "Governments have not yet considered the capture of water from roofs in rainwater tanks to be of sufficient magnitude to warrant the issuing of specific entitlements to use this class of water.

"However, if rainwater tanks were to be adopted on a large scale such that their existence impacts significantly on the integrated water cycle, consideration could be given to setting an entitlement regime for this class of water."

Such a regime already exists for farmers catching rainwater and storing it in dams.

A residential household version could include a licensing arrangement and taxes for those wanting to collect more than a set amount.

The commission yesterday confirmed the email was accurate.

Mr Thwaites said there were also fears the Federal Government could seize control of the resource from the states and tax rainwater.

And Federal water parliamentary secretary Malcolm Turnbull has said that if the Australian constitution were drawn today, control of water would be given to Canberra.

Prime Minister John Howard's environment parliamentary secretary, Greg Hunt, also has talked up water privatisation.

Mr Thwaites said yesterday the Bracks Government opposed any taxes on rainwater.

"We want people to use rainwater to take pressure off Melbourne's storages," he said.

"We are encouraging people to install rainwater tanks and that's why we offer a rebate of up to $1000 on them.

"Greg Hunt is saying private companies should take over recycled water.

"If private companies were allowed to take over water they would seek to maximise profits at the expense of the public.

"Private companies would not want the competition from water tanks and would therefore seek to control tank water or have it taxed."

Mr Howard said in his New Year message water had to be looked at from a "national perspective".

And Mr Hunt has signalled a plan to force states to recycle more waste water or allow private firms access to it.

Mr Matthews said in his email: "It is important to think of the capture of water from any source in an integrated way.
"If 1000 homes were to install 5000-litre tanks with an annual yield of 57,000 litres, this is 57 million litres that would not have reached a river or ground water system, or -- viewed another way -- is taken from either the environment's entitlement or another productive use."


www.news.com.au...



posted on May, 16 2009 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Morningglory
 



To answer your first question just because someone else owns the mineral rights doesn't mean they'll find anything worth mining, no guarantees. Can't really charge them for something that may or may not even be here. This area was heavily mined for high grade coal about 50 years ago so there's a good chance it's long gone. We have vents everywhere the land is honeycombed with mine shafts. The well drillers have to go deep to get past them.


Ah but they retain the mineral rights. They do so assuming that perhaps some day they will find something under your property that is of value. They therefore owe the property owner storage fees and other fees associated with the access rights to said undetermined minerals. Otherwise the person or entity that owns the mineral rights should sell the rights to the homeowner at fair market value. Unless it is cheaper to buy storage rights to the aforementioned minerals whether they exist or not.


As far as charging for water storage that's a laugh our ground doesn't hold water for long it runs off. There is the aquifer down below but I mean come on. It's not like it's putting us out having it down there.


Ah but you cannot collect water before it reaches that aquifer. They therefore are transporting a known commodity across your private property without your permission. Transportation fees are justified in this measure and the state would have to pay fees in order to retain the rights they hold to the water from that aquifer. Otherwise they are transporting across your land a known hazardous material.



posted on May, 16 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   
What have we come to when rain is considered property of somebody.
If they produced the rain magically then fine but its a natural occurance.
Even if they did create it magically then dont drop it onto her roof otherwise finders keepers.

Water is natural, we should pay for piping and filtration, we should NEVER allow rain to be bought out.
No permission needed, Nature gave her that for free so they need to back off.
Theres going to be a huge backlash one day and all the money in the world wont stop it.

[edit on 16-5-2009 by keepithush]



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 03:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by obilesk
2. Why is there such a hubub over water wasting? Water evaporates and then comes back down. Everything in between has little bearing on how much water the world actually has. I mean, I just can't get my head around the claim that we could run out of water. In some areas it is harder to come by, yes. But "wasting" water, as if we can actually run out, seems impossible to me. So please, if anyone can give me an actual reason for why I am wrong in that opinion, it would be much appreciated. I try not to be naive, but some things seem simple to me.


Contemplate the normal cycle
it rains - some water evaporates - some water seeps into ground - eventually after years it hits the water table.

Then there is todays wastefull ways
it rains - some water evaporates - some water seeps into ground - eventually it hits the water table. BUT now we pump up more water than seeps into the ground and less water hits the water table. The water table drops. Which in turn means less water to pump up. Much of what we do pump up is wasted in gardens and homes because people take the quantity for granted. Turn the tap on - we have plenty of water. A lot of what we waste is going into the drains and are transported out to sea. NOT into the ground to replenish ground water.

AND then we add pesticides which causes more and more ground water to be polluted above safety limits. Wells are closed down and new wells are sunk.

What we will run out of is clean drinking water. And the cost of cleaning will rise in the future.
Americans will soon start to complain as much about the price of water as they do about the price of gas. Did you know that we pay what amounts to
about 8.5 dollars pr gallon of gas?



3. The technology for desalinization is widely available. If we can build giant expensive fresh-water filters, then why can't we build desalinating plants as a matter of course and then pump the stuff to where it is needed? We do this on a small scale right now. Can't funds be diverted for the globalization of these filters? This would avoid wars over water. Of course, when was the last time our world leaders did a damn thing for the world population that actually Helped them...


What a splendid idea. Only thing wrong with it, is funding it. And as long as some governments think it is more important to develop war machines and "police" in countries where they are not wanted, then nothing will happen.
As long as Africa, India and other developing areas are suffering nothing will happen. Once the US and Europe is hit hard we will see things starting to happen. And meanwhile people will exercise their right to be wasteful in the "knowledge" that science will save them.




So please, other than the local water-tank or aquifer getting low in times of drought, why all the hooha about securing water rights on someone else's property, especially when it's fricken Rain Water?!?

It's either backroom deals, corrupted officials, greedy corporate interests, or a full combo of all of them.


Or it could be those scientists that have advised your goverment that something could be done now - before it is too late?



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


You are right they do retain mineral rights. As far as access and/or mining they would have to compensate us for use of access roads or mine development. This very thing happened to a neighbor 1 mile away. The people were relocated to a nearby area with more land and the company drilled them a water well. Their neighbor refused to sell, fenced off his property and had to live next to an open pit mine. He had no water well on his property. After several years the mine was reclaimed. This company has gone bankrupt so a bank probably holds or sold off the mineral rights.

That's what the money guys do they come in take and leave. Usually they leave things in a mess but the state made this particular company reclaim the mine before they went belly up. Many company's filed bankruptcy so long ago the state would have to pay to reclaim the mines. The state does pay to seal off entrances.

As far as the aquifer storing water we are not disallowed access. Because of our unique situation with our development we are all permitted to drill wells. We still have to file and do the paper work but we would not be turned down. Several families have done just that. We have not. I don't see how we could charge for something we could utilize ourselves.

HolgerTheDane is right the water table is getting lower. 5 years ago during a bad drought wells were drying up. Many would not recover soon enough or in any usable amounts to depend on. People had to haul water to supplement their wells or have the driller come out and go deeper. The family nearest to us went 500 ft. at a cost of $30,000. Quite a gamble, you still have to pay the driller for the undeveloped hole hole even if it's dry. Things have gotten a little better some wells never recovered but now there is a new threat to area wells.

It's always something. A nearby methane drilling operation is pumping out vast amounts of water in the process. They hold it then release it into the river. Farmers downstream are complaining of a high salt content which is stunting crops. Some wells are going dry due to the pumping others have exploded because of the methane, it's getting into the wells. People are furious. They have halted the operation for a time to make a study. Pumping out large amounts of water from the aquifer leaves voids and can increase seismic activity. We get little shakes of about 3-4 but who knows what all the pumping could cause. Also the weight of reservoirs can cause an increase in activity.

I can't say how many wells are near me but I know when a new one is punched my nearest neighbor feels it in the recovery time for their well. People move here from back east and the first thing they do is plant trees from home. This is a disaster. The trees are water hogs and are not native to this altitude or climate. We have trees, we lost some pinon but our cedars are beautiful.

We are a desert region so rain/snow varies from year to year not to mention the impact of drilling or all the new people with their wasteful ways. Yet the demand is constant and growing.



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by HolgerTheDane
 

Thank you for that!
I was going to jump in on the conservation side,
but I see you already brought it up!
You can only drill so deep........



posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 07:32 PM
link   
ok i'm a bit late in on this thread, but it popped up and here i am.

read a few of the responses. this is the new age i'm sad to say, this is the new order at play, it all comes under they own everything from the air we breathe onward. it is all for sale. graziers of stock are being held accountable for air pollution for the methane breathed, burped and flatulated from their animals, no doubt we will come under the same rule someday.

user pay is a good tag for it.

over here they deem they own 90% of the water, they have certain slide scales and this determines how many dams you may have in rural, it does not take into accounts the years of no rain for water for the stock, they could care less. so in simple terms here you get 10% of the rain that falls on your property for free. there has been talk of putting meters on bores/wells with pumps. no matter how isolated you think you are in rural they use sattelites to monitor you and if you sneek a dam in they are on your doorstep rapid time. you can't lie they have high quality pics. permits are needed. last i heard $30kAUD??

they can sneek all of this in as most of the masses in totally engrossed in watching sport on tv, they don't watch news or current affiars type programs, they worship sport.

so over there you already in some places have tight controls on what you do in your yards, gardening wise, like compost bins must be out of sight and bales of hay/straw must be wrapped and out ofsight, seen it all spoken about on many forums.

ove herf they already making storm water from your home an issue, very likley you are going to have to capture it before it gets into their system and then have it disposed of, i don't think they are thinking of letting you use it. so in new estates have heard of underground storm water tanks being installed.

unless the masses become aware we will simply have to accept the inevitable.

len

www.lensgarden.com.au...



posted on Jun, 27 2009 @ 08:50 AM
link   
We’re on the road to total control and are ever accelerating. They don’t want to control just every resource necessary for life: water, food, shelter and even the amount of CO2 that you exhale, they want to control your every thought and deed. They have bought the original lie ‘ye shall be as gods’, and are intent upon playing god.



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Ah yes, the gov at work once again, prying there nose into the lives of private citizens once again. I feel sorry for this poor woman. Rain is just water falling from the sky, how can someone claim ownership let alone say that someone can or can't do what they please as far as gathering it to water plants? Though why she botherd trying to get a permit in the first place is beyond me. Just set up a rain barrell with out asking for perrmission and see if anyone cares, they will be wating her for sure now though just ready to issue a fine. What next?
Wind tax,
Breathing tax,
sun tax,
night tax,
sleep tax,
tax us for how many cubic feet our bodies take up in the air?



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 01:23 AM
link   
Seen this and thought I better post it! Thanks everyone!
hosted.ap.org...

Tucson rainwater harvesting law drawing interest






top topics
 
85
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join