Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Man in Jail for Collecting Rain Water in Oregon

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Man in Jail for Collecting Rain Water in Oregon


cnsnews.com

(CNSNews.com) – Gary Harrington, the Oregon man convicted of collecting rainwater and snow runoff on his rural property surrendered Wednesday morning to begin serving his 30-day, jail sentence in Medford, Ore.
“I’m sacrificing my liberty so we can stand up as a country and stand for our liberty,” Harrington told a small crowd of people gathered outside of the Jackson County (Ore.) Jail.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Wow. Collecting rain water is a crime now? What happened to the right to liberty, property ownership? Since when is rain water regulated?

So does this mean if I put a bucket out on my deck and collect rain water that I am going to jail?

Seriously?

This is GOVERMENT overstepping its bounds, once again.

cnsnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:16 AM
link   
I appreciate the thread, but this story is several weeks old at least and I'm sure I've seen it discussed on ATS.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Since when does Oregon own the rain?
1925...........



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:26 AM
link   
I've noticed the up tick in people charged or fined for collecting rain water, There are two reasons I see that makes it plausible

1. Cloud seeding, since they make it rain they think the rain is theirs
2. The rain has for now, low level radiation from the nuke plants going down, and don't want people to find out.

Just remember they will jail you or fine you, but it's all for your safety and security,



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:29 AM
link   
The title of the article is slightly misleading, and sensationalist.

the charge was :


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.


Now he claims it was just runoff and rain, they claim he was actively diverting a stream/river on to his property, THAT is what the crux of the issue is, not that he was simply collecting rainwater....



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Another amazingly one-sided article on this guy, leaving out all the pertinent facts (who needs those pesky facts anyway?)

Here is the old thread on this

Original Thread

He is diverting streams that flow into the watershed, which is against Oregon water laws... Plain and simple.

I can't believe none of the media outlets ever showed a picture of his collected rainwater (stocked fish ponds) for perspective.

... Found this on google maps (1900 Crowfoot Rd, Eagle Point, OR )



edit on 9-8-2012 by Zarniwoop because: (no reason given)
edit on 9-8-2012 by Zarniwoop because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
We are human beings. Why do we let faceless criminal organizations tell us what to do? When do we become adults? We get one Earthly life, don't let somebody tell you how to live it.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by vkey08
The title of the article is slightly misleading, and sensationalist.

the charge was :


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.


Now he claims it was just runoff and rain, they claim he was actively diverting a stream/river on to his property, THAT is what the crux of the issue is, not that he was simply collecting rainwater....


Precisely. Catching rainwater in a few barrels is one thing. Intentionally diverting streams and other runoff into large holding ponds is quite another. It can (and does) dramatically impact the entire watershed...causing all kinds of problems with fish and other wildlife by disrupting the ecosystem. In most states, if a river or stream flows through your private land, you don't actually own the water, you own the ground under and along side of it, specifically for this reason.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 10:44 AM
link   
I can't find any real information on this except from crazy right wing sites.

Anyone have any real sources for this?



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


When the article said resevoirs, I grew suspicious. If he is divierting streams and creating irrigation on a yard, that is a serious problem.

Nice find poster. You should get an applause.

Explains why only the crazy right wing sites are stating this to promote their bully government propaganda, when there is always another side to it.

I have dealt with stuff like this on a local level. The police don't go around patrolling water collection on people's yards. This started out as a local complaint, he was probably warned 2 dozen times. then other agencies were invoved. He refused to cooperate, and months later, they had to involve the police.

That is how these things usually come to being.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


You know, I looked all over that address on Google maps and I can't seem to find even a single stream for him to have diverted water from.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   
So, in reading more about this, it appears that Harrington wasn't diverting streams as initially inferred, but was only collecting diffuse surface water, which is essentially run-off without a defined course. Normally the capture of diffuse surface water is perfectly legal so long as the water is only used on that land and it doesn't interfere with natural waterways, etc.

However, the 1925 act the article references appropriates the entire watershed for municipal use, which would override the state's laws about diffuse water use.

The argument here is twofold: the language of the 1925 act is somewhat vague and could be interpreted to mean only defined streams, creeks, and rivers. If, in fact, the 1925 act does not cover diffuse surface water, then it subsequently does not trigger the appropriations defined therein and thus the department has no regulatory authority over Harrington's reservoirs.

This is sticky, but given his close proximity to a major drainage and the topography of his property, he is right on the very edge of it being 'diffuse' and directed runoff into a major drainage.

His lawyer's rundown of the case:

Case Info



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   
I collect rain water also. I keep goldfish in the barrels to eat the mosquito larvae before they can fly away. I wonder if there's a law against having outdoor aquariums?



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Ya but he set up resevuwars not just a bucket. All he needed to do was go get a permit. Besides the real reason is he was skinny dipping in there which is why he was jailed.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by JIMC5499
 


I looked for that as well. It looks like the photo of that area was taken during Summer, after those streams had dried up. The entire area looks pretty brown and perhaps in need of water conservation.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   
heres a source..


"The website, www.empoweringthejury.org, includes a petition to the state of Oregon to reverse Harrington's July 11 guilty verdict.

Harrington has solicited a videographer to film footage showing that his reservoirs don't have creeks flowing into them. He intends to post it and other information about his defense that he wasn't allowed to present in court, he says."

www.mailtribune.com.../20120805/NEWS /208050318
edit on 9-8-2012 by mdez13 because: link fix


apparently i cant enter the link.. ill try again
source
edit on 9-8-2012 by mdez13 because: link issues ...



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:36 PM
link   
Problem is it doesn't matter what any website says, he was not charged with collecting rainwater, plain and simple, they charged him with diverting a stream or river, and somehow they were able to prove their case...

He has the right to appeal, and it makes me suspicious that he isn't...



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by vkey08
 


heres another article about it. i dont believe its in this article, but in a press conference he says he plans on taking it to the supreme court if necessary

RT source

here are oregons water laws, quite large if you ask me.

water laws
edit on 9-8-2012 by mdez13 because: adding laws





new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join