Skip to comments.9 Misdemeanors, $1500 in Fines and 30 Days in Jail, All Over Disputed Rainwater Rights
Posted on 07/05/2014 10:49:16 AM PDT by PoloSec
One has to ask you who owns the rainwater that falls from the sky? If you said the property owner then Im sorry to say you are dead wrong.
Gary Harrington has been in the news as of late and this week he entered a local jail to serve 30 days for collecting rainwater on his property.
The issue at heart is the dispute of who really owns the water, snow and collective run-off that falls from the sky. Gary Harrington will begin serving a 30 day jail sentence for refusing to back down on that issue that surrounds his rural estate in Oregon. Im 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 Jail.
The small group held signs in support for Harrington as he walked inside the jail, turning to wave goodbye to the crowd before slipping inside.
Harrington has been found guilty of breaking a 1925 law for having three illegal reservoirs on his property.
Not only has Harrington refused to comply, but he has also been convicted of nine misdemeanors, sentenced to 30 days in jail, fined over $1,500, all for collecting rainwater and snow run-off on his Oregon property.
Oregon State claims that Harrington is diverting water meant for the states rivers and streams, which is part of their water supply. The government has become big bullies and from here on in, Im going to fight it, he said.
He went on to say, Theyve just gotten to be big bullies and if you just lay over and die and give up, that just makes them bigger bullies. Harrington went on to say, We as Americans, we need to stand on our constitutional rights, on our rights as citizens and hang tough. This is a good country, well prevail.
Harrington will be serving time into the month of September due to other related issues from this entire incident.
Should have just said they were wetlands - the libs in OR would have demonstrated and rioted.
Patriot. I am in awe of him. Especially because he will lose (one way or the other) in the end.
of interest ping
P28675: Murder. What are you in for?
P75689: Stealing rain.
Aren’t property owners required to keep stormwater runoff on their properties to reduce pollutants and suspended soils from reaching the pristine waters of the state?
Your carbon foot print? is too large. Please stop breathing when you speak to me. What falls from the sky is taxable. It’s so simple.
Colorado Ping ( Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from the list.)
I think it’s Maryland where you are actually taxed on the rain runoff from your roof. They calculate sq/ft and tax you accordingly. One inch of rain on a 300sq/ft roof produces “X” amount of runoff into the sewers or some such idiocy.
The State's claim is too broad and ambiguous. They need to specify the particular stream or river watershed which is being violated. If Harrington's property is not part of a specific watershed then he is not in violation of the idiotic law.
I've got mixed opinions on this.
I’ve got kind of mixed emotions on this one. Our Big ranch is 32 sections (32 square miles) and it feeds to the head of the Concho River. While we have built some small ponds we don’t build them in what we call the main basin so we don’t deprive any of those down stream of much needed water. There is one area on the ranch I could dam up and turn it into a lake about 3 miles long and a mile wide but that cuts off water to neighboring ranches. Water is the life blood to West Texas Ranches.
Can you identify your stolen rain? Stop with that they all look alike to me as that’s racist. Rain drops have feelings too.
My guess is that he has the wrong lawyer or is representing himself.
The law is faulty in so many ways.
A landowner who builds a small pond to irrigate crops, etc., for instance, would have to get a permit or he would be in the same boat.
So issuing a permit to one and denying a permit to another .....
Bringing in a landscaaper and terracing one’s property to reduce runoff would run into the same legal problems unless not enforced.
One can think of 100 examples.
In many states, mine included, one must create holding ponds to prevent runoff when one grades, paves or in anyway changes the natural runoff pattern.
I thought Oregon had a very wet climate and that there was no problem with lack of water.
Does not make much sense, but then neither do most libs and Oregon is noted for nut case libs.
Yes, you are correct, except that your driveway, parking area, and other impermeable surfaces are included along with the roof.
I’d blame whoever it was that caused the rain in the first place and have those idiots go after them ... wasn’t the owners fault it rained on the property. The libs sue you for capturing the rain (CO & OR) or tax you if it runs off into sewers.....
Does that mean that one is not allowed to dig a fish pond on his property to raise fish as a food source?
I think the penalty is worse if the EPA rules that the puddle in your backyard is a navigable waterway.
I do see your point but the price of freedom is eternal vigilance and the nation is far from vigilant.
"How strangely will the tools of a tyrant pervert the plain meaning of words!" --Samuel Adams, to John Pitts, 1776
"When the law no longer protects you from the corrupt, but protects the corrupt from you - you know your nation is doomed." Ayn Rand
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." - Tacitus, Roman Senator and Historian (A.D. c.56 - c. 115)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.