Skip to comments.N. Idaho couple battle "overzealous" EPA (Private Land Rights Violated)
Posted on 10/12/2011 4:45:15 PM PDT by WilliamIII
Washington, D.C. - A Priest Lake couple is headed for the U.S. Supreme Court over a land use dispute with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that should have never occurred, according to Members of the Idaho Congressional Delegation. Mike and Chantell Sackett were in Washington, D.C., today as part of a forum convened by Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) and attended by Idaho Senator Mike Crapo, Idaho Senator Jim Risch and Idaho Representative Raúl Labrador.
(Excerpt) Read more at cdapress.com ...
If this was so important you had to put it in breaking news, why didn’t you bother telling us what it’s about?
The article is unclear on the facts. Something about wetlands designation.
“Can EPA take over your land, calling it wetlands,’ without meaningful, direct judicial review?” they said. “We believe property owners have a constitutional right to have their day in court and EPA has to be subject to the rule of law.”
Yes unless you live in the Hamptons.
Article doesn’t detail what actually happened. Anyone have that?
Thanks. I just read it, and still don’t know what it’s about. It seems to be a pointless rant about someone’s opinion of the EPA. Long on emotion and short of facts.
They’ll be ok unless their name is Weaver or Koresh.
Here is the URL to an article that better describes what’s goin on.
The Employment Protection Agency
Excerpts can be 300 words long. Yours is 73. Where are the other 227?
If you're wondering what this is about, here's a good article from Businessweak from last summer that explains it from the beginning.
Thank you. Looks like they have a good case. I hope (for their sake and everyone’s) that they win and the EPA gets smacked around good.
EPA needs a gigantic injection of weed killer so it can’t come back.
Whenever I hear about the EPA strong-arming businesses and private individuals I want to pull my hair out. I would love to eliminate the EPA for good. If someone out there could set up a fund for this family while exposing the EPA, I would be sending donations.
I'm surprised that nobody has gone "Carl Drega" on an EPA official. Yet.
If they continue on this course, it's just a matter of time.
Nah, I like it that they protect you from employment.
Do you know what caused the EPA to show up on their doorstep in the first place? Anonymous complaint??
Meaning, what is the scuttlebutt on who the puppetmaster is? Who benefits from preventing this house from being built?
We're in North Idaho. There are no "wetlands" up here. Gimme a break.
Definition of Wetland: A wetland is an area of land whose soil is saturated with water either permanently or seasonally.
You mean the moist black dirt farmland in Iowa where I grew up is all wetland? Who decides what saturation means? Let's get scientific here. Your saturation may not be what I think is valid. 3% 10%? 30%? So the whole state of Iowa is a wetland?
You're gonna' love this Wetlands pic:
Pic is from Here.
Don't even think about building in any of these areas. Whaa? The whole states of Minnesota, Louisiana, Wisconsin, Michigan, Mississippi and Florida? Feds Gone Wild! Disband the anti-capitalist EPA!
Last line of the article: "The bottom line: The Supreme Court could turn a minor land dispute between an Idaho couple and the EPA into a far-reaching case on government power." I hope the Sacketts win. .
BTW, in a related case, the EPA diminished our snowmobiling trails because it might hurt the caribou. None of the old timer locals have ever seen a caribou in these parts - and that's up to the border. We're too far south, mainly Canadian critters, and of course, Alaska. Anyway, lots of court fights. That went on for years too. . .
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.