N. Idaho couple battle "overzealous" EPA (Private Land Rights Violated)

The Coeur d' Alene Press ^ | October 12, 2011 | The Coeur d' Alene Press

[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.

[BykrBayb]

If this was so important you had to put it in breaking news, why didn’t you bother telling us what it’s about?

[dynachrome]

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.”

“

[marty60]

Yes unless you live in the Hamptons.

[PapaNew]

Article doesn’t detail what actually happened. Anyone have that?

[BykrBayb]

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.

[dynachrome]

They’ll be ok unless their name is Weaver or Koresh.

[Sergio]

Here is the URL to an article that better describes what’s goin on.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/mike-and-chantell-sackett-vs-the-epa-08112011.html

[Liberal Bob]

Here
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/mike-and-chantell-sackett-vs-the-epa-08112011.html

[Last Dakotan]

The Employment Protection Agency

[upchuck]

If this was so important you had to put it in breaking news, why didn’t you bother telling us what it’s about?

BUMP!

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.

[BykrBayb]

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.

[The Antiyuppie]

The UnEmployment Protection Agency

Fixed it.

[ully2]

EPA needs a gigantic injection of weed killer so it can’t come back.

[GunPkrBkr]

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.

[Charles Martel]

They’ll be ok unless their name is Weaver or Koresh.

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.

[Art in Idaho]

I know Mike and Chantell Sackett. They are good people. They've been messing with this for two years. The area they're talking about is not a 'wetland'. Total crock. I'm glad they're going all the way with this though they'll be bankrupt if he loses. It's a principle thing. These federal agencies have to be stopped, and after the revolution, dissolved. Just another "make work" path to socialism case. Just one more thing to remember when you vote. Let's see, I'm at about 2000 reasons. . .

[Last Dakotan]

Fixed it.

Nah, I like it that they protect you from employment.

[Valpal1]

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?

[Art in Idaho]

I have to admit I don't know the knitty-gritty details of the case. It's just been known locally as a crock case. Haven't actually sat down with Mike and Chantell to get the details. He is not talking now I'm sure given the current circumstances. I heard about it about two years ago. Evidently the Feds showed up 4 years ago. Sounds like a planned puppetmaster deal.

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. . .