POTUS asserts dominion over creeks, streams, wetlands and even big puddles

[Sticks]

www.undergroundworldnews.com
President Obama’s administration on Wednesday claimed dominion over all of America’s streams, creeks, rills, ditches, brooks, rivulets, burns, tributaries, criks, wetlands — perhaps even puddles — in a sweeping move to assert unilateral federal authority.

The Environmental Protection Agency, along with the Army Corps of Engineers, says it has the authority to control all waterways within the United States — and will exercise that authority.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Sticks]

What does this mean to mining? BTW this is not a political post, so don't delete it as such. This was posted merely to inform you all that things are going on that relate to our hobbies and interests. IMO not legitimate so void, as well as anything this admin has ever signed.

 

[kayakpat]

I don't think it will affect dredging as this seems about adding foreign toxic elements to watersheds thru industries and farming. Steelmaking here uses rivers of water for washing ore and cooling, we return it to the river after taking the contaminates out we wash off. No problem, with dredging I think the fight is over the effects on fish not on possible contaminates so I don't see any change

 

[Jim in Idaho]

Anybody that doesn't think this will effect ALL uses eventually, is a fool. I'm old enough to remember when the EPA was "only" for regulating certain chemicals. Now look at it. This all about control, and nobody that enjoys control enjoys it because they can't say NO, in big letters. That's what control is...the ability to stop people from doing things. We may not see it right away, but there will be huge changes in our use of the outdoors. Count on it.
Jim

 

[rodoconnor]

Anybody that doesn't think this will effect ALL uses eventually, is a fool. I'm old enough to remember when the EPA was "only" for regulating certain chemicals. Now look at it. This all about control, and nobody that enjoys control enjoys it because they can't say NO, in big letters. That's what control is...the ability to stop people from doing things. We may not see it right away, but there will be huge changes in our use of the outdoors. Count on it.
Jim

As you well know ,here in Idaho the epa has very ham handedly all but destroyed dredging. Yet food processors and dairys are allowed to buy from the epa permits to allow them to dump their refuse into the rivers.

 

[winners58]

Obama has taken executive action with this new rule changing the CWA
this should have gone through the Congress, as in "Act of Congress"
this will affect land owners, miners and farmers. dry creek beds that
haven't seen water for years, ditches, dry wetlands, 100 year floodplain, are now considered
a tributary. this is a power grab by the EPA and gives them control over 60% more waterways,
and are now “waters of the United States” and would require a permit where none was needed before.
.
News story; With new EPA water rule, Obama again takes executive action on environment - LA Times
.
EPA water rule faq's (pdf's); Clean Water Rule Factsheets | Clean Water Rule | US EPA
.
pre-publication of the Finial Rule (295 pages); http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-05/documents/rule_preamble_web_version.pdf

 

[beekbuster]

"The rule only protects waters that have historically been covered by the Clean Water Act. It does not
interfere with or change private property rights, or address land use. It does not regulate most ditches
or regulate groundwater, shallow subsurface flows or tile drains. It does not change policy on irrigation
or water transfers. It does not apply to rills, gullies, or erosional features."

this was taken from the summary factsheet. i can understand lawyer talk pretty well, but the final rule document was gibberish if you ask me, i couldnt even find section iv part A. (the summary).
what they dont mention in the laws is usually where the intention lies...i think its going to bring more permits needed for activities (pay-to-play). and restrictions imposed onto waterways set by definition. similar to fish and game code, all waters closed if its not on the list of open waters. and mining will be in the crosshairs.

 

[Sticks]

I may be way off with this assessment but it's all about money. As the world dumps the dollar those dollars come home to US. One of the few tools they have to offset that are fines and fees. I say this because the tool to offset can't be anything that physically exists or it won't work. Only manufacturing or mining can help offset this. New wealth has to be created from new products. Fines and fees have both been increasing as of late, and those EPA fines are extreme if caught in violation. I believe the OR dredge permit states and has stated for a while that they can assess a daily fine consecutively or compound those days together. Say 10-12 or even more days at something like 10K per day. Now what happens when you fail to pay? They take everything you own. This new law mainly deals with the folks in the country, not the city. People will lose their land, or claims. Have you ever wondered why when you go into the city every intersection has cameras on it that the cops don't use to solve crimes? Or that lawyers can't use to win lawsuits. Now in Small town America, no cams... They do not intend for us to continue living in the Sticks. They certainly do not want nor will they allow anyone to dig $5K per oz AU. (many are saying it will likely hit that.) Which is pretty stupid as it would be a great tool to offset the inbound repatriated dollars. 10k per oz would work even better.

 

[fowledup]

I don't think it will affect dredging as this seems about adding foreign toxic elements to watersheds thru industries and farming. Steelmaking here uses rivers of water for washing ore and cooling, we return it to the river after taking the contaminates out we wash off. No problem, with dredging I think the fight is over the effects on fish not on possible contaminates so I don't see any change

Pat -Please before continuing any further, do yourself a favor and go to Western Mining Alliances webpage and peruse and study their archives collection. In it you will find verifiable facts, synopsis, case law and examples, essays and the most complete history on the issues you "think" you know about. You should have no trouble turning what you "think" into what you know and have verified. Not attacking, picking a fight, disrespecting, or meaning to demean or put ya down in anyway, I think your well intended, but just a bit misinformed on a thing or two. That and every thread seems to turn into a devils advocate pizzing match lately, lol! Seriously though, the WMA archives is a great collection, and no it's not all biased opinion pieces or propaganda, in it you will find the good, the bad, and the ugly.

 

[Gold Maven]

Here in Ohio, the EPA has required all farmers to contain their manure in concrete, with a roof.

I'm not sure of the exact wording or requirements, but I'm selling concrete to a lot of po'd farmers.

 

[2cmorau]

Maven same in Crazyfornia, no run off of manure to water ways $10,000 fine per day if it accures

 

[kayakpat]

the chesapeak bay gets a nasty stinky dead spots in the water from the runoff, and I seen the have a big spot in the gulf of mexico from the same stuff, that is what this is about

 

[fowledup]

the chesapeak bay gets a nasty stinky dead spots in the water from the runoff, and I seen the have a big spot in the gulf of mexico from the same stuff, that is what this is about

You know I bet your 100% absolutley correct, but just maybe there is an off hand chance that it's also about what others have been saying as well! Wouldn't that be a quinky dink, a piece of legislation that has consequences that reach more than one user group or geographical region, totally amazing we could all be correct. What a wicked pizzer of a notion, right?

 

[kayakpat]

Well we will see, California is going to get the ban on dredging lifted for good, Looks like , I think they are going to win their case, and I see nothing in this that will change that.

 

[fowledup]

This isn't new or different, it's another. Many of the points and elements of this have all ready been argued at the supreme court level concerning mining in one way or another. The WMA archives I gave you lists many of the more notable cases specifically those concerning discharge. It's like this- If you and I are in a law suit and I win, but your not satisfied with the verdict so you have your brother sue me for the same thing. Guess what I didn't win and I get to keep proving the same argument over and over. That's how this relates to mining. It's another series of repetitive arguments to sort out in court. The lawyers are the only ones winning!

 

[fowledup]

Well we will see, California is going to get the ban on dredging lifted for good, Looks like , I think they are going to win their case, and I see nothing in this that will change that.

Oh if it were only true. As much as we'd like it to be, this is not true either. There is not just one deciding case, there are multiple cases at the Supreme Court level, all carry significant weight as to whether or not dredging comes back. Our side tried to get it all argued in one case, once and for all, the opposition/state wouldn't do it. So we already know once the current cases are resolved we are going right back to court. This time with an agency who will be using all the crud they can muster from what the president just signed.

 

[NeoTokyo]

Executive order....
I've been getting my hopes up for months and now they are being dashed away.

 

[fowledup]

Here in California it is how "they" will be able to act as if they are being compliant and look genuine with a straight face in the suction dredge settlement talks while snickering in their heads because they know their buddies are hard at work in the next room ensuring the exact opposite is really happening.
If you haven't already and want to read a very insightful article on how government funding operates, checkout this months WMA newsletter, specifically - "The Closing Statement"

 

[Mad Machinist]

Can someone phone Obama and tell him I just pee'd in the wash in my backyard as a form of protest. Tomorrow I think I'll go dump the barrel of used oil I have in it, just out of spite.

 

[Mad Machinist]

Wife had a better idea. Since outhouses are still legal in Arizona......