I guess we know who owns the rain now.

[hemet dennis]

Just a thought here but if the runoff does damage to this person's property is the city liable? It would seem so.

A local paper said he was collecting it for a firefighting use.

I don't think anyone can be held liable for an act of nature.

But if he collected for a couple of months and his gate breaks and does damage to a neighbors property do you think he would be liable ?
And if the government let him would they be liable ?

 

[GardenerGal]

I think I read somewhere that Colorado and (IIRC) Wyoming also "own" rainwater, and it's illegal there for private citizens and businesses to collect it. Something to do with the scarcity of water and rain in those Western regions, I suppose.

It is bizarre, though.

 

[hemet dennis]

I think I read somewhere that Colorado and (IIRC) Wyoming also "own" rainwater, and it's illegal there for private citizens and businesses to collect it. Something to do with the scarcity of water and rain in those Western regions, I suppose. It is bizarre, though.

The laws were not intended for homes and are being changed.

http://earth911.com/news/2009/07/03/colorado-bill-legalizes-rainwater-harvesting/

 

[hemet dennis]

Just a thought here but if the runoff does damage to this person's property is the city liable? It would seem so.

A local paper said he was collecting it for a firefighting use.

If someone stops rainwater from watering a stand of trees and the trees dry out and catch fire would that someone be liable ?

 

[speckledhen]

Has anyone been told They'll be arrested for collecting barrels of rain water for home use ?
3 reservoirs is a lot different then some barrels.

Lets not try to inflame this and get the thread closed.

Excuse me, Dennis, but why would you accuse me, of all people, of trying to "inflame" a thread to get it closed, with information that everyone has access to? It is a known fact that people have been fined in the past for collecting rainwater in barrels for home use in Colorado. Perhaps you should do some more research on your own.

Hopefully, those ridiculous laws will be changed, but they were used in the past to stop citizens from using rainwater that fell on their own private land. I merely stated that I would not comply with such a law.

http://www.hcn.org/issues/343/16919/print_view
Quote: http://www.cap-az.com/Portals/1/Pub...ston--Rainwater-Harvesting--May-2010--CAP.pdf

Quote:
and, btw, we lived in Colorado for a time. It was most definitely illegal to collect water from your roof for your own use.


P.S. if it's closed, it won't be because of me. RR threads often are closed when they get off track, as this type tends to do. Y'all have fun.

 

[duckinnut]

Seems to me the whole issue could evolve into a legal nightmare. If the stream runs through his property,does it belong to him? If it belongs to the public and it floods his land and causes damages, is the public responsible for the cost of repairs? When it snows, should the town be required to plow his property towards the stream? If he watered his livestock with the water and they got sick and died due to contamination,would the town be liable seeing that they lay claim to the resource? Please note that I am playing the Devils advocate here, don't believe all these questions but in the court of law these questions might be asked by legal counsel.

 

[Stephanie739]

The laws were not intended for homes and are being changed.

http://earth911.com/news/2009/07/03/colorado-bill-legalizes-rainwater-harvesting/

Not good enough:
"However, strict limits apply. Senate Bill 09-080, which went into effect July 1, states that rainwater collection can happen only if:

• Harvesting takes place on residential property
• The owner of the property has a legal entitlement to a well
• No water is provided in the area by a water district or a municipality
• The roof is the only location collecting rainwater
• The collected rainwater is put to uses explicitly permitted in the well permit"

 

[hemet dennis]

It is a known fact that people have been fined in the past for collecting rainwater in barrels for home use in Colorado. Perhaps you should do some more research on your own.

Hopefully, those ridiculous laws will be changed, but they were used in the past to stop citizens from using rainwater that fell on their own private land. I merely stated that I would not comply with such a law.

I couldn't find any case of a person in Colorado being fined for collecting a couple of barrels of rain water. Now that doesn't mean it hasn't happened but all I've seen is someone read somewhere or someone heard about a guy. I don't consider those as facts. So if you have some link or something to these known facts could you tell us ?
Or you could P.M. it to me so we don't get this "off track" and keep this thread about someone collecting large amounts of rainwater in 3 reservoirs.

 

[chickened]

Seems to me the whole issue could evolve into a legal nightmare. If the stream runs through his property,does it belong to him? If it belongs to the public and it floods his land and causes damages, is the public responsible for the cost of repairs? When it snows, should the town be required to plow his property towards the stream? If he watered his livestock with the water and they got sick and died due to contamination,would the town be liable seeing that they lay claim to the resource? Please note that I am playing the Devils advocate here, don't believe all these questions but in the court of law these questions might be asked by legal counsel.

That was my point... when anyone claims legal ownership they are responsible for the maintenance. Not sure how all this works in court but it is possible. If the government builds a coffer dam and it breaks they are liable if negligence can be proven. If this guy was collecting water for flood control and they said he could not then I think the city would be on the hook for damage.

 

[hemet dennis]

That was my point... when anyone claims legal ownership they are responsible for the maintenance. Not sure how all this works in court but it is possible. If the government builds a coffer dam and it breaks they are liable if negligence can be proven. If this guy was collecting water for flood control and they said he could not then I think the city would be on the hook for damage.

I thought you said he was collecting for fire control ?

Was there a flooding problem ? If there was he should have gone to the city to fix it.

If the city lets him keep a dam that's not permitted would the city be liable if it broke ?