[Bush Lady]

What do you think. Should the government have the right to charge us for water that we get off our own property.

I don't think that it is right.

We are paying for to put the well in, and set everything up. And then the government wants to charge us for what we are taking out of the ground.

How would they set something like this up?

This is a bad idea. I can see the protests there will be already.

[sglv]

Originally Posted by Bush Lady

What do you think. Should the government have the right to charge us for water that we get off our own property.

I don't think that it is right.

We are paying for to put the well in, and set everything up. And then the government wants to charge us for what we are taking out of the ground.

How would they set something like this up?

This is a bad idea. I can see the protests there will be already.

Protests there would be. Do you own the water rights?

[Rep]

Are you using the public's water? Of course you are.

Water is a huge issue that we have not begun to consider.

[TooBad]

Originally Posted by Rep

Are you using the public's water? Of course you are.

Water is a huge issue that we have not begun to consider.

So when do they start charging for using the "public's" air?

[Dzurlord]

If the Gov. were going to charge us for the water then they should reimburse me the $15000.00 that I paid to install my well, or give me credit for that amount.

[angelize56]

Hey BL!!! Congratulations....your first post in this thread was your 2000th...you're a distinguished member now!

[angelize56]

Welcome to TSG Dzurlord!

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by Rep

Are you using the public's water? Of course you are.

Water is a huge issue that we have not begun to consider.

Water on private land is not the public's water unless the water rights are sold to the residing government.
I'm not even sure Ohio has 'water rights' as an option in property titles.
It's obsurd to charge someone for the use of property that they already own..... and have pay taxes on for the privilage of that ownership.

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by Dzurlord

If the Gov. were going to charge us for the water then they should reimburse me the $15000.00 that I paid to install my well, or give me credit for that amount.

Indeed.
The property owner should share in the profits from the water the government sold from off his land .....if it goes to others



BTW, welcome to TSG

[LuckyStrike]

Originally Posted by Rep

Are you using the public's water? Of course you are.

Water is a huge issue that we have not begun to consider.

I get the impression from your response that you see nothing wrong with government charging rural people for water they get from their own wells.

Is there any form of nanny state interference in people's lives, or any form of taxation that you liberals don't like?

[Rep]

Originally Posted by Stoner

Water on private land is not the public's water unless the water rights are sold to the residing government.
I'm not even sure Ohio has 'water rights' as an option in property titles.
It's obsurd to charge someone for the use of property that they already own..... and have pay taxes on for the privilage of that ownership.

TY...I was not aware of that.

I did though confuse the issue with another. In WI lakes, streams and rivers are the publics.

An issue that comes up is when owners of property along the banks want to extend docks into the water. They feel it is their right to do so as they own the lakeshore property.

Doing so without examining the impact to fisheries and aquatic life would have a negative impact on the fish and habitat needed for them to live.

I understand this is unrelated to well water rights. Sorry.

[iltos]

Originally Posted by TooBad

So when do they start charging for using the "public's" air?

methinks that most hearts and minds agree with this sentiment

but Rep's right....water has been a product for years (if you live in an urban area...check out the trash cans....those zillions of plastic bottles will stay bottle-like for a thousand years) and its use and distribution is rapidly becoming one of those 'big' issues.....it's a resource, and commercialization is big business

civilization is not without its costs, folks....

but the other side of the coin is that if we allow the feds "ownership" of water, then we have every right to demand and expect that it stand up for its qualities, regardless of any economic incentives that might argue for "relaxed" standards

imo, part of our anger and resentment is a sense that the feds don't really want to do that, and the ensuing 'balancing act' between the economic and social/environmental issues seems to usually favor the right of business to maximize profit over the right of the people to enjoy a clean environment.

yeah, yeah...i know....the constitution doesn't guarantee a clean environment....

but it doesn guarantee maximized profits, either....so....if progress is so goll dang important, the question seems to be....is it progress to put profits ahead of quality?

it certainly is doable...but is it progress?

[Dzurlord]

It has been my experience that people who put a well in do not have an alternative option. They are not provided water by the government. In my case, I purchased land in a subdivision that had to be zoned for residential use, which IMO constitutes consent by the Gov.. Would not think they would have the right to then tax us on it without some kinda of grandfather clause.

[Dzurlord]

Sorry for being Rude. Thanks you all for the welcome. Hope everyone is doing well!!!

[StumpedTechy]

Water on private land is not the public's water unless the water rights are sold to the residing government.

As a non well owner and a son of a man who worked for a water district for years on end I have to look at it another way.

The cities have costs to just bring water to their citizens. This water has always been partially filled by the standing ground water as it runs off into lakes and streams. These lakes and streams do not get as much runoff when the water is being sucked up by someone who has decided to put in a well. When this water isn't enough the city has to pay money to develop other water gaining systems (either supply lines desalination plants or what may be the case)

Essentially you (the well owner) are taking a product they are charging for and removing the amount of this product the city can supply to its residents.

To make an correlation - A farmer (the city) goes out and plants 10 fields of corn (the water supply for the city). You go out and buy a sickle (your well and the cost of it) and then take your "share" of the corn. 1 person does this its not too bad but as more well owners buy their sickles where are the paying city folks going to get their chare of the corn?

You can argue the you paid for the well point to death but thats like saying I bought a gun I can shoot it whenever I want.

Water is a prescious resource and having a well IMHO does not mean you should get free reign of it.

What I think SHOULD happen is this.

The city should pay for a portion of the wall installation and allow a specific useage credit to the well per month. Meter read the wells just as you do the city water and charge for the overages. Well owners get their well and the water they should have but are paying for any overusage.