Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Big punishment fine for plowing own land, but

The Army Corps of Engineers was involved so :

http://www.redding.com/story/news/2017/05/23/farmer-faces-2-8-million-fine-plowing-field/336407001/

This is plain bull s%it.

They have no right to keep him from making a living on his own land.

I sure hope that someone higher up in the new .gov gets him some relief.

One reason i do not want nor seek anything from the .gov.
Once they get a foot hold anywhere they don't leave or have your interests at heart.
Scum sucking folks right there.

These are the kinds of things that make people hate government. I wish the farmer good luck as it's cali and he'll need all the luck he can get.

Absolute NONSENSE! This is big government at it's near worst . Government can. and has been nothing short of dreadful.

Complete BS

Some agencies are out of control. Some years ago I read about a family farm in NE that had been farmed continually for 140 years. Then the parents died and none of the kids wanted to farm it. It sat fallow for about 10 years until one of the sons decided to farm it. Big mistake. After he plowed it, the EPA came roaring in saying that one field was a wetland. There was no water on it or anywhere near it. But, apparently some birds had carried in seeds of some kind of wetland grass that had taken hold. It was an official wetland without water. I never heard how it got resolved.

Agenda 21.

When is that giant can of whoopass gonna get opened up?

This is why we can't allow Democrats in control ever again.

Let's take it a step further and run the UN out of the country with a stern and sincere warning.

I thought the clean water act was repealed by trump.

They have no idea of the seething anger that lies underneath with people that they think are just going to continue to go along with all this kind of crap. I have a governor on me that would stop me from doing some things, many people don't and I'm afraid there will come a day the ones oppressing and attacking from all sides, will find that out. There is a limit that a free people will put up with.

He was charged in 2013. That was when the obama [bleep] was in charge.

2011 the Army Corps of Engineers fuucked up and couldn't handle the Missouri River.


Big ass mess from Montana to Missouri.



I forget how many agencies and permits and waiting just to move a sanded in pump-site up river.



The actual people that came out to take a look were all cool.

spot on

He doesn't have the authority. Only congress can do it. Trump can restrict enforcement of regulations, though.

Did you read the whole article? The farmer is dealing with the feds on this, nothing to do with California.

Ha! The Obama precedent says he can ignore any law he chooses to ignore.

You guys need to take a step back and take a breath. I'm not going to pretend to know everything behind this, but there's a LOT more than what's stated in just the short article.

99.9% chance this individual is involved in a government program and to be facing a fine that large, they are a pretty big operation. These fines go back to any benefits they have received on all of their land back to the year the conversion happened.

They way this will play out is they'll be given a chance to either buy wetland credits (no different than a Walmart being placed on a swamp, they buy wetland credits somewhere else and drain the swamp they want to build on) or more than likely they will be given a chance to break whatever tile they installed and essentially go from there.

Moral of the story, if you want to participate in a government program than you have to follow the rules.

I own a farm, and have to sign documents at the local USDA (FSA) office every year. If you are involved in any of the programs that the agency offers, then you will sign a paper stating that among other things, you won't damage wetlands. I think the "wild card" is what is, or isn't, considered to be wetlands. I've seen farmers here clean up and tile land that I thought was way too wet for farming, and turn it into good farmland. I've also seen land that has to be left alone because it was wetlands. never could see much difference.

We as farmers have to double world food supply in the next 25 years or so to feed the growing population....and they are still pulling this crap...
Around here we have a sod buster rule....not sure how it works but you need gov aprouval to break out new ground...our ground has all Ben in production for years so no worries.....we just went to a meeting on wetlands.....Same thing there......

Federal overreach keeps on growing. I got a letter from the Game and Fish that it is time to renew the Registration on my pontoon boat. Feds now require a printed picture or a pencil rub of the serial number before it can be renewed. I have yet to find the number on this old boat, made back in the 1960's. I have had it registered and have the title from when I bought it but that is not enough. I talked to the woman at the Revenue office and She gave me a number to call at the Game and Fish, and said they would tell me where to look, to find the number, and if I could not they would send a person out to help. I told the Woman where I picked up proof of Personal Property assessment (required) that I figured at least 3 trips to the Revenue office before I got it registered, and She laughed and agreed. miles

It's the Coast Guard that's now requiring a hull number. I had to register mine but it didn't take a photo. I just wrote it down and entered it on an Idaho DMV online form. Quick and simple. They said that if there's no number to contact them to have one assigned and they tell you how to attach it to the boat.
It sounds like AR is doing it differently than ID is even though it's a federal thing.

Yup, I don't like the meddling usacoe's, met two of them on the way out of a store one day, flung the door open in their faces trying to knock the fugg outta them, stopped and stared a pardon me men to em! fuggin pussies!

Today's problems require innovative time tested solutions

I remember about 12 years ago when I was serving on a local city council and we wanted to put in a new road across the prairie to connect two main streets, and the Army Corps notified us we would have to mitigate wetlands on our project. What wetlands? I went out with the city engineer and walked the project - no wetlands. But they insisted that when excavation for the interstate was conducted in the sixties, that the earthmovers had taken dirt from the area to build an interchange, and thus, wetlands were created adjacent to the Laramie River. Stupidity.

Yup, there's a pod of those pussies that hang out in a building on the North side of town here, they've never fu-ked with me, but have heard stories for decades of their damn meddling!

Fugg them and their wetlands BS, plus waters of the state/u.s.........................................certainly not a cause I'd wanna die for.

Seems he might should look into following the recommendations of his consultants?
From the article:

"Because the property has numerous swales and wetlands, Duarte hired a consulting firm to map out areas on the property that were not to be plowed because they were part of the drainage for Coyote and Oat creeks and were considered “waters of the United States.”

Francois conceded that some of the wetlands were plowed, but they were not significantly damaged. He said the ground was plowed to a depth of 4 inches to 7 inches."

(my highlighting)

Now, if a person hires "experts" to explain where to plow and where not to plow, then, according to an admission by an attorney, goes ahead and plows anyway............ and then ends up in court....................................

well, maybe that person needs to reconsider his actions?

Just sayin'

Geno

PS Perhaps he wasted his $$$$ on the consultants if he wasn't going to use their determinations anyway?

PPS What part of "were not to be plowed" did he not understand? (ref: "Shall not be infringed" )

I see an opportunity to pick on the vegetarians. The veggies food destroys fish and pollutes water. They must stop supporting vegetables. Time to eat only water.

The question is, what constitutes a wetland? From what I've read over the years, they don't seen to consider water a necessity for it to be wet. They look at the plants and animals there. If they find something that's normally found near water, they call it a wetland even though there is none. They do the same thing with endangered animals. If they find an area with plants or prey animals that an endangered animal normally uses, they will call it 'suitable habitat' and restrict it even though no endangered animals are found there.

Hull Identification Numbers were not a requirement on boats until 1972, so yours very well may not have one.

Sure hope these are not the regulations that govern draining the swamp.

Wrong, at least for some agency's determinations. Plants can be part of the rationale for the determination, but not the sole one. Things like soils can tell a LONG story if you know what you're looking at.

Under the Obama administration the EPA had risen to the power that they could regulate and control a mud puddle if they so chose to. Not sure what the current rules are, but I know Trump made some no beating around the bush Executive Orders concerning some of this stuff. Hopefully it made some needed changes.

Screw them, carve a few #'s in the hull and take a picture.

Thank you for boots on the ground. Right now I'm trying to figure out how to not quit my job as inspector at the city. Council and mayor do NOTHING. even when warned. Ahead of time. Then when something pisses off a voter or two, literally the right couple... its guess whose fault?

I hate government, small or large and wish I'd never started this job. Council does what the manager spoon feeds them to do... but I digress

That is what I am thinking too. Working with the possum cops, it may be fall before I get it registered. We shall see. miles

You said it yourself - soil. Not the bottom of a pond or creek, soil. If there's no water or indication that it's periodically wet, it's not a wetland. How many years back does it have to be dry before it doesn't qualify as a wetland? 100? 200? I live in the high desert but 1000's of years ago, when Lake Bonneville collapsed, this was under water. Is it still a wetland? The same soil is here.

to be a wetland, the area has to have the right type of plants growing in it, the right chemical composition of the soil and the right microbiology living in the soil. An expert can go out and look for the right vegetation and did soil samples where the vegetation changes and see if the microbiology etc change as well. That would determine the limits of what is a wetland and what is not. The rules also do not really call out that wetlands cannot be disturbed. You cannot put fill material into the wetlands. Simply discing or plowing the wetlands should not have caused a violation to my understanding because no fill or dredged material was added. The only fill would come from erosion of the plowed soil, which is supposed to be exempt from the farming operation. It would be much easier to get people to work with the rules if they were more common sense.

For instance, the ACOE has jurisdiction on wetlands that are on navigable waters of the US. How can wetlands in highway ditches and small spring fed puddles in the Wyoming prairie be considered navigable waters of the US? Luckily for us, all of the ACOE employees that we have dealt with have been very good to work with, and even helpful. The only question is, should the even be involved on many projects.

Hang in there, rost. We need your info on the 'Fire. And your city needs you. It just doesn't know it.