14 Comments

  1. I think the authors viewpoint on this is selfish and misguided. During a drought releasing this water he stole from going down river and helping more than just himself would make perfect sense right now. How can you think it is okay for one man to collect all this runoff and keep it for himself? I am all for off grid, back to nature living. If I could afford it you would never see my ass again I’d be in the woods. He is stopping water from flowing down hill. He is being greedy. If he could have filled those ponds with water that fell over his land I’d be behind him 100% but he didn’t he took water that would have flowed farther down and replenished aquifers and hydrated the land. If this guy was my neighbor I would be sick with knowing he was stopping me and whatever I was growing from flourishing.

    1. Listen Jillian…he DIDN’T divert, dam, or otherwise “steal” anything “upstream” as you put it. Your terminology illustrates your ignorance. We are NOT talking about a hydrologically connected waterway here.
      Creating ponds to hold rainfall and snowmelt on ones own property is a natural right – and sound practice from an ecologic/hydrologic perspective. Retention/detention ponds simultaneously reduce the demand on the underlying aquifer to supply water for irrigation, while increasing groundwater/aquifer recharge. There is evidence that ponds such as these INCREASE well productivity for those wells at lower elevation than where the ponds are created.
      As is often the case with namby-pamby bleeding-hearts, you opine based on your uninformed “feelings”, and would have all of us LIVE according to your “feelings” on a matter – while what’s actually “best” or “right” takes a back seat.

      1. I’m going to assume you haven’t been reading every article I find on this topic as I have. If he was only diverting runoff and snow melt on his own property they he wouldn’t need dams 10 and 20 feet high. The snow melts up high then as gravity dictates pull is “downstream” so to speak because if you have ever seen snow melt it runs like a small temporary stream. You obviously ignored the actual fact that he did divert and dam water that was attempting to cross his property not just capture snow and rain that fell on his acreage. That water could have ran down for miles leading to the replenishment to many more people benefiting from natural water flow. Having nothing to do with people buying or not buying water. I’m not really sure you understand how groundwater works. I do. I based my “feelings” on facts you based yours on a self serving bias. If I were you I would delete your comment because you are incorrect. Until you read all the details of what he physically did to capture the water you aren’t making any valid points just name calling and being useless.

    2. B A Norrod says:

      But it is ok when the city, state, or federal govt does it and holds people hostage with fines, penalties, or imprisonment and it is ok that they charge outrageous bills for it on top of all the taxes we pay. Is that what you are saying? If it falls from the sky, I say finders keepers. I think you are being selfish and misguided, are you by chance a baby boomer? I wonder why most baby boomers sold Grampas farm to build empty run down strip malls?

  2. All bringers of tyranny need to be shot, killed and buried in unmarked, deep graves.

    1. Undecider says:

      No, the graves need to marked to serve as a warning to others.

    2. OvidiuGOA says:

      All talk and no action, this is america

  3. What do you do when judges deny justice?

    1. There is no stream on his property for this water to flow into. He has not diverted water at all. This water will run out of where it is dammed and pool where it meets resistance. Jackson County and the state of Oregon are wrong on this matter.

  4. Kongming Hy says:

    This is insane 🙁

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *