So, that jazz musician with the speech impediment got a day job?
tmqu019f2sv5j1mljqukabulr605hldd2@4ax.com...Not since 1922.
That's somewhat out of date. I'll have to track down the cases, but"Jim Thompson" <thegreatone@example.com> wrote in message
news
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 18:11:22 +0000 (UTC), kensmith@green.rahul.net
(Ken Smith) wrote:
In article <WgbQO9DWvS7BFwmg@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
John Woodgate <noone@yuk.yuk> wrote:
[...]
Haven't you had riparian rights before? I would have thought that they
would have been brought over from Britain, at least, since they are very
ancient here. I mean, 'from time immemorial' - before 1186.
In the state of Texas, the biggest pump wins. Any water on your land or
below your land is yours to pump out.
In Californian, LA wins. Any water LA wants badly enough they get.
--
Not quite. AZ has first rights to the Colorado River.
Not since 1922.
http://ag.arizona.edu/AZWATER/arroyo/101comm.html
480)460-2350 | |480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |The Coors brewing methos has several regional advantages.
That's the way it's been done here in AZ, USA for many years. The
Well, obviously _all_ water is "former sewage" if you track it back
Not quite. AZ has first rights to the Colorado River.
480)460-2350 | |480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |Coors? Tastes like water, now that you mention it."Richard the Dreaded Libertarian" <eatmyshorts@doubleclick.net> wrote in
message news
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 03:24:44 -0600, Scott Stephens wrote:
Ken Smith wrote:
I followed the link and discovered some stuff:
(2) The bill is not just about rain water landing on your roof. It is
also about all manner of run-off water.
(4) The rain barrels and cisterns are included in the text to allow
rules
to exist so that folks don't need permits for rain water that fell on
their own roof.
In other words, the law is being mischaracterized by those who oppose
it.
I guess I don't understand. I can use my own rainwater, but not give it
or sell it then? What is the law for?
The way I understand it, the law is for preventing people who happen to
have bought a piece of land with a natural stream running across it from
damming that stream and using, or selling, that water which if
uninterfered with, would have flowed downstream where somebody else has
the same dilemma.
Apparently, the only legal way to collect stream water is to wait for it
at the delta.
You can do what Colorado does. They ship it to California in beer cans.
Relieving boredom
Because you, like most of the rest of us, are dying of loneliness.
If your intent in capturing rainwater is to water your lawn, why do you
What's the point in a DVR? The television shows are just going to end
Good point. So you'll need *two* licenses, then: one for rainfall on
We, here in AZ, have "once-in-100 years" floods about every 5-7 yearsI read in sci.electronics.design that Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness> wrote (in
3caHd.5030$0B.1461@fed1read02>
please have a drop of rain-water Uncle Sam?"', on Tue, 18 Jan 2005:
Now, you "must" contain that same water to
prevent downstreamers' having to cope with it (over the specified CFS
minimum, that is). IOW you have to shoulder your own flood damages, but
not pass them on.
Let us hope that the sponsors of the bill get a once-in-100 years cloudburst over
their properties and attempt to contain the resulting flow!
Would they like some pictures of Boscastle?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cornwall/uncovered/stories/august2004/boscastle_floods.shtml
480)460-2350 | |480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |I'll try to track that down... it was about 15 years ago.
Here, the Phoenix water system, under youngest daughter's tutelage,
The general population never understands science. In yesteryears we
480)460-2350 | |480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |ROTFLMAO!On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 10:29:47 -0800, "Richard Henry" <rphenry@home.com
wrote:
"Richard the Dreaded Libertarian" <eatmyshorts@doubleclick.net> wrote in
message news
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 03:24:44 -0600, Scott Stephens wrote:
Ken Smith wrote:
I followed the link and discovered some stuff:
(2) The bill is not just about rain water landing on your roof. It is
also about all manner of run-off water.
(4) The rain barrels and cisterns are included in the text to allow
rules
to exist so that folks don't need permits for rain water that fell on
their own roof.
In other words, the law is being mischaracterized by those who oppose
it.
I guess I don't understand. I can use my own rainwater, but not give it
or sell it then? What is the law for?
The way I understand it, the law is for preventing people who happen to
have bought a piece of land with a natural stream running across it from
damming that stream and using, or selling, that water which if
uninterfered with, would have flowed downstream where somebody else has
the same dilemma.
Apparently, the only legal way to collect stream water is to wait for it
at the delta.
You can do what Colorado does. They ship it to California in beer cans.
Coors? Tastes like water, now that you mention it.
John
480)460-2350 | |480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |