The U.S. Government is suing New Mexico for perceived damages in a groundwater case, and the prize is control of the state’s water. In May 2011 we learned that the EPA was beginning to change the way America’s waters are controlled, and that control was to be extended to your ponds and puddles. Happening now in New Mexico:
The lawyers told the committee [New Mexico Legislature Water and Natural Resources] the U.S. government is apparently trying to take over legal management of the state’s water supply. The federal government has asserted claims for damages to groundwater in a natural resource damage case in New Mexico involving Chevron/Molycorp. The claim seeks for those damages to be awarded in the form of future water rights management. Source: Las Cruces Sun
There is no better way to control “The People” than to control their water.
This is the work of Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar and Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack. In a letter to them from the Western Governors’ Association:
“…The ramifications of such legal position extend to the very heart of the Western states exclusive ownership and/or management and control of the groundwater resources within their respective boundaries.”
Jay Stein, a lawyer representing the city of Las Cruces, who has filed as an intervener in the case, said the outcome of the hearing could potentially affect the city’s water supply.
“In the pending water rights adjudication in state district court, here in Las Cruces, the court has turned to the United States’ claims. Foremost among these is the issue of the United States’ claims to “groundwater’ or to “project water in the ground,’ as they have termed it.
These claims are not supported by any actual beneficial use of groundwater. Nor are they supported by state law which governs proceedings in the adjudication.
“These water claims are unqualified but potentially could amount to hundreds of thousands of acre-feet per year.”
New story, same old song.
Investor’s Business Daily, April 2011:
This is not about clean water any more than cap-and-trade is about climate change. It’s about increasing government power over our every aspect of our lives. The power to regulate is the power to destroy, and part of the administration’s goal of raising energy prices to the point green energy looks acceptable if not attractive. IBD
The Environmental Protection Agency also released its guidelines for expanding federal power over the nation’s waterways, ponds and puddles. IBD
One of the reasons for the 1967 War [Middle East against Israel] was the Arab nations’ cutting off irrigation water to Israel. No crops no food. Throughout history, tyrants have taken the people’s water and restricted its use. It is a technique that brings a people to their knees or their graves. We can live without electricity but we cannot live without useful water. Our water is a matter of Liberty…
● All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide
● All interstate waters including interstate wetlands
● All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters:(i) Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; or
(i) Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; or
(ii) From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; or
(iii) Which are used or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce;
● All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under this definition;
● Tributaries of waters identified inparagraphs (s)(1) through (4) of this section;
● The territorial sea;
● Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters that are themselves wetlands) identified in paragraphs (s)(1) through (6) of this section; waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons designed to meet the requirements of CWA (other than cooling ponds as defined in 40 CFR 423.11(m) which also meet the criteria of this definition) are not waters of the United States.
Then there is this notation at the bottom of the list:
Waters of the United States do not include prior converted cropland. Notwithstanding the determination of an area’s status as prior converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the purposes of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction remains with EPA.
At this same time, former Democrat Senator Russ Feingold tried to abscond with the water in your praire potholes:
25) WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES- The term `waters of the United States’ means all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, the territorial seas, and all interstate and intrastate waters and their tributaries, including lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, natural ponds, and all impoundments of the foregoing, to the fullest extent that these waters, or activities affecting these waters, are subject to the legislative power of Congress under the Constitution.’.
House Agricultural Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., says the expanded EPA guidelines would let the government “regulate essentially any body of water, such as a farm pond or even a ditch.” A bipartisan group of 170 congressmen wrote a letter to the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers urging them not to issue the expanded guidelines.
The American Farm Bureau Federation said in a statement that the guidelines “take an overly broad view of ‘waters of the U.S.’ It would serve as a road map for EPA and the Corps to designate nearly all water bodies, and even some on dry land, as subject to federal regulations that dictate land-use decisions.”
The Government wins some and they lose some. If they can’t get it done through legislation, they try it through a lawsuit. Countless coal mines have been shutdown due Government claims that they are negatively affecting water resources, even when the claim has been proven to be untrue. It is no small matter. Our waters are among our most precious sources of liberty. Original Source of this story Fox News.