State Imposed Waterway Buffers:

“Waterway buffers:

“The Environmental Management Commission of NC (other states are also) is attempting to implement a system of 'buffers' along many (eventually most) large and even small waterways in the state.

Within these 'buffers', which might be from 50' to 200' wide from the water's edge of the waterways, a natural vegetation cover is to be maintained (no, clearing, grading, building, plowing, etc., occasional tree cutting would be allowed).

No landowner compensation is currently planned for any loss of property rights and in fact the landowners for a large fee can purchase an exception in places to build roads, bridges and such within the 'buffers'.

Well, to put it mildly, there has been a storm of protests in reaction to the vision of the " Varnmental Commnists"!

I for one, first, am in favor of the acquisition of all designated flood hazard areas along waterways, beaches and shores by public agencies but with fair market landowner compensation

and, second, would like to see the public acquisition of 'buffer' strips of some width to be determined along all sections of waterways that are downstream from a culvert of a public road, this would rule out the numerous small headwater streams from the buffer rules, again, with fair landowner compensation (eminent domain).

Of course, a current total price for such a program (eminent domain fee acquisition) has been calculated by the Clean Water Management Trust Fund of NC and is figured to be over 10 billion dollars with the CWMTF of NC current annual budget only being about 200 million dollars

so thats why they want to impose the 'buffer rules' with no landowner compensation.”

There could many new hiking opportunities along such a buffer netwok.
last edited: 1/28/06 8:10:33 AM”

“lonesurveyor - I've felt sick to my stomach because of our government's wishes twice since Clinton was in office. Once when Bush said he wanted to make all illegals, legal. And just now reading your post. That is the most blatant disregard for our Constitution and the rights and freedoms of the citizens. There are other ways to get this done, such as enforcing environmental control laws, which are far less devastating.

This is sick.”

“By the way, your post is fuego.”

“Upper Catawba River Land Owners Alliance has been formed to fight the buffer rules.

ucrla.org

also the Citizens for a Sound Economy are fighting this, CSE.org.

I guess the only practical approach would be to allocate funds to acquire the areas from landowners would be willing to sell.

Supposedly, the experts tell us, great water quality benefits (and flood control benfits) would result from such protected by natural vegetation waterway buffers.

I am with you on the immigrant issue, it must be controlled.
last edited: 1/28/06 8:20:05 AM”

“I guess the only practical approach would be to allocate funds to acquire the areas that landowners would be willing to sell.

This is reasonable.”

“If the waterway is public, the bordering land should be public, also. I have seen this in the Rep. of Panama.

In Iowa, when they developed Rock Creek State Park and a lake, by building a dam, they did keep a buffer zone around the water. Nearby residents have to get permission to cut the lawns in the zones in front of their homes.
And they cannot cut on weekends or holidays.”

“I have a number of thoughts on this. I'm in favor of buffers to both stop/slow runoff, be it manure or simply soil loss, and to also save the natural areas along lovely streams.

1. The idea of buffer zones along waterways is not new. The FSAs and SWCDs of the federal government have partnered in doing this with farmers for years. I've lived in Minnesota for a few years and have covered such programs. Farmers get incentives for planting buffer zones, etc.

2. Minnesota also has a feedlot program. I dont know if that's something offered on a federal basis or not. A feedlot officer goes out and checks the feedlots on farms of all sizes for runoff based on animal units. If need be, measures are suggested to be put in place to stop or slow runoff. Then typically the SWCD enters the picture, to create a plan, and help implement and partially fund it. Yes, "feedlot" can mean a small family farm, not just huge operations.

3. If there is not enough money to acquire land (or give incentives) in NC, maybe a prioritized list needs to be made, with really bad areas worked on first. That's how the feedlot program was implemented.

4.You said there are large fee exceptions for buildings roads, etc. I'm not sure I understand. Is this for necessary, needed projects? Or, as stated, it sounds like it's some bass-ackwards, George Bush F*-ed up way of playing business with the environment: Pay me enough and you can do what you damn well please with the waterway environment, no matter how bad it might be.

That crap, money/pushiness vs. environment can work ("work" not being the operative word, "can be pushed through" is more like it), although it would be better for all if it didn't. In Decorah, Iowa, Wal-Mart -- which had a store in town and wanted to relocate a Super Wal-Mart on the flood plain of the Upper Iowa River -- bypassed the normal government process. It never went through Planning and Zoning or Board of Adjustment meetings, somehow just showing up in front of the City Council with its request. The City Council said OK to its request for a variance, sparking much public protest and questioning and eventual lawsuits.

Then I believe it went ahead and put fill on the flood plain without Iowa DNR approval, getting hit with a fine, but still all went ahead. Private individuals fought it for five years, as an empty shell of a building stood there.

Three guesses who eventually prevailed. Don't know how that screwed up the flood zone, with the city immediately upstream.

5. Private land acquisition can work. In the same county where Wal-Mart went in, further downstream on the Upper Iowa, a guy wanted to put in a subdivision on a bend of the river. This is a river that was nominated for Wild and Scenic river status, mind you (but private citizens in Allamakee County, which borders the Mississippi River, squelched that with the land right concerns of the type you mentioned. At the geographical point mentioned here, the river is in the second county from the Miss, in Winneshiek County.)

The Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation raised funds, came in and bought the land.
http://www.inhf.org/upperiowariver.htm
http://www.inhf.org/protectupperiowa.htm
http://www.inhf.org/riverbenddone.htm

So, obviously, private land acquisition can work.



It's all looking to keep our waterways in great shape both pollution-wise and, also, it looks nicer. It's all about keeping them available for future generations.

Supposedly, the experts tell us, great water quality benefits (and flood control benfits) would result from such protected by natural vegetation waterway buffers.

There's no "supposedly" about it. The measures have been in effect in the Midwest for a long time -- especially in the area where I live, a nonglaciated area of steep hills, pretty bluffs and karst topography (caves, where your groundwater, polluted or not, directly disappears into watersheds).

It definitely helps. There is no "supposedly" about it. Natural vegetations and measures worked long before we humans came around.”

“Regulation is not a taking as long as a landowner has some economic use for his land. This is established case law.

There is no Constitutional right to do whatever the hell you please with your land, everyone else be damned.

As someone living in a state that was largely developed long before people understood the impact, I can tell you that what NC is doing appears reasonable.”

“I can agree with the concept of a buffer, but if it is important enough to do so then it should be important enough to pay a fair price.”

“I could write forever on the ag land use issue. Natural vegetation certainly works and it's long been proven.

In my area, farmers plant corn and soybeans. Well, the widespread planting of soybeans only started occurring maybe 20 years ago on our steep hillsides, because it is such a good paying cash crop.

However, neither has a good root system. Plus, the spacing of rows allows all kinds of non-planted dirt to sit there, soak up insecticides and herbicides, and then run off in a rainstorm, because there's nothing to hold the soil in place. In addition to the long-time build up of chemicals in runoff, we can't afford to lose the valuable topsoil needed for crops. (Many farmers now disk the remnants of last year's crop to leave something to cover the ground, as opposed to the bare soil of plowing.)

Alfalfa (hay) is a crop that has a great root system to keep soil in place, plus it covers all the land its on; it's not in rows. However, the move to cash crop farming -- as opposed to needing the hay for livestock (which has typically moved to much larger farms) -- means there's little alfalfa on our hillsides. But lots of corn and soybeans, where the soil just washes away.

And you know what alfalfa is similar to? The natural prairies that lined our land when the pioneers arrived. A good root system, not only holding the soil in place, but serving to filter the water runoff when heavy storms occur, catching more of the soil being eroded than open-row crops.
last edited: 1/28/06 10:09:07 AM”

“Again, Never buy beachfront property.”

“You write purty good for a girl.”

“LMFAO! You read purty good for someone from Wisconsin.
last edited: 1/28/06 10:07:14 AM”

“Only cuz you right so good.”

“Right! :-)”

“Hey lizs, tobacco used to be the best cash crop. Now many farmers have moved into soybeans and cotton. So now they shouldn't be growing soybeans either? Just plant alfalfa. I wonder how many horse ranches there would need to be to support a family farm? Or maybe there shouldn't be any family farms, just huge corporate entities that have the political clout to do whatever they want.”

“I live in an area where there are lots of organic crop producers -- which works well on small farms and can make good money with niche marketing.

Also, in our area that's a research farm working on hazelnut and chestnut production, as well as working on uses for the products. I've seen presentations showing which crops, usually alternative crops, work best in maximizing seasonal light cycles and rain cycles in the area

The widely-spaced rows of the cash crops on *steep hillsides* don't work very well at preventing soil erosion or runoff of insecticides, herbicides and/or manure. (Weren't we talking about protecting waterways in this thread?)

So... you like water you're not supposed to even filter? Go visit Yellow River State Forest in Iowa, a beautiful place and even a trout stream in it, but don't drink the water. Check what's coming off the steep hillsides upstream.
last edited: 1/30/06 12:01:54 PM”

“And now, getting back to protecting waterways... I can't say I like Minnesota as an adopted state all the time, but I do admire the efforts put forth in identifying and working on keeping streams clean... or try to get them back to what they once were:


Rochester, Minn. -- The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency will host informational meetings in Mankato and Rochester to present a draft of the state's 2006 list of polluted waters. The meetings are scheduled as follows:

Tuesday, Feb. 7 -- 1:00-3:00 p.m., Mankato Farm Service Agency Office, 1160 Victory Drive, Ste 1

Wednesday, Feb. 8 -- 1:00-3:00 p.m, Rochester MPCA Office, 18 Wood Lake Drive SE

The meetings include a presentation on categories of impaired waters and how water bodies are placed on the list. Opportunities for public participation in the process of identifying and cleaning up polluted waters will also be discussed.

Waters on the list, also known as "impaired waters" under the Federal Clean Water Act, do not meet water-quality standards. Pollutant levels in these waters are above acceptable limits. Therefore, these waters are unable to meet their designated uses for fishing, swimming and aquatic habitat.

The state is required to update its polluted waters list every two years. The draft 2006 update includes 396 new listings, which brings the total list of impairments to 2,274. Since some waters have multiple impairments, the 2006 list includes 1,008 lakes and 721 river segments with one or more pollutant problems. Approximately 16 percent of Minnesota's lakes and 10 percent of stream reaches have been assessed at this time. As more water bodies are evaluated, the list is expected to grow larger.

The south central and southeast portions of the state have several new listings in the 2006 draft. In the Minnesota River Basin, approximately 138 new stream reaches and 22 new lakes/reservoirs have been added. The Lower Mississippi River Basin saw an increase of 31 new stream segments and three new lakes/reservoirs. The Cedar River and Des Moines River Basins had 14 and 13 river reaches added, respectively. Two lakes in the Des Moines Basin were added as well.

For details about the draft 2006 list of polluted waters, visit the MPCA Web site at www.pca.state.mn.us/water/tmdl.html.

The draft 2006 list of polluted waters in Minnesota is on public notice from Monday, Jan. 23, to Friday, Feb. 24, 2006. Informational meetings are scheduled throughout the state. The meetings include a presentation on categories of impaired waters and how water bodies are placed on the list. Opportunities for public participation in the process of identifying and cleaning up polluted waters will also be discussed.”

“I'm too poor to own waterfront property, but not too poor to own kayaks. Sounds like a good kayaking opportunity.


But as with so many things big government does it's got me wondering, "is this really necessary?"”

“I own waterfront property and had to obtain permits to build my boatshed and docks. The property stakes are about 12 feet into my yard from my bulkhead. The property from the stakes to the middle of the Amite River a federal waterway, belongs to the government not me. I use it like it is mine but it's not mine. I built the dock the boys and I are standing on in this pic but, it's your land/water. If you wanna have a dock party, I don't know if I can legally stop you.

http://image56.webshots.com/56/3/10/97/404131097YZSIDy_fs.jpg”