Land rent ad infinitum, ad nauseum

[FrankChodorov]

If there is 'city water' why would you need a 'well permit' of any kind?

Because you don't like Chlorine and Flouride? (And NO those are not the names of the town's secretaries, LOL)

We had to fight to keep our wells private here in Bedford! Otherwise the town would have had control over them, even though we have NO town water services, unless you live on the Manchester border.

in NH we all own the groundwater in common and the state is the public trustee.

you are free to access and use the groundwater so long as you leave enough and as good in common for others after which your use will infringe on others.

[CNHT]

in NH we all own the groundwater in common and the state is the public trustee.
you are free to access and use the groundwater so long as you leave enough and as good in common for others after which your use will infringe on others.

Like hell you do!!!!!!!!!!!!!  LOL  My well is MINE and MINE alone. It is not 'in common' with anyone, least of all the town where I live. It is on private property which I own outright and no town entity is going to 'take' it for their own purposes. We defeated that bill already in the statehouse.

[FrankChodorov]

in NH we all own the groundwater in common and the state is the public trustee.
you are free to access and use the groundwater so long as you leave enough and as good in common for others after which your use will infringe on others.

Like hell you do!!!!!!!!!!!!!  LOL  My well is MINE and MINE alone. It is not 'in common' with anyone, least of all the town where I live. It is on private property which I own outright and no town entity is going to 'take' it for their own purposes. We defeated that bill already in the statehouse.

the well maybe "yours" but the water is "ours"...

this is a very well established constitutional fact in NH.

why do you think the state requires public boat ramps on all lakes over 20 acres?

[CNHT]

the well maybe "yours" but the water is "ours"...

Just try and challenge me on that, and you'll get a nice suprise as you look down the butt of my Ruger...

this is a very well established constitutional fact in NH.
why do you think the state requires public boat ramps on all lakes over 20 acres?

You are talking about two different things. If the state owns a park, they are trustees of the water. If I have installed a well pump and therefore made a well on my own property, I own it and the water I take from it. Unless the town plans to help me fix it next time it burns out, they have no rights to it even though one selectman/rep tried to pass a bill that said the town could seize it from me if they needed the resources.

Like I said, we defeated that ITL in committee and even if it had passed, they'd still have my Ruger to contend with.

[Heyduke]

the well maybe "yours" but the water is "ours"...

Just try and challenge me on that, and you'll get a nice suprise as you look down the butt of my Ruger...

this is a very well established constitutional fact in NH.
why do you think the state requires public boat ramps on all lakes over 20 acres?

You are talking about two different things. If the state owns a park, they are trustees of the water. If I have installed a well pump and therefore made a well on my own property, I own it and the water I take from it. Unless the town plans to help me fix it next time it burns out, they have no rights to it even though one selectman/rep tried to pass a bill that said the town could seize it from me if they needed the resources.

Like I said, we defeated that ITL in committee and even if it had passed, they'd still have my Ruger to contend with.

Dude is spot on.  You do not own the water--just the means to access it.  If I wanted to, I could move in next door to you and install a well that accesses the same aquifer.  Groundwater has no boundaries other than those determined by hydrology.  As a Goffstown resident, you may well be using MY water. 

Your example of the state and boat ramps is also inaccurate.  It is a long-standing problem in NH, but the state is responsible for access to all bodies of water, because the water in NH is in a public trust.  In this fashion, I may not cross someone's posted land to go swimming, but if I am already in the water, then I'm not trespassing. 

[CNHT]

Dude is spot on.  You do not own the water--just the means to access it.  If I wanted to, I could move in next door to you and install a well that accesses the same aquifer.  Groundwater has no boundaries other than those determined by hydrology.  As a Goffstown resident, you may well be using MY water. 

I don't see how that's possible as I am not a Goffstown resident, and I am not using your well pump. The water might be from the same aquifer, but I would have no right to enter your property and take from the well by the means which you have installed to get it up out of the ground. Period!

Your example of the state and boat ramps is also inaccurate.

The 'dude' was inaccurate, not I.

It is a long-standing problem in NH, but the state is responsible for access to all bodies of water, because the water in NH is in a public trust.  In this fashion, I may not cross someone's posted land to go swimming, but if I am already in the water, then I'm not trespassing. 

The  Dude is WRONG about wells on private land such as mine which are owned outright. The town may NOT come onto my property and use MY pump to pump water out of MY well. Nor may they come onto my property and install their own pump to pump water out of the aquifer at the point where it passes under MY LAND because that is called 'trespassing'. They will have to reach the aquifer by some other means or they will be met with the butt of my over/under.

The 'dude' should move to a communist country where his ideas would be more acceptable.





By the way, the public trust idea is for general waterways, not private land...however, they are trying to expand this and wonder how they can get around private rights to do so...

http://www.csc.noaa.gov/cz/CZ05_Proceedings_CD/pdf%20files/TiccoPublic.pdf

I'm telling you, while the public sleeps the gov't is busy scheming on how to remove more of your rights, little by little.

[Heyduke]

What we are saying is--you own the well--but the well is not the water. 

Well=pump, pipe, housings. 

Water=water. 

I could move in next door, pay outrageous amounts for a horizontal well that goes under your property, and pull water from within proximity of your well. 

So long as there is no degradation in supply or quality, it is legal. 

Ownership of land does not constitute everything adjacent to that land.  The air and water are not yours, but you have the freedom to use them so long as you are not impacting the freedoms of others to use them. 

It may be disagreeable to you, but it is what it is. 

BTW--how's life in The Beverly Hills of New Hampshire these days?   

[FrankChodorov]

I would have no right to enter your property and take from the well by the means which you have installed to get it up out of the ground.

I never said that...

what I said was the well that you dug and pump groundwater from is your individual private property as it was paid for in exchange for your labor propducts which are yours and yours alone as the natural extension of the right of self-ownership.

but the actual water itself is owned in common as an individual (not collective) right with the state sole role to act as the public trustee and is yours to freely to use and access as you see fit so long as it does not infringe on anyone else's individual equal access opportunity right.

when it does the state has a duty to act to protect the individual, common rights of others that YOU are infringing upon.

[FrankChodorov]

The 'dude' should move to a communist country where his ideas would be more acceptable.

what is so unbelievable to me is that people don't understand the difference between collective rights and rights owned in common.

the foundational principles of the US are based on common rights as defined by the concept of negative liberty.

[CNHT]

What we are saying is--you own the well--but the well is not the water. 
Well=pump, pipe, housings. 
Water=water. 
I could move in next door, pay outrageous amounts for a horizontal well that goes under your property, and pull water from within proximity of your well. 

You sure could but not by coming ONTO my land to take it from there, which is what the town intended to do if they felt we struck a good supply.
They cannot use our land as their entry point, and that's what they wanted, to take existing setups for their own use!

BTW--how's life in The Beverly Hills of New Hampshire these days?   

I wouldn't know since I don't live in Beverly Hills. I live in NH.  WITH MY GUNS.  

[CNHT]

The 'dude' should move to a communist country where his ideas would be more acceptable.

what is so unbelievable to me is that people don't understand the difference between collective rights and rights owned in common.

the foundational principles of the US are based on common rights as defined by the concept of negative liberty.

What is unbelievable to me is that you are such a collectivist.

[president]

Just try and challenge me on that, and you'll get a nice suprise as you look down the butt of my Ruger...

What are you going to do, threaten to kill yourself? 

[CNHT]

I would have no right to enter your property and take from the well by the means which you have installed to get it up out of the ground.

I never said that...

Well maybe you should have read my post first before disagreeing with it?
I said that a certain rep tried to create a means by which his newly formed 'water authority' could seize our wells if we 'failed to do the right thing and turn them over' in case they felt they needed them.

FAT CHANCE BUD!

[Heyduke]

What we are saying is--you own the well--but the well is not the water. 
Well=pump, pipe, housings. 
Water=water. 
I could move in next door, pay outrageous amounts for a horizontal well that goes under your property, and pull water from within proximity of your well. 

You sure could but not by coming ONTO my land to take it from there, which is what the town intended to do if they felt we struck a good supply.
They cannot use our land as their entry point, and that's what they wanted, to take existing setups for their own use!

BTW--how's life in The Beverly Hills of New Hampshire these days?   

I wouldn't know since I don't live in Beverly Hills. I live in NH.  WITH MY GUNS.  

What I meant was--from a neighboring property, I could go under your property to access the exact water that you are accessing--without ever stepping foot on your land.  

As to the BHills reference--it is a running joke around here that some realtors are advertising Bedford as 'The Beverly Hills of New Hampshire'.  I'm just busting your chops, as I grew up around here and know Bedford for far more than just the McMansions and Toll Brothers monstrosities going up around town...

[FrankChodorov]

The 'dude' should move to a communist country where his ideas would be more acceptable.

what is so unbelievable to me is that people don't understand the difference between collective rights and rights owned in common.

the foundational principles of the US are based on common rights as defined by the concept of negative liberty.

What is unbelievable to me is that you are such a collectivist.

collective ownership and ownership in common are actually opposite...

one is a group right (collective) where you have to get permission from all the other owners or their delegated authority (the state) PRIOR to use and the other is an individual right - in your case you need not ask anyone to access and use the groundwater but it is only judged AFTERWARDS whether or not you are infringing on anyone else's individual equal access rights.

what are the state's responsibilities as it relates to determing whether or not it needs to protect the individual rights because of your use?

this is not a hypothetical because the supply of groundwater is limited and if the population continues to expand there will come a day when your use IS infringing on the individual common rights of another.