Land rent ad infinitum, ad nauseum

[CNHT]

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.  

Isn't that basically what's done by everyone who surrounds me? Believe me, they wanted to take private wells.. specifically.

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...

Did I ever say I lived in Bedford? Hmmmm.. You must have me mixed up with someone else. (By the way, I just banned someone from another board for posting personal info without the users permission ? it's netiquette you know?)

[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.

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.

:blah:

[FrankChodorov]

maybe you should have read my post first before disagreeing with it?

I didn't disagree with your post I just stated the facts as I know them as it relates to groundwater in the state of NH.

when and if you are infringing on the INDIVIDUAL equal access rights of others I will support the state's duty to protect those rights.

but if the state is overstepping it's role and asserting the water is owned collectively or denying your INDIVIDUAL equal access rights I will be right beside you defending your common rights as an individual.

[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.

:blah:

I can only conclude from this that you concede the point...

[CNHT]

I can only conclude from this that you concede the point...

Nope, never said that.  This would have been more to the point   

[Heyduke]

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.  

Isn't that basically what's done by everyone who surrounds me? Believe me, they wanted to take private wells.. specifically.

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...

Did I ever say I lived in Bedford? Hmmmm.. You must have me mixed up with someone else. (By the way, I just banned someone from another board for posting personal info without the users permission ? it's netiquette you know?)

Are you threatening to ban me?  

I don't know jack about the personal information of a single person on these forums unless it was posted here.  

Get a grip.  

[FrankChodorov]

I can only conclude from this that you concede the point...

Nope, never said that.  This would have been more to the point   

got it...the white flag of surrender!

what specificlly do you disagree with?

[CNHT]

Are you threatening to ban me?  

I don't know jack about the personal information of a single person on these forums unless it was posted here.  

Get a grip.  

Since I am not a moderator of THIS board, I cannot ban you. But I am moderator of many others and have done that if necessary is what I was saying.

[CNHT]

what specificlly do you disagree with?

By buying into the collectiivist thing you are enabling those who wish to FURTHER the control over private waterways and wells. It's in the works and will be shot down, hopefully.
See the PDF file of one of my previous posts, with attention to the last paragraph:

"Essentially, the question for greater application of the PTD rests on the process of
defining (and potentially expanding) the doctrine and the impairment of existing rights,
whether they are constitutionally granted public rights or private landowner rights. As a
general matter, coastal managers have more opportunity to liberally apply the PTD if the
legislature has declared the doctrine a public policy, but must still balance competing
interests (and be ready to defend in potential legal challenges) such as claims of adjacent
property owners and the public. This evolving application of the PTD may, thus, result in
coastal policies more restrictive to private ownership and more favorable for public use, including
the alteration of existing zoning boundaries that result in larger coastal areas being designated for
communal employment and protection from development."

The above is talking about salt water, but once the existing doctrine is expanded, it will be used on all water. 

[Heyduke]

Are you threatening to ban me?  

I don't know jack about the personal information of a single person on these forums unless it was posted here.  

Get a grip.  

Since I am not a moderator of THIS board, I cannot ban you. But I am moderator of many others and have done that if necessary is what I was saying.

And I have been a member of countless forums and BBs since the late '80's, and I have been banned from approximately 1 board in that time.  I have also moderated, administered, etc etc etc.  

I swear--for a bunch of people trying to build a community, I have experienced more hostility in the FSP forums than just about any other forums I have participated in, and all I have ever tried to do here is post NH info, job leads, real estate information and other details about what NH is like to a NATIVE of NH that still lives here.  

Whatever...

[CNHT]

And I have been a member of countless forums and BBs since the late '80's, and I have been banned from approximately 1 board in that time.  I have also moderated, administered, etc etc etc.  

I swear--for a bunch of people trying to build a community, I have experienced more hostility in the FSP forums than just about any other forums I have participated in, and all I have ever tried to do here is post NH info, job leads, real estate information and other details about what NH is like to a NATIVE of NH that still lives here.  

Whatever...

I have never threatened to ban you just cautioned you on the use of personal information. I have only banned two people in my long IT history, from any boards, and I repeat I am not a moderator of this board.

You will find that those of us who know each other in person, like each other very much and there is no hostility to speak of...even when we don't agree on some things.

[FrankChodorov]

See the PDF file of one of my previous posts

this is a huge forum...can you link me to it?

By buying into the collectivist thing

this just further confirms for me that you really don't understand our foundational principle of negative liberty based on individual rights held in common like freedom of speech.

believe me - I am very, very careful and precise about my language about what is the exact function of the state as it relates to it's role as the public trustee (which is part of the public trust doctrine) in protecting individual equal access rights to our common assets.

you are enabling those who wish to FURTHER the control over private waterways and wells

the state is the public trustee for ALL groundwater and ALL bodies of water over 20 acres.

what exactly is a "private waterway"?

if you are pulling 500K gallons of water/day off the aquifer on your private property that is draining all of your neighbors wells what are the responsibilities of the state as it relates to the INDIVIDUAL equal access rights claims of your neighbors?

can they come onto your private property and demand that you cease and desist on the rights infringement of others?

[CNHT]

See the PDF file of one of my previous posts

this is a huge forum...can you link me to it?

By buying into the collectivist thing

this just further confirms for me that you really don't understand our foundational principle of negative liberty based on individual rights held in common like freedom of speech.

believe me - I am very, very careful and precise about my language about what is the exact function of the state as it relates to it's role as the public trustee (which is part of the public trust doctrine) in protecting individual equal access rights to our common assets.

you are enabling those who wish to FURTHER the control over private waterways and wells

the state is the public trustee for ALL groundwater and ALL bodies of water over 20 acres.

what exactly is a "private waterway"?

if you are pulling 500K gallons of water/day off the aquifer on your private property that is draining all of your neighbors wells what are the responsibilities of the state as it relates to the INDIVIDUAL equal access rights claims of your neighbors?

can they come onto your private property and demand that you cease and desist on the rights infringement of others?

They can dig another well just as I am having to do as a result of just that.

Right?   

Also, here is the PDF file once again: http://www.csc.noaa.gov/cz/CZ05_Proceedings_CD/pdf%20files/TiccoPublic.pdf

When they start forming 'water districts' as public agencies, then submit legislation to take specifically take over private wells for the 'public good', I am worried and you should be too.
Thanks to the bunch on this board and elsewhere, we were able to fight that.

I don't know what everyone else thinks, but I am sure it's understood that no one special owns the oceans and rivers, only the land which abuts it. But when you own property and you have drilled a well upon it, no one has the right to take that access point away from you, even if the water comes from elsewhere and is considered common property. It is only considered common property insofar as yes, everyone has access to it, but by their own means and not by way of YOUR land!

[FrankChodorov]

They can dig another well just as I am having to do.

how exactly is digging another well going to keep you from violating other individual's equal access rights?

[CNHT]

They can dig another well just as I am having to do.

how exactly is digging another well going to keep you from violating other individual's equal access rights?

What I am saying is, the draw from others is so huge that my water is now down to a trickle. So I am forced to dig again. That's my tough luck.
The town is saying they wanted to be able to steal from others to give to me...so you see, I'm the one in the position to benefit and I still nixed it.