Dam Bill

[Duck Tape]

http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess122_...8_20170202.htm

I would copy and paste but the reader on here does not delete the stricken words so it does not read correctly.


This bill passed the House

[Timberman22]

That's a "dam" shame.

[stant]

More damn government regulation. We need to regulate the damn fools in state government. Why can't they just cut the regulation instead of trying to increase it? I think it makes them feel important. News flash, we really wouldn't miss a damn one of them if they all feel off the earth tomorrow.

[DRDUCK]

FELL

[scatter shot]

Reminds of this oldie but goodie. As per Snopes ( I know, don't say it ) it's a true event-

STATE OF MICHIGAN
Reply to: GRAND RAPIDS DISTRICT OFFICE STATE OFFICE BUILDING 6TH FLOOR
350 OTTAWA NW GRAND RAPIDS MI 49503-2341
JOHN ENGLER, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
HOLLISTER BUILDING, PO BOX 30473, LANSING MI 48909-7973
INTERNET: http://www.deq.state.mi
RUSSELL J. HARDING, Director

December 17, 1997

CERTIFIED

Mr. Ryan DeVries 2088 Dagget Pierson, MI 49339

Dear Mr. DeVries:

SUBJECT: DEQ File No. 97-59-0023-1 T11N, R10W, Sec. 20, Montcalm County

It has come to the attention of the Department of Environmental Quality that there has been recent unauthorized activity on the above referenced parcel of property. You have been certified as the legal landowner and/or contractor who did the following unauthorized activity:

Construction and maintenance of two wood debris dams across the outlet stream of Spring Pond. A permit must be issued prior to the start of this type of activity. A review of the Department's files show that no permits have been issued.

Therefore, the Department has determined that this activity is in violation of Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Michigan Compiled Laws annotated. The Department has been informed that one or both of the dams partially failed during a recent rain event, causing debris dams and flooding at downstream locations. We find that dams of this nature are inherently hazardous and cannot be permitted. The Department therefore orders you to cease and desist all unauthorized activities at this location, and to restore the stream to a free-flow condition by removing all wood and brush forming the dams from the strewn channel. All restoration work shall be completed no later than January 31, 1998. Please notify this office when the restoration has been completed so that a follow-up site inspection may be scheduled by our staff. Failure to comply with this request, or any further unauthorized activity on the site, may result in this case being referred for elevated enforcement action. We anticipate and would appreciate your full cooperation in this matter.

Please feel free to contact me at this office if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

David L. Price
District Representative Land and Water Management Division

Dear Mr. Price:
Re: DEQ File No. 97-59-0023; T11N, R10W, Sec 20; Montcalm County

Your certified letter dated 12/17/97 has been handed to me to respond to. You sent out a great deal of carbon copies to a lot of people, but you neglected to include their addresses. You will, therefore, have to send them a copy of my response.

First of all, Mr. Ryan DeVries is not the legal landowner and/or contractor at 2088 Dagget, Pierson, Michigan — I am the legal owner and a couple of beavers are in the (State unauthorized) process of constructing and maintaining two wood "debris" dams across the outlet stream of my Spring Pond. While I did not pay for, nor authorize, their dam project, I think they would be highly offended you call their skillful use of natural building materials "debris." I would like to challenge you to attempt to emulate their dam project any dam time and/or any dam place you choose. I believe I can safely state there is no dam way you could ever match their dam skills, their dam resourcefulness, their dam ingenuity, their dam persistence, their dam determination and/or their dam work ethic.

As to your dam request the beavers first must fill out a dam permit prior to the start of this type of dam activity, my first dam question to you is: are you trying to discriminate against my Spring Pond Beavers or do you require all dam beavers throughout this State to conform to said dam request? If you are not discriminating against these particular beavers, please send me completed copies of all those other applicable beaver dam permits. Perhaps we will see if there really is a dam violation of Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Michigan Compiled Laws annotated.

My first concern is — aren't the dam beavers entitled to dam legal representation? The Spring Pond Beavers are financially destitute and are unable to pay for said dam representation — so the State will have to provide them with a dam lawyer. The Department's dam concern that either one or both of the dams failed during a recent rain event causing dam flooding is proof we should leave the dam Spring Pond Beavers alone rather than harassing them and calling them dam names. If you want the dam stream "restored" to a dam free-flow condition — contact the dam beavers — but if you are going to arrest them (they obviously did not pay any dam attention to your dam letter-being unable to read English) — be sure you read them their dam Miranda rights first.

As for me, I am not going to cause more dam flooding or dam debris jams by interfering with these dam builders. If you want to hurt these dam beavers — be aware I am sending a copy of your dam letter and this response to PETA. If your dam Department seriously finds all dams of this nature inherently hazardous and truly will not permit their existence in this dam State — I seriously hope you are not selectively enforcing this dam policy, or once again both I and the Spring Pond Beavers will scream prejudice!

In my humble opinion, the Spring Pond Beavers have a right to build their dam unauthorized dams as long as the sky is blue, the grass is green, and water flows downstream. They have more dam right than I to live and enjoy Spring Pond. So, as far as I and the beavers are concerned, this dam case can be referred for more dam elevated enforcement action now. Why wait until 1/31/98? The Spring Pond Beavers may be under the dam ice then, and there will be no dam way for you or your dam staff to contact/harass them then. In conclusion, I would like to bring to your attention a real environmental quality (health) problem: bears are actually defecating in our woods. I definitely believe you should be persecuting the defecating bears and leave the dam beavers alone. If you are going to investigate the beaver dam, watch your step! (The bears are not careful where they dump!) Being unable to comply with your dam request, and being unable to contact you on your dam answering machine, I am sending this response to your dam office.

Sincerely,
Stephen L. Tvedten

[Southernduck]

Give me the dam cliff notes

[Southernduck]

In all seriousness the SC legislature needs to work on eliminating regulation instead of creating new. Y'all can't manage what you got now...

[Mars Bluff]

Another over reach caused by knee jerk reaction. Just so DHEC can come in & make dam owners spend un-Godly amounts of $$$ for nothing. Guess DHEC has blown through that original $600,000 so they can gobble up more. Pot holes cause way more damage and death than dams in this state.

[scatter shot]

The department indicates that this bill will require additional general fund expenditures of $182,940 during FY 2017-18 and $168,906 each year thereafter. Of these amounts, $148,155 would be recurring annual expenditures for salaries and employer contributions for an Environmental Health Manager III and an Administrative Assistant. The Environmental Health Manager would provide high-level technical assistance to department engineers, and the Administrative Assistant would coordinate a significantly increased amount of paperwork including entering and tracking dam owner contact information, report submissions, and compliance tracking. Additional recurring operating expenditures of $20,751 in FY 2017-18 include the cost of office supplies, travel, copier use, and


DT, I appreciate you posting all of these bills lately. I don't presume to know your position on each of these bills but taking your recent posts collectively a fella may conclude that you are the canary in the mine??!! If yes, thanks for posting.
I'm with the general consensus not grow government or increase regulation unless absolutely necessary. This particular bill I'm not in favor of.

[codeman216]

The department indicates that this bill will require additional general fund expenditures of $182,940 during FY 2017-18 and $168,906 each year thereafter. Of these amounts, $148,155 would be recurring annual expenditures for salaries and employer contributions for an Environmental Health Manager III and an Administrative Assistant. The Environmental Health Manager would provide high-level technical assistance to department engineers, and the Administrative Assistant would coordinate a significantly increased amount of paperwork including entering and tracking dam owner contact information, report submissions, and compliance tracking. Additional recurring operating expenditures of $20,751 in FY 2017-18 include the cost of office supplies, travel, copier use, and

Somebody's buddy needed a job man.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Duck Tape]

The bill requires current owners of dams of a certain size to register them and annually report the status of dam safety through a check list. example: holes, rupture, spillway status, tree growth,

It also grows government by adding regulations and new employees.

It really does not change what dam owners should already be doing other than the reporting requirement.


I made sure the small ponds and duck ponds were excluded..

[Southernduck]

That's wonderful DT but DHEC needs a gut check. I understand very well the issues of pond dams. We are currently battling DOT and DHEC on ours which blew out in the flood, thankfully we own a mile of the creek below the dam so it had plenty of room to spread before it left our property. The states plan is to fuck us, fortunately they fucked up on the paperwork a long time ago. Otherwise they would devalue our place significantly....

[reeltight]

DT...would the senate even take this up? If so probability of passing?

[stant]

DrDuck,

Thank you, thinking faster than my fingers would work.

[duckman88]

The bill requires current owners of dams of a certain size to register them and annually report the status of dam safety through a check list. example: holes, rupture, spillway status, tree growth,

It also grows government by adding regulations and new employees.

It really does not change what dam owners should already be doing other than the reporting requirement.


I made sure the small ponds and duck ponds were excluded..

I would be careful with that language unless that is how ambiguous it is in the bill. Do you mean duck impoundments as in leveed areas flooded for the sole purpose of waterfowl hunting or any body of water that is lowered/raised for the purpose of waterfowl hunting? I would imagine that there are a lot of guys with 'impoundments' that are actually ponds by definition that they manipulate the water level to flood portions of it.

Edit: also DT can you site the section with the language excluding duck ponds? I understand the bill more than likely will not say 'duck pond' but where in the bill is the exclusion duck ponds would fall under?

[Mars Bluff]

The bill requires current owners of dams of a certain size to register them and annually report the status of dam safety through a check list. example: holes, rupture, spillway status, tree growth,

It also grows government by adding regulations and new employees.

It really does not change what dam owners should already be doing other than the reporting requirement.


I made sure the small ponds and duck ponds were excluded..

You forgot the rest of it. DHEC would require dam owner to hire an engineer & obtain permits before any repairs are made. This is where the dam owners will get their feelings hurt. You will be given a time table by DHEC to get this done. If not, they'll threaten to do away with the pond. At your expense of course. So long to our little fish ponds. Just like the duck ponds it becomes a money mans game.

[Mars Bluff]

If it's such a concern, why not set aside that money and allow dam owners to apply for grants to make necessary repairs. At least the money wouldn't be pissed away. I've seen families have to sale farms that were in their families for years because the couldn't afford the requirements that DHEC & the army corp of engineers placed on them. People lost their homes to floods after the "big one" because their subdivisions were built below lakes. Were the permits to build those subdivisions not issued by govt? Surely they won't come out & admit that they don't know shit about anything.

[thunderchicken]

Without me trying to decipher all the legal jargon, what size ponds are they proposing to regulate (how many acres could a pond be before it falls under this legislation)?

[Duck Tape]

This bill as amended increases the number of dams that would be regulated by the Department of Health and Environmental Control pursuant to the Dams and Reservoirs Safety Act. Under existing law, dams under twenty-five feet in height with an impounding capacity of less than fifty-acre feet are exempt from regulation unless dam failure or improper reservoir operation might result in the loss of human life. The bill expands the definition of regulated dams and reservoirs to those for which the department determines that dam failure or improper reservoir operation might result in serious damage to homes, industrial and commercial facilities, public utilities, main and secondary highways, or railroads.

The amended bill eliminates the regulation exemption for dams whose failure might threaten roadways for which maintenance responsibility has been accepted by the Department of Transportation or county or municipal governments. Regulated dam owners are required to provide current contact information regarding the owner and an emergency action plan including updated contact information for emergency management officials no later than July first of each year.

As amended, the emergency action plan, or any other provision of law or regulation, shall not require the owner of a dam classified as a high or significant hazard to notify any downstream residents or business owners. The owner must notify emergency officials and the department of the failure or potential failure. Emergency management officials are required to inform or evacuate any downstream residents or business owners located in the inundation zone. As amended, the bill restricts the department from requiring any changes to a dam or its appurtenant works due to a reclassification unless the failure would likely cause loss of life, or repairs are identified by the department through inspection.

[Southernduck]

Thunderchicken, a 3ac pond with a max depth of 20ft will probably come pretty close to 50 ac/ft which is defined as enough water to put 1ft of water over 50 ac.

This amendment is opening the door for more government in our lives and further depletion of private property rights