Desecration of Atascadero wetland and creek @ Occidental Road, June 20, 2008

[Zeno Swijtink]

On Friday, June 20, 2008, the new owner of some lots with wetlands adjacent to Atascadero creek @ Occidental Road brought in a backhoe apparently to drain the property.

Great damage was done before they were stopped by PRMD after many phone-calls from concerned citizens to PRMD, Cal. Department of Fish and Game, The DA office, and US Army Corps of Engineers.

For photos go to

https://www.atascaderogreenvalleywatershed.net/desecration.htm

[Helen Shane]

May we know the name of this person who apparently thinks the backhoe is a toy, and whose playground the wetlands? Is this what comes under the list of of property rights?

Brigt green stars to the concerned citizens who knew what to do and whom to call. Helen Shane


On Friday, June 20, 2008, the new owner of some lots with wetlands adjacent to Atascadero creek @ Occidental Road brought in a backhoe apparently to drain the property.

Great damage was done before they were stopped by PRMD after many phone-calls from concerned citizens to PRMD, Cal. Department of Fish and Game, The DA office, and US Army Corps of Engineers.

For photos go to

https://www.atascaderogreenvalleywatershed.net/desecration.htm

[montanaal]

After reading this thread and as a concerned citizen of the area I have researched and contacted the operator of the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Hitachi</st1:place></st1:City> and he informed me that he was only doing maintenance on an existing drainage ditch. He also commented that he is a drainage and road specialty contractor and does significant amount of work for Marin Open Space and the Water Districts. I have also contacted Mr. O’Brien the owner of the parcels who recently purchased the land which is under the Williamson act since 1972 to farm hay and grow organic vegetables. He was cutting and bailing hay and cleaning the property of some 80 years of debris when the neighbors called in law enforcement rather than talking to him about the work being performed. Mr. O’ Brien is a conservationist and wildlife proponent and is in the process of applying to the California Department of Fish and Game to work out a deal to renew the Coho Salmon habitat on the property to fulfill his dream of renewing the land to its original state. He mentioned he is planning to plant new trees on the property and is also attempting to repair the existing fences that borders of the property to keep campers and trespassers out of the protected fish habitat and delicate flora. Mr. O’Brien should be viewed as a environmentalist with a vision for the area.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
Sincerely,
<o:p></o:p>
Alfred Forrest Giddings Jr.
Grandson of Retired Lieutenant Warden Alfred Giddings Sr.

[Braggi]

... Mr. O’Brien should be viewed as a environmentalist with a vision for the area.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
Sincerely,
<o:p></o:p>
Alfred Forrest Giddings Jr.
Grandson of Retired Lieutenant Warden Alfred Giddings Sr.

I'd like to think so. What was done looks like desecration to me and is probably illegal. Perhaps not. I look forward to more information as it becomes available.

I'll hope for the best.

-Jeff

[Geni Houston]

I am simply so mortified that I have to speak up. Obviously I dont know the truth because I was not there nor do I know any parties involved. But I do know you should not simply believe what you read nor simply what you hear.

Why was the property owner not asked? Is our community just looking for a fight? Who was taking the photos? A trespasser? (hmmm....sounds familiar)

Seems like every issue that comes down the pike has to immediately have lines drawn and sides picked. I thought we were the peaceful, evolved, informed community. How about tar and feathering after conviction.

[Zeno Swijtink]

I am simply so mortified that I have to speak up. Obviously I dont know the truth because I was not there nor do I know any parties involved. But I do know you should not simply believe what you read nor simply what you hear.

Why was the property owner not asked? Is our community just looking for a fight? Who was taking the photos? A trespasser? (hmmm....sounds familiar)

Seems like every issue that comes down the pike has to immediately have lines drawn and sides picked. I thought we were the peaceful, evolved, informed community. How about tar and feathering after conviction.

Note that I am only asking for an investigation.

As to why the owner "was not asked," in cases like this there is an urgency to get the thing stopped as many critters are harmed or threatened with death, habitat is destroyed, and the owner is often unknown or not around while the "work" is done.

I did inquire whether the necessary permits were obtained before I posted the message. I did not mention the name of the owner, some out of state (Montana) photographer ("Grandson of Retired Lieutenant Warden Alfred Giddings Sr.") did, apparently a friend of the owner.

You seem to blame me for not being "objective" or nice in calling this a "desecration," and I had indeed a deeply felt response to the destruction shown in the pictures: the silt running off to the creek, where it will clog and embed the pebbles salmon need to deposit their eggs, the water drained from this wetland area that many critters depend on.

Trespassing? If the completion of a crime was prevented I think it was justified, as in citizen-arrest.

I'll await the outcome of the ongoing inquiry. Thank you all who called Mike Reilly's office.

[Russel Branch]

How can you fight a crime by committing one yourself?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
"Trespassing? If the completion of a crime was prevented I think it was justified, as in citizen-arrest."<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
The last I checked a citizen-arrest was a right given to you as an American Citizen while trespassing is an illegal offense. There is no state in the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">United States</st1:place></st1:country-region> that gives you a right to Trespass unless there is a state official with a warrant or probable cause.
<o:p></o:p>
If you look at this from a legal standpoint, in court this case would be thrown out almost immediately. Yes you have pictures showing activity on the land with the use of an excavator. But these pictures were taken illegally by trespassing so they would not be useable in court. 2<SUP>nd</SUP>, they show activity on the land I will admit, but they do not show detailed devastation of habitat by the owner.
<o:p></o:p>
It’s apparent that the owner of the land is doing something, but no one knows what exactly. A meeting with the owner and the surrounding neighbors seems to be an appropriate way to discuss the situation at hand.

[Zeno Swijtink]

How can you fight a crime by committing one yourself?

Russel,

Sorry for not being clearer: I did not trespass in obtaining these pictures.

It is always goes to see new faces here on the Board. Hope you stick around!

[Geni Houston]

I think we are missing the point. Maybe the outcome of the inquiry should have been revealed before yet another rumor is started designed to enflame.

[handy]

I think we are missing the point. Maybe the outcome of the inquiry should have been revealed before yet another rumor is started designed to enflame.

Excellent suggestion. But you are not dealing with rational neighborly inquiry; you're dealing with irrational socialist meddling in the private affairs of others.

I think the individuals who interrupted the work should be required to personally pay all costs incurred for time lost, etc. A good slap in the wallet usually has the effect of shortening the nose.

[Braggi]

Excellent suggestion. But you are not dealing with rational neighborly inquiry; you're dealing with irrational socialist meddling in the private affairs of others. ...

Just curious handy, if you saw a man beating and raping a young woman, on private property, would it be trespassing to jump the fence and stop the crime?

Who should be prosecuted, the rapist or the trespasser?

-Jeff

PS. Note that trespassing is not an issue in the wetlands desecration case under discussion.

[Braggi]

... The last I checked a citizen-arrest was a right given to you as an American Citizen while trespassing is an illegal offense. ...

Your sentence is a little hard to decipher, but, I think it is perfectly legal to trespass if you are doing so in an effort to defend a victim of a crime. If someone with a stick hides behind a fence and clobbers people that walk by, it will be legal to go behind the fence, even if on private property, and make a citizen's arrest for assault.

-Jeff

[MsTerry]

[quote=Zeno Swijtink;62619]Note that I am only asking for an investigation.
No, a cease and desist order is a lot more than that


As to why the owner "was not asked," in cases like this there is an urgency to get the thing stopped as many critters are harmed or threatened with death, habitat is destroyed, and the owner is often unknown or not around while the "work" is done.
Come on now good old Zeno, people were able to take pictures, couldn't they ask if the owner was around too?


I did inquire whether the necessary permits were obtained before I posted the message.

What kind of permits are needed to make a drainage trench?


You seem to blame me for not being "objective" or nice in calling this a "desecration," and I had indeed a deeply felt response to the destruction shown in the pictures: the silt running off to the creek, where it will clog and embed the pebbles salmon need to deposit their eggs, the water drained from this wetland area that many critters depend on.

Would you have the same reaction if a slde had caused the same?

Trespassing? If the completion of a crime was prevented I think it was justified, as in citizen-arrest.

LOL Zeno you are no citizen


I'll await the outcome of the ongoing inquiry.
Will you abide with the ruling?

[MsTerry]

Now, now, Jeff
You first have to establish if a crime has been committed, which in this case is not clear yet.
And to give you another analogy, it is not legal to clobber a robber to prevent a crime. You can not commit a crime to prevent a crime, that is what frustrates cops so much.


Your sentence is a little hard to decipher, but, I think it is perfectly legal to trespass if you are doing so in an effort to defend a victim of a crime. If someone with a stick hides behind a fence and clobbers people that walk by, it will be legal to go behind the fence, even if on private property, and make a citizen's arrest for assault.

-Jeff

[shellebelle]

Now if we could just take that to heart!

Oh yeh then we wouldn't be in those foreign nations defending them from themselves!



You can not commit a crime to prevent a crime, that is what frustrates cops so much.

[handy]

Just curious handy, if you saw a man beating and raping a young woman, on private property, would it be trespassing to jump the fence and stop the crime?

Who should be prosecuted, the rapist or the trespasser?

-Jeff

PS. Note that trespassing is not an issue in the wetlands desecration case under discussion.

Strawman argument. Hypothetical and unrelated. To answer the question though, I don't know if it would be trespassing. I doubt that I would care in the moment, given the crime.

I didn't mention trespass. I addressed only the act of interfering with someone performing an apparently legitimate maintenance task on property not owned by the busybody doing the interfering.

P.S. please reserve terms like 'desecration' for acts like our invasion/occupation of Iraq. Applying it to deepening a drainageway denigrates the meaning.

[Braggi]

Now, now, Jeff
You first have to establish if a crime has been committed ...

Wrong again, MsTerry. Probable cause is what you need and an eye witness account is probable cause. Whether or not a crime was committed comes out before the judge ... much later.

Lack of permits in this case is the issue. It's almost impossible to get permits to drain a wetland these days. It's reasonable to assume the owner knew that and hired the machine operator to get it done before authorities could be notified. That's an all too common practice.

That might be wrong, but it's also possible a terrible crime was nipped in the bud.

-Jeff

[Braggi]

... P.S. please reserve terms like 'desecration' for acts like our invasion/occupation of Iraq. Applying it to deepening a drainageway denigrates the meaning.

Although I agree about Iraq, in this case it depends on what you consider sacred.

-Jeff

[Zeno Swijtink]

Excellent suggestion. But you are not dealing with rational neighborly inquiry; you're dealing with irrational socialist meddling in the private affairs of others.

I think the individuals who interrupted the work should be required to personally pay all costs incurred for time lost, etc. A good slap in the wallet usually has the effect of shortening the nose.

When it comes to water and waterways there is seldom something you could call purely private affairs. We all live downstream from someone, and water when, and if, it flows downstream, carries all kind of stuff, sand and pollutants.

The state decided to protect water resources and restrict uses of private property as it affects water for good reasons. Much of it goes back to old English law.

[handy]

Although I agree about Iraq, in this case it depends on what you consider sacred.

-Jeff

Yah... I wouldn't consider it a 'sacred' duty to prevent someone from improving the drainage of a swamp. I would be more likely to thank them for mosquito abatement.

[MsTerry]

Just probable cause, Jeff?
Hell, I'd be busy just walking down mainstream, arresting citizens left and right.


Each state with the exception of North Carolina (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina) permits citizen arrests if the commission of felony (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony) is witnessed by the arresting citizen, or when a citizen is asked to assist in the apprehension of a suspect by police (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police). The application of state laws (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_law) varies widely with respect to misdemeanors, breaches of the peace, and felonies not witnessed by the arresting party. American citizens do not carry the authority or enjoy the legal protections of police, and are held to the principle of strict liability (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_liability) before the courts of civil- (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_law_%28common_law%29) and criminal law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_law) including but not limited to any infringement of another's rights


Wrong again, MsTerry. Probable cause is what you need and an eye witness account is probable cause. Whether or not a crime was committed comes out before the judge ... much later.

Lack of permits in this case is the issue. It's almost impossible to get permits to drain a wetland these days. It's reasonable to assume the owner knew that and hired the machine operator to get it done before authorities could be notified. That's an all too common practice.

That might be wrong, but it's also possible a terrible crime was nipped in the bud.

-Jeff

[handy]

When it comes to water and waterways there is seldom something you could call purely private affairs. We all live downstream from someone, and water when, and if, it flows downstream, carries all kind of stuff, sand and pollutants.

And the next rain will carry thousands of times more than what was disturbed by a man with a machine. Who gets snitched on for that?


The state decided to protect water resources and restrict uses of private property as it affects water for good reasons.

I wonder if the people of Iowa and Missouri are happy with 'state protection of their water resources' at the moment?

QUOTE=Zeno Swijtink;62785]Much of it goes back to old English law.[/QUOTE]

Yes. Socialist meddling has been around for a long time.

[Zeno Swijtink]

And the next rain will carry thousands of times more than what was disturbed by a man with a machine. Who gets snitched on for that?

Never underestimate the might of a man with a machine! :wink:

How would your political philosophy deal with interrelations between people living on the same creek?

[MsTerry]

Wrong again, MsTerry. Probable cause is what you need and an eye witness account is probable cause.
Again, Jeff?


Whether or not a crime was committed comes out before the judge ... much later.
-Jeff

If the accusers were wrong, how should they be punished for their crime.



That might be wrong, but it's also possible a terrible crime was nipped in the bud.
A terrible crime, Jeff?????
I am surprised to hear that a guy who fantasizes about evolution, someone who advocates gay marriage as something that happens because the meaning of words change, has such a hard time seeing that even nature changes because human action is involved.
What is so terrible about that? what is the crime?

[MsTerry]

Never underestimate the might of a man with a machine! :wink:


Yes a backhoe can look pretty frightening to the uninitiated.
the pictures look like they are diverting or channeling water, they remind me of ricepaddys or "slootjes" from your native Holland.
If those pictures truly match up, the one with the semi lake being the area where they made a channel, It would be washed away next winter.
wouldn't water in the summer time provide life for all kinds of critters?

[Lenny]

Just curious handy, if you saw a man beating and raping a young woman, on private property, would it be trespassing to jump the fence and stop the crime? Who should be prosecuted, the rapist or the trespasser? -Jeff
PS. Note that trespassing is not an issue in the wetlands desecration case under discussion.

Just to toot my own horn and show how stupid I was as a young man (about 23) I did that. Pimp slapping "his" whore around in a motel parking lot on Market Street, near the S.F. Mint. I yelled something like, "Hey, you're so tough slapping women around, do you want to try a man?" STUPID thing to do, but then young men are so. Guy came over and we were going to do the man dance when the stupid woman came running over saying, "It's all right" about a hundred times, dragging the cretin away. I stepped forward when he pulled out a razor. She kept yelling at me to leave them alone and all was A-OK. Discretion took the better part of me. Sad tale for all involved.
Point is, no danger to folks in the creek issue, and money would solve that time delay, as the all courts are based on that stuff. And as I understand it, wetlands or no, it was still private property. If you had a contractor painting your house and your neighbor ran over and told him to stop due to color (I think that could happen in Rhonert Park) who would be charged for the time lost? Not the home owner I would judge.

[Becky]

On Friday, June 20, 2008, the new owner of some lots with wetlands adjacent to Atascadero creek @ Occidental Road brought in a backhoe apparently to drain the property.

Great damage was done before they were stopped by PRMD after many phone-calls from concerned citizens to PRMD, Cal. Department of Fish and Game, The DA office, and US Army Corps of Engineers.

For photos go to

https://www.atascaderogreenvalleywatershed.net/desecration.htmi am really late reading this so i am sorry if i am digging up old threads. A friend of mine grew up around this property and mentioned it a few weeks ago the damage that was done. her parents life near by and its so upsetting to see all the damage done. can something like this ever be repaired?

[Zeno Swijtink]

Neighbors see wetland threat in ditch work (https://www1.pressdemocrat.com/article/20080707/NEWS/807070309)
County halts excavation work on property north of Sebastopol
By ROBERT DIGITALE
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Monday, July 7, 2008 at 4:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Monday, July 7, 2008 at 3:40 a.m.

Depending on whom you ask, the 1,000-foot-long excavation was the cleaning of a drainage ditch or the "desecration" of the Atascadero Creek wetlands.

The work on a 60-acre ranch north of Sebastopol was done without permits and has resulted in a stop-work order by county inspectors. The order includes a demand for a "biotic resource assessment" and a restoration plan that addresses potential impacts to rare aquatic life.

"It's pretty egregious," said Julia Pollock, a neighbor who wants to see the wetland near Atascadero Creek permanently protected, possibly by a conservation easement.

But property owner Rob O'Brien, who bought the land in January, said he meant no harm. He said he merely hired an excavator to clean out a drainage that was backing up during winter storms.

"It was about to flood out his horse ranch," he said of a neighbor's property.

O'Brien said the work was more than 200 feet from Atascadero Creek, outside the area designated as a county "biotic resource combining area." As such, he said, the county's demand for the biotic assessment and the restoration plan doesn't apply.

County and state officials closely monitor work done in and near area creeks.

In 2003, an excavator who illegally cleared trees and brush along Atascadero Creek near Mill Station Road was sentenced to six days in jail and fined $1,000. The property owner was expected to spend tens of thousands of dollars restoring the riparian corridor and adjacent wetlands.

O'Brien's property lies close to the West County Trail north of Occidental Road. The land's eastern boundary includes an expansive canopy of trees, tall reeds and slough-like tributaries that feed into the creek.

Some neighbors have tried for five years to acquire protection for the property's wetland.

County and state inspectors learned from neighbors of O'Brien's excavation work and visited the property last month. The county on June 27 sent O'Brien a three-page order to immediately stop work, warning failure to "resolve this violation" could result in a lawsuit or "possible criminal action."

In recent weeks, the matter has been debated on the WaccoBB Internet bulletin board, serving the west county, where critics used the term "desecration" to described the excavation and a friend called O'Brien a conservationist and wildlife proponent.

O'Brien, a Marin County businessman and building contractor, acknowledged he should have found out what permits were needed before excavating.

Last week, he allowed a reporter to view the excavation that ran from west to east across most of the property. The resulting trench in one spot accommodated a 3-foot diameter pipe serving as a culvert.

O'Brien insisted he stayed out of the 100-foot riparian corridor on Atascadero Creek and expressed hope that, as a result, he won't be subject to an extensive restoration project, which would need to be monitored for five years.

"I've learned a valuable lesson cheap," he said.

County spokesman Ben Neuman said O'Brien was expected to present county inspectors with information seeking to demonstrate that the work remained outside the creek setback area.

But neighbors said other agencies may find the excavation violated state and federal laws governing wetlands, water quality and wildlife.

"There's a lot of regulations in place here," said neighbor Anna Ransome. "And he's just talking about one."

John Short, a senior engineer with the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, said the excavation did cause damage along a tributary to Atascadero Creek.

"It is a very serious violation of many agencies' codes and regulations," Short said.

You can reach Staff Writer Robert Digitale at 521-5285 or [email protected].

[Braggi]

...
In recent weeks, the matter has been debated on the WaccoBB Internet bulletin board, serving the west county, where critics used the term "desecration" to described the excavation and a friend called O'Brien a conservationist and wildlife proponent. ...

OMG, we're famous!

In Sonoma County a person needs to get a permit before grading a new road; even on their own property. Work with an excavator in wetlands involves numerous State and Federal agencies. While I agree the complication is far greater than reasonable, Zeno's point about effects downstream justifies at least some of it.

I have to imagine the "new" owner got the land relatively cheaply because there is a wetland there and the former owner knew how difficult it would be to secure building permits.

Again, I look forward to seeing how this plays out.

-Jeff

[Zeno Swijtink]

In Sonoma County a person needs to get a permit before grading a new road; even on their own property. Work with an excavator in wetlands involves numerous State and Federal agencies. While I agree the complication is far greater than reasonable, Zeno's point about effects downstream justifies at least some of it.

The purpose of the permitting process is to make sure the work is done with knowledge and good judgment, and that a proper balance is maintained between private interest of landowner and the interests of neighbors, of the society at large, and of wildlife.

Improperly graded roads are sources of sediment and muck in the creeks. Gold Ridge Resource Conservation District, the RCD in the area of this violation, has a program in the watershed downstream of the Atascadero Wetland.

https://www.goldridgercd.org/pdfs/stewardsv7summer.pdf (page 4)

The "drainage ditch" likely to be involved in this incident is a blue line stream along Occidental Road that meanders into this wetland and that itself will have delivered sediment to this wetland because of upstream lack of knowledge and good judgment.

Caring for our environment requires a level of working together that we have not yet been able to muster in our society.

[Zeno Swijtink]

Yah... I wouldn't consider it a 'sacred' duty to prevent someone from improving the drainage of a swamp. I would be more likely to thank them for mosquito abatement.

Indeed, many people associate wetlands with diseases and ghosts. But have a look at "Postmodern Wetlands: Culture, History, Ecology" by Rod Giblett, Rodney James Giblett.


"Postmodern Wetlands explores the representation of wetlands (swamps, marshes, etc.) in western culture. For many, wetlands are a place of disease and horror often associated with the melancholy and the monstrous; in short, they are 'black waters'. Yet, ecologically, wetlands are vitally important for human and other life on earth: they are 'living' waters. The aim of this book is to produce a cultural critique of wetlands as both living and black waters. Drawing on a wide range of disciplines and methodologies, the book analyses wetlands in relation to aesthetics and philosophy, cities and human psychology, mythology and narrative and medical, military, social and conservation history. It discusses these issues using examples across a variety of genres and making reference to British, American and Australian wetlands."

[Lenny]

So, in the end, this guy puts up the money, pays the taxes, and then needs permission to do what WE want?
I suppose I should change my POV, as I would not want him to ruin our place, but then I would think HE wouldn't want to ruin HIS place either. So it's a matter of opinion. If he wants to put in an airport or nuclear power plant there....oh, never mind....back is acting up again and tired of pain....can't think clearly even when I'm not hurting....won't take up more of your time.
Sorry as it's not worth the :2cents: in electrons.

[Zeno Swijtink]

So, in the end, this guy puts up the money, pays the taxes, and then needs permission to do what WE want?
I suppose I should change my POV, as I would not want him to ruin our place, but then I would think HE wouldn't want to ruin HIS place either. So it's a matter of opinion. If he wants to put in an airport or nuclear power plant there....oh, never mind....back is acting up again and tired of pain....can't think clearly even when I'm not hurting....won't take up more of your time.
Sorry as it's not worth the :2cents: in electrons.

No, it's like he wants to dump his sand in your backyard. But then he got his sand from his neighbor who dumped it in his backyard when he wasn't looking, or when the previous occupant was still in charge. So it's his neighbor's sand. But then the neighbor has moved and ... Get the picture?

Sorry to hear of your back.

[MsTerry]

Zeno,
Life is change, nature is change and some people even change :):
If there is a wetland, that means it is at the lowest point of the surrounding areas to collect the water to stay wet.
Everything comes down to that area, including silt.
If O'Brien's area is getting flooded now, and it wasn't before, that means his drainage is silting over from the land above him.
What do you suggest he should do to address his problems?
If an earthquake comes along and pulls the plug out of these wetlands, should we bulldoze the hole and plug it up again? or would we let nature do it's cycle?


No, it's like he wants to dump his sand in your backyard. But then he got his sand from his neighbor who dumped it in his backyard when he wasn't looking, or when the previous occupant was still in charge. So it's his neighbor's sand. But then the neighbor has moved and ... Get the picture?

Sorry to hear of your back.

[Zeno Swijtink]

PS. Forgot the most important part. When He invented private property - you know the story: at Babel, when He got upset because we tried to build a very high tower so we could peek into His house, and He confused our building project by introducing English and Spanish and Polish, and so, and we had to leave the area He divided the earth in cadastral parcels and send us off in different directions - so when He invented private property he forgot all about the watery areas!!

So creeks and stuff are still His property!!!

Then in the middle of the 20th c. Anno Domini this bunch of religious fanatics emerged that wanted to help Him care for His watery property.

It has all been downstream from there :wink:

[MsTerry]

It has all been downstream from there :wink:
We all live downstream, but what do you suggest O'Brien should do to solve his drainage problems?

[Zeno Swijtink]

We all live downstream, but what do you suggest O'Brien should do to solve his drainage problems?

Talk to Him.

[Braggi]

We all live downstream, but what do you suggest O'Brien should do to solve his drainage problems?

Get a permit. In the process he'll have to consult experts. He'll get help figuring it out.

The water might not be a problem. It might be a blessing he didn't understand.

It might make the property very valuable to a conservation group.

-Jeff

PS. I didn't see the actual land but from the photos it doesn't look like there was ever a "drainage ditch" in the area the excavator cut that channel. Perhaps I'll actually take a look at it tomorrow since I'll be out that way.

[MsTerry]

Talk to Him.
He did, you just didn't like the answer!

[Zeno Swijtink]

He did, you just didn't like the answer!

So why did you ask me if he already had His answer? There is no second opinion about His waters!

[MsTerry]

So why did you ask me if he already had His answer? There is no second opinion about His waters!
Oh yes there is. His Holy Water can still be administrated by Zeus!

[MsTerry]

PS. I didn't see the actual land but from the photos it doesn't look like there was ever a "drainage ditch" in the area the excavator cut that channel. Perhaps I'll actually take a look at it tomorrow since I'll be out that way.
Jeff, I think you yourself have worked with heavy equipment. What I saw on the pictures was a channel, probably a little wider than it was, for easy maintenance.
I didn't see any heavy duty destruction or movement of large mounds of dirt. I don't believe you need a permit for that kind of digging.
Since you are the president of your road, do you get a permit every time you clean out your ditches? Does your road cross a creek? Do you get permits when you work around there? Or do you just get the job done?

[Zeno Swijtink]

I didn't see any heavy duty destruction or movement of large mounds of dirt. I don't believe you need a permit for that kind of digging.

https://www.atascaderogreenvalleywatershed.net/images/AtascaderoWetlandsAssault062008/3%20Atascadero%20Damage%206-20-08s.JPG

[MsTerry]

https://www.atascaderogreenvalleywatershed.net/images/AtascaderoWetlandsAssault062008/3%20Atascadero%20Damage%206-20-08s.JPG
3 guys without a shovel did that?
What's their #

[Lenny]

Quote:
MsTerry wrote: https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/orangebuttons/viewpost.gif (https://www.waccobb.net/forums/showthread.php?p=63728#post63728)
We all live downstream, but what do you suggest O'Brien should do to solve his drainage problems?


Talk to Him.

She has a hell of a time talking to Don!

[Barry]

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20090303/articles/903030229 (https://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:history.go%28-1%29)


https://www.pressdemocrat.com/images/logo2.gif

Sebastopol landowner and his contractor slapped for environmental crimes


BY LORI A. CARTER
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT



Published: Tuesday, March 3, 2009 at 3:47 p.m.

A west Sonoma County landowner and his building contractor admitted environmental crimes Tuesday in a deal that requires the owner to put 15 of his 60 acres along Atascadero Creek permanently off-limits to development.

Robert O’Brien of Tiburon and his contractor, Craig Charles von Schalscha of San Rafael initially faced three felony counts as well as misdemeanor charges stemming from last summer’s drainage work on O’Brien’s cattle ranch near Sebastopol.

All other charges were dismissed with the agreement that both men admit one misdemeanor count of altering a stream without a permit.

O’Brien hired von Schalscha, owner of Blackpoint Construction in Petaluma, to conduct drainage work on his property, which is adjacent to Walker Creek, a tributary of Atascadero Creek in July and August, according to attorneys in the case.

Von Schalscha and his workers dragged heavy equipment through 800 to 1,000 feet of wetlands and redirected a small stream on the Occidental Road property. Neither O’Brien nor von Schalscha sought a permit for the work.

The plea deal approved in court Tuesday calls for both men to pay $15,000 each to reimburse state Fish and Game, the regional water quality control board and the county planning department for the costs of investigating and assessing potential damage.

O’Brien was ordered to serve 180 days in jail and von Schalscha 60, which can be served on home-confinement or other jail alternatives.

And O’Brien must create a wildland easement on a 15-acre parcel east of Atascadero Creek, making the area off-limits in perpetuity to any development other than wetlands management, prosecutor Jeffrey Holtzman said.

Von Schalscha’s attorney, Alexander Anolik of San Francisco, estimated the land’s top value at more than $300,000. That value couldn’t be confirmed late Tuesday.

The Sonoma County Open Space District was in negotiations to acquire the land several years ago but no agreement was reached.

Another major component of the agreement is that O’Brien must repair any damages and must prepare a new mapping of the wetlands on his 60 acres, Holtzman said. Mark Pollock of Napa, O’Brien’s attorney, said O’Brien’s actions will help the community.

“It’s kind of a so-what after all of this,” he said of the single misdemeanor count. “But I think Mr. O’Brien did the right thing by the community, voluntarily. He created a 15-acre wildland forever...for the benefit of the community.”

He said no permanent damage was done with the work, which he said was conducted in the dry summer months when there wasn’t a danger to the creeks.

If there is a lesson to be learned, Pollock said, it’s that land owners should contact local regulatory agencies before beginning any similar work.

“Mr. O’Brien made a stupid mistake,” he said. “He shouldn’t have trusted a contractor. He should’ve called the agencies himself first.”

Anolik said his client specifically asked O’Brien, the property owner, whether any permits were needed.
“He asked O’Brien if he had permits,” he said. “O’Brien says ‘I will check if they’re needed.’ The next day, he says, ‘Don’t worry, we don’t need it.’”

Typically, permits for construction work are sought by the property owner, not by contractors or workers, Anolik said.

The case came to the attention of regulatory agencies and prosecutors by neighbors upset that the work many have affected the creek and wetlands.

[Africali]

Thanks for the update, Barry. A bit of Justice Served Cold. Just upstream on the Atascadero, there are new Cows, which have inflicted lots of damage to the creek and the watershed this winter, as well as demolishing the vernal pools and cr*pping all over the place. What, I wonder, is to be done when a private landowner on the Atascadero Creek rents to Cows? Besides eating the cows, I mean? :wink: