1 Attachment(s)
Update on watershed reporting requirement
Thousands of rural Sonoma County residents miss deadline for water regulations
Rural residents within the watersheds of four Russian River tributaries that provide habitat for imperiled fish species have only partially complied with controversial drought regulations handed down last summer to preserve dwindling stream flows.
That’s the word from state water managers, who have resorted to aerial photography in remote areas to detect lawns that are being watered when they should not be, officials said.
In a progress report on the conservation regime presented this week, a representative for the State Water Resources Control Board said “quite a few” properties appeared to be benefiting from turf irrigation in violation of the regulations, though so far only 23 inspection cases have been opened and 14 warnings issued, officials said.
In addition, only half of more than 10,000 landowners in the four affected watersheds had met October deadlines for mandatory reports detailing their use of surface and groundwater — despite the threat of hefty fines for those who fail to submit the information, state water regulators said.
Continue reading here: https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/4...-county?page=2
Re: Update on watershed reporting requirement
Yes and I live outside of the critical area and still receive the notices demanding compliance. My phone messages to that effect to the state agency remain unanswered. While I respect the intent of the action it needs to be improved in at least this respect!
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by lili22:
Re: Update on watershed reporting requirement
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by lili22:
What's so very troubling is that the agency has the power to charge $500 a day for non-compliance, and there is virtually no rule of law at all as to who will be charged and who will not.
If both "Bob" and "Alice" are 30 days late, but both submit, and Bob does so with the excuse "I forgot to submit the information" and Alice does so but with the comment "I think you are a bunch of busy-body, good-for-nothing Sacramento bureaucrats who should all be out of a job tomorrow, and I'll work toward that end", who decides which one or why gets a $15,000 fine? What's the appeal, and is it simply up to a whether that bureaucrat got lucky last night or had a fight with his wife? I have NEVER seen such a high-handed administration of potential punishment with no recourse.
Yes, I submitted my info on time, even though my situation could not be entered into their website. I spent 3 hours on the phone after which they admitted that "you'll just have to submit the wrong info so the system will work". Fortunately I had them send that to me in writing so that when they come after me for their money, when inevitably the state will drop into another financial hole and they will scour the earth for people who they have some reason they can get money from (e.g. "we notice 2 years ago you were 3 days late sending in your well info, that will be $1500), at least I have some documentation that I was endeavoring to be as best as I can be, a subservient worker bee to our Sacramento overlords.
