Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

fizzgig

(24,146 posts)
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 06:58 PM Mar 2015

Colorado "rain barrel bill" hits choppy water in tough House debate

A bill that would allow Colorado residents to legally put out rain barrels to catch water dripping from their roofs boiled down to a debate over precedent and "common sense" in the statehouse Friday.

The measure, letting residents put out a 100-gallon barrel and catch up to 600 gallons a year to use on their gardens, passed a narrow voice vote, and it appears to be in danger when a roll-call vote is held next week.

Colorado water law says water that falls on your roof isn't yours; it belongs to the system and ultimately downstream users who own a water right, said Rep. Don Coram, R-Montrose.

Rep. Jessie Danielson, D-Wheat Ridge, countered: "It still goes into the same ground it would if it came down the gutter and straight into the ground."


the rest from the denver post.
14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Colorado "rain barrel bill" hits choppy water in tough House debate (Original Post) fizzgig Mar 2015 OP
I haven't lived in Colorado for almost nineteen years... NaturalHigh Mar 2015 #1
i've been hearing about it since i was a kid fizzgig Mar 2015 #5
Saw this coming. silverweb Mar 2015 #2
the 600 gallon limit is enough to water your lawn once, maybe twice fizzgig Mar 2015 #4
Absolutely sickening. silverweb Mar 2015 #11
yes, people, colorado really has laws that forbid one to capture rainwater. a fact that niyad Mar 2015 #3
yeah, there is still some insanity here fizzgig Mar 2015 #6
I live in fundieville, so still lots of insanity. niyad Mar 2015 #7
I was amazed to find out about this. The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 2015 #10
Needs some very serious thought. madamesilverspurs Mar 2015 #8
That changed in 2009 Canoe52 Mar 2015 #13
No kidding, it does all go the same place, it just saves potable water on the way Warpy Mar 2015 #9
Reason for debate - water company profits packman Mar 2015 #12
That's exactly it Warpy Mar 2015 #14

NaturalHigh

(12,778 posts)
1. I haven't lived in Colorado for almost nineteen years...
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 07:02 PM
Mar 2015

and they've been debating this since I was there.

silverweb

(16,402 posts)
2. Saw this coming.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 07:06 PM
Mar 2015

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]The miniscule percentage of rain that people might catch and save would have NO effect on groundwater levels.

Saying it belongs to "the system" means only that the profiteers are afraid of people paying for less water - especially once corporations succeed in privatizing the supply, which is the ultimate goal.

Once again, as always, this obstruction is purely corporate profit driven.

niyad

(119,186 posts)
3. yes, people, colorado really has laws that forbid one to capture rainwater. a fact that
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 07:07 PM
Mar 2015

comes as a huge surprise to many when discussing water conservation efforts for home use, etc.

no, we cannot capture rainwater, no passive systems, etc. yes, there are times this is one truly messed-up state (and no, legal pot is NOT responsible for this insanity)

fizzgig

(24,146 posts)
6. yeah, there is still some insanity here
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 07:14 PM
Mar 2015

but it's much more progressive than it was when i was a kid.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(120,004 posts)
10. I was amazed to find out about this.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 07:40 PM
Mar 2015

Last edited Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:16 PM - Edit history (1)

Here it's not only legal, it's encouraged. I have two rain barrels - one captures rain off the house roof, the other off the garage. The rain that goes into the barrels is the same rain that would otherwise fall on my yard, and I merely store that very same water in the barrels and just put it on the yard later, when it isn't raining. I am unable to wrap my brain around the rationale for prohibiting rain barrels. It's the same damn water going to the same damn place! The only thing that changes is when it goes there!

madamesilverspurs

(16,010 posts)
8. Needs some very serious thought.
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 07:18 PM
Mar 2015

When visiting family in Washington State a couple years back, I was amazed to learn that residents aren't allowed to capture the rain off the roof; especially surprising given the area's well known raininess. Now they're looking at drought, with snowpack in the Olympic Mountains at 3% of normal.

Gonna get more interesting all over the place.

Canoe52

(2,963 posts)
13. That changed in 2009
Sun Mar 22, 2015, 11:35 AM
Mar 2015

Washington state changed the law in 2009. The original law was 100 years old and was intended to prevent private parties from building reservoirs and diverting water, not to single out rain barrels.

Warpy

(113,070 posts)
9. No kidding, it does all go the same place, it just saves potable water on the way
Sat Mar 21, 2015, 07:39 PM
Mar 2015

I have no idea why this is being debated at all, it should be one of those no brainer decisions.

I guess the usual light switch thinkers and zero tolerancers are on the prowl again.

 

packman

(16,296 posts)
12. Reason for debate - water company profits
Sun Mar 22, 2015, 11:22 AM
Mar 2015

Yes, a few gallons here and there won't make that much difference - But, imagine several hundreds of people bypassing the meter and using rain barrel water for gardens, car washing, etc. Could mean quite a bit for the company running which is usually a monopoly for water distribution.

Warpy

(113,070 posts)
14. That's exactly it
Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:18 PM
Mar 2015

Now I could see a reason for debate if people were having those rain barrels siphoned off to sell to water starved farmers or something, but putting it back where it would have gone in the first place does no harm to anyone but a fat pig of a water company exec who sees a few dollars escaping his grasp.

Funny, around here, a rain barrel might cause me to break ground for a kitchen garden, if we'd been getting enough to support a rain barrel or two. Without them, forget it, water is so costly that any veg I grew would have invisible gold plating on it.

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»Colorado»Colorado "rain barre...