Forum Home Gallery Register FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Gardener's Forums



Go Back   Gardener's Forums > Speciality Gardening > Water Gardens

Notices

Advertisement

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old Wednesday 16th July 2008, 18:56
brettski
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
All USA residents, please read this NOW

I posted this exact thread on the Bird Forum. As I said there, if I am out of line, then please moderate to acceptable limits, including deletion.
-
-
-
(attn; BF moderators. If this is too "charged" for the BF, please delete or amend in any way you see fit. My intent is only for the betterment of birding and all natural resources. If there is a better board to post this on, please do so. If this subject is covered elsewhere within BF, please re-direct)
-
The United States EPA is accepting public response to the following proposal:
Ornamental Water Features 4.1.4: This specification establishes that builders shall not install or facilitate the installation of ornamental water features. Ornamental water features are defined as fountains, ponds, waterfalls, man-made streams and other decorative water related constructions provided solely for aesthetic or beautification purposes. Because these water features serve no functional or practical purpose their water use is not considered efficient.
-
The EPA is accepting responses and feedback thru July 21, 2008. The email is: [email protected] or call Mr. John Flowers at 202-564-0624
-
For more info, just google Ornamental Water Features 4.1.4
-
I hope that I am overeacting on this...but....I don't think so. It is attached to a much larger Water Sense bill (http://www.epa.gov/watersense/specs/homes.htm that is designed to facilitate efficient water use and conservation in home construction. We all know how simple restrictions can take twists and turns as they develop. I feel we all need to supply some guidance to straighten this thought process out.
Thanks, Bski.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old Thursday 17th July 2008, 11:51
Chrisl1966's Avatar
Chrisl1966 Chrisl1966 is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Wantage
Posts: 212
Not a US resident but I would still like to comment. I find this a very odd idea. Here you are encouraged to create a water feature because it is good for wildlife. We have a 4000ltr pond that only gets fed by rain water. We have 3 water butts to collect rain water for the drier season and it works well. We attract all sorts of wildlife and get a lot of enjoyment out of just sitting next to it watching the world go by. Doesn't that count for something too?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old Thursday 17th July 2008, 12:45
Palustris's Avatar
Palustris Palustris is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: West Midlands
Age: 72
Posts: 185
Images: 10
The only source of water for many birds and amphibians in urban Britain is the garden water feature. Is this not true for urban America? Perhaps with so many wide open spaces elsewhere there is not felt to be the need to look after urban wildlife to the same extent.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old Thursday 17th July 2008, 13:56
lakercapt lakercapt is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Oro-Medonte Ontario Canada
Age: 82
Posts: 842
Images: 68
Watched a programme on TV a couple of nights ago about severe water shortages in California and what was needed to help resolve the problem. Suppose it could also apply to other parts of SW US.
All want lush lawns and maybe swimming pools in the desert so with the expansion of the population one has to wonder where they think all this water is coming from.
Many suggestions about diverting water from the Great Lakes (more than they do now) have been frowned upon. Lose a valuable resourse to support a false lifestyle!!!. I dont think so.
A COMPANY WANTED TO SINK A WELL IN OUR LOCAL AQUAFER AND USE IT FOR BOTTLED WATER.
Fortunately our town council vetoed that plan.
All the houses in this area are on wells and to lose that supply would be a major disaster.

Last edited by lakercapt; Thursday 17th July 2008 at 20:51. Reason: Additional text and spelling
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old Thursday 17th July 2008, 19:42
Mary Evelyn
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I have 3 bird baths and a small water feature which i ensure has always fresh water in it and it is cleaned properly every week.The birds would be lost without it.I don't think there will be a problem with mine.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 2008_Water Feature.jpg (98.6 KB, 7 views)
File Type: jpg Baby Starlings c.jpg (53.9 KB, 7 views)
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old Thursday 17th July 2008, 21:20
brettski
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I got a curt response from one poster on the Bird Forum. He did point out that the clause was offered as a voluntary decision. I accept that....for now.
My reason to bring it forward is that I can't believe that this thought process got enough traction to even warrant including it in writing as a "voluntary" action. To me, it's ridiculous; voluntary or mandatory. Since the email address and the phone number are available for comment, I truly believe we need to collectively voice an opinion. It's stuff like this that can morph along into something bigger in governmental legislation while we sit idly by. Yeah, it sounds so ridiculous that many may pay it no mind; as benign. I can't....it strikes too close to home and smacks of a larger conflict down the road. I just came away from a conference for private water owners; basically ponds and small lakes. Mr Dale Hall, Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, was a guest speaker. He stayed all day and spent time speaking one on one with the guests. He is a good guy. He understands the private landowners rights and desires to maintain control of what we own. There is a subtle swing within federal government that is a direct by-product of resource conservation. Water has become a VERY big deal. There have been some rumblings that lean toward more governmental control over ALL fresh water within the U.S., regardless of it's location. No, it has not gotten that far yet, but the earmarks are there. There is a thought process, right or wrong, that ALL the resources are for ALL of us....not just mine. Even Dale noted that the rain falls over all the land, not directly into one pond or lake. I didn't like hearing that, even though it makes sense (to some extent).
-
I am not a politically charged kinda guy. I don't want to joust nor argue. There will be those that disagree and believe I am making something over nothing. I want them to voice that opinion; it's their right. Heck, I'm the one that brought it up....I better be able to take some critique.

Last edited by brettski; Thursday 17th July 2008 at 22:20.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old Friday 15th June 2012, 04:30
delrgnico delrgnico is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: fgrfgg
Posts: 2
Hi Judi,
I love visiting these types of places
Often the ones on our doorstep are the ones we overlook. We have some lovely house/gardens to visit here in Norfolk.

_______________________

Last edited by Kits; Friday 15th June 2012 at 11:09.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 14:11.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.