Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Columbus Dispatch)   The City of Columbus, OH thanks property owners who mow and maintain the reservoirs next to their properties. Just kidding, the city is suing them   (dispatch.com ) divider line
    More: Asinine, Columbus, property owners, water source, horizontal drilling, reservoirs  
•       •       •

14121 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Jun 2012 at 4:36 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2012-06-22 02:33:02 AM  
11 votes:
You mean people have to follow laws in a civilized society and can't just do what they damn well please? Perish the thought!

The old woman was told since '97 to stop it and they just charged her now? What an abuse of power! If they charged her the first time, fine, it might be an overreaction, but fifteen farking years?!

The guy built a fire pit on property that wasn't his? Well the city should just allow anyone to build anything anywhere! There are clear property maps of every property in Franklin County, there is nothing to "go back and forth" on, if there is dispute settle it in court.

As someone who drinks that water and pays his fair share of Columbus taxes and water bills, I can finally say: stay off my lawn!
2012-06-22 05:29:55 AM  
6 votes:
Subby is a troll... and a moron.
2012-06-22 07:45:18 AM  
5 votes:
The thing that frustrates me about small children is this. When Junior is warned if he flicks his peas across the dinner table at his brother one more time he will be sent to his room, and then Junior goes ahead and flicks peas just as he was told not to, and Junior is then sent to his room, as he was told would happen, Junior then cries at the top of his lungs about the unfairness of it all. Now I can grasp that small children do not have developed brains and therefore may be incapable of understanding the very basic concept of stop doing action x, or if you don't, consequence y will occur.

Adults on the other hand have absolutely no excuse when it comes to not understanding the repercussions of their actions, particularly when it is directly spelled out in the form of stop mowing ground that does not belong to you and needs to be left natural, or we will have to prosecute you. Fifteen years worth of warnings at that. Yet they somehow still cry at the unfairness of it all. I don't get it. Are they all retarded?
2012-06-22 06:28:10 AM  
5 votes:
So subby thinks it is okay for people to mow land they don't own which needs to be left natural in order to filter run-off into the water that will later be used as drinking water for many people.

I sure hope subby doesn't own land next to any reservoirs.
2012-06-22 09:07:32 AM  
4 votes:

fredklein: The guy built a fire pit on property that wasn't his?

No, he built it on land he thought (thinks) was his. Or did you miss the part where "he's gone back and forth with the city over where the boundary line of the property is"??


Here's how I imagine the 'back and forth' over the boundary line went.
Him: This firepit is on my side of the property line!
Clerk: No sir, it isn't. Here's the map.
Him: This firepit is on my side of the property line dammit!
Clerk: Sir, I've answered your question, could you move along and let me help someone else?

He leaves grumbling something about property taxes being rent and not owning his property and why should he pay for schools when he doesn't have kids. Then comes back in a week to repeat the whole process.
2012-06-22 07:30:31 AM  
4 votes:

Nidiot: So subby thinks it is okay for people to mow land they don't own which needs to be left natural in order to filter run-off into the water that will later be used as drinking water for many people.

I sure hope subby doesn't own land next to any reservoirs.


THIS

I came here to say it.

It almost looks like the people here are doing a great service by trimming the verge and making it look nice, but the fact is, EVERYTHING bordering that reservoir needs to remain as it is. The environment is more important than your impression of how it looks. If you don't like it, build a fence.
2012-06-22 06:35:42 AM  
4 votes:
The city seems to have been incredibly reasonable here. If anything, you're being too gentle (it's taken 15 years to move from warning to prosecution).
2012-06-22 08:58:43 AM  
3 votes:

AverageAmericanGuy: What's next? A summons for fertilizing your lawn?


Generally the government tends to frown upon the the poising of public drinking supplies.
2012-06-22 09:11:40 AM  
2 votes:
I wish I lived closer. I'd have thousands of "Jury Nullification" brochures printed and start handing them out, to everyone in the city.


You'd watch your work undone by people like me adding brochures about water quality.

Seriously, what the fark is it with suburbanites ? Don't you have any idea what it takes to supply you with decent water?
2012-06-22 09:10:34 AM  
2 votes:

ocschwar: I think it might also have something to do with the fact that more well rooted vegetaation is better at preventing soil/silt runnoff into the water supply. I think too much silt can choke a water supply of oxygen. I'm not so sure that the directive is for keeping the water safe for drinking per se, but to keep it as a healthy environmental area. It's not like reservoire water comes directly into your house, it still has to be filtered/treated, etc. But that environment needs to be kept healthy, there are plenty of fish, etc. living in that reservoire and accumulating soil/silt wouldn't be a good thing either and I think a healthy barrier of wild growing vegetation helps to keep some of that out by keeping the soil around the reservoire together.

The answer is MONEY. If your water goes through a filter of natural vegetation before reaching the pump house, the filtration and purification in the pump house is a farkload cheaper.

That's why Boston and New York control huge swaths of land around their main reservoirs, and not only enjoy good water quality, but enjoy it for cheap.


It almost sounds like you are saying that like it is a bad thing. In other words, the natural barrier keeps the water cleaner so less needs to be done to it (at less cost) before it get pumped out to peoples houses. Good reasoning all around, I'd say.
2012-06-22 09:06:47 AM  
2 votes:

david_gaithersburg: AverageAmericanGuy: What's next? A summons for fertilizing your lawn?

.
.
In many waterfront areas the use of fertilizer is illegal. If you are using fertilizer you may as well have your toilet dump directly into the river, bay, or whatever.


As someone who lives in Maryland and would prefer the wonderful Chesapeake bay to not have huge dead zones where no life can survive, I heartily approve this message from my perfectly healthy non-monoculture crabgrass- and dandelion-speckled lawn.
2012-06-22 08:54:55 AM  
2 votes:
some light reading for those that don't understand how buffer zones of native vegetation work


http://www.extension.iastate.edu/Publications/PM1507.pdf

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/deq-wb-nps-bfs_250604_7.pdf

http://www.watershed-assistance.net/resources/files/SEWF_Wetlandfacts h eet_RiparianBuffer.pdf
2012-06-22 08:52:21 AM  
2 votes:

Endive Wombat: But seriously, how does the length of the grass affect the natural filtration process?


Vegetative Filter Strips for Improved Surface Water Quality
2012-06-22 08:41:12 AM  
2 votes:

Endive Wombat: Nidiot: So subby thinks it is okay for people to mow land they don't own which needs to be left natural in order to filter run-off into the water that will later be used as drinking water for many people.

I sure hope subby doesn't own land next to any reservoirs.


I am not trying to provoke you here, but please, answer this question: How does the water get better filtered with the wild grasses being 4' tall vs. a mowed 4" tall?

I can understand the city getting upset about unauthorized tree removal, and perhaps the fire pit (which as an aside, I would suspect the fire pit is 1/2 foot over the line or some other nonsense).

But seriously, how does the length of the grass affect the natural filtration process?


It isn't about the grass. They need weeds, trees, shrubs etc... If you leave grass, which is terrible for the environment, alone long enough it is replaced by much more sustainable plants that have vastly deeper root structures than what grass does. Ideally the city wants a ring of plants around the reservoir with roots that are going at least a foot to two feet deep.


And whoever brought up mosquitoes earlier, they don't breed in tall grass, they require shallow, standing water for their larva, any thing deep or moving will kill them. Or dragonflies love to eat mosquito larva. And if you research dragonflies even a little bit, they love to lay their eggs on plants that are right on the border of water bodies.
2012-06-22 08:11:55 AM  
2 votes:

STRYPERSWINE: If the government isn't doing its job, fark you, I'll do it for you.

/Arizonan


Your comment is amusing, as it clearly shows that you failed to understand that the government was and is indeed doing its job, and the idiot residents are intentionally screwing that up by fudging public property even after being explicitly informed that they are idiots and shouldn't be doing that.
2012-06-22 07:53:44 AM  
2 votes:
Pantubo

STRYPERSWINE


If you wont read the article then read the post above yours by durbnpoisn. The grass by a reservoir is not meant to be mown. It is not about what looks pretty to your eyes but what is best for the quality of people's drinking water.
2012-06-22 07:13:52 AM  
2 votes:

Nidiot: So subby thinks it is okay for people to mow land they don't own which needs to be left natural in order to filter run-off into the water that will later be used as drinking water for many people.

I sure hope subby doesn't own land next to any reservoirs.


Teatards think everything everywhere should be mowed or paved.

Mr Cool: In most municipalities if one maintains a property for five consecutive years said person can claim eminent domain and gain annexation of said property.
This, I feel, is the cities concern, beyond the excuse of water shedding problems.
So it shall be written, so it shall be done.


You should probably not believe everything you hear.
2012-06-22 07:08:11 AM  
2 votes:
Hand Banana:
AgentPothead: Never understood the white man's fascination with "owning" land.

Thanks to property taxes we don't own land anyway, we rent it.


The difference is the city can put a lien on your property faster than a landlord could legally evict you. That said, property taxes are why I have a nice paved street in front of my house and cops who drive along it from time to time and a pipe to take away my bodily wastes and dish water. Hard to argue with that.
2012-06-22 05:57:34 AM  
2 votes:

AverageAmericanGuy: What's next? A summons for fertilizing your lawn?


.
.
In many waterfront areas the use of fertilizer is illegal. If you are using fertilizer you may as well have your toilet dump directly into the river, bay, or whatever.
2012-06-22 05:23:23 AM  
2 votes:
Protect your right to fertilize drinking reservoirs!
2012-06-22 04:55:44 AM  
2 votes:
Never understood the white man's fascination with "owning" land.
2012-06-22 12:15:51 PM  
1 vote:

fredklein: thurstonxhowell: fredklein: I don't think 20 foot swath of random weeds qualifies as "properly designed and constructed". So, I don't think it really applies here.

I, having done an equal amount of research into my comment, declare that it does apply here.

I don't need "research" to know that random weeds are neither "designed", nor "constructed".

/Nor to know that lawns are not "cropland".


"weeds" are local flora, that have evolved to thrive in that environment. No design or construction needed, nature can take care of itself far better than humans can.
2012-06-22 11:32:11 AM  
1 vote:

fredklein: GreatBunzinni: Endive Wombat: But seriously, how does the length of the grass affect the natural filtration process?

Vegetative Filter Strips for Improved Surface Water Quality

Firstly, that specifies Vegetative Filter Strips as
"areas next to cropland
that are seeded to close-growing plants. They are
designed to remove sediment, organic material, nutrients,
and chemicals carried in runoff or waste water."
and talks about them removing "Nitrogen and phosphorus". You know, from fertilizer you use on "cropland".

A lawn is not "cropland".

Second, it specifies that:
"Filter strips must be properly
designed and constructed to be
effective."

I don't think 20 foot swath of random weeds qualifies as "properly designed and constructed". So, I don't think it really applies here.


1. No one cares about your uneducated guesses regarding the barrier zone around the reservoir.

2. The fertilizer used on lawns contains the same nitrogen and phosphorus that fertilizer used on croplands does, and idiot homeowners over-apply said fertilizer, just like farmers do.
2012-06-22 09:42:39 AM  
1 vote:
I don't think 20 foot swath of random weeds qualifies as "properly designed and constructed". So, I don't think it really applies here.


It's Ohio. You let a piece of turf grow out long enough and it fills with native shrubs. Utterly beautiful, IMO. And also well studied (Ohio State's hydrology department is competent, albeit not good at making the general public aware of these things.) And good for the water.
2012-06-22 09:25:57 AM  
1 vote:
We should all know by now that lawns of green grass aren't so "green" for the environment. Keeping turf from turning brown wastes water; people use too much pesticide and herbicide, toxic chemicals that can contaminate the fish we eat and water we drink. And keeping lawns at a reasonable height burns fossil fuels, releasing greenhouse gases and other pollutants into the atmosphere. Now a new study in Geophysical Research Letters shows that turf causes yet another problem, this time from the fertilizer spread to keep grass growing.

rest of the article


QUIT MAINTAINING GRASS YOU SUBURBAN ASSHOLES
2012-06-22 09:17:34 AM  
1 vote:

Monkeylint: david_gaithersburg: AverageAmericanGuy: What's next? A summons for fertilizing your lawn?

.
.
In many waterfront areas the use of fertilizer is illegal. If you are using fertilizer you may as well have your toilet dump directly into the river, bay, or whatever.

As someone who lives in Maryland and would prefer the wonderful Chesapeake bay to not have huge dead zones where no life can survive, I heartily approve this message from my perfectly healthy non-monoculture crabgrass- and dandelion-speckled lawn.


Too bad the farmers don't care too much about that.

Link

/loves me some eastern shore corn though
//on the other hand, loves me some chesapeake rockfish too
///conundrum
2012-06-22 09:12:34 AM  
1 vote:
Just wait until the city comes and installs big signs that say "Property of the City of Columbus. Trespassers will be procecuted."

I would rather have tall weeds on the edge of my property than those signs..
2012-06-22 09:01:23 AM  
1 vote:

I think it might also have something to do with the fact that more well rooted vegetaation is better at preventing soil/silt runnoff into the water supply. I think too much silt can choke a water supply of oxygen. I'm not so sure that the directive is for keeping the water safe for drinking per se, but to keep it as a healthy environmental area. It's not like reservoire water comes directly into your house, it still has to be filtered/treated, etc. But that environment needs to be kept healthy, there are plenty of fish, etc. living in that reservoire and accumulating soil/silt wouldn't be a good thing either and I think a healthy barrier of wild growing vegetation helps to keep some of that out by keeping the soil around the reservoire together.


The answer is MONEY. If your water goes through a filter of natural vegetation before reaching the pump house, the filtration and purification in the pump house is a farkload cheaper.

That's why Boston and New York control huge swaths of land around their main reservoirs, and not only enjoy good water quality, but enjoy it for cheap.
2012-06-22 08:58:04 AM  
1 vote:

Nidiot: Endive Wombat: Nidiot: So subby thinks it is okay for people to mow land they don't own which needs to be left natural in order to filter run-off into the water that will later be used as drinking water for many people.

I sure hope subby doesn't own land next to any reservoirs.


I am not trying to provoke you here, but please, answer this question: How does the water get better filtered with the wild grasses being 4' tall vs. a mowed 4" tall?

I can understand the city getting upset about unauthorized tree removal, and perhaps the fire pit (which as an aside, I would suspect the fire pit is 1/2 foot over the line or some other nonsense).

But seriously, how does the length of the grass affect the natural filtration process?

To be honest, I don't know all the details of why, but I bet that the city is not making it up for shiats and giggles, and that it is in fact based on scientific data. It is not only the difference between height of grasses but the number of different species of grasses and herbaceous plants, some of which would not survive regular mowing and therefore not even get to exist if mowing is allowed, that form part of an ecosystem. Different plants draw elements out of the soil in slightly different quantities, have deeper or shallower roots to reach different soil strata. Legumes are known as nitrogen fixers, taking it from the air and storing it in their roots, so there are possibly other properties other plants have that are beneficial that I don't know about. Also different plants would aid and support different insect life that in turn their turn support aquatic life. Lawns tend to be fairly sterile monocultures in comparison to wild grasslands.

No doubt there are experts that could tell you details that would leave you immune to insomnia for life, but I am not one of them. But I am smart enough to know that if someone better qualified than me says it is best to not do something, then it is best to pay attention.


I think it might also have something to do with the fact that more well rooted vegetaation is better at preventing soil/silt runnoff into the water supply. I think too much silt can choke a water supply of oxygen. I'm not so sure that the directive is for keeping the water safe for drinking per se, but to keep it as a healthy environmental area. It's not like reservoire water comes directly into your house, it still has to be filtered/treated, etc. But that environment needs to be kept healthy, there are plenty of fish, etc. living in that reservoire and accumulating soil/silt wouldn't be a good thing either and I think a healthy barrier of wild growing vegetation helps to keep some of that out by keeping the soil around the reservoire together.
2012-06-22 08:55:10 AM  
1 vote:

theknuckler_33: Endive Wombat: I guess my next question here is if this has become such a problem, why doesn't the city just put up a damn chain link fence? Looks ugly? Who cares, you folks couldn't leave the cities property alone, so now you get to look at an ugly fence.

I'd guess that there are probably dozens, if not hundreds of homes that abut the various reservoires and they only have a few bad apples, so to speak. Suppose the distance to line all the reservoires with a fence is presumably miles long, that's a hell of a lot of fence to put up and very expensive (and susceptible to vandalism/repairs/maintenance, etc.). I suppose they could put up a fence just along the trouble makers property. I guess that would fix the problem, but would look really silly.


who cares about how it looks when you're discussing maintaining the quality of drinking water? I'm not sure there's another source of survival more important than water.
2012-06-22 08:54:08 AM  
1 vote:
I live in Boston. I fly in to Columbus to visit inlaws every once in a while.

Which means when I get to their place and drink some water from the tap, I see for myself exactly why the city is right and these neighbors are morons.

Ohioans, your tap water is farking disgusting. Don't mess with the vegetation that protects your reservoirs.
2012-06-22 08:52:07 AM  
1 vote:
I'm okay with this.
2012-06-22 08:42:57 AM  
1 vote:

Endive Wombat: Nidiot: So subby thinks it is okay for people to mow land they don't own which needs to be left natural in order to filter run-off into the water that will later be used as drinking water for many people.

I sure hope subby doesn't own land next to any reservoirs.


I am not trying to provoke you here, but please, answer this question: How does the water get better filtered with the wild grasses being 4' tall vs. a mowed 4" tall?

I can understand the city getting upset about unauthorized tree removal, and perhaps the fire pit (which as an aside, I would suspect the fire pit is 1/2 foot over the line or some other nonsense).

But seriously, how does the length of the grass affect the natural filtration process?


To be honest, I don't know all the details of why, but I bet that the city is not making it up for shiats and giggles, and that it is in fact based on scientific data. It is not only the difference between height of grasses but the number of different species of grasses and herbaceous plants, some of which would not survive regular mowing and therefore not even get to exist if mowing is allowed, that form part of an ecosystem. Different plants draw elements out of the soil in slightly different quantities, have deeper or shallower roots to reach different soil strata. Legumes are known as nitrogen fixers, taking it from the air and storing it in their roots, so there are possibly other properties other plants have that are beneficial that I don't know about. Also different plants would aid and support different insect life that in turn their turn support aquatic life. Lawns tend to be fairly sterile monocultures in comparison to wild grasslands.

No doubt there are experts that could tell you details that would leave you immune to insomnia for life, but I am not one of them. But I am smart enough to know that if someone better qualified than me says it is best to not do something, then it is best to pay attention.
2012-06-22 08:41:02 AM  
1 vote:

unlikely: They're all like "Look, Cleveland has been the #1 festering shiathole in this state long enough. Without that tall grass breeding noxious weeds and those small but plentiful mosquitoes that are unique to Ohio, we're always going to be #2. Well NO MORE. You people are THROUGH holding us back from the #1 slot where we belong."


noxious weeds? Oh, and mosquitos are spawned in stagnant water. WTF is your deal?
2012-06-22 08:29:19 AM  
1 vote:
You would think the guy with the fire pit would hire a surveyor for a couple hundred bucks and have the land staked out to figure it out once and for all.
2012-06-22 08:21:29 AM  
1 vote:

Endive Wombat:
I am not trying to provoke you here, but please, answer this question: How does the water get better filtered with the wild grasses being 4' tall vs. a mowed 4" tall?

I can understand the city getting upset about unauthorized tree removal, and perhaps the fire pit (which as an aside, I would suspect the fire pit is 1/2 foot over the line or some other nonsense).

But seriously, how does the length of the grass affect the natural filtration process?


Taller grass is thicker and absorbs more water.
2012-06-22 08:10:14 AM  
1 vote:
Columbus is a decent town. Mostly centrist. Fairly smart. Plenty of things to do. Passable food. Decent people.

It's like an oasis surrounded by the wasteland we call Ohio.
2012-06-22 08:08:02 AM  
1 vote:

Nidiot: Pantubo

STRYPERSWINE

If you wont read the article then read the post above yours by durbnpoisn. The grass by a reservoir is not meant to be mown. It is not about what looks pretty to your eyes but what is best for the quality of people's drinking water.


Don't bother. It's easier for right-wingers to rant than read.
2012-06-22 08:05:23 AM  
1 vote:

Mr Cool: In most municipalities if one maintains a property for five consecutive years said person can claim eminent domain and gain annexation of said property.
This, I feel, is the cities concern, beyond the excuse of water shedding problems.
So it shall be written, so it shall be done.


It's called "adverse possession," but I would be surprised if it was five years. In Massachusetts it's 20 years. It looks like Ohio requires 21 years. You may be right that this is the city's concern. They may feel they need to stop the possession now, rather than argue in court after 21 years have elapsed.
2012-06-22 07:37:58 AM  
1 vote:

STRYPERSWINE: If the government isn't doing its job, fark you, I'll do it for you.

/Arizonan


But the government IS doing its job.

let me guess, you didn't read the article?
2012-06-22 07:13:48 AM  
1 vote:
watch what happens when they stop shovelling the city's sidewalk in front of their houses.
2012-06-22 06:58:34 AM  
1 vote:
In most municipalities if one maintains a property for five consecutive years said person can claim eminent domain and gain annexation of said property.
This, I feel, is the cities concern, beyond the excuse of water shedding problems.
So it shall be written, so it shall be done.
2012-06-22 05:07:36 AM  
1 vote:

AgentPothead: Never understood the white man's fascination with "owning" land.


Thanks to property taxes we don't own land anyway, we rent it.
 
Displayed 43 of 43 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report