08-24-2014, 10:53 AM
Thank you very much for the help. To the average person, most laws are not understood unless it has a direct impact on their life, I apologize for that on my end. When we "brainstorm" solutions in the office, there is usually legal counsel to advise us if the idea is acceptable by law, or not, and we go from there. Common sense is usually lacking in higher appointed areas, so, we as grunts think of the simple stupid stuff, and sometimes it works!
I find all sorts of rulings regulating what belongs where ( where development stops and shoreline starts),and accessibility to ocean rights, but still haven't found where you can not add seawater to the waterways. Only regs on disturbing flow to ocean by changing grade, adding locks, etc.. Although I do have a tendency to take regulations and Code books and ask " show me where I can not do it this way. I believe I am still following the intent of the law, or ruling". If a law stated that you can not harass or endanger the wildlife in a National Sanctuary, and an oil spill occurred within its boundaries, how do they gather the wildlife and scrub them down with dish detergent to return back to the sanctuary? Technically, trying to catch a wild animal is harassment, along with a bath by human, due to the simple fact that they are wild.
I also understand ( I hope!) in reading, that by definition of SMA, all waterways that are fed by the ocean thru natural or permeable source are under the regulation of the SMA, and are to be accessible by the same rules as coastline. So, in effect, all dwellings within the SMA boundaries are similar to owning a condo. You own the house, the Feds own the land. Am I understanding correctly?
Community begins with Aloha
I find all sorts of rulings regulating what belongs where ( where development stops and shoreline starts),and accessibility to ocean rights, but still haven't found where you can not add seawater to the waterways. Only regs on disturbing flow to ocean by changing grade, adding locks, etc.. Although I do have a tendency to take regulations and Code books and ask " show me where I can not do it this way. I believe I am still following the intent of the law, or ruling". If a law stated that you can not harass or endanger the wildlife in a National Sanctuary, and an oil spill occurred within its boundaries, how do they gather the wildlife and scrub them down with dish detergent to return back to the sanctuary? Technically, trying to catch a wild animal is harassment, along with a bath by human, due to the simple fact that they are wild.
I also understand ( I hope!) in reading, that by definition of SMA, all waterways that are fed by the ocean thru natural or permeable source are under the regulation of the SMA, and are to be accessible by the same rules as coastline. So, in effect, all dwellings within the SMA boundaries are similar to owning a condo. You own the house, the Feds own the land. Am I understanding correctly?
Community begins with Aloha