The EPA’s Latest Land Grab

It’s been clear that the executive branch of the federal government is working overtime to extend their authority. This started long before Obama became president, but it has accelerated at an alarming rate since he took office. Obama’s administration has put out more regulations per week than any before, each of which extends their authority to reach into people’s lives and control them and their businesses.

While the IRS has the reputation of being the most insidious of all government agencies, I’d have to say that the EPA is working hard to stay a close second. What started as a government agency to protect our corner of the world has become the political arm of the environmental movement.

That’s scary enough in and of itself. There aren’t many special interest groups that have control of a government agency, but the EPA has pretty much been taken over by environmentalists. Oh, they don’t “officially” own the EPA, but they pretty much dictate what the EPA does.

We see this no more clearly than watching how Obama’s EPA is working hand-in-hand with radical environmentalists to force the country into green energy, by making it either illegal or impossible to use cheaper sources of energy.

The EPA cares no more for your and my interests than those environmentalists do. Their focus is on taking the world back from man and giving it back to nature. It seems like if a few billion people have to die to do that, then as far as they’re concerned, no problem.

{adinserter bph}That may sound a bit alarmist, but it’s not a new notion. The Georgia Guidestones, a New Age monument, said to have the New Age Globalist Manifesto written on it, declares that one of their goals is to bring the world population down to 500 million people, about one-fourteenth of what it is today.

Interestingly enough, that same figure shows up in the United Nations Agenda 21. Agenda 21 purports itself to be a “voluntary action plan for sustainable development.” One hundred, seventy-eight countries have signed it, including the United States.Surprisingly, it was President Bush who signed it, not President Obama.

It takes a while to dig through Agenda 21 and gain any understanding of it, but it basically herds all of mankind into big cities, leaving the rest of the world to return back to nature.

Okay, so what does this have to do with the EPA? Since “sustainability” is a catch phrase for “protect the environment at all costs” it has a lot to do with the EPA. Essentially, the EPA is the government agency which has the greatest responsibility for implementing Agenda 21. They are coordinating the efforts of other government agencies, such as the BLM (Bureau of Land Management) to find ways of implementing the necessary changes so that Agenda 21 can be put into full effect.

Remember Clive Bundy and his ranch? That was the BLM working on a land grab. One thing that was hardly mentioned during that debate is that the BLM had already managed to put all the other ranchers in that area out of business; Bundy was the last man standing. They wanted to clear Bundy out, so that they could turn that area back over to nature as a refuge for the desert tortoise.

That’s bad enough, but the latest action by the EPA is even worse. The EPA is working to redefine the Clean Water Act, which gives them authority to regulate wetlands and waterways. Under the new definition, they would also have control over any lands which have temporary wetlands, as well as all tributaries that feed into waterways, even temporary tributaries.

That doesn’t sound so bad, until you understand what it means. We’ve already seen some of their definition, by how they’ve been attacking citizens, essentially implementing these new definitions before they are officially accepted.

A “temporary wetland” is anywhere that there is water present only part of the year. Let me ask you a question; is there any time during the year, where water puddles in your yard? If so, you have a temporary wetland. According to the EPA’s new definition, you don’t have control over your land, they do. Basically, they own your land.

The same thing can be said for temporary tributaries. If you have anyplace on your land where water runs off when it rains, leaving any sort of a mark, that would be considered a temporary tributary. Likewise, drainage ditches and landscaping ponds would give them the right to your land.

Let me be clear about this. The EPA is trying to use this twisting of the law to confiscate land from law-abiding American citizens, who haven’t done anything wrong. Their only justification is the way that they are writing regulations, nothing more. Congress hasn’t given them this authority, they have seized it on their own, perhaps under the president’s direction, perhaps not. Whether or not he has approved it really doesn’t matter, as they know he supports Agenda 21.

About the only way that you could make sure that your property is safe from seizure under these new regulations is to make sure that no water could fall on it.

I suppose if you built a roof that extends from border to border of your property, forcing all water that falls there to run off onto your neighbors’ property, you’d be safe. But then, all it would take is one leak in that roof and they’d have the loophole they need.

It is germane to note that this action is illegal. The Supreme Court has already ruled twice that the EPA’s authority is limited to relatively permanent bodies of water, not temporary ones.

However, that doesn’t meet the progressive agenda, nor does it allow them to implement Agenda 21. So you can be sure that they will keep on trying, regardless of whether their actions are legal or not.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.

Written by

Bill White is the author of Conquering the Coming Collapse, and a former Army officer, manufacturing engineer and business manager. More recently, he left the business world to work as a cross-cultural missionary on the Mexico border. Bill has been a survivalist since the 1970s, when the nation was in the latter days of the Cold War. He had determined to head into the Colorado Rockies, should Washington ever decide to push the button. While those days have passed, the knowledge Bill gained during that time hasn’t. He now works to educate others on the risks that exist in our society and how to prepare to meet them. You can send Bill a message at editor [at]

Latest comments
  • I usually read your blogs and find them informative and factual. However, this article is not completely true. After fact checking (I fact check everything), I have found that some of your suppositions are not entirely true. While they may have been before revision to the Act, they are not now (the day the blog article was posted).

    One example is where you are state “A ‘temporary wetland’ is anywhere that there is water present only part of the year. Let me ask you a question; is there any time during the year, where water puddles in your yard? If so, you have a temporary wetland. According to the EPA’s new definition, you don’t have control over your land, they do. Basically, they own your land.”
    However, the revisions recently made to this bill state “In clarifying the list of waters not subject to CWA jurisdiction, the agencies did not include ‘puddles’ from the lists of waters generally not considered jurisdictional in previous preambles or guidance documents. This is not because puddles are considered jurisdictional, it is because ‘puddles’ is not a sufficiently precise hydrologic term or a hydrologic feature capable of being easily understood. Because of the lack of common understanding and precision inherent in the term ‘puddles,’ the agencies determined that adding puddles would be contrary to the agencies’ stated goals of increased clarity, predictability, and certainty. In addition, one commonly understood meaning for the term ‘puddle’ is a relatively small, temporary pool of
    water that forms on pavement or uplands immediately after a rainstorm, snow melt, or similar event. Such a puddle cannot reasonably be considered a water body or aquatic feature at all, because usually it exists for only a brief period of time before the water in the puddle evaporates or sinks into the ground. Puddles of this sort obviously are not, and have never been thought to be, waters of the United States subject to CWA jurisdiction. Listing puddles also could have created the misapprehension that anything larger than a puddle was jurisdictional. That is
    not the agencies’ intent.”

    I hope you will revise your article so as not to unintentionally scare people based on false information. There is enough going on out there to be terrified about, this does not have to be one of them.

    Thank you!

  • As much as I detest our government and know how badly they’re turning on us, I have a hard time swallowing Agenda 21 ever happening. Everyone would have to live in little, cramped cells, and guess what that means:

    The same corporations that own the people in power would lose money, because people would simply not have room for all of the pointless shit that they buy from these corporations and their subsidiaries. The powers that be, the real powers, that is, the purse strings, will stop Agenda 21, even if the public is idiotic enough to welcome it.

  • I own land in the mountains which has several natural clean springs ORIGINATING on this property. Several converge and drain into a pond on my property that has fish, frogs, salamanders, snakes, and all of the outher wildlife indigenous to our area living in and around this pond. That includes animal and vegetative life. I protect this environment. Our Colonial government determined that only navigable esturaries are considered public property. The EPA thinks they can do a better job than the landowner? In some cases probably yes. But responsible landowners will always protect the environment of their privately owned property. The EPA does not own my land. I bought and paid for it and I am a better conservationist than they could ever be because it is in my best interest to be so and I better know the needs of this property than any of them ever will. I have beavers on my land now building a huge damn on part of my wetland property. They are cutting down many of my trees to do so and even have patched my pond and built up the spillway so that the water is now only three feet from my cabin. They have even cut trees down which are now in my pond. They will take them away. It is nature at work and wonderful to observe. The EPA has no business interfering with the transformation of a natural habitat. They need to stay off of private land.

  • I would like to see a link from a reputable source that supports your claim “that the BLM had already managed to put all the other ranchers in that area out of business.”

  • Very valid, pithy, sutcnicc, and on point. WD.