2008 House Bill 164 (Change requirements for restoring surface mines)

[Comments on this legislation] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

Introduced by Rep. Don Pasley on January 8, 2008, to change certain requirements relating to restoration to original contour of surface mines.
- Referred to the House Natural Resources and Environment Committee on January 9, 2008.

Line

Comments

Introduced by Rep. Don Pasley on January 8, 2008. New Comment

1) 'Looks Great to Me [by Anonymous Citizen on April 11, 2008]
HB 164 looks like common-sense legislation to me.

You can't bury streams? Damn - I didn't think that was legal to begin with!

It turns out the coal companies are making money hand-over-fist to pay their owners and stockholders outside the state and are externalizing a lot of their costs at the expense of our water quality and way of life in the state.

'Doesn't seem fair to me. I hope they pass this bill next year.
Reply New Comment

Line

2) Amend this bill [by BigCoal41501 on March 6, 2008]
Let's amend this bill and make it apply across the board to all industries that damage streams!

Let's make it apply to those districts, most of which have reps who have sponsored this bill, that have agriculture interests or large timber interests. Oh no, punish coal mining, eliminate the ability to create cheaper flat land in the mountains.

God, some politicians are so short-sighted and self-serving.
Reply New Comment

Line

3) Explanation of Streams: [by Anonymous Citizen on February 28, 2008]
In this law a stream is anything that at some point in time (meaning it could be anything from a ditch to low spot in the land) that will have water in it when it rains. No streams are being buried! When a valley fill is complete, the same amount of water that ran off before, will still be there, but with the addition of silt control structures that will prevent silt from entering creeks & rivers.
This is nothing different than what this state does when it builds roads, or any of us do if we build a home (we try to divert the water away from our home) under this proposed law (if it was not specific to mining) everyone that diverts water from their home would be in violation.
Keven Couch
Reply New Comment

Line

4) Common Sense [by Anonymous Citizen on February 25, 2008]
This looks like common sense to me.

Why wouldn't you make it illegal for people to dump waste in streams or even bury the streams? That's bad for all of us.
Reply New Comment

Line

5) Great bill, but needs more [by Anonymous Citizen on February 20, 2008]
This needs to be expanded to include: construction for shopping centers, schools, hospitals, new housing or anything that requires a stream or ditch to be moved. Lets not forget the amount of damage our farmers do to the land every year by plowing up soil & fertilzers that run off into our streams, not even to mention what the horse parks are doing with those dirt tracks that lead to erosion & what about our roads (i.e. I-64 widening).
COME ON & WAKE UP KENTUCKY! THIS IS A TERRIBLE BILL.
KEVEN COUCH
HAZARD, KY
Reply New Comment

Line

6) Right on. [by BigCoal41501 on March 6, 2008]
Why don't you call those good ol' GOP reps and tell them to withdraw their sponsorship.
Reply New Comment

Line

7) Great bill! [by Anonymous Citizen on February 13, 2008]
There are over 1,000 people coming to Frankfort to lobby in favor of this legislation - the Streasaver Bill - on February 14th.

http://www.KFTC.org/love
Reply New Comment

Line

8) Strange partners [by BigCoal41501 on March 6, 2008]
GOP reps and the KFTC, what strange bedfellows. Sure makes a same-sex marriage law seem tame.
Reply New Comment

Line

Home
Create an account
Legislation watch
Search Legislation
Search Voting Record
Reports
- Recent Laws
- Missed Votes Report
Links
About
Tell a friend about this site