The last issue of the Egremont Newsletter scared some people. I got two calls from Egremonters asking if they were going to go to jail because they'd done something on property they "owned" without filing papers with the Conservation Commission. (In its writeup, the ConCom put quotation marks around "owned", which tells you something right there.) I told them the law and regulations are so broad that almost anything you do within 100 feet (sometimes 200 feet) of a puddle (let alone a real wetland or stream), or a plant that's on the DER's very long "water plant" list, theoretically subjects you to the jurisdiction of the local ConCom. The scope of the law and regs is so broad that there once was, and I think may still be, an exception for mowing your lawn, i.e., without the exception, mowing your lawn would have been covered and required you to file papers.

So what do most people do? They ignore the law and do the work on the sly. Can you blame them? No matter how small the job and no matter how infinitesimal the effect, theoretically you have to file papers and pay a fee and wait until you get a response.

This is a classic case where overregulation, no matter how well-intentioned, has the opposite effect of its purpose. Ignoring the law has become so common that it's often ignored when it shouldn't be. There are some real wetlands in Egremont that really should be protected, but the fear of overzealous regulation keeps people from complying.

And the broad scope of the regulation just provides a way for one neighbor who doesn't like what his neighbor is doing to stop or delay what may be a harmless activity. (My grandmother taught me about minding my own business.) A member of Egremont's ConCom once told me that what the ConCom did was basically to oversee disputes between neighbors over puddles.

So what do you think should be done about this?