On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 06:31:52 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Andy Asberry" wrote in message
.. .
I'm in Texas

Sunday, a week ago, an employee called to say he had hurt his back at
work ten days earlier. I told him he could go to any doctor. He went
to the ER at a reputable hospital. Their diagnosis: hemorrhoids! They
sent him home with the appropriate ointment and pain medication and
told him to see his family doctor on Monday.

Still convinced he had a back problem, he went to a chiropractor on
Monday. Surprise,surprise, the x-rays and MRIs confirmed he had a
"twisted" spine. Limo picks him up every day (he has a car and his
wife drives) and carries him to therapy (electronic muscle
stimulation).

His hemorrhoids you ask? According to the workers compensation
statutes, his first medical provider must refer him to any other
doctors. Which ten days later hasn't happened, even after it ruptured.

I'm barred from telling him which doctors to see. I understand that.
I'm not qualified. But a health professional who is not qualified to
treat a condition should disqualify himself.

The system is broke when quacks are allowed to syphon off money that
is intended to ease suffering and repair bodies.

What is it like in other states?

If they can't work, we just shoot 'em and throw them in the swamp with Jimmy
Hoffa, here in New Jersey.

Ed Huntress


You know Ed, I was pretty sure with your connections, you would know
where Jimmy was.

I would be interested in your view on the following.

A lifelong farmer bought a new farm on the prairie with a creek
running through it. A seasonal creek; when it rains, the creek runs.
This farm is along an interstate highway. He began cleaning the creek
bed (more a ditch), gathering up old dead trees and brush. The State
of Texas has a program that proves removing Salt Cedar from banks can
return the flow of water to now dry streams. He removed a few of
those. All this was over a period of two years.

During this period, an EPA official drove past this farm on his way to
work every day. Some 6 months after his last work on the creek, the
EPA hoard descended on him. He was cited for polluting "navigable
waters of the U.S. (defined as a flow of water 4 feet wide and 4 feet
deep by 200 feet long at any time during the year), the pollution
being dirt; converting wetlands and destroying migratory bird habitat.

To date, it has cost him nearly $100,000 to correct his damage. He had
to plant willows along the creek bed. Which are now sucking more water
than the Salt Cedars, which, by the way, really aren't cedars. He had
to plant special grasses 30 feet out into his fields for 2650 feet on
both sides of the creek. He had to build a 2 acre shallow pond and
plant oak and pecan trees in it. The pond must be flooded in the
winter and drained in the spring. No matter that the creek is dry, he
has to provide the water. No matter that it rains and fills the pond,
he has to drain it. He has to pay for pencil-pusher monitoring for who
knows how many years.

Forget the fact that the "cure" seems to go far beyond the damage. My
question is about the EPA official, responsible for mitigating such
"damage", who watched it happening for two years. Does he not have
some duty to stop illegal activity when he sees it? Or is he thinking
of the income to his agency of fines of up $11,000 a day as long as
the damage goes unremediated? Over 8 million.

A cop would surely detain two masked men with shotguns exiting a bank,
even though a robbery hasn't been reported.