paul has a new video  

 



visit the thread.

see the DVDs.

  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic

When they come to offer you money for a little pipeline  RSS feed

 
bob day
Posts: 475
Location: Central Virginia USA
23
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I got a call yesterday, "will you take $40,000 to let the ACP cross your property?

ACP is the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, taking Fracked Gas from the marcellus shale to north carolina.
 
There's so many things I hate about this pipeline, It is certainly being billed as a "done deal", and FERC is known to be a rubberstamp for the gas industry.

Of course I will be much more screwed if I resist and wait for eminent domain to take my property anyway, but I will feel like a traitor if I co operate and give the ok which might make it easier for them to get the permit.

I was talking with an environmental defense lawyer working against this and he said that people need to believe they can win

On the one hand this seems like a tremendous opportunity, on the other hand it seems like I'd be selling my soul (and abandoning the Earth care /people care ethics)

Right now I'm leaning toward not negotiating, I just wish the whole thing would disappear.






 
Kyrt Ryder
Posts: 746
Location: Graham, Washington [Zone 7b, 47.041 Latitude] 41inches average annual rainfall, cool summer drought
11
  • Likes 2
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I would be asking myself two questions.

1: How much good can I do with this money?

2: How much more money might I be able to squeeze out of them


In my personal opinion... all the fighting in the world won't win. Sure it might not pass through your property, but they'll just take the 40,000 they were going to pay you and give it to someone else, with a bit of extra cost to go around you.
 
Eric Bee
Posts: 107
5
  • Likes 2
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
With the caveat that I'm neither a lawyer nor experienced in such matters and am basically speculating:

Maybe there is nothing that you can do, but I would personally do everything I can to make sure of that.

I found this: http://friendsofnelson.com/

If it were me I would only oppose if I could join other land owners and if I thought there was a chance, even a small chance, of winning. The more these pipeline serve corporations at the expense of people the more they will continue to run rough-shod over our land.

The truth is that $40k is likely peanuts for what you are being forced to deal with. If this were here and it was my land I can tell you that my property value would drop by a heck of a lot more than that and I would hold out for top dollar if I really thought it was inevitable. Literally at least double if not 3x. I mean, one accident anywhere on the ACP and your ability to sell at all will be severely diminished, never mind what might happen if the leak was on your land. And don't forget that that pay-off is taxable income, so you need to compare that against the drop in your property value on those terms. If it were me I'd consider offering to sell the whole property. Maybe not before I chained myself to a dozer.

I'm really sorry you have to deal with this. Good luck and stay strong!
 
bob day
Posts: 475
Location: Central Virginia USA
23
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Thanks for the thoughts, I do plan to go over to a "property rights revival"  tomorrow in Nelson,  I've been fighting this thing since we found out back in 2014.

It's like some sort of cosmic test to see if I was really serious.

My original thought was that my actual losses would be around 70k, so I wouldn't have taken the 40k anyway (at least theoretically) . It's just that thinking about that amount of money is a lot different than a real person saying he'll rush right over and hand it to you.

I know there are lots of landowners around saying hell no, like the ones next to me  were doing until the offers started flying, and now they are just looking to get their best deal. I personally think they are way underestimating the actual damages and settling way too cheap,  Of course my idea of not dealing with them at all doesn't seem to be in anybody's mind now that there's the smell of money in the wind.

I did think about the taxes on that sudden windfall, and the idea of setting up a Permaculture trust that could be non profit and receive the money tax free, pay for all the ongoing permaculture developments and a small salary for me.

Anybody got ideas about what sort of trust and how complicated that might be.

Bill talked about a permaculture religion down in S america somewhere, maybe I could set up a church and say good bye to all of the land taxes and all forever. Permaculture ethics rival the moral values of most religions, and for me it is a religion more than just a growing system anyway



 
bob day
Posts: 475
Location: Central Virginia USA
23
  • Likes 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
The property rights "Revival" was quite interesting.  They had an easement burning and people were burning their offers in a campfire sort of thing. They even had blank pages for people to burn so they could be part of the ritual even if they didn't have their easement documents with them

It was nice to have some people of like minds around, and even if the pipeline goes through I definitely feel more a part of the general  local community and like we're standing up together.  Money isn't everything!
 
elle sagenev
Posts: 1283
Location: Zone 5 Wyoming
17
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Well when we got the oil lease papers we talked to our lawyer about not signing and thus stopping the whole thing. He said if we did that they'd petition the oil and gas commission and blah blah blah basically it'd happen anyway but we'd get less money.

So I'd ask someone if your not signing would have any impact, cuz it might not.
 
bob day
Posts: 475
Location: Central Virginia USA
23
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
That's one of the things that is impossible to say without a crystal ball.
I guess the smart money would be on the ACP winning their certificate and eventually running over me, but even then they are supposed to pay me a fair price, although that would likely involve lawyers and time--and less money.

I just can't give in without at least voicing my opposition to the project and putting my money where my mouth is. Otherwise if I accept their offer I'm just enabling them to do their worst.



 
elle sagenev
Posts: 1283
Location: Zone 5 Wyoming
17
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
bob day wrote:That's one of the things that is impossible to say without a crystal ball.
I guess the smart money would be on the ACP winning their certificate and eventually running over me, but even then they are supposed to pay me a fair price, although that would likely involve lawyers and time--and less money.

I just can't give in without at least voicing my opposition to the project and putting my money where my mouth is. Otherwise if I accept their offer I'm just enabling them to do their worst.





I can't say for the pipeline but I was told if we refused and they went to the commission we would be made partners. Meaning we were also responsible for the expense of drilling, etc.
 
bob day
Posts: 475
Location: Central Virginia USA
23
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
The pipeline doesn't work that way.  We are in the pre draft environmental impact statement  phase. The pipeline does not have it's permit so it cannot declare eminent domain and force anyone to do anything (except for surveying which some circuit court judges have allowed under a va law.

Once they get the permit they just take your land or take you to jail if you try and stop them.  they don't even have to pay you right away, although eventually you can sue for damages if their offer isn't fair.

I don't know about the oil lease business, and I've heard of them trying to sue people for drilling costs when wells become more expensive than they're worth. I've also heard those attempts to charge landowners were thrown out of court and I doubt they could force you to become a partner.  But I don't doubt those guys will lie with a smile on their face in front of a state policeman, because they did that when they came to survey my property.
 
Troy Rhodes
Posts: 626
26
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I have not one, but two pipelines that go through my 7 acres.

They put a new replacement line in two years ago.  40K is about 10K better than what I got.

We negotiated back and forth and I got them to come up a little.


The people who fought tooth and nail now have the new replacement pipeline just like I got, but with the same or less money, and more legal bills.


Extremely doubtful you can stop it.


You may get a little extra money to replace trees that they have to take down.


I feel your pain....


 
Miles Flansburg
master steward
Posts: 4139
Location: Zones 2-4 Wyoming and 4-5 Colorado
195
bee books forest garden fungi greening the desert hugelkultur
  • Likes 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
It depends on how much land I could buy in the area for that price. If I could buy another , nicer, bigger, property , I would probably try to sell mine outright and move somewhere that might have less intrusions.
 
bob day
Posts: 475
Location: Central Virginia USA
23
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Thanks for the input.  Yes, I have thought about other properties and the possibility of moving, and that may come up at some point.  I have decided to at least give them the opportunity to make a better offer (in writing) and specifically itemize on a map exactly how they will be working as far as their truck traffic and such, how my access will be affected, and the location of temporary work spaces, what maintenance schedules to expect, etc etc.

I wasn't even willing to think about it for a while, but the cold water realism splashed me in the face as I was reading Trumps policies toward gas and oil development. I believe in the long run they are overstructuring these supply lines for export capacity, since most of the experts say minor modifications would easily supply our power needs, but with 11 new pipeline projects supposedly doing the same thing it is clear that they are playing hide and seek with the gas, trying to force us to accept their intrusion through eminent domain , which could not be claimed for export. So on paper each of these pipelines supplies domestic gas for the permit, while actually scurrying to cove point and a new terminal planned for the Gulf of Mexico. 

Also, we could get some percentage yearly instead of a one time payment if not for eminent domain.

It seems pretty clear that solar and wind are poised to make another incremental jump in supply, and could very well be that the final outcome is a bunch of gas electric plants that primarily are just backups for renewables, and a pipeline that ends up not running at capacity as the world weans itself from fossil.It does appear that whatever happens,renewables are poised to drive energy prices through the floor within ten to 20 years. Maybe I can set up my systems, walk away with occasional visits to maintain them, and return after fruit trees are well into production and the pipeline /compressor station is at a low ebb or has become obsolete.

Of course it would still be better if we weren't destroying ecosystems and old growth forests to install a  limited functionality pipeline that will outlive its usefulness relatively quickly.
 
Eric Bee
Posts: 107
5
  • Likes 2
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Unfortunately the outcome of the election does kind of change things or at least add a greater element of risk.

The 100 day action plan of our president elect includes:

"... lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks and allow vital energy infrastructure projects, like the Keystone Pipeline, to move forward"
 
bob day
Posts: 475
Location: Central Virginia USA
23
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
when I hear things like that I just want to run away, unfortunately places to run get fewer and fewer. I imagine everyone on both sides of the energy issues are rethinking their positions. Maybe the pipeline people will feel emboldened and reduce their original offer.

Whatever happens, I likely have another year or so before tshtf,
 
Eric Bee
Posts: 107
5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Bob, part of the reason I posted that is because I'm very afraid that is the case. The emboldening has already begun in other areas...

If it were me I'd be seriously thinking of cutting a deal and moving on. Everything I said above was predicated on a different election outcome. That said, out of curiousity I did some quick research on how to approach the problem and if you haven't already, it's very informative to google this. Makes me think that while you may not be able to stop it, you have much more power than you realize. Eminent domain is not always imminent and pipelines have been stopped by landowners holding out for a better deal -- it just got too expensive. Or at least it stands to reason that the first offer is not going to be the best one.

This one for example: http://www.cantonrep.com/article/20141018/News/141019242

Also, aside from being compensated fairly (and I maintain that $40k isn't likely fair) I personally would consider it my duty to make that pipeline as expensive as possible


Edit: This: http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/columnists/tomlinson/article/Pipeline-companies-should-pay-for-full-value-of-5493007.php

And this: https://www.ewu.edu/Documents/CBPA/NWTTAP/ROW/Rights%20of%20Way%20-%20Landowner's%20Guide.pdf


Edit 2: http://thelandlawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/FAQs-about-Atlantic-Coast-Pipeline.pdf

"Q: Can Dominion take my property?
A: Yes, if the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issues Dominion a Certificate of Public Necessity and all appeals
challenging the Certificate are exhausted. Even then, Dominion must follow the legal requirements to obtain title to
property, which first requires Dominion to attempt to obtain the property through a voluntary agreement. Dominion also
cannot take more land than is necessary for the pipeline. Dominion will not obtain title to the land until either an agreement
is reached, compensation is paid, and an easement is recorded, or a Court order confirms title.
Q: How much does Dominion have to pay for the easement?
A: Dominion must pay just compensation, which equals the fair market value of the property interests that are being
acquired plus damages to the property that remains."

In one case, for another pipeline the compensation after a court battle went from an initial offer of $80k to $1.6 MILLION (http://agrilife.org/texasaglaw/2014/08/11/compensation-considerations-when-pipeline-companies-cross-your-land/)


Edit 3, and I promise to shut up now:

A user on this forum received more than twice the original offer by negotiating:

https://permies.com/t/19313/pipeline-property-plant-trees-bushes



 
bob day
Posts: 475
Location: Central Virginia USA
23
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Thanks for the info. Mostly I will be seeking damages to the remainder of the property, since the pipeline runs directly across my entire frontage, essentially harming all potential lot sales if/when I choose to subdivide.

At least 6 lots at least 20k/lot. It may not destroy every lot, but it will certainly lessen the value of the lots, if i can sell them at all.

Obviously 40k isn't even close.

Yes, there's a way to go before they have the right to come in, and friendly negotiating would seem to be in order, and I will likely mention the option of buying outright the whole property for 200k, although I don't expect them to go for that, I don't think they really want to own extra land. TWT

 
bob day
Posts: 475
Location: Central Virginia USA
23
  • Likes 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Just a quick update,

It's been a couple weeks now and I haven't heard anything more, I haven't contacted them, they haven't contacted me. My neighbor had his offer increased from 20 k  up to 70 k, but he decided not to deal, so at least for now I will enjoy my peace that denial brings, and just pretend that first offer didn't happen.

If they come back with 100k all bets are off, but i would still have to think about it.

 
Anne Miller
pollinator
Posts: 827
Location: USDA Zone 8a
59
bee dog food preservation greening the desert hunting toxin-ectomy
  • Likes 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
If you haven't thought about it, this will decrease your property value.
 
Anne Miller
pollinator
Posts: 827
Location: USDA Zone 8a
59
bee dog food preservation greening the desert hunting toxin-ectomy
  • Likes 2
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
bob day wrote:Just a quick update, It's been a couple weeks now and I haven't heard anything more, I haven't contacted them, they haven't contacted me. My neighbor had his offer increased from 20 k  up to 70 k, but he decided not to deal, so at least for now I will enjoy my peace that denial brings, and just pretend that first offer didn't happen. If they come back with 100k all bets are off, but i would still have to think about it. 


While you are waiting, here is some information that might be helpful:

Keep a journal of your entire interaction  from  the  first  visit  to  the  completion  of  the  project,  get names if you talk to anyone and note dates.  It is best to have another person present during your talks, if someone is with you make  a  note  of  it.    Keep  that  journal  at  hand  over  the  years  to  document ongoing dealings with the Grantee [all entities seeking an easement].  Take a few rolls of pictures  before  the  initial  survey,  before  and  after  construction  and  before  and  after  any  maintenance.    Develop  the  film  right 
away and label the snapshots, give  a brief description of the shot and  date  it.    Keep  the  photos  with  the  journal.    The  Grantee [all entities seeking an easement]  is  responsible for any damages occurring as a result of his activities on your property.

You are going to be presented with a sheaf of papers during the easement process.  The most important document is the Grant of  Easement  and  Right  of  Way.    All  subsequent  documents  will be  based  upon  the  contents  of  the  Grant.    Keep  copies  of  all  paperwork. Even before you see this paperwork you may be asked to give permission for a survey.  Go  ahead and sign the permission form.
 
Anne Miller
pollinator
Posts: 827
Location: USDA Zone 8a
59
bee dog food preservation greening the desert hunting toxin-ectomy
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Here are a couple of other clauses of interest:

"Grantee  warrants  that  the  purchase  price  paid  per  square  unit  of  land  for  this  Grant  is  not  less  than  that price paid for similar land in ________ County,  ___.    If  Grantee  agrees  to  pay  another  landowner  a  higher  price  per  square  unit  of  land,  then,  Grantee  shall  make  an  additional   payment  to  Grantor  to  equal   the   difference   between   the   price   paid   to   Grantor per square unit of land and the higher price per square unit of land paid to the other landowner. "


In  order  to  avoid  problems  concerning  compensation  for  damages,  specific  clauses  may  be  added,  as  you  feel  necessary,  such as the following.

"Grantee agrees to pay the Grantor fair market value for  any  trees  destroyed  or  severely  damaged  as  a  result of Grantee’s construction, maintenance, repair
or removal activities. If  Grantee  destroys  any  trees  or  similar  vegetation  used  by  Grantor  for  decorative  purposes,  Grantee  shall pay Grantor the fair market value thereof
 
bob day
Posts: 475
Location: Central Virginia USA
23
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Thanks for the reminders of the technical and legal issues, especially thanks to remind me to take notes and pictures--too often they can be game changers, with just a little discipline and not much extra time.

I heard back from the guy, and he started throwing around the 100k number. Likely I will accept that, if he actually comes through with it. I know there is a small degree of my own collusion that enables the pipeline as a whole, but after reading all the comments and technical reports to the contrary over this whole project, watching the FERC  publish a Draft statement that doesn't acknowledge any of it,it appears there is really nothing to do that would change the FERC decision, but I could likely lose a lot in legal fees etc. if I didn't accept this offer beforehand.

not to mention extensive delays.

I have also thought that some of the money could go to the opposition since the approval process is not over, and that might be more effective than me simply refusing.

At any rate, I want to talk with the community, and come clean about my intentions and get reactions, there is also a lawyer working for environmental defense who I need to talk with to discuss all this.

I feel somewhat unstable, both emotionally and mentally, as if an impulse could make me decide prematurely. So I plan to take my time and do a lot of listening

Also of course, the money would simply be funneled back into Permaculture projects, perhaps a new piece of ground somewhere, with enough money to simply develop it in a Permaculture way without even worrying about personal labor, time and money.

My personal needs are minor, another 5-10 k to finish this project, complete with swales, plantings, and house.

taxes of course--what would income taxes on 100k be, and is there any way to reinvest or work around them to mitigate them.
All thoughts are welcome, at this point there are only observations, I could pretty easily go either way, although  it would be a bit harder to take the money without the eminent domain already granted since I really do object to the project and would like to see it die on the books.
 
Troy Rhodes
Posts: 626
26
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I dislike the very notion of the big petro companies shoving the little guys around.

But, having gone through it, I now realize it's just a pipe in the ground which I got a nice pile of money for.

It is extremely unlikely to ever cause you trouble, you just can't plant trees over it.

If you use gas or oil or natural gas, well....it has to travel from point A to point B somehow.


 
Anne Miller
pollinator
Posts: 827
Location: USDA Zone 8a
59
bee dog food preservation greening the desert hunting toxin-ectomy
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
This is a construction manual for transmission lines.  I thought the part about erosion and vegetative restoration might be of interest to someone as I would feel it would be similar to a pipeline:

http://www.dairynet.com/power_delivery/BMP1_Volume1.pdf
 
bob day
Posts: 475
Location: Central Virginia USA
23
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Just a funny aside, after talking about 100k and how difficult it would be to turn it down, and would it be ethical, etc etc, I got an offer in the mail for 9k--Guy made it easy for me to do the "right thing"

I have been talking with various people about the "right" thing to do if they did offer a reasonable amount, and have received surprising support. Even though nobody really wants the pipeline, being out of the direct line of fire and knowing the distorted way the courts and such are leaning, they mostly understand that this isn't a case of betrayal, it is more a case of trying to keep your property value.

In the easement offer they mention using only mechanical means to remove vegetation, but I'm not sure about maintenance afterward. I know I have seen caveats where they might go in with herbicides to control invasives later on in other documents, but I'm not sure if that means those herbicides seemingly banned during construction, would be allowed later on here.

One thing, they talk about leaving chips behind, so I can likely keep a lot of that carbon for use in projects if I just ask them to leave the stuff in piles. For me personally, having them cut down the pines and leave the chips behind could be a real win win all the way through--assuming they actually bury a pipe that never leaks or explodes with a driveway that can support heavier traffic, (a full cement or gravel truck).

If I get any amount of money at all, I see a whole series of smaller swales right up to the permanent easement with blueberry and numerous other berry bushes. Perhaps even a keyline pattern chisel plowing and pasture development over top of the pipe, although I've heard the pipe can somehow impact the health of animals grazing above it--milk cows and the like. (anybody have any experience with this?)

 
Troy Rhodes
Posts: 626
26
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
When there's a light snow, you can see exactly where the 2 pipelines run down in my pasture.  So, you get a little season extension in the spring and the fall.
 
John Weiland
Posts: 969
Location: RRV of da Nort
52
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Just a recent update regarding the Dakota Access Pipeline in North Dakota with reference to general pipeline easements:     http://bismarcktribune.com/news/state-and-regional/lawsuit-accuses-dakota-access-of-misleading-landowners/article_94ffc850-a0d9-5939-b10a-444e73ac863d.html

Lawsuit accuses Dakota Access of misleading landowners
Amy Dalrymple Forum News Service  18 hrs ago

Morton County landowners who claim Dakota Access LLC deceived them into accepting an unfair price for pipeline easements are seeking more than $4 million in damages in a federal lawsuit.

A group of landowners claims in a U.S. District Court case that Dakota Access agents harassed, threatened and intimidated them and used fraud and misleading statements to secure a lower price in exchange for allowing the pipeline to cross their land.  Most of the landowners in the group accepted $216 per rod for pipeline easements, but later found out some of their neighbors received as high as $2,000 per rod, the lawsuit states. A rod is 16½ feet.

“The landowners were told that they were being offered the best deal that was ever going to come along and no one else would receive a better deal,” said Fargo attorney Peter Zuger. “Many were told their land could be taken by eminent domain if they didn’t agree.”

The 1,172-mile Dakota Access Pipeline will transport oil from the Bakken oilfields to a transportation hub in Patoka, Ill. The landowners in the suit collectively own 11 separate pieces of land that make up about 9 miles of the pipeline route in Morton County, Zuger said.  Land agents contracted by Dakota Access approached the landowners in 2014, telling them they had 30 days to consider the proposal or risk losing a 20 percent signing bonus, the lawsuit states.

The agents also told some landowners in late 2014 that because the price of oil was going down, they should sign the agreements right away and they’d still get the money even though the pipeline might not be constructed, the complaint says. Landowners also were told they would receive less money or “basically nothing” if their land was taken by eminent domain.

Vicki Anderson Granado, a spokeswoman for Energy Transfer Partners, the main developer behind the Dakota Access Pipeline, said the company doesn’t comment on pending litigation. Dakota Access was still in the process of being served with the complaint, which means the legal answer will be due in about three weeks.

The lawsuit is not the first time North Dakota landowners have complained about how land agents representing Dakota Access have treated them. Concerns also were raised to the North Dakota Public Service Commission when the pipeline was under review, with some landowners complaining about bullying tactics and threats of taking their land through eminent domain.
 
bob day
Posts: 475
Location: Central Virginia USA
23
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Yes John,

Lies are SOP for these bastards. Some of the actual workers will tell what they know, but the wheeler dealers will say anything.

I asked one of them about the recent spill/sedimentation, fines another one of their pipelines had recently been convicted of, and what they would do differently, and the guy said with a straight face it was because of slippery mud and they had never dealt with that before. But now that they know about slippery mud everything would be OK.

We have heard varieties of answers to questions depending on who we talk to.  The thing about how the pipeline won't be approved anyway so this is free money is a famous one.

We are now commenting on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, and with tons of specific details not yet even part of the plan,  tons of other details that were released after the DEIS was issued, previous comments by experts in everything from caves and Karst to economics, the DEIS still concluded no significant impact.

These guys have ceased to even try to appear rational, they simply paint a rosy picture and then hope they make as much money as possible. They expect these things to fail, but simply try and and play the actuary odds that it won't fail too soon or too catastrophically.
 
Destroy anything that stands in your way. Except this tiny ad:
Video of all the permaculture design course and appropriate technology course (about 177 hours)
https://permies.com/wiki/65386/paul-wheaton/digital-market/Video-PDC-ATC-hours-HD
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
Boost this thread!