The Rats Win
When I talk to people who say they've bought property in places like Central America, I always wonder to myself how much danger they're in of the government "nationalizing" their land. Well, it turns out, in the U.S.A., owning land isn't always much protection from the government seizing it from you, either -- really, or de facto, as detailed in a rather unbelievable op-ed piece in the Sacramento Bee.
M. David Stirling writes of unbelievably ridiculous protections for endangered animals that are endangering the lives and livelihoods -- and ruining the lives -- of humans. After Hurricane Ivan, for example, Florida residents Paul and Gail Fisher and other residents of Perdido Key, a barrier island near Pensacola tried to rebuild, but were barred from doing it by the U.S. government:
Instead of supporting the human victims, the government went to bat for the Perdido Key beach mouse.In 1985 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had listed the mouse as an endangered species, designating 60 percent of the island that was public land as its critical habitat. Three months after Ivan struck, and as these homeless property owners were trying to get their lives back together, the agency said it was extending the mouse's critical habitat to the lots where their homes once stood.
The agency threatened to sue the local government if it granted any permits to rebuild.
The federal government's actions to prevent the property owners from rebuilding stood in stark contrast to its effort for the mice. Before the storm, it rushed in workers to trap beach mice to ensure the rodents would survive the storm.
Today, these former residents of Perdido Key are still paying their mortgages and taxes on property their government bars them from occupying.
The government is proving more devastating than Hurricane Ivan.
Others, like the Domenigonis in Riverside County, were prohibited by Fish and Wildlife from "disking" firebreaks on their own land, per the county fire chief's warnings, because the agency, without the Domenigonis' knowledge or consent, placed more than 1,600 acres of their ranch in a kangaroo rat Habitat Conservation area, costing them more than $400,000 in lost income, legal fees, surveys, and related expenses. And, in previous years, because their farm apparently lies in fire territory, the county fire chief:
If they even disked the land, they could face a year in prison, a $50,000 fine for each "take" of a k-rat, and impoundment of their farm equipment....Because of this order, the Domenigonis and other residents suffered further losses when fire hit in October. Twenty-nine homes in the area were destroyed.
...One of the victims was Anna Klimko, who obeyed Fish and Wildlife's order not to create a firebreak because of the k-rat. Pictured on national television, with tears streaming down her face, Klimko kneeled in the ashes of what had been her home, digging for keepsakes. She posed this question: "For what? A rat."
Wildfires, hurricanes, tornadoes and other disasters are common in America. The normal response is to help victims quickly, including putting a roof over their heads and getting their lives back to normal.
But in Perdido Key, a federal agency prohibited people from rebuilding homes destroyed by forces beyond their control.
In California, a federal agency prohibited people from protecting their property and their lives from fire.
Such treatment is not only at odds with what Americans expect of their government, but a long way from our philanthropic tradition and even normal human behavior.
What kind of ethos could motivate the federal government to elevate mice and rats over humans?
It's time for common sense and balance when crafting and enforcing the laws that govern the relationship between the human species and the plant and wildlife species.
This is supposed to be a democracy, not a dictatorship, and certainly not a dictatorship of petty bureaucrats essentially taking people's land away, and without a dime in compensation -- much worse eminent domain behavior than in Kelo v. City of New London.
thanks, André-Tascha
I think the problem here is that the Feds should be obligated to give proper notice about their plans and compensate owners for their loss.
Apart from the lack of notice, Kelo feels worse to me, but that maybe because I am a bleeding heart for endangered species.
Kelo upsets me more because of the bogus use of the land for other commercial purposes.
And I completely agree about the tyranny of unelected bureaucraps.
jerry at May 24, 2008 9:38 AM
To me, this is outright theft, cloaked in government.
Amy Alkon at May 24, 2008 9:44 AM
This isn't new at all.
But now it's time for the environmentalists to be honest: barrier islands are the worst place, liability and environmentally, to allow human development. Sorry - it just is.
Consistency warning: be sure that as you reject government seizure without due process, you also reject government assistance to those who build in such areas and then fail to properly insure their assets.
-----
There is actually a worse case of government misconduct: You'd better not own something the Sheriff wants. Be sure to read the reference links.
Radwaste at May 24, 2008 10:00 AM
Really horrible. Here's one of the reference links with a good overview:
http://www.saveourguns.com/scott001.htm
Amy Alkon at May 24, 2008 10:46 AM
Government seizure of property for redistribution to others is simply communism.
That being said, I find it humorous that we get all snotty about protecting rare and unique animal DNA ("How dare they prevent me from building where I choose!") and then we get all snotty about people who build on an otherwise inappropriate spot ("How dare they build in a flood plain / tornado alley / crumbling coastline / fire risk area!").
Somehow it's bad to thrust their insurance risk on the rest of us, but it's not bad to thrust the biosphere risk on the rest of us?
Give the critters a break. They're not preventing us from breeding like rats, ya know?
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at May 24, 2008 11:05 AM
Those are scary stories I have, sadly, heard before. I guess the concept of private propriety is used until a bureaucrat wants something from you.
Toubrouk at May 24, 2008 11:15 AM
Gog, I am totally against taxpayer money for those who live in known disaster areas. As for protected species, it's de facto seizure of private property with these rulings that I have a problem with. You want to protect land before somebody owns it, have at it.
Amy Alkon at May 24, 2008 11:21 AM
Nothing, nothing, sucks as hard as Kelo
Crid at May 24, 2008 11:36 AM
*You want to protect land before somebody owns it, have at it.*
I think you're conflating the value of the homeowner with the value of the land with the perceived value of a rat.
I'm saying that rare DNA deserves our protection more than a building does.
I'm saying that if the house falls down and it's been a danger to the rare mouse DNA (and I'm aware these are relatively new discoveries for us, so no fault to the original builder), then pay off the homeowner and let them rebuild someplace less critical.
Let's not confuse the irreplaceable DNA issue with property rights. There's no comparison. One is a human construct (which I enjoy as much as the next guy) and the other is, well, irreplaceable.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at May 24, 2008 11:55 AM
"Threatened" and "endangered" protection has a sketchy history of actually being helpful to the target species. It mainly gives the Socialists in our midst some more ammunition.
doombuggy at May 24, 2008 11:58 AM
Interesting. Do tell us more. (P.S. One link per comment -- post separate comments for each link so you won't get eaten by my spam filter!)
Amy Alkon at May 24, 2008 12:03 PM
"I think the problem here is that the Feds should be obligated to give proper notice about their plans . . . "
I'm guessing this is what the issue will turn on. I have no familiarity with Florida land use law, but I'm guessing somewhere in the stack of papers that these landowners signed when they made their purchase was an environmental caution that any new building permits (and re-building permits?) would be subject to DFW approval.
I skimmed this excerpt from the 2006 Dept. of Interior recommendation to increase the habitat zone:
"Critical habitat designation does not affect landowner actions that do not require Federal funding or permits, nor does it preclude development of habitat conservation programs or issuance of incidental take permits to permit actions that do require Federal funding or permits to go forward. In conclusion, the designation of critical habitat for the Perdido Key beach mouse, Choctawhatchee beach mouse, and St.Andrew beach mouse does not pose significant takings implications."
full document is here - http://www.perdidopropertyrights.org/uploads/6-16-06%20USFW%20Federal%20Register%20PKBM.pdf
Note in particular the language indicating that the proposed expansion does implicate landowner actions that do "not require Federal funding or permits." So, it seems from Fish and Wildlife's POV, these landowners have received some type of Federal permission to live/build there in the first place.
Having spent all of five minutes looking into this, I have no idea if the aforesaid is true. Nor do I know anything about the potential impact the Florida mouse's survival. I can, however tell you, that due process is a pretty important thing and it usually relies heavily on notice. If the property owners ignored a particular warning or official-looking piece of mail, they could be well and truly fucked.
snakeman99 at May 24, 2008 1:36 PM
What irony! The area is called "Perdido Key" Perdido is spanish for "I have lost" or "I have forfeited" Seems like it was aptly named.
winston at May 24, 2008 3:09 PM
Oneday as an exercise in "you can't be serious!"... look at what the Yellow Cheeked Warbler did to cattle ranchers in south Texas.
G_R
Gunner Retired at May 24, 2008 4:27 PM
Keep voting for Democrats. This is what heppens.Maxine Waters even wants to nationalize the oil companies.
They won't stop until we throw them out or lynch them.
Smarty at May 24, 2008 6:32 PM
Gog, irreplaceable DNA???
Why is it valuable? Dinosaurs died out, stuff happens. If you think these people are crying over stuff, you are wrong, they are crying over years of effort and hard work to build a life.
Smarty at May 24, 2008 7:50 PM
Hey, build a life on the waterfront, be prepared to deal with the consequences: first you disrupt the food chain, then you expose yourself to natural disaster. Be honest, not ignorant: what we do affects how things are.
Pick a vacation spot you admire - Yellowstone, the Oregon coast, Acadia National Park. Fill it with people. Now do you think that's such a good idea?
Radwaste at May 24, 2008 8:37 PM
It isn't about rich people building in Yellowstone or on the beach you moron. There are places in California where you are not allowed to clean up trash on the side of the road because an ENDANGERED FLY likes the trash!!! There are guys in ordinary agricultural areas blocked from part of their property for slugs.
And there are environmentalists who need a price on their heads.
Smarty at May 25, 2008 10:59 AM
It isn't about rich people building in Yellowstone or on the beach you moron. There are places in California where you are not allowed to clean up trash on the side of the road because an ENDANGERED FLY likes the trash!!! There are guys in ordinary agricultural areas blocked from part of their property for slugs.
And there are environmentalists who need a price on their heads.
Posted by: Smarty at May 25, 2008 10:59 AM
Hey Reaganite
Attribution for your anectdotal evidence would bolster your case immeasurably.
john O at May 25, 2008 11:47 AM
"you moron"
Oh, good.
An intellectual has joined our discussion group.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at May 25, 2008 12:00 PM
I don't have the slug reference, but here's a good link:
http://www.theinternetparty.org/issues/index.php?section_type=iss&cat_name=Environment&td=20011016115800&page_sort=2
Amy Alkon at May 25, 2008 12:06 PM
Sorry, it was a snail, not a slug. But you actually need attribution to believe it? Sucker. Here are a bunch:
http://www.aws.vcn.com/flawed.html
This crap is the result of socialists (those people who thing "Reaganite" is a bad thing) getting what they want.
Smarty at May 25, 2008 2:54 PM
Small consolation, but biologists can't all agree on what a specie is.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=what-is-a-species, June 2008
If apparently different creatures can sexually produce fertile offspring, it may make land use laws less draconian, since local populations will not be genetically unique.
DaveG at May 26, 2008 12:41 AM
THE ABUNDANT WILDLIFE SOCIETY OF NORTH AMERICA (AWS)
12665 Highway 59N
Gillette, WY 82716
Tel.: 307.683.2826
Founded by former cattleman Dick Mader in 1989 in effort to obstruct reintroduction of the endangered grey wolf in Yellowstone National Park. Mader's son, Troy, considers himself the world's leading expert on the wolf, and distributes booklets showing deer, sheep, and cattle supposedly mauled by the grey wolf. Associated with the Wise Use movement and is a member of the Alliance for America.
FUNDING
Members are primarily fur trappers, ranchers and hunters, although AWS does not publicly disclose their identities
this is a bunch? all from one source?
This crap is the result of socialists (those people who thing "Reaganite" is a bad thing) getting what they want.
Reagan was the beginning of the end for this country, a flight from reality by a bunch of christian thieves who wanted to profit by denuding the forestland of America before their man "Jesus" came back to rapture them.
Johno at May 26, 2008 11:12 AM
"Reagan was the beginning of the end for this country"
Only if by "this country" you mean the Soviet Union.
winston at May 26, 2008 2:13 PM
Smarty, do try to recognize that Perdido Beach - etc. - was the subject. Apology accepted.
Radwaste at May 26, 2008 2:49 PM
johno - you'd be more likely to be taken seriously if you weren't spouting lies about Reagan. But I suspect you'd rather have your fantasy of some Jesus-freak taking over the world than realizing that nobody seriously believes that deforesting the US is a precondition for the return of Jesus.
Look, here's the rub with this whole endangered species thing.
There are salmon all over the pacific northwest. And each spawning group is considered a separate "species" for protection purposes, even though they are all the same God damned fish.
And this was used, and continues to be used, to deny irrigation rights to farmers on the basis of some "endangered" salmon herd.
Most of the species listed as protected under ESA aren't in any danger at all. Look at the whole polar bear thing - their population is INCREASING, and they've just gone on the protected list. Why? So that some conniving commies can then use the ESA as a bludgeon to force the federal government to regulate CO2 before man-made global warming is shown to be a hoax.
The ESA has never been about protecting species. Only about hurting people.
brian at May 26, 2008 7:54 PM
It's utterly ridiculous to deprive people of a home to give their home to MICE!!! When I read that a political cartoon image jumped right into my head of the mice having the run of the house while the people peeped fearfully out of holes in the walls for fear of being trapped.
Frankly, at what point do we decide some species needs protecting or it's just survival of the fittest? I mean, c'mon, do we really need rats and slugs? I have a little trouble buying that if they die out, it harms us all. If a few dinosaurs were around today, would we be re-introducing them to the wild and telling ranchers they can't shoot them even when they endanger their livestock the way we are the wolf? I don't know about you but I'm damned glad dinosaurs are extinct.
Whether it's for an endangered species or a developer, the goverment shouldn't get away with using eminent domain as an excuse to steal. If you think it's just "Reganites" that are against it, go to motherjones.com and do a search on eminent domain. You'll find a whole list of articles they've done on the government stealing property from private citizens. Whatever you think about Mother Jones Magazine, you can hardly consider them anything other than liberal. When the liberals and conservatives actually agree on something, frankly, that's worth thinking about why. Especially, for those of us, who would like more people to see the middle of the road.
Donna at May 27, 2008 9:58 AM
"I mean, c'mon, do we really need rats and slugs?"
Yes.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at May 27, 2008 10:47 AM
johno - you'd be more likely to be taken seriously if you weren't spouting lies about Reagan. But I suspect you'd rather have your fantasy of some Jesus-freak taking over the world than realizing that nobody seriously believes that deforesting the US is a precondition for the return of Jesus.
Look up James Watt. Reagan was the beginning of the end. The waste, deficit spending, and jingoistic nationalism were just manifestations of corporatization of this country......
I just made all that up. Everything was great in the eighties. no scandals, no recessions, no wars.
Let's put Reagan on the dime.
johno at May 27, 2008 11:13 AM
That fucking lie about James Watt came out about 5 years ago as an attempted Bush Bash. It was a lie then, and it's a lie now. James Watt NEVER SAID ANYTHING about the destruction of the environment being a trigger for the return of Jesus.
You, sir, are a disingenuous hating fuck. Ronald Reagan saved this country from James Earl Carter, hastened the demise of the USSR and restored America's faith in herself. Deficit spending is something that every Congress has engaged in. Don't act as though Reagan came up with it all by himself.
And if you think I'm going to sit here and let you lie about Ronaldus Magnus, you are out of your little mind.
brian at May 27, 2008 11:48 AM
Oh, and the phrase you're looking for is:
"Put Ron on The Rock"
brian at May 27, 2008 11:52 AM
Leave a comment