Jogeephus
Well-known member
...before you allow the government to prepare a multiple-use management plan on your property.
This might just be a regional thing and might not apply to many on the board but I thought it best to give those who this could apply some food for thought. While I'm an advocate of multiple-use conservation practices I was greatly disturbed by some recent events which have occurred in my area. This coupled with the news that Robert Kennedy Jr. is being considered as the new EPA director, I thought prudent to share something with you. I don't mean this to get political, I just want to share this with you so you can be aware of some possible risks you could face if you allow the government to prepare one of these plans on your land.
As you know, agriculture and forestry enjoy some exemptions to the rules and regulations imposed by the EPA. One of which is our ability to do certain construction work without having to get an environmental impact plan and a host of other things that would make road building and other improvements cost prohibitive. As you know, as long as we follow the Best Management Practices we can do this work without all the hassles.
However, it just came to my attention that a landowner here was attempting to build a road on their property. Unfortunately, there was and environmental group that did not want him to do so cause they wanted his land to remain natural. The group turned the landowner in to every government agency there was. After much hassle and delay, it was determined the landowner had done nothing wrong and was well within his rights to continue his work.
End of story? Not quite. The environmental group then hired an environmental defense law firm run by Kennedy to halt this work. So where do they get their money? Ted Turner - he's funding them. (and hes' buying up a bunch of land out west - interesting harbinger)
Unfortunately, the landowner wanted to be a good steward of his land and had contracted with the government to draw up a multiple-use managent plan on the property. Due to this, one of their objectives was recreational activities such as hunting. Due to this, the environmental law firm has filed a suit stating that this recreational objective voids their exemption they enjoyed under agricultural and foresty and as such they would have to go through the gambit of following the more stringent rules and regulations similar to that you see on our interstates. Additionally, they claim, that since he does not meet the agricultural exemptions that he should also lose is preferential tax status which allows lower ad valorem taxes on his land.
As it stands, a cease and desist order has been given to the landowner and the landowner is now looking at a long and drawn out legal dilema.
Interesting enough, as fate would have it, I ate dinner with my cousin the other night. She travels in these circles and and knows both Ted and Robert. I was floored when she described how she went to a fund raising dinner that was raising money for this same group. She even gave them money cause they played on her love for the land. I told her she was funding something that would hurt her personally. She then gave me John's history. How he got a DUI and as punishment was forced to community service cleaning up a river. This got him interested in the environmental movement. She also told me how he used to be a heroin addict and was arrested for this. But as it seems, his last name will give credibility to a person who otherwise might just be considered a junky.
Not meaning anything political but we might need to rethink what plans we put on paper for our land. Maybe this will help someone out and prevent them from this same dilema.
edit- got names mixed up :oops:
This might just be a regional thing and might not apply to many on the board but I thought it best to give those who this could apply some food for thought. While I'm an advocate of multiple-use conservation practices I was greatly disturbed by some recent events which have occurred in my area. This coupled with the news that Robert Kennedy Jr. is being considered as the new EPA director, I thought prudent to share something with you. I don't mean this to get political, I just want to share this with you so you can be aware of some possible risks you could face if you allow the government to prepare one of these plans on your land.
As you know, agriculture and forestry enjoy some exemptions to the rules and regulations imposed by the EPA. One of which is our ability to do certain construction work without having to get an environmental impact plan and a host of other things that would make road building and other improvements cost prohibitive. As you know, as long as we follow the Best Management Practices we can do this work without all the hassles.
However, it just came to my attention that a landowner here was attempting to build a road on their property. Unfortunately, there was and environmental group that did not want him to do so cause they wanted his land to remain natural. The group turned the landowner in to every government agency there was. After much hassle and delay, it was determined the landowner had done nothing wrong and was well within his rights to continue his work.
End of story? Not quite. The environmental group then hired an environmental defense law firm run by Kennedy to halt this work. So where do they get their money? Ted Turner - he's funding them. (and hes' buying up a bunch of land out west - interesting harbinger)
Unfortunately, the landowner wanted to be a good steward of his land and had contracted with the government to draw up a multiple-use managent plan on the property. Due to this, one of their objectives was recreational activities such as hunting. Due to this, the environmental law firm has filed a suit stating that this recreational objective voids their exemption they enjoyed under agricultural and foresty and as such they would have to go through the gambit of following the more stringent rules and regulations similar to that you see on our interstates. Additionally, they claim, that since he does not meet the agricultural exemptions that he should also lose is preferential tax status which allows lower ad valorem taxes on his land.
As it stands, a cease and desist order has been given to the landowner and the landowner is now looking at a long and drawn out legal dilema.
Interesting enough, as fate would have it, I ate dinner with my cousin the other night. She travels in these circles and and knows both Ted and Robert. I was floored when she described how she went to a fund raising dinner that was raising money for this same group. She even gave them money cause they played on her love for the land. I told her she was funding something that would hurt her personally. She then gave me John's history. How he got a DUI and as punishment was forced to community service cleaning up a river. This got him interested in the environmental movement. She also told me how he used to be a heroin addict and was arrested for this. But as it seems, his last name will give credibility to a person who otherwise might just be considered a junky.
Not meaning anything political but we might need to rethink what plans we put on paper for our land. Maybe this will help someone out and prevent them from this same dilema.
edit- got names mixed up :oops:
