Posted on 06/17/2004 10:06:43 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer
long-toed salamander is threatening to devour a $24 million school construction project and may also consume the property rights of many residents in this rural community on the Monterey Bay. No, this isn't the plot of another far-fetched disaster movie by the UFO-logists who brought us "A Day After Tomorrow". It is, however, becoming an increasingly common theme played out in communities around the nation, courtesy of eco-litigators backed by the Endangered Species Act. The Aptos Salamander situation not only provides a new perspective on the endangered-education angle, it is helping local residents recognize that the cost of eco-indulgence may be their property.
A vital point that takes the salamander puddle beyond an issue of simply sucking education funds from kids to an issue that could greatly impact the lives and property of many Aptos residents: Aptos High School (AHS) is within a one-half mile radius of the salamander pond; that's a one-mile diameter! This brings up many important issues that local media has failed to address, but that are important for homeowners to consider: How many homeowners live in the one-mile Salamander Circle? How many Aptos residents suddenly lost their rights to use and improve their property? What happens if the salamander actually migrates to the edge of the Salamander Circle -- do we then see another 1/2 diameter of private property get sucked into an ever expanding black hole of environmental protection? Is it worth every billion it costs if we save but one salamander life - or are there more responsible and effective ways to be good stewards of the earth while protecting our inalienable rights?
While most of us may be supporters of protecting endangered species, it seems important that we consider the true cost of such indulgence. Arbitrarily establishing a one-mile diameter for salamander habitat in a populated area might mean more than just taking money from kids; it may also be sacrificing the rights of many local residents to enjoy the use of their property.
A report titled "Accounting for Species: the True Costs of the Endangered Species Act" by the Property and Environment Research Center (www.perc.org/) indicates that Aptos residents may be facing what has become a common situation in today's eco-political climate. In short, if the pattern identified in the PERC report holds true, AHS may need to prepare to fork over a significant amount of bond money and land to eco-litigators and eco-consultants in the name of the salamander.
Compounding the costs, homeowners within Salamander Circle might find themselves faced with paying heavy habitat mitigation fees to eco-extortionists - or even permanent road blocks - the next time they file for a permit to improve their property. This might seem a bit "out there" for those who are seeing it for the first time; however, property owners may want to become familiar with a couple of similar cases at other California schools, as cited in the PERC report:
"Local governments everywhere are finding themselves limited by the ESA. They are not allowed to build schools, hospitals, roads, and other infrastructure projects in areas designated as critical habitat...
"A new high school was delayed one year in Vista Murrieta, California, by the Quino checkerspot butterfly. The school ended up costing... $1.25 million more than it would have cost.
"In January 2004, plans to build a new elementary school in Wildomar, California, were put on hold because of the checkerspot butterfly and the California gnatcatcher. Students will probably start school in the fall of 2004 in portable classrooms, and the school district may have to purchase other potentinal habitat as mitigation for building the school."
Fortunately, local media has put a spotlight on the eco-litigators; this could result in a less-resource-intensive resolution of the AHS construction issue. However, Salamander Circle could continue to suck money and land from Aptos residents long after the AHS construction issue is resolved. The PERC report says:
"Seventy-five percent of all listed (endangered) species have portions or all of their habitat on private lands, and landowners are not compensated for their losses from ESA regulations. The economic costs (to private land owners) of designating critical habitat just for the coastal California gnatcatcher will average $300 million per year."
Because we would all like to consider ourselves good stewards of the planet, we seem to have developed a collective tendency to look the other way when neighbors have lost their property rights to special interest groups in the name of the environment.
When a large segment of our community seems to be directly confronted by policies, procedures and laws enacted by government and non-government organizations in the name of the planet, some of us may get a tough lesson in the true cost of eco-litigation to our families, our homes and our freedoms.
Happy earth day.
Did have a nice pair of Snail Darters for a while, until the guy who sold them to me went to jail for fraud; did you know that catfish minnows don't even make good bait?
Monterey to Tennesee? Sounds like a good transition to me. Santa Cruz has become the black heart of the beast, and it is difficult living here most of the time.
Made one trip into Santa Cruz in about 67; saw this lady fishing off the two-lane highway bridge in the bay, she looked like she just stepped off the Pancake box, bandanna and all - dinner, I guess.
"Snaught"?
Like your knows, you no?
'Snot true!
The guy who wrote that back in 1963 was very prescient.
Just about everything he predicted has come true. And yet the evil empire is dead and the trype it represented is more alive and flourishing here in America than in the old Soviet Union.
However, again, I think you are overreacting to this issue.
Personally, I don't know all that much about the Endangered Spieces Act. I do know government has to be scrutinized to make sure it doesn't exceed its bounds. But NOTHING, NO RIGHT is absolute - NONE of them. All of them are subject to SOME restrictions or we would live in anarchy.
But if we hadn't taken steps in the past to preserve endangered wildlife and prevent habitat destruction, our National Symbol, the bald eagle, would be extinct. Buffalo would be extinct. Bears and wolves would no longer exist - anywhere.
I agree with you about NAFTA, but many good conservatives would say the jobs lost overseas have been replaced here by other jobs and by employing people in other countries they are better able to afford our own exports.
Conservatism and liberalism are not defined by individual litmus tests on signle issues. They are defined by an overall attitude on a multiplicity of varying issues.
Just because I disagree with you in part on this issue doesn't make me a conservative. If I was a liberal I would hunt and own a gun or hate Bill Clinton, or oppose abortion and homosexual marriages or dislike courts which legislate from the bench, or be repelled by revisionist theologians.
But you have to understand how OUR government operates. Lobbyists with money get what they want. So do lobbyists with votes. If they have BOTH, they get even more.
Yes, the radical environmentalists haver a lot of power in Washington. But so do the Construction Unions and Construction lobbies and what is good for the Country and America as a whole should always take precedence, not what an indiviual lobbying group wants.
I read it. I agree with most of it. I fail to see what it has to do with the issue at hand.
Are you maintaining that its totally irrelvant to you if all species of animals disappear except for what we can cook?
Do you want to live in a world of concrete and asphalt and planted city parks?
Do you not want your children to have an opportunity to hunt and fish and hike in a wilderness?
Don't you want some vestige of the the America that Washington, the pilgrims, the Indians, etc, saw left for posterity?
The people who live in large cities, for the most part, do NOT think like conservatives, they think like liberals.
They don't like guns, hunting, and feel the government should be the answer to everybody's problems.
Do you wnat more and more of these people perpetuated in America?
Is THEIR lifestyle what you want to leave as a legacy to your children?
Personally, I would be happier living in 17th Century America and the closer we can get to that ideal the better.
I believe you are exaggeratnig the issue here.
The problems you represent will not rise and fall on the salavation of this one salamander.
There is no argument which can move a closed mind.
Each species of animal contains genetic information, biological secrets which may be of practical use to man. In addition, there is the esthetic appeal of viewing and enjoying them in their own right as a creation of God's.
And salamanders and most living things do serve a function in the complex ecosystem which makes up earth and of which we are all a part.
1. The meaning of the Phrase "to regulate trade" must be sought in the general use of it, in other words in the objects to which the power was generally understood to be applicable, when the Phrase was inserted in the Constn.
2. The power has been understood and used by all commercial & manufacturing Nations as embracing the object of encouraging manufactures. It is believed that not a single exception can be named.
James Madison to Joseph C. Cabell
18 Sept. 1828
I've read more than you Old Profssor, I am a Zoologist by education and a conservative by political philosophy, and I am not aware of doing any shouting on this board on this issue.
The reactions to my postings on this subject sadden rather than enrage me.
Read my posts about Irraq, Kerry, Kennedy, Kean and the liberal left to see my rage.
Here there is only sadness.
I see you are from Tennessee.
I have never been there, but from what I have read, it must resemble in large part the sort of American I would like to see preserved.
If you want to see what I am talking about - visit Hudson COunty or Bergen County New Jersey, or the Charlotte - College Triangle Area of North Carolina, or New York Coty or Baltimore or Boston.
Image a landscape full of nothing but the same monotonous developments, raod way after roadway choaked with an endless stream of constant cars so thick none of them can move.
That's what uncontrolled development has created and its on its way to Tennessee.
As a species, we have but one goal, survival; abandon that and the whole game is over.
"Personally, I would be happier living in 17th Century America and the closer we can get to that ideal the better."
I agree. I ive as close to that model as is possible. Your arguements and 'questions' however, have nothing to do with this or me. If I had my way, I'd do away with cities...they breed confusion and greed. But that's not going to happen. I hope you will continue to study this issue to see what we're really up against. I will continue to be a true conservationist and love and care for the land and all it's creatures as I always have.
Thanks. I'll check it out.
I hate the U.N. (anger not sadness).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.