Many Celebrated the Endangered Species Act's 40th year, yet, the clear minded are looking more closely at the results. While it is true that many species are more abundant than they were when the Act was passed in 1973, it is also true that the costs and unintended consequences of the law have burdened private property owners, our food producers, and the economy of the United States. Some of this is examined in the links below. While digesting the work of others collected below will be somewhat time consuming, an understanding of the Endangered Species Act and the events and effects it has brought about will be worth while.
Discussion List—December 4th, 2014
Those who wish to preserve and protect property rights have faced many challenges in the year 2013, those challenges and many more will face us in the coming year 2014. On the other side of the coin, though, are the positive works of many individuals and organizations coming together to stand up for their liberties. We are also fortunate to have representatives in government both at the state level and at the federal level who are working on these same goals. It is well worth our while to support those in public and private life who are laboring to protect our property rights. In brief, a look at what is faced.
Impact Statement on proposed changes to the Hydraulic Code Rules -Chapter 220-110 Washington Administrative Code (WAC). The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has prepared a Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement that will be reviewed here. For purposes of this article, the above mentioned document will be called DPEIS. This is needed because throughout the document referred to (http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/sepa/2013/13072peis.pdf) the department seems to think that other acronyms are interchangeable with DPEIS. The DPEIS in itself is problematic. This document is generalized, does not include supporting documentation, and is redundant, rambling, and was not prepared with the required cost – benefit analysis.
At issue is a proposed buffer that would accommodate vegetation while restricting lake-front development By STEVE MAYNARD Staff writerNovember 10, 2013 Lake Tapps residents say the state is trying to take away their property rights by imposing new shoreline regulations that could restrict or halt their ability to make improvements or build along the lake front. “The property rights of every citizen that owns property on the lake are going to be subject to severe restrictions,” said Leon Stucki, vice president of the Lake Tapps Community Council. The issue will be the focus Thursday night at a community meeting called by Sen. Pam Roach, R-Auburn, and her son, Pierce County Council member Dan Roach, R-Bonney Lake.
There has been much call for reform of Washington’s Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act and the Legislature is currently reviewing the GMA. We would like to thank Senator Pam Roach for the information below regarding meetings and a hearing involving the GMA and SMA. CAPR urges your attendance. Please see the bottom of the page for the Black Diamond meeting address. November 13, Wednesday. 7 PM at the Black Diamond Eagles There will be a Gov. Ops hearing in Black Diamond. The purpose is to kick off the discussion on GMA. There will be proponents and opponents of the original bill and they will, based on the Black Diamond experience, point out what has worked and what has not worked. This will be broadcast on TVW. November 14th, Thursday. 7 PM at Dieringer Elmentary, 21727 35th St.
The Skagit CAPR Chapter has been running a series of TV Spots during primetime Fox News programming on Comcast since February in Skagit County. You can view them on our supporting webpage at http://proprights.org/INFO Click the thumbnails to watch each 30 second video.
Photo courtesy of Dave Onkels
By Roger Almskaar, CAPR Whatcom Published in the Business Pulse, Fall 2013 issue:
Whatcom County’s Rural Lands; For Nature and People?
From "The American Thinker" October 24, 2013 Virginia Farmer Starts Property Rights Legal Revolution By Mark J. Fitzgibbons Long and growing is the list of property rights abuses by federal agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency. Even at the state level, wetlands and other laws are being used to invade and destroy private property rights. Last term, the United States Supreme Court in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District brushed back the government on its bullying treatment of private property owners, but the case was remanded for further litigation. Private property owners can go bankrupt litigating to defend and protect their property rights, and government bureaucrats and lawyers rely on that as part of their strategy to push their extortive agendas. Property owners have skin in the game; government bureaucrats and lawyers do not.