May 31, 2007
By: Sid Riley
This column presents a non-partisan, conservative viewpoint about items of interest in our community and our lives. Focus is on items that are impacting your pocket book, your personal freedoms, and your rights. I hope that you will read the column regularly and that it occasionally influences your opinions and actions. Now, on to the subject of the week::
"Jackson County has suddenly begun losing some of it’s most beautiful trees."
The Property Owner states, "Those trees belong to me. I bought them when I purchased the property, and I can cut them down if I want to!"
The Environmentalist Tree Hugger states, "Those are irreplaceable natural treasures and they should be protected for the interest of the public and for future generations to enjoy!"
As a staunch defender of personal and property rights against government intrusion, AND as an avid lover of the outdoors, I find myself in a real dilemma in resolving this conflict. It saddens me deeply to see beautiful trees casually cut down as some new structure is being built. Often these projects represent efforts of investors to create profitable ventures. In many instances they live far from Jackson County. They have little regard for the natural beauty that makes this area unique. To them profits are more beautiful than trees.
I have been a private pilot most of my life, often flying home at night after working on a project far away. I have often remarked that one unique feature of flying into Marianna and over Jackson County at night, is that you can not see the towns. In most areas the towns shine brightly from city lights and homes. Here, most of the lights are hidden from aerial view by the tree canopy that covers the area. We are in danger of losing this feature.
At the same time I despise government intrusion into my life, my pocket book, and my personal and property rights. I deeply resent them trying to tell me how to live my life, construct my home, fasten my seat belt, how much water I can use in my toilet, how high my deck rail has to be, how to run my business, what I have to carry in my boat, …….and on….and on. I would also resent having to ask their permission to cut a tree that I wanted to remove from MY property.
Both arguments are valid and true……..A reasonable compromise approach is needed.
As far as our situation in Jackson County goes, I would recommend the following:
1. Enact a county wide tree ordinance that specifies what size trees can be cut of each variety, without any external, public involvement.
2. Create a "Tree Harvesting Committee" appointed by the County Commissioners to review all new projects that involve land clearing. They would meet with the planners of the project, identify valuable trees that must be cut, valuable trees that could be saved, and valuable trees that should be saved. This "Tree Team" committee would be comprised of property owners, builders, and environmentalists.
3. Once the identification process is completed the county would then determine which trees it wishes to purchase from the property owners for a predetermined price per tree. If saving a tree creates an increased cost for the project, that would be taken into consideration in paying the property owner. Once purchased, these trees would become public property.
4. The funding of the budget for tree acquisitions would come from, (a) environmental grants that are now being wasted on much less beneficial
projects, (b) additions to impact fees, (c) donations from any real tree lovers that might live here.
Under no circumstances do I feel it is appropriate for the government to merely legislate itself the right to go onto a property owners land and "confiscate" trees Then hire some "tree-a-crat" to inspect and levy fines. The owner should rightfully be paid for any trees that the "public" wants to keep.
Our county needs this type of plan in effect as quickly as possible. New projects, armed with chain saws and axes are being planned as you read this. With this approach we will be recognizing the rights of the property owners, and we will be preserving most of our beautiful trees. We will be "Getting It Right!"
BUREAUCRATIC FUNGUS OF THE WEEK:
As previously discussed, the bureaucracy is filled with many species of fungi that choke productivity, create waste, and make government less and less effective. This week’s species is: " Wasti Overi Reactionitus Extremus" . English Translation = "Waste from over reaction to the extreme". More often than not, when a serious problem is encountered, and there is strong public reaction to a need, government will jump forward and implement remedial procedures that go far beyond the level that was needed to solve the problem. They use a sledge hammer when only a few taps from a tack hammer was needed.
One good example of government over reaction to a situation was when those British tourists were sadly killed by a gang of thugs at a state rest stop several years ago. Fearing a negative impact on our tourism business, the bureaucrats in Tallahassee quickly enacted legislation that made it necessary to have full time night security at all state rest stops. This over reaction has since cost the taxpayers of Florida millions and millions and millions of dollars in wasted funds. One lone, highly noted incident ( and things can happen, regardless of security) and they covered the problem with wasted tax money.
If they had merely increased the frequency that the night police patrols checked the rest stops, their level of reaction would have been more reasonable. If they had taken that approach, they would have been "Getting It Right".
No comments:
Post a Comment