The most important concept to keep in mind as we review this chapter, is that of personal property rights. We’ve become too accepting of government by force instead of government by consent, piled under decades of rules, regulations, ordinances, laws and taxes to fund them. We’ve lost sight of the purpose and scope of government.
We all want to be safe, but the most important purpose for government is to ensure our private property rights. According to author and political writer Michael Rozeff, “There can be no freedom, no peace, no justice and no prosperity without private property…”
What is there to criticize about conservation? Most of us care about the land, wildlife, the earth. When does caring become extreme environmentalism? What boundary is crossed to trigger our use of that label? It is when environmental restrictions result in the taking or partial taking of a person’s private property. It’s when restrictions ordinances, codes, laws, taxes and other actions amount to a partial or complete taking of personal property.
In 2011, the state of Florida passed a statute under Title VI, Chapter 70, Section 001, called the “Bert J. Harris, Jr., Private Property Rights Protection Act.”
“The Legislature recognizes that some laws, regulations, and ordinances of the state and political entities in the state, as applied, may inordinately burden, restrict, or limit private property rights without amounting to a taking under the State Constitution or the United States Constitution. The Legislature determines that there is an important state interest in protecting the interests of private property owners from such inordinate burdens. Therefore, it is the intent of the Legislature that, as a separate and distinct cause of action from the law of takings, the Legislature herein provides for relief, or payment of compensation, when a new law, rule, regulation, or ordinance of the state or a political entity in the state, as applied, unfairly affects real property.” This states the basic purpose of this statute, though there are pages more of details.
This is a strong statement of property rights in Florida. This is good reason for insisting that the original property rights protection language in the current comprehensive plan be included in the 2040 Draft plan as discussed in Part 2.
We will show areas of deep concern throughout Chapter 10, that we believe transgress private property rights, which could result in a “partial taking.”
Throughout this Chapter and in Chapter 1, emphasis is placed on Ecological Linkages to complete a wildlife corridor from the Green Swamp in Pasco County, across most of Ridge Manor, across the Withlacoochee State Forest, the Chinsegut area, The Quarry, the Annetuluga Hammock, including all of Chasshowitzka, Weeki Wachee, Royal Highlands and many other neighborhoods.
This huge swath of Hernando County encompasses tens of thousands of acres, many with platted neighborhoods and private property owners.
Although current owners are reassured that they will still be able to live there, the possibility for future effects on property values including new rules, regulations and ordinances that are foreshadowed may impair the ability to sell for full value. Restrictions may alter a person’s ability to expand buildings, fences and lighting on their own property.
It should also be pointed out, that there are many accredited scientists who see problems with wildlife corridor theory. Isolating populations of wildlife in preserves may prevent disease spread and spread of invasive plants.
It has also been theorized that corridors may even increase extinction events. We should look before we leap. Conservation monies could be more effectively spent in quality of environment instead of expensive property acquisition of questionable corridors. We have even noticed in our four decades on our own property, that even though we have left half of our property undeveloped, the wildlife doesn’t know this. They freely traverse our fences, visit our garbage cans (which we secure), eat from our bird feeders, drink from our bird fountains, amuse us with their antics, and entertain our dogs. We enjoy this life in the woods, by our own free consent, not by force.
In June of 2015, the then Environmentally Sensitive Lands Committee of Hernando County (a voluntary board) laid out plans to acquire lands by purchase with taxpayers’ money, in Ridge Manor. It was a project on a grand scale, aspiring to close to 3,000 acres in Ridge Manor, much of it occupied. (We still have the maps to prove it.) Other projects were listed that correspond to the “Ecological Linkages” map. Since then, our County Commission disbanded the committee, taking the responsibilities on themselves. The BOCC has not to this point shown any interest in acquiring any further lands (much to their credit). They gave as one major reason, that as much as 45% of Hernando County property is already off the tax roles, being either in Conservation or government hands. This “Ecological Linkages” area seems to be a back door way of still insisting on this wildlife corridor across Hernando County. Our skepticism of this plan is understandably substantiated by our prior knowledge of environmentalists’ plans. We would like to see all references to Ecological Linkages and Wildlife Corridors, reduced to voluntary educational programs only. The Ecological Linkages map should be removed.
In Chapter 10, Strategy 10.01 A (5) states:
“Mechanisms to be used in preservation include – land acquisitions, conservation easements, purchase of development rights, development incentives, landowner agreements and similar mechanisms.”
Strategy 10.01 B (3 ) states:
“Ensure that the land development regulations allow for development layout that promotes clustering and open space protection for significant habitat areas.” (Clustering is a technique where the property owner is required to build only in a certain restricted portion of their property, essentially “taking” a large portion for wildlife habitat.)
Strategy 10.01 C (1) states:
“The Hernando County Environmentally Sensitive Lands (ESL) Program shall identify protection priorities and strategies. The ESL Program shall explore opportunities for willing-seller acquisition, conservation easements, partnering with other agencies, springs protection, the protection of natural resources, the protection of cultural reserves, and cooperative management arrangements as authorized by the Board of County commissioners.” (We know how the current Board feels, but this document will be in effect for the foreseeable future, and should better protect our human rights, not just wildlife. Willing-seller acquisition may sound all right, but this still requires taxpayer money to purchase, and land is once again removed from the tax roles, making the burden larger for the remaining taxpayers. Once land goes into Conservation, it rarely if ever comes out again. It will be a lost opportunity for private property ownership.) (Partnering with other agencies has sometimes meant SWFWMD, which does have eminent domain powers in the state.)
Strategy 10.01 C (5) states:
“… review of the impact to remaining habitat in the historic coverage of hammock woodlands habitat, … Development within these areas shall provide for conservation of habitat, rare species, topographical features, remnant ecological assemblages and archaeological resources. Habitat conservation measures may include requirements for open space, development layout, conservation easements and/or mitigation.” (Further restrictions on private property rights)
Strategy 10.03 A (1) states in part:
“Hernando County shall maintain a Riverine Protection Ordinance that regulates and manages all land use along the Weeki Wachee river, the Mud River, the Withlacoochee River in order to buffer the impacts of development on the riverine systems. The ordinance shall apply, at a minimum, to land use activities located within one (1) mile of the bank along all designated Hernando County rivers and shall address…” (various setbacks, buffers, wildlife and plant preservation, drainage and shoreline integrity…)
Strategy 10.03 B (10) states:
“The County shall engage in and encourage the acquisition or procurement of conservation easement for important wetland habitats including: a. those with upland hammock islands such as occurs in the Weeki Wachee Swamp and Chassahowitzka Swamp; b. those that serve as important floodways adjacent to rivers, and other floodwater storage areas; c. those within or adjacent to areas depicted on the Ecological Linkages Map.
Chapter 15 of the United Nations Sustainable Development document for the 21st Century, is titled CONSERVATION OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY. Goals and strategies in this document are very similar to those used to carry out conservation in our comprehensive plan for Hernando County. In goal 15.2, it states that “The current decline in biodiversity is largely the result of human activity and represents a serious threat to human development.” Goal 15.5 encourages government at all levels to promote biological diversity, including (I) on private land and (j) in areas adjacent to protected areas. As they control one piece of land, the goal will always be the one adjacent to it. This strategy is unlimited in the land it will devour.
A treaty with the United Nations (The Convention on Biodiversity 1992) was voted down by our U.S. Senate due to the extreme restrictions on our private property rights. Over 50% of our land would be off limits to human habitation, especially near lakes, rivers and waterways. The science of conservation biology was largely created by the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature). IUCN is an accredited United Nations advisor made of government agencies teamed with non-governmental organizations, to carry out goals.
These include the EPA, U.S. Forestry Service, FWC, the Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation, The Nature Conservancy, just to name a few. There are many fine, well-meaning people with noble ideals who work for these groups. Many don’t realize the extent nationally of these goals against private property rights. We have no problem with people who wish to live an eco-friendly life on their own property. We have no problem with them passing out brochures and giving lectures. We do have a problem however, with them mandating how others should live on their own private property. Already, we have around 45% of lands in government hands in Hernando County. How much more do we need to preserve? How many more laws, rules and regulations do we need to tell us how to live on our own property?
This is just a sampling of the rules, regulations and restrictions that are in Chapter 10 on Conservation and the global ties to push for more control over private property and water rights. When do these restrictions overstep the bounds of private property rights?
While some of these restrictions may be mandated by the State of Florida, any that can be eliminated or “mitigated” should be. Any mandatory regulations should be footnoted with the corresponding law that requires it. All conservation ideology should be prefaced with “theory”, and opposing theories should be included.
Once again, it is our hope that a much more educationally oriented document be developed including all theories, fewer mandates and more flexibility.
Previous articles in this series:
CRITIQUE OF THE HERNANDO COUNTY 2040 DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (Part 1)
Critique of the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan Part 2: Property Rights