|
|
OpinionQuestions who was surveyedTo the editor: Regarding the letter by Virginia Stark (ECM Post Review, 1-21-04), she refers to a survey which she cites to indicate that there is widespread agreement to ìfinally do something for the public good,î i.e., the taking of private land for public use (or preservation, whichever term you prefer).ÝI take exception to her statement that each and every household was surveyed in 2000, as she states, because neither I nor anyone I know was surveyed. Could the reason for that be because we are owners of larger parcels of land in Chisago County?Ý Had I been surveyed, I do not know how I would have responded, not knowing how the survey questions were worded. Too often, the questions are skewed to get an answer that whoever commissions the survey wants to get.ÝI do not know if that is true in this case. In the same issue was a letter from Michael Madden of Center City referring to landowners as being motivated by our own ìparticular, private prospects of personal benefit.î Doesnít that form the basis for many of the decisions people make in their lives?ÝDoes anyone you know work for no expectation of return in salaries, benefits, medical care, retirement, or something to pass on to their heirs? My interests in my land are anything but short-term. I have owned, farmed and lived on my property for almost 18 years, which still makes me a newcomer to the county but not to rural life, as that is how I grew up.ÝI have put much time and money into turning very poor land into something that will actually support crops within the bounds of reason.ÝI have never applied chemicals or pesticides to it, and kept artificial fertilizer to an absolute minimum.ÝI have managed my woods to create opportunities for new hardwoods (not pines, which are not originally native in this area) to begin regrowth in an area where much of it had been logged in long past years, all at my own expense.Ý For my actions I get called greedy, uncaring for the land and ìfuture generations.î Well, the way I see it, we have a group (albeit a small but vocal one), for whom the existing bike trails and one of the finest state parks I have ever seen are apparently not enough to support their personal favorite activities.ÝTherefore, they want to turn the rest of the county into their own private playground under the guise of ìenvironmental concerns.î When he puts landownerís ìrightsî in parentheses, Mr. Madden indicates his willingness to stipulate that we do not have rights, which plays well when you are working on an emotional argument with no Ý factual basis to back it up. However, landownerís rights are a well-established principle of law going back at least as far as the Magna Carta in England, and they are now under assault in all parts of the nation. Thank goodness that at least in some areas of the nation, property rights are beginning to be recognized in the courts again. I cannot speak for all landowners in the county, but the ones I know are live-and-let-live people who would like to work our farms and make legal use of the land we have bought and paid taxes on.ÝAbusing and using up the land (which some people charge us with in order to demonize us) is not in our best interests, as it only hurts us in the long run by destroying our incomes, our quality of life, and the inheritance we can pass on to our children and take care of us in our old age.ÝBut I guess for some people, our being able to do that is just asking too much. Gary Vennes ©ECM Post Review |