Liberty Matters News Service

November 6, 2003

Kyoto No, Healthy Forests Yes

Last week, the Senate voted to kill the Kyoto legislation and to pass the president's Healthy Forests bill. The McCain/Lieberman bill, S. 139, called for reducing so-called "greenhouse gas emissions" went down to defeat 55-43. The bill, referred to as Kyoto-Like by some, would have required fossil fuels use to return to year 2000 levels by 2010. To meet the requirements, energy output would have to be reduced, boosting the cost of electricity by 7-12 percent, petroleum products, like gasoline, 12-16 percent and the cost of coal by a whopping 51-140 percent. Sen. McCain claimed the annual cost to Americans would be only $20.00 a year, but a study by Charles River Associates, an economic consulting firm, said the actual costs would be much higher, eventually rising to $1,300.00 per household. In 1997, the Senate voted unanimously to reject Kyoto by approving the Byrd-Hagel resolution that stated, "the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol" that "would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States." Last week's vote confirmed that intent. The Senate also approved the Healthy Forest Restoration Act after accepting Sen. Diane Feinstein's (D-CA) amendment requiring $760 million to thin trees and underbrush adjacent to "at risk communities." The bill now goes to a Conference committee to iron out the differences. The Senate version contains several horrendous unrelated items including; "a new federal regional zoning plan run by the National Park Service and money to implement the dreaded "invasive species act."
Cost Effective

California Biologist: "It Needed to Burn"

In the wake of the Earth-scorching forest fires in California that caused 20 human deaths and burned over 700,000 acres, wildlife experts are now hunting for rare critters in what is left of their "critical habitat." U.S. Forest Service biologist Steve Loe frets that when it finally rains, rivers and streams will flood because there is no longer vegetation to hold back the water and many species could be washed away. Fish and Game biologist Chanelle Davis will be flying over the San Gabriel Mountains looking for six radio-collared Nelson's bighorn sheep. "Those that survive [the fire] should thrive, she said. Until the fire, the sheep were being killed off by predators - perhaps coyotes, dogs or mountain lions - creeping through the tangled undergrowth, while the mature woody plants weren't providing them [the sheep] with enough nutrition." It's unclear how Davis expects anything to survive if all the vegetation was burned, but added; "Fire is great for this habitat. It needed to burn" and hadn't in more than 20 years. "Of course, we would have preferred it didn't burn all at once."
Wildlife Experts Scramble to Save Threatened Species

California Farmers Beware!

Brenda Jahns Southwick, a former attorney for the Bureau of Land Management and now the managing counsel for the California Farm Bureau Federation (CFBF), told attendees at the Agribusiness Management Conference in Fresno that the organization is working toward establishing "partnerships for restoration, " with government agencies that would support commercially viable agriculture while providing habitat for endangered species. (Bruce Babbitt's Safe Harbor, No Surprises and Candidate Conservation Agreements.) CFBF "identifies closely with environmental concerns," said Ms. Southwick and the restoration partnership deal would preserve farmland as a valuable resource for food and fiber as well as preferred wildlife habitat based on the natural movement of animals (Wildlife Corridors). Southwick said the program will have provisions to protect farmers from prosecution should their government partners mismanage the wildlife. Beware, these programs allow the government to become the managing partner over private property and landowners lose most of their bundle of rights to the government and endangered species.
CFBF Seeks Habitat Restoration Pacts with Agencies

Eminent Domain Abuse

Increasingly, the attitude of government regarding private property is; "If we want it, we'll take it." A New Jersey Superior Court Judge, James Hurley, ruled that the city of North Brunswick could use its power of eminent domain to take Edwin Otken's 104 acre farm to build ball parks and hiking trails. Mr. Otken had planned to sell his land to U.S. Home Corporation to build 400 homes for senior citizens. The city appraised the land at $6 million, but U.S. Home Corporation offered him several million more. In a similar story out of Arizona, Pinal County Superior Court Judge William J. O'Neil decreed that the owners of a strip mall must renew the lease of their tenant Peoria Justice Court for another two years over the objections of the landlord. The court's lease had expired in July and since it would be moved to a new location in eighteen months the county only wanted the space for two years. The owners held out for a five year lease, saying a dance studio had already agreed to a five year term. Mike Freret, vice president of development for Orsett/Columbia Ltd. said; "What the lower court said via these actions was that municipalities can create new contracts where none existed before. That's way beyond the premise of what the eminent domain statutes were set up for." Orsett/Columbia Ltd. has appealed their case the Arizona State of Appeals Court.
Socialism Threatens Property Rights in America

Home