While I may not be a resident of Lake County, I am a resident of Colusa County and the National Conservation Area (NCA) designation would not only affect Lake County, but Colusa, Solano, Napa and Yolo counties as well.
But herein lies the problem: Of the 800,000 acres in the Blue Ridge Berryessa region, over 400,000 is privately owned. Arbitrary layers of conservation on privately owned land can affect property values, and many of those landowners have no idea that there is a proposed conservation area that they may be forced to deal with. Environmental groups are not elected by the people and their vision for the region may differ from others who live there. But regardless of their vision, they have no authority to plan for the future of privately owned land.
Private landowners should be able to opt-in to such a designation. While proponents of an NCA designation proclaim that it will protect the region from growth, it creates a mechanism by which local government is bypassed, thus giving the federal government land use authority.
Private property rights are included in the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution because our forefathers understood the basic principles of private property and their role in creating the American dream in a capitalistic society.
Over the years the environmental movement has stripped many landowners of these rights through government intrusion and the Endangered Species Act. The acquisition of private property for “public good” under the guise of protecting the environment is only a scare tactic. Landowners, farmers and ranchers have been good stewards of their land for many decades and the government and environmental groups have no right to impose regulations on private landowners that have the potential to put them out of business.
It is critical that the public understands that private property rights need to be protected and that programs that undermined those rights need to be exposed. In our nation and right in our backyard, a deceptive land grab is being pursued to further the environmental agenda, and agricultural and our rural economies are the innocent victims that are caught in the crossfire.
So why the use of scare tactics? What is the big unknown fear that we need to be protected from? Development? The fear that landowners will sell out to the highest bidder is a real threat, but it is also someone’s right to sell if farming or ranching is no longer economically viable for them. Investing in programs that help keep farming and ranching viable is the way to prevent development not additional environmental and government regulations and fees.
Also, it’s not surprising that environmental groups are supporting such a concept. The NCA designation will create an influx of money to the region, and that means that local environmental groups will be able receive grants to “preserve” the region and further their agenda.
The goal of an NCA designation is land acquisition and federal land use authority. This region has been protected by private landowners for over 100 years, and who is to say that the federal government can do a better job managing the region?
It seems disingenuous for the proponents of such a designation, who claim to want to preserve the region for future generations, to want to put those future generations deeper and deeper into debt. And while there may be a growing number of organizations that want to support this designation, there are a growing number of landowner, elected officials, nonprofit organizations, ranchers and farmers who are opposed to such an egregious violation of private property rights.
Public awareness and knowledge of the issue is the only way to protect our communities. We are a nation that was built on the “land of free and home of the brave” and private property rights are one of the founding principles that make our county so great.
Ashley Indrieri is the executive director of Family Water Alliance, a nonprofit grassroots organization that advocates for private property rights, water rights and the sustainability of agriculture for rural north state communities.
{mos_sb_discuss:4}
