🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: ca.environment
Article #7098

Re: What "takings"? Private property? Ecology

#7098
From: Mike Vandeman
Date: Thu, 11 May 1995 00:00
45 lines
2901 bytes
From mjvande Thu May 11 10:44 PDT 1995
From: mjvande@pbhye.PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman)
To: JConlan@aol.com
Subject: Re: What "takings"? Private p...
Cc: mjvande
Status: R

-Point of substance #1:
 
This is not what I call "substance" (fact). You are simply stating an opinion.
Words like "disaster" and "needs to be" are purely subjective, and don't
convince me (or anyone else) of anything. I listen to facts. Period.

-The Endangered Species Act (ESA), as it is currently being implemented by the
-EPA, is a policy disaster and needs to be supplanted by a new system for
-habitat preservation that takes into account the fact that private property be
-longs to private entities and not to the public. The task of preserving

Define "private property"! The animals and plants on someone's property
cannot be owned, because they are beings with minds of their own, so the
"private property owners" have no right to harm them. If they belong to
anyone, they belong to all mankind. Besides, since all the land in the
U.S. was stolen from the Indians, nobody has a clear title to it. More
justly, it belongs to the wildlife, who have lived on it for millions of
years. It is not any duty of the government to guarantee land speculators
a profit (or any other businesspeople)! Your "arguments" are bogus, and
won't convince anyone who can think.

-endangered species habitat is a societal responsibility and should not be
-mandated to a class of individuals (open space property owners) without offeri
-ng them fair market compensation for the lost use of their land.  Habitat
-conservation and restoration should be conducted on public land.  If a
-sensitive habitat owned by a private individual is deemed necessary to the sur
-vival of an endangered species (based on a peer-reviewed scientific review
-process) then this land should be condemned and purchased with public funds.
-
-Pretty selfish concept, isn't it?  
 
Yes, unbelievably. Humans are the most selfish species on the Earth. No
other species claims to "own" land. They only make use of it, and share it
with all other species. Only humans think they own every sqwuare inch of the
Earth. Where does such a "right" come from? And don't tell me "the Bible"!
Besides, humans are more flexible than wildlife: we can easily move; they 
can't, since they need certain conditions to survive.
Technical Details
Message-ID: <3otirb$cgk@gw.PacBell.COM>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail
References: <fergieD7Kt1H.FC5@netcom.com> <3no5lu$7nn@newsbf02.news.aol.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 10df74,b7b23e3700f6d4e6
X-Google-Attributes: gid10df74,public
From: mjvande@pbhye.pacbell.com (Mike Vandeman)
Subject: Re: What "takings"? Private property?  Ecology
Date: 1995/05/11
Message-ID: <3otirb$cgk@gw.PacBell.COM>
X-Deja-AN: 102501282
references: <fergieD7Kt1H.FC5@netcom.com> <3no5lu$7nn@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
organization: Pacific Bell
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: ca.environment