Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SierraWasp; marsh2; Carry_Okie; hedgetrimmer; calcowgirl; farmfriend
From the leg.info website above:

This bill would establish the Sierra Nevada-Cascade Conservation Grant Program, which the secretary would administer, to accomplish various purposes in the Sierra Nevada-Cascade Mountain Region. The bill would authorize the secretary to undertake various projects and activities, including providing grants and loans to public agencies and nonprofit organizations, to meet the goals of the program.

The bill, as a part of that program, would authorize the secretary to provide grants to local public agencies, local water districts, and nonprofit organizations, consistent with the requirements of Proposition 50, for the acquisition of specified land and water rights, related to protecting water quality in the region. The bill would appropriate $9,150,000 that is available pursuant to Proposition 50 for protecting water quality in the region, to the secretary, to make those grants. The bill would require any acquisition made pursuant to the program to be from a willing seller.

17 posted on 08/01/2004 9:02:44 AM PDT by forester ( An economy that is overburdened by government eventually results in collapse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: forester

As we have seen in the Upper Klamath Basin, the term "willing seller" is relative. When a regulation reallocates your property to use (or nonuse) by another interest and you lose the ability to derive economic value from that property, you can become a "willing seller" pretty quick.

Here is an illustration of my point on local control. Siskiyou RCD has completed phase I of a study on how a Water Trust could be initiated in the Scott River system that is consistent with the complex, long standing adjudication and will respect underlying water use rights: http://www.sisqtel.net/~armstrng/opinion072304.htm It is anticipated that the Conservancy will rush in, buy land and water and most likely try to assert their right against lower diverters. This will cause a chain of litigation and enormous costs. The result will inevitably be an assault on ag use, not preservation.

My objections to Conservation easements are articulated here:
http://www.sisqtel.net/~armstrng/opinion032504.htm
WaterThe acquisition of water use rights wou underlying problem with Conservation Eas


18 posted on 08/01/2004 10:29:19 AM PDT by marsh2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson