[count-your-change]

Why....I thought all the keyboard conservatives would be supportive of a citizen's right to decide how and who uses his property. A couple hundred foot wide swath through a forest would pretty much ruin it.

[Charles Martel]

From the comments on the NPR page, it looks like this property has an easement running through it, which evidently the previous owner granted to the company building the pipeline. The current tree-sitting idiot owner bought the land subject to the easement.

This smells like a deliberate maneuver by some eco-nazi organization. The "owner" even looks like one of the timber industry protesters from the Pacific Northwest, who are known to use similar methods.

[MamaTexan]

Why....I thought all the keyboard conservatives would be supportive of a citizen's right to decide how and who uses his property.

One would if it were his property.

From what I can tell from the rather pitifully written article the pipeline is being constructed on a PUBLIC EASEMENT which passes through his property.....

so the constuction isn't taking place on his property after all.

[1rudeboy]

I would’ve expected keyboard conservatives to read the darn article, first.

[Baynative]

If he bought the property with recorded easements he has no ground to stand on. (no pun intended)

If the land is his and is unencumbered, he had the right to take up arms and defend his castle.

[X-spurt]

Never heard of a single pipeline being stopped in Texas, Courts won’t do it.

Pipelines are a fact of life in East Texas.

[BfloGuy]

Why....I thought all the keyboard conservatives would be supportive of a citizen's right to decide how and who uses his property.

"Keyboard conservatives." Good one.

But that was my first thought, too. I can support a pipeline without necessarily having to give up my property to do so. Now, maybe the guy's an environmentalist whacko; but they have property rights, too.