"Nature provides for free." How? Where do those coastal nutrients originate? Who released them and how? How is that release balanced with other uses, both locally and at a distance? How are other assets in between in the riparian system effected?
Sir, my system is fully capable of dealing with it all, with the goal that the balance be optimized between natural and extractive. In fact, I want the oceans privatized. Perhaps there should even be nations there. Did you really read Part IV, Chapter 4?
Yes, I read it. One section I underlined several sentences:
Local corporations can integrate competing interests among fisheries, domestic water, urban land use, erosion, silt, flood control, all using risk-based pricing.Natural Process Mark Edward Vande Pol, Wildergarten Press,1999, page 278
On the same page, you wrote critically of the Army Corps of Engineers wisdom, as County workers removed logjams, barriers to fish--previous logjams had been swept downriver and lodged against bridge pilings causing floods.
You asked: Did they subject their ideas to peer review?
As an aside, it is amazing the barriers in a river that steelhead can get past. With the spring spawning run on here, it is common to see steelhead miles upstream past numerous beaver dams.
One point of the above is the obvious referrence to "peer review" and your opinion that in that case, it likely would have prevented problems.
In Ron Arnold's book, Undue Influence, on page 105 again:
Blurbs for Nature's Services say about the authrors: Their findings clearly demostrate that these services--providing clean wate, pollination, pest control, climate regulation, flood control, and fisheries, to mention only a few--are not only valuable, they are irreplaceable. While insufficient information was available to calculate the economic value of all--or even more--ecosystem services, those which could be quantified measured, at a minimum, many trillion dollars annually."
You make the generic claim that Ron Arnold has a hidden agenda. That's funny. That's the same thing the foundation-fed enviro sharks are saying. He does seem to be positing one idea you share with him: the property owner must take the Moral High Ground of Environmentalism back from government and activist lawyers. NP, p. 373 Though Arnold suggests taking it from the environmentalists.
From Natural Process I read that you are suggesting property owners begin the necessary data collection on their property to be able to fight back against the government, to be aware of the cost of events on their property that currently have no price on them, but have been collectively bagged into a commons. Judging by what the enviros say about Nature's Services the road to certifying those events on private property will he a tug-of-war between two opposing factions.
So tell me if I'm closer in your opinion to having read the book.