Posted on 07/07/2002 12:42:50 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
"The Wildlands Project," published in Wild Earth in 1992, chose a map of Florida to illustrate its concept of core wilderness areas, connected by corridors of wilderness, all surrounded by "buffer zones," managed for "conservation objectives." What are conservation objectives? Reed Noss, author of "The Wildlands Project," says "... the collective needs of non-human species must take precedence over the needs and desires of humans."
The humans who live in South Florida are seeing the needs of non-human populations being given priority over the property rights and livelihoods of the people who live there. The entire Everglades is shown on the Wildlands map as a core wilderness area, surrounded by buffer zones that reach from Miami to Key West.
CERP the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan is the name used to describe 52 projects to transform South Florida into the Wildlands project's vision of how the state ought to be.
The initiative was launched by environmentalists who convinced the politicians that the Everglades has been destroyed, and must be restored to save biodiversity in the ecosystem.
Among the organizations that are promoting the restoration project are: the Nature Conservancy, which received more than $136 million in federal grants between 1997 and 2001; the Audubon Society, recipient of $10 million in federal grants during the same period; and the World Wildlife Fund, which has received more than $70 million in federal grants.
The Nature Conservancy and the Audubon Society funded the writing of "The Wildlands Project," according to its author, Reed Noss.
Politicians, however, depend on votes and money from industry, as well as from environmental organizations, so the plan necessarily included input from the business community.
When the plan finally came together, it was supposed to achieve three equal priorities: expand water supplies for South Florida's exploding population; control water flows and prevent flooding; and provide sufficient water flows to restore the Everglades. This tenuous agreement was the basis on which President Clinton and Gov. Jeb Bush launched the $7.8 billion project on Dec. 11, 2000.
From day one, the project was in trouble. While the U.S. Corps of Engineers is the agency with overall responsibility, there are several other federal agencies, state agencies and county agencies involved all with turf to protect and agendas to advance. Riding herd on all these agencies, is a network of environmental organizations, each with their own interests and agendas. Then comes the powerful industries that employ people and pay taxes. At the bottom of the list are the land owners those who are most directly affected by the restoration plan.
At the moment, everyone is unhappy. The environmentalists are threatening to withdraw support if higher priority is not assigned to Everglades restoration. Scientists within the implementing agencies have no idea whether the plan will work. And the landowners are finally organizing to say "enough is enough."
According to an extensive report in the Washington Post, Stuart J. Appelbaum, the Army Corps of Engineers man in charge, says "We have no idea if this will work." The EPA's South Florida director says of the project, "It's falling apart before my eyes." And Fish and Wildlife Service biologist, Bob Gasaway, says "I don't see a shred of evidence that all this money will help the environment."
Shannon Estenoz, an engineer for the World Wildlife Fund, says he is getting angrier by the day and thinks his organization's folks may have been "suckers" for having supported the CERP.
All these problems with the CERP may be dwarfed by the trouble that is now brewing in the Florida swamp. The land owners are getting tired of seeing their property flooded, or condemned and taken, or devalued by the threat of future projects.
Homeowners associations, property-rights groups and legal-defense funds have sprung up all across South Florida. Edmund W. Antonowicz, secretary of the 15,000 Coalition, fired off a letter to President Bush, urging him to step in and prevent the massive land grabs that are going on. Madeleine Fortin's Legal Defense Foundation sued the Corps of Engineers, charging that the Corps lacked legislative authority to condemn land outside the original "footprint" authorized in 1989. A preliminary ruling finds in favor of the land owners.
These efforts have attracted the attention of the Paragon Foundation in Alamogordo, N.M., which sent Jay Walley, to meet with more than 40 representatives of area organizations in Homestead on June 29. The meeting produced a skeletal plan to create a broad coalition to guide a national effort to stop the erosion of private property rights in South Florida, and restore some semblance of sanity to the CERP.
I'm not sure why you didn't have hurricane insurance and instead had to rebuild out of your own pocket...
Let me explain. Back in those days we actually did have hurricane insurance, but there were clauses that precluded 'rising water.' We really didn't need rising water coverage because the houses, while beachfront, were far enough away from storm tides that the only damage prior to Carla was adding sand to the property. However, McFaddin's Pass, as it is called, caused the rapid erosion of the beach. By this time, 'rising water' costs had sky-rocketed so we simply couldn't afford it.
Understand also that I'm not knocking Jeb Bush. My contention is with little bureaucrats hundred or thousands of miles away who only think they know better than the locals who have the experience and knowledge to not "poop in their own beds," so to speak.
I wish I had the wordpower and knowledge to explain just how communistic the so-called "environmentalists" have become.
They erroneously assume property owners care nothing about their property, the preservation of it, or respect for the creatures that live on or near it. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Obviously, I cannot speak for the property owners in Florida, just as I couldn't for the Klamath Falls farmers when enviro-nazis cut off their water supply. But I could see the injustice of outsiders dictating how and what property owners do with their property. Just as I resent the enviro-nazis telling me I can no longer build on my property because I may damage it!
My family did more to protect and save our property and the creatures on it than the mindless bureaucrats think they do.
I realize what happened in your case is different.
True. However it is the same group of people telling the Florida property owners how and what they can do with their own property.
I read between the lines on Lamb's comments about the "lack of private ownership."
Certainly there is "private ownersip," and a lot of it throughout the United States.
However, I cite my own experience in this that you have so kindly responded to.
I wish you would share that with us, Summer!
No, my whole point is enviro-nazis want to control private property.
As I stated, we, the property owners in that community, did much more to protect the environment than the bureaucrats many miles away did. Yet we were call "the destroyers!"
You worry too much about spelling, Summer. =o) I knew what you meant. =o)
(Sorry for the delay, had to go shopping.)
You just said the magic word, corruption. Once upon a time we, the private property owners were the environmentalists. Then organizations started popping up that promoted basically the same things we cared about. But corruption crept in and those once sane organizations took it too far.
Just like the anti-smokers who "only wanted an area set aside in resturants where people wouldn't smoke." Look what a monster that has turned into.
This is why I and many others call them "enviro-nazis." They want total control of everyone elses property.
What does control equate to? Power!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.