THEY'RE STILL STEALING OUR LAND!
Grandpa lost his farm to the Tennessee Valley
Authority and the condemned land was sold as riverfront lots.
© 1998 By J. Zane Walley
|
Alabama farmers were dirt poor in the late 1920s, but
my grandpa, Wad Walley, had a few acres of rich bottomland and scrub
mountainside alongside the mighty Tennessee River. With a couple of old
mules and a brood of hardworking sons he managed to scratch out a fair
living by raising corn, sugar cane and shipping a few cows up the river
to auction at Chattanooga, Tenn., by stern-wheeler riverboat. Nothing
fancy, just enough to keep the family fed and buy everyone a set of
clothes and a pair of brogans each year.
They were getting by, that is, until agents
from the federal Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) knocked on the door
and told Grandpa that his land had been condemned because of the new
lake they were building. The TVA agents promised Wad an equal amount of
land in trade, and they did give him land; eroded, ruined, rocky,
wore-out, with no house, pens, or barns. Grandpa, my father and uncles
had to take jobs in a distant town to rebuild the farm and just survive.
The lake came up after the dam was
completed, right up to the edge of the land that had belonged to my
family. TVA had plans for our old homestead. Yessir, they did! Auctioned
it off as riverfront lots; but of course Wad couldn't afford to bid
against the real estate folks and TVA carpetbaggers. That old farmer
never forgot, and he never forgave the TVA for stealing his land and
selling it at a profit. He never trusted the government again.
Federal tactics don't seem to have changed
much from those days when federal agencies would bully a poor uneducated
farmer and his family from their land and livelihood. If anything be
true, there is a glut of organizations attempting and succeeding in
forcing people from their property. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS),
the Corps of Engineers and U.S. Forest Service along with countless
regional, state, county and city agencies seize, or threaten to seize
incalculable amounts of private property each year.
Sixty years later, Texas rancher Margaret
Rodgers was in the same predicament as Grandpa Wad when the feds
threatened her. "When I got this letter from the Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, they came on me without any warning
at all," she remembers. "They said that I could have a stay in
jail and a $25,000 to $50,000 fine. I thought it was unreal that the
government can come in when we owned this property. I just wondered,
what else can the government do to private property owners?" In
Margaret's case, federal agents ordered her not to build a fence on her
property because it might destroy the habitat of the golden-cheeked
warbler, a bird protected by the Endangered Species Act.
If an endangered species wanders on your
property it can confiscate your whole package of property rights. FWS
has the authority under the government's power of condemnation which is
its fundamental power to take private property for a public purpose
without the owner's consent. The government's power of condemnation is
also known as the power of "eminent domain" which is one of
the harshest proceedings known to law.
RANGE queried two FWS officials, Jennifer
Fowler-Propst of New Mexico and Ron Fowler of the Division of Realty in
Washington, D.C., about hostile taking of land by FWS. Both promptly
denied that the agency had ever seized land under eminent domain. Fowler
wrote, "There is a common misconception about the Fish and Wildlife
Service's condemnation policy and history." It is inexplicable they
should deny that fact when in truth their own public records show 15,058
acres grabbed under condemnation proceedings. Even more alarming, the
Division of Realty files are militaristically classified as
"Containing Sensitive Information" suggesting that citizens
will never have access to the full truth.
Disputing the "no condemnation"
statements by Fowler-Propst are public announcements by FWS that they
might use the power of eminent domain to acquire lands for the Nebraska
Niobrara National Scenic River, the acquisition of Bair Island in San
Mateo County, Calif., and for restoration activities in Florida's
Everglades ecosystem. Recently, unwilling sellers in Poway, Calif., lost
land to hostile eminent domain proceedings for the San Dieguito River
Park.
FWS claims it likes to work with
"willing sellers" and pay "fair market" value for
private properties. Problem is that, commonly, their fair market value
is established after an endangered species has been listed on the
properties for which they are negotiating, and the value has nose-dived.
Use restrictions have become the flash point
in the property rights controversy. Properties seized under hostile
eminent domain are compensable under constitutional takings law. By
contrast, for a use restriction to provide compensation, the decrease in
land value must be proven severe. Few landowners could meet the
constitutional threshold for reparations even if they could afford to
fight it. Federal court is expensive, so cost is the powerful
disincentive to litigation. This is especially true in the
"takings" arena where it is hard to win on the merits. Summed
up, if an endangered animal or plant is found on your property, the
value falls through the floor. That gives FWS, or one of its
constituents like The Nature Conservancy, an opportunity to purchase it
at bargain basement prices.
Federal agencies all have mission
statements. The one proudly ballyhooed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service is, "The principal agency through which the federal
government carries out its responsibilities to conserve, protect, and
enhance the nation's fish and wildlife and their habitats for the
continuing benefit of people."
Seems the know-it-all, inside-the-Beltway
federal environmentalists have forgotten the "continuing benefit of
people" portion of the mission statement. The conclusive line is
that FWS is working to take control of thousands of acres of privately
held lands and the federal Endangered Species Act is being used as a
tool to destroy the Constitution and Bill of Rights. This well-intended
act has evolved into a weapon to regulate, intimidate, harass, and
punish landowners for having so-called endangered species on their land
by "taking" private property for wildlife habitat. While
"just compensation" has been touted, the best (read cheapest)
way to control lands is to stop all economic uses through abusive
governmental regulations and impermissibly violating property rights
protected by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Norman Podhoretz, the editor of Commentary
magazine, wrote some years ago that "Environmentalism is the
American socialism." I reckon old Grandpa Wad Walley could relate
to that statement. If he could speak from the grave he would probably
protest, "Hell, it ain't nothing new; they're still stealing our
land!"