THIS LAND IS MY LAND. . . CITIZENS, AGENCIES SQUARE OFF OVER PROPERTY RIGHTS Series: THE CONTRACT AND YOU

By Bill Lambrecht Post-Dispatch Washington Bureau | St Louis Post-Dispatch (MO), July 9, 1995 | Go to article overview

THIS LAND IS MY LAND. . . CITIZENS, AGENCIES SQUARE OFF OVER PROPERTY RIGHTS Series: THE CONTRACT AND YOU


Bill Lambrecht Post-Dispatch Washington Bureau, St Louis Post-Dispatch (MO)


Jim Koeller strides over fragile corn plants and pauses at a dip in the field. Despite fierce spring rains the day before, the patch of earth where he stands is barely moist.

Yet federal officials whose boots had never walked here declared this field and others nearby as wetlands, triggering restrictions on what Koeller and his neighbors in western Illinois can do with their land.

Little did the government realize the resentment it would stir up, turning the rich soils of the Mississippi River bottomlands into ground zero in the fledgling property rights movement.

"These weren't swamps or places where turtles, frogs and ducks live; nothing like it. This was our property; and with a stroke of a pen, it was gone," says Koeller.

Not for long.

Starting in 1987, Koeller led Pike County, Ill., farmers on a crusade against the government's new wetlands program. They were early enlistees in a property rights movement that now is close to changing the fundamental relationship between government and landowners in this country.

To conservationists, the prospect of this change threatens two decades of environmental laws. Every government action to protect the health, safety or welfare of the people could trigger a new cost - compensating disadvantaged property owners.

To Koeller and his neighbors, that would be fine. The problem, to them, was the ease with which the federal government made new rules. The enemy was the Soil Conservation Service, the Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Environmental Protection Agency - all of which had a hand in a new government manual for choosing wetlands for federal protection.

With the aid of aerial photography, the government declared over 2,000 acres of Pike County new wetlands. Farmer Jim Gay calls it the "glancing duck theory." Gay says: "If there might be water there and the duck flying overhead might glance down and see it, then the federal government thinks it should be a wetland."

For farmers, the wetland designation meant prohibitions on draining fields, improving them for farming or changing them in any way. The maps were mailed out on April Fool's Day, 1991. To the Illinoisans, it was no joke.

They raised such a ruckus that the government sent a special team to hear their appeals. Koeller and others won the appeals. g

Pike County, Ill., became the American Farm Bureau's emblem for the dangers of a government that tramples on property rights. In July 1991, Koeller, Gay and Pike County Farm Bureau director Blake Roderick raised their concerns at a news conference in Washington. Shortly afterward, then-President George Bush ordered the new wetlands system scrapped.

The Midwestern farmers were not alone. Coastal dwellers complained that wetlands designations slowed development. Mining and timber interests said they were constrained by protection of endangered species. Neighbors to national parks griped that the government "locked up" land around them.

Recently, riding the crest of anti-government sentiment, property rights turned into a full-fledged political force with devotees that range from militia leaders to presidential contenders.

Pro-property rights bills have been filed in every state legislature and passed in a few. In Congress, a property rights proposal passed the U.S. House as part of the "Contract with America," and a similar plan will be taken up by the Senate. Each would require the government to pay landowners compensation if the value of their property is diminished by a government regulation.

Under the House-passed bill, if a rule protecting a wetland or an endangered species forced Jim Koeller to take land out of production or reduced the value of any portion of his land by 25 percent, Koeller would be entitled to an equivalent payment from the government.

The Senate version would raise the payment threshold to one-third but allow compensation for any federal regulation, not just wetlands and endangered species.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

THIS LAND IS MY LAND. . . CITIZENS, AGENCIES SQUARE OFF OVER PROPERTY RIGHTS Series: THE CONTRACT AND YOU
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.