In my previous op-ed, I explained where natural resource inventories come from; in this one, I will explain why they are an infringement on private property rights.
Chances are that your town has done a natural resource inventory (NRI); most have. At its core, an NRI is a map that is laid over your town that identifies such features as open space, wetlands, waterbodies and streams, ground water, conservation lands, soil composition, significant wildlife habitats and rare and uncommon plant and animal species.
The state RSA that enables and governs the implementation of NRIs is 36-A, “Conservation Commissions,” which states that a conservation commission “shall” conduct an NRI to include lands owned by the state or lands owned by the town or city. This RSA also allows private land to be included in the NRI, but only if the landowner gives the town permission to do so.
The problem is that these NRIs are being overlayed over entire towns, including private property whose owners choose not to participate. To exacerbate this problem, no one I have spoken to knows this is happening.
This is an issue as it pertains to your property rights because the intent of these NRIs is to protect and conserve the areas that they Identify, and it empowers your town to use them for that purpose by embedding NRIsin the town’s governing documents.
I will use my property of Roxbury and our draft NRI as an example. I own 30 acres at the end of one of the town’s narrow gravel roads. The land is comprised of equal parts woods and hay fields. There is one residential home on the property. Under existing town zoning regulations, there exists the potential for a subdivision of the land to create a building lot that would allow for a second residential home. I did not give the town permission to conduct its NRI on my property.
Roxbury’s draft NRI openly states that the document supports the goal to conserve and protect open space and limit development. To accomplish this, the crafters of this NRI have assigned 15 separate “Significant Wildlife Habitats” that encompass our entire town.
One of these habitats is “Grassland”. My property is almost entirely classified as “Grassland”. Under the designation of Grassland, the NRI states, “Roxbury’s grasslands include hayfields and meadows. They support numerous species of greatest conservation need, and therefore, are some of Roxbury’s most significant habitats for wildlife”.
A ”species of greatest conservation need” is a designation from the NH Wildlife Action Plan that refers to a species that is most at risk, experiencing declining numbers and habitat loss, and requires immediate conservation action.
The draft NRI then goes on to state that the state’s Wildlife Action Plan has developed three classifications of what it calls “Exemplary Habitat”. This is land that is in pristine condition and prioritized for conservation. There are three categories in this classification: those that are considered a resource to the state, those that are considered a resource to the region, and those that are considered a resource to the town. My property has been identified as a resource for the region.
The draft NRI then goes on to state that the contractor who conducted the NRI has documented numerous rare and uncommon plant and animal species in Roxbury, including 22 species of “greatest conservation need.” However, because of confidentiality agreements with the NH Natural Heritage Bureau and with the landowners who allowed field surveys to be conducted on their land, the contractor will not disclose the information.
Lastly, the draft NRI identifies what it calls “Important Agricultural Soils.” This is land that is considered the most productive land for farming. This classification is divided into three categories, “Prime Farmland”, “Farmland of Statewide Significance” and “Farmland of Local Significance”. My property has been designated both as ‘Prime Farmland” and “Farmland of Statewide Importance.”
The Federal Act that created these farmland classifications, “The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981” was established in part to ensure that land that it designated as prime, or of state and local significance would not be converted from farmland to non-agricultural uses.
At the end of the draft NRI is a list of recommendations from the contractor who conducted it to town officials which states that the NRI should be used in the town’s land use planning. They recommend that the town use it to protect the rare species that it has identified and the habitat that these species use.
They further recommend that the town incorporate the NRI into all the town’s governing documents including, the Master Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Flood Plain Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations and Site Plan Review, as well as implementing innovative land use planning techniques to achieve this end.
According to the legislation that enables an NRI to be conducted, it is to be limited in scope to lands that the town owns, and private property where the landowner chose to participate, but we can now see that it has been applied to the whole town, including landowners that chose to not participate.
There is a migration happening in the language of private property rights. The crafters of this new language acknowledge that it is your property, for now, but they also state that it is the town’s property and even the State’s property. How do you not see that they whisper, it is all for the common good.
The end game of this ideology is feudalism, where you become the new sharecropper and the town hall the new company store. This ideology, its crafter and their complicit dupes must be checked hard. In my next, and final, op-ed on Natural Resource Inventories I will discuss the strategies we can use to combat them.
