Guest Column
Montana Property Rights, Traditions Need Protection
An assault on private property rights by the government and special interest groups is hurting Montanans -- and trampling on tradition.
By Guest Writer, 5-21-09
Montana has long had some admirable traditions concerning property rights. Most of us grew up asking before we went hunting or fishing, and most property owners were eager to allow their neighbors recreational access. We got along pretty well with each other based on the principle of what’s mine is mine, and what’s yours is yours.
That principle seems to be fading. Some segments of state and local government, and myriad private special interest groups, are pushing agendas that are having a very negative impact on how we can use our property. And the impacts just aren’t on big farmers and ranchers—homeowners are finding themselves under attack as well.
I belong to an organization called United Property Owners of Montana (UPOM). We were formed last year in response to the troubling trend we see in rural Montana where it’s becoming harder and harder to make a living off the land. That trend is a direct result of the multi-fronted assault on private property rights.
The impact is we’re in jeopardy of losing the unique culture and heritage that makes Montana such a great place to live, work, and recreate. It all goes back to those traditions based on respect that we all grew up with—the traditions that are now disappearing.
That’s why all property owners need to band together to preserve our Montana traditions. It doesn’t matter if you’re a homeowner or a big rancher—the erosion of one person’s rights affect us all by making it that much easier the next time a new rule, regulation, or lawsuit is proposed to diminish the next person’s rights. At the legislature, every lawmaker says they’re for property rights. But a look at the votes shows there’s a real difference in thinking about how much control government should have over how we use our property.
UPOM lobbied at the legislature in favor of dozens of bills that would reinforce the rights we all enjoy as Montanans. But it seems like we spent just as much time fending off assaults from various state agencies and wealthy special interest groups who want more control over what you can do with your property.
We’ve compiled what UPOM did during the legislature in a report, including individual scores for legislators based on committee and floor votes. The report is easy to find on our website.
Though these bills usually don’t get the big headlines, many of them were some of the most contentious of the session. We’d encourage all Montanans to take a look at how their individual legislators really voted on property rights and compare it with how they say they vote on property rights. Oftentimes there’s a big difference.
It doesn’t matter if it’s a bill on water rights or the state fish and game, all property rights issues affect all property owners in Montana. If we sit by and allow someone else’s rights to be diminished, we just make it that much easier for our rights to be impinged down the road.
Chuck Denowh is the policy director for the United Property Owners of Montana.
New West welcomes guest columns of all kinds. Submit yours to editor@newwest.net.
[End of article]I see no real point being made in this article. I challenge the author to justify his statments with some facts. In the meantime, a quote to consider:
All political power is vested in and derived from the people. All government of right originates with the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole.
Anyone know where I got this? Maybe the author should do some further reading... there is a lot of other neat stuff in there too.
No examples huh? From the one example on your website, you are trying to limit access access to publicly owned streams. From some of the outfitters and stuff that are in your group, I am going to take a wild guess and say another privacy issue you have a problem with is allowing access to public lands that are walled off by your private lands and you want to use as your personal fiefdoms. This is pretty common among major landowners in the West.
Comment By Chuck, 5-21-09How about another quote to consider: Government has no other end but the preservation of property.
Tim, if you have questions about any of the statements made in the article, please specify. It's not very fair to cast aspersions on the factuality without pointing to specific things you don't think are right.
flounder, don't make things up--no where on our web site did you say that we're trying to limit access to streams. In fact, we supported this session's stream access bill.
We don't oppose public access to public land either, and frankly I don't know where you got that notion. In fact, we've been working against the road closures on public land that have done so much to limit hunting access for Montanans, which puts more pressure on private landowners.
It's pretty obvious you'd rather ignore the facts and spread hate.
This article is lacking in anyspecifics to make a cogent case for Montana property rights preservation. How about some facts? "Troubling trend" and numerous other vague words and phrases are simply a few feathers short of a wing.
Comment By Tim, 5-22-09Here are three thesis statements that are not supported with facts in the article:
-Some segments of state and local government, and myriad private special interest groups, are pushing agendas that are having a very negative impact on how we can use our property.
What are the agendas, and what are the negative impacts on how we can use our property, and for that matter, when has government ever been free of special interests? Last time I checked, Farm and Ranch interests wield significant political power and are well represented on all levels of Montana government.
-We were formed last year in response to the troubling trend we see in rural Montana where it’s becoming harder and harder to make a living off the land. That trend is a direct result of the multi-fronted assault on private property rights.
My father is a rural Montana beet\bean farmer or as he prefers ‘a small business owner’. You’re right that it’s getting a lot harder to live off the land. I‘ve never heard that lost property rights are the cause of the problem. I hear a lot about high taxes, high energy prices, high cost of health care, bad weather, bad equipment, problems with bugs, varmints and weeds, competition with corporate sugar farms, but never about property rights. Care to first, define the assault on property rights and second, explain how that’s making it harder for Dad to make a living?
-The impact is we’re in jeopardy of losing the unique culture and heritage that makes Montana such a great place to live, work, and recreate. It all goes back to those traditions based on respect that we all grew up with—the traditions that are now disappearing.
Maybe you could explain this heritage and culture that we are losing. Maybe the tradition of ‘what mine is mine and what’s yours is yours’? That’s not the Montana I grew up in. It’s not the Montana my father still farms, and I don’t believe it’s the Montana our forefathers envisioned when they wrote the Constitution of the State of Montana, which is where that quote came from.
Mr. Denowh, private property rights, by themselves, aren't what make Montana unique or special. To my mind, it's the spirit of community and willingness to help a neighbor that make Montana special. Private property rights include the right by native Montanans to sell out, including the right to screw your neighbors by deciding who you want to sell to.
Comment By flounder, 5-22-09You supported a stream access bill that as I can gather allows landowners to fence through public right of ways without making any allowance for access. Now I wouldn't care about that, being I am fit enough to hop any fence, but I think back to when I would visit my 85 yr old great grandmother in Augusta way back in the day, and whether this would have limited our fishing excursions.
Comment By john, 5-24-09land can never really be owned. we live off what it provides, but it was here before we were and will be after we're gone, living things in toto, not just people or montanans. don't get too worked up about the shared myth of ownership/value.
Comment By Mickey Garcia, 5-25-09If "land can never really be owned" then a person shouldn't have to pay property taxes on the land.
Comment By Mickey Garcia, 5-25-09Before the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution was finalized, what was "Life, Liberty and Property" became "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness". Private Property Rights as given to individuals in the 5th and 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution have been almost completely nullified by exclusionary zoning and regulatory takings by local government to the point were property value has to have been reduced to almost nothing before a local exclusionary zoning regulation can be considered a taking. Ironic, considering the fact that zoning and regulation appeared at the beginning of the 20th century in order to protect existing residential home owners from incompatible uses locating next door and devaluing their property investment. Presently, all the Government needs from you as a property owner is property taxes. The Government will take care or everything else. The Government will tell you exactly what you can and cannot do with "your" property all because the Supreme Court believes that the police powers of local government supersede any mere right that individuals have to be compensated for the loss of their property.
This article was printed from www.newwest.net at the following URL: http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/montana_property_rights_traditions_need_protection/C35/L35/