Whereas conservation easements are actually covenants that stipulate a negative use of the land; they prohibit the landowner from acting in a manner that will change the ecological, open, natural, scenic or historical aspects of the land; and this negative use will include obligations imposed upon the landowner; and,
Whereas by granting a conservation easement, a property owner is not only restricting the future use of his property, he is actually conveying an interest in the property to a government agency or non-governmental organization (NGO) such as The Nature Conservancy. The conveyance of that interest results in a reduction in value of the property because it creates an unusual type of undivided interest in the property that will give rise to future conflicts; and,
Whereas, one of the biggest drawbacks to conservation easements is that inflexible decisions made today could inversely impact and most likely defeat the right of the landowner or his heirs to make critical decisions concerning their needs in the future. Few farming operations are void of financing, and one of the most often used forms of collateral is the property. Be prepared for a reduced loan value in proportion to residual fair market value of the land after the conveyance of a conservation easement. If for some reason, you or your heirs cannot continue farming, the easement may render title to your property either unmarketable or greatly reduced in value to the private sector; and,
Whereas, livestock grazing may continue provided that it does not cause significant deterioration of stream banks, water quality, vegetative communities, or soil structure and composition. (What is significant deterioration of all these resources? Who makes that determination and what quantity and/or quality measurements will be used?); and,
Whereas, the grantee (The Nature Conservancy or government agency) has the right to enter upon the property at reasonable times (not defined) in order to monitor property owner (whose status is now that of a tenant) compliance with and otherwise enforce the terms of this easement. (This gives The Nature Conservancy or government agency absolute authority over the property.) If The Nature Conservancy or government agency determines that the property owner is in violation of the terms of the easement, The Nature Conservancy or government agency can demand corrective action sufficient to cure the violation. If the violation has caused injury to the property, the property owner will be responsible for all costs to restore the property to the condition desired by the easement holder. If the property owner fails to take corrective action within a short time frame, appropriate legal action will be initiated. All legal costs incurred by the easement holder in enforcing the terms of the conservation easement including, without limitation, costs of suit and attorneys’ fees and any cost of restoration of the property will be borne by the property owner;
Therefore, LAND urges and insists that our State Legislature pass new and corrective legislation to keep conveyances such as conservation easements from being placed on North Dakota lands. These easements in affect remove control from state and local level to national level.
Whereas, the passage of Swampbuster allowed government agencies such as NRCS, USF&WS, Corps of Engineers, FSA and others to impose restrictions on and otherwise encumber private land property; and,
Whereas, these government agencies need to have their jurisdiction confined to problems of a regional nature--such as flow of water downstream, contamination, dredging, etc.; and,
Whereas, in keeping with the intent of the 5th amendment of our Constitution there is a demand that a landowner be free to do as he sees fit within his property borders as long as he doesn't change properties beyond his borders;
Therefore, LAND urges and insists Congress pass new and corrective legislation to keep government agencies within their proper jurisdiction.
LAND supports abolishment of the Governor’s Advisory Panel and elimination of the Governor’s veto authority, so that final authority for approving all land transactions from private ownership to non-profit organizations and government agencies rests with county commissioners.
LAND supports buy back provisions in any conservation easement contract.
Whereas, America was founded upon the belief that private property is the foundation of all liberty, and in the words of our founders, “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and there is not force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence;” and
Whereas, private property in America is seriously jeopardized by the growing inventory of government owned land, and by the increasing regulatory control of land use; and
Whereas, federal, state, and local governments already own approximately 40% of the total land area of the United States;
Therefore, LAND supports the following actions:
Acquisitions of land by the federal government shall be offset by divestiture of not less than equal acreage, and of equal value, from the federal inventory within the affected county, township or parish;
Congress shall carefully monitor and control the acquisition of private real property by the federal government through annual, specific appropriations and authorizations. No dedicated funds should be established to acquire private real property.
The federal government shall immediately adopt a policy of PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS PROTECTION as the first criterion in the consideration of land use regulations and legislation.
The federal government shall not acquire real property in any state without the consent of the county commissioners thereof.
1999 RESOLUTIONS
These resolutions were passed by LAND members voting during the business portion of the annual meeting.
1. LAND believes farmers should be able to take necessary steps to keep wildlife from destroying personal property and/or be compensated for loss.
2. LAND supports renewed efforts to develop a locally managed wetlands policy that recognizes the interests of private landowners.
3. LAND supports the concept that government agencies and non-profit organizations who own or manage land, be required to maintain the land under the same laws, rules and regulations which impact private property owners, i.e. noxious weed regulations.
4. LAND supports the efforts of landowners using federal lands to obtain congressional legislation preserving their historic and legal rights to the use of these lands.
5. LAND supports that all conservation easements be limited to ten years in length.
6. Whereas LAND feels landowners are some of the original conservationists and will continue to be very conservation minded as it is essential to the success and profitability of the agricultural industry; and
Whereas, there are very serious problems with the federal and state agencies that have unlimited powers of both land acquisitions and/or perpetual easements.
Be it resolved, that LAND supports alternative methods concerning land acquisitions and easements such as short-term easements and full compensation in lieu of taxes; and,
Be it further resolved, that LAND opposes funding for further land acquisition by federal and state agencies.
WHEREAS, the current emphasis of the NRCS seems to be wetland preservation and wildlife habitat enhancement;
LAND supports that NRCS return to its original mission to enhance and ensure the health of soil and water.
2. WHEREAS, much private and public land in farming communities is set aside for non-farm uses such as wildlife habitat, water storage for flood control, water bank and CRP; and,
WHEREAS, this land can host wildlife such as ducks, deer or blackbirds, which are detrimental and financially burdensome to the agricultural community;
LAND supports policy that agencies responsible for increasing wildlife populations take financial responsibility for wildlife depredation to farmers and ranchers.
3. WHEREAS, the concept of mitigation does not compensate the property owner for the taking of his property;
LAND opposes all forms of mitigation.
4. WHEREAS, it has been agreed by the 1998 Governors Wetlands Working Group that North Dakota’s farmers need more flexibility in managing their wetlands;
LAND supports allowing landowners to combine and consolidate wetlands as long as the water doesn’t leave their property.
5. LAND supports the exemption of sheetwater from regulation.
6. WHEREAS, private property owners are expected to pay their property taxes in full for the public good;
LAND supports the use of Duck Stamp program funds to pay taxes and maintenance on lands purchased through Duck Stamps, so general funds are not redistributed for a wildlife program.
7. LAND supports the concept of allowing USFWS to sell land and easements previously acquired.
8. LAND supports the elimination of the $25 million additional funding to the ND Wetalnds Trust in the reformulated Garrison Diversion plan. Should this funding remain in place, LAND will be on record in oppostion to the project.
2. Whereas American farmers need to continually improve the efficiency of their land and operations to compete in a global economy; and Whereas drainage and/or filling of nuisance wetlands can enhance farming efficiency and often enhance wildlife habitat; and Whereas such improvements increase land valuations which benefit all of society; LAND supports the repeal of all regulations barring development on privately owned land as long as water does not move, or increase water flow, beyond the property owner's borders.
3. LAND supports returning the Conservation Reserve Program to its original purpose of soil conservation.
4. Whereas, some government agencies including FSA and NRCS, state that 85-90% of regulation infractions of their rules are reported to them by neighbors and other farmers; LAND supports that the accused be told the identity of the original complaintant, so this might stop much frivolous or minor complaints.
5. Whereas government provided classroom instructional material has the effect of furthering the agency's political agenda; and Whereas the content and structure of the lessons, such as those provided by the North Dakota Forest Service and the USFWS's "Wet and Wild" program, present only the agency's view and not the landowners; and Whereas the format of such instructional materials provides no opportunity for students to question the consequences of adopting their plan, thus showing their argument that these materials provided to teachers promotes critical thinking is erroneous; LAND opposes government agencies providing classroom instructional materials for children.
6. Whereas the stated goal of the North Dakota Wildlife Institute is to have one million acres of land west of the Missouri River to remain ungrazed; and to assess the impact of this radical departure from normal management practices; LAND supports that trial ungrazing studies be conducted on the North and South units of Theodore Roosevelt Park.
7. Whereas the funds derived from the sale of duck stamps may by law be used to purchase land and easements; LAND supports changing the law to require use of the same funds to pay the taxes on such land in full, plus pay for operating and maintenance costs.
8. Whereas the use of bunch type grasses are grasshopper friendly; and Whereas the use of these varieties are cost-prohibitive; LAND supports the use of readily available sod forming grasses as an adequate practice for CRP land.
9. Whereas thousands of acres of good North Dakota cropland has been under water since 1993; and Whereas the taxes on this land have been paid in lieu of income producing crops; LAND supports the adjustment of the NDSU valuation model to temper ag land value increases.
10. Whereas the government would like to control even more land and waterways; and Whereas one of these methods is to include our lakes, rivers or streams in a special designation; LAND opposes the inclusion of any North Dakota lake, river or steam in any special designation.
11. Whereas defendants in a lawsuit with a government agency are put to great economic cost; and Whereas legal action is sometimes taken for punitive and malicious reasons; LAND supports that all legal costs, attorney's fees and other actual damages and expenses, such as lost wages and income, be paid by the offending agency when the action against the defendant is found to be unjustified.
12. LAND supports the strict enforcement of control of grasshoppers and noxious weeds on CRP land and land owned by state and federal agencies and non-profit organizations.
