Art Triggs
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Dutchess Co.,NY
-
Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.
Taking private land
- Thread starter Art Triggs
- Start date
WB9YZU
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Madison, WI
I see both sides. The Ecologist side of me says "Save the land", The Jeeper side of me says "Public Land should be Public Access".
There is a point where the sides meet.
What really scares me is neither the Ecologists, OR the Public Access folks, but Land Developers!
I see more farms converted into Sub Divisions in the middle of Tim-Buk-Tu than I can care to think about. These folks have no basic services (Fire, Police, Garbage collection) except what they sponge off a local town. Then they build these HUGE 3000sq ft houses and pay small amounts of taxes. My only satisfaction is that these folks driving their Chevy Suburbans and Caddys to town 50+ miles one way, are now paying $3.10 a Gallon!!
There is a point where the sides meet.
What really scares me is neither the Ecologists, OR the Public Access folks, but Land Developers!
I see more farms converted into Sub Divisions in the middle of Tim-Buk-Tu than I can care to think about. These folks have no basic services (Fire, Police, Garbage collection) except what they sponge off a local town. Then they build these HUGE 3000sq ft houses and pay small amounts of taxes. My only satisfaction is that these folks driving their Chevy Suburbans and Caddys to town 50+ miles one way, are now paying $3.10 a Gallon!!
roXJeepr
NAXJA Member #334
- Location
- Knoxville, TN
Welcome to communist America!
8Mud
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Central Germany
We used to live near the valley end of Topanga Canyon. Adjacent to our homestead (actually a small hobby farm), was a large tract of the Santa Monica mountains owned by the Wriggly's (the gum).
The Wriggly owned land was set aside as a bird and wildlife preserve, because it had a spring and year round water. After almost every fire, the developers would lobby for a change in the zoning, so they could developer the area. There argument was it´s burnt, no wildlife, a better use than desert, would be housing.
Grandma Wriggly would quietly tell the city of Malibu that she would null and void there 99 year leases, if they tried to rezone. Most of Malibu is leased not owned.
Our homestead after a fire, was bought by the county and added to the wildlife refuge (imminent domain) and is today a super market parking lot. I think the plan was to add to the refuge, there by having a legal say in it´s administration and or usage.
As a side note, there is a lone house between our old property and the Wriggly preserve that has a very political hands off sign attached to it. And on the other side of the Wriggly holding, is a nudist camp that is frequented by high rollers (of all flavors), that also seems immune. Much of the rest is owned by or controlled by the Topanga Indians or actually the Channel Island Indians, that claim the land.
Point of my ramble is, there are a whole lot of things going on that Joe citizen is completely unaware of. Property is one of the few hedges against inflation that actually work. If you are going to save today, for a retirement in 40 years chances are you´d have to save 8 times as much as you´d need today for the same life style as you have. Buying property and being lucky enough to hold onto it, you might break even or loose only say half of your savings to inflation.
I can´t help but think, as soon as the shine wears off of the wildlife conservation thing. A whole lot of people are going to become very rich developing the lands set aside now. Hey weren't the Clintons heavy into real estate?
Joe civilian kind of gets blown around in the wind, generated by the high rollers and there long range schemes.
Capital "Conservation", which means not letting inflation eat up your capital, is big business.
The Wriggly owned land was set aside as a bird and wildlife preserve, because it had a spring and year round water. After almost every fire, the developers would lobby for a change in the zoning, so they could developer the area. There argument was it´s burnt, no wildlife, a better use than desert, would be housing.
Grandma Wriggly would quietly tell the city of Malibu that she would null and void there 99 year leases, if they tried to rezone. Most of Malibu is leased not owned.
Our homestead after a fire, was bought by the county and added to the wildlife refuge (imminent domain) and is today a super market parking lot. I think the plan was to add to the refuge, there by having a legal say in it´s administration and or usage.
As a side note, there is a lone house between our old property and the Wriggly preserve that has a very political hands off sign attached to it. And on the other side of the Wriggly holding, is a nudist camp that is frequented by high rollers (of all flavors), that also seems immune. Much of the rest is owned by or controlled by the Topanga Indians or actually the Channel Island Indians, that claim the land.
Point of my ramble is, there are a whole lot of things going on that Joe citizen is completely unaware of. Property is one of the few hedges against inflation that actually work. If you are going to save today, for a retirement in 40 years chances are you´d have to save 8 times as much as you´d need today for the same life style as you have. Buying property and being lucky enough to hold onto it, you might break even or loose only say half of your savings to inflation.
I can´t help but think, as soon as the shine wears off of the wildlife conservation thing. A whole lot of people are going to become very rich developing the lands set aside now. Hey weren't the Clintons heavy into real estate?
Joe civilian kind of gets blown around in the wind, generated by the high rollers and there long range schemes.
Capital "Conservation", which means not letting inflation eat up your capital, is big business.
Last edited:
