Our Languishing Public Land by Robert H. Nelson was merely based on doing away with public lands. Throughout this reading it is mentioned many times that the government is just wasting their money on the upkeep for public lands. If the government sells their land to private owners that they will be saving a tremendous amount of money, which would help with our national debt. All in all the message from Our Languishing Public Land is for the government to sell their land for private ownership, since it is just costing the government more and more money that they can’t afford to spend. Throughout This Sovereign Land, Daniel Kemmis believes that having public lands is important to the western states. Kemmis also believes that by having public lands will not only benefit the community, but benefit our economic …show more content…
Coming from a family who ranches I understand the necessity of public lands. If we don’t have grazing lands for our cattle then we won’t have enough feed for the cattle causing them to have to ration the feed or they would have to be auctioned off at the sale barn. Without our public lands then we would not be able to graze and since we wouldn’t be able to graze then all of the local families who has bought our beef for 5+ years will have to find a different supplier. Public lands are great but having them in control of the government is similar to not having the land in the first place. According to Our Languishing Public Land by Robert H. Nelson, the government spends million of dollars on the land and even after taxing the community who uses it they still come up short millions of dollars. I agree with Robert Nelson that the government spends too much money on public lands, however I do not agree that all public lands owned by the government should be sold to private owners to take away our public lands. I agree with Daniel Kemmer that the lands should be in control of the
For around three cents per acre, 15 million in total, the land would have been as if one was giving land away in modern days. But even when the purchase was made, it was a steal. But this is exactly what was needed, land, and more land. A place to grow larger, somewhere to call ours. But even then that we bought the land, we did not know what was upon the land. To even have any knowledge of what was in the land, there were ones who were paid to be sent out to see what the land had to offer us. This was a very scary risk for him as he didn’t know if the land would have anything to offer. Though these peoples main purpose was to map out the land for it to be sent out. But if anything were to come up wrong in the purchase, Jefferson’s reputation would be ruined. Not only would they think that his opinions were useless, but he would no longer be a man anyone will
This essay is about the land rights of of Australia and how Eddie Marbo was not happy about his land been taken away from him. In May 1982 Eddie Marbo and four other people of the Murray Islands began to take action in the high court of Australia and confirming their land rights. Eddie Marbo was a torres islander who thought that the Australian laws were wrong and who went to fight and try and change them. He was born in 1936 on Mer which is known as Murray Island. The British Crown in the form of the colony of Queensland became of the sovereign of the islands when they were annexed in1978. They claimed continued enjoyment of there land rights and that had not been validly extinguished by the sovereign. (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2012)
In the year of 1862, Abraham Lincoln signed the Morrill Land Grant Act providing funds for the creation of land-grant schools in each state in the United States of America. Specifically, this act gave each state “30,000 acres…to establish a college that would promote education in agriculture, mechanics, classical studies and military tactics” (Morrill Act). The act provided each state with government funds to purchase the land, but the state itself was required to find the capital to erect the buildings. The Morrill Act was initially introduced to President Buchanan, but he vetoed it based on his belief that it was “financially draining for the Treasury, a threat to existing colleges, and unconstitutional” (Morrill, J.). On the second occasion
The concept of eminent domain is the condemnation of property for the public’s well being or good for private use is not the original intention and should not be used in this way. Private corporations and individuals are using the initial purpose was for the acquisition of land for the building of railroads and highways. The use of eminent domain has changed over the years by law, government and legal interpretations. These changes have allowed private interest groups to petition the state and local governments for eminent domain to be declared on property where the owners refuse to sell. Each states position on eminent domain is decided by the legislature and the voters of the state for use by private corporations and individuals. The claim by the corporations and individuals is that there projects is for the good of the public which plays of the condemnation of property and roads of being for the public’s well being. The use of eminent domain for the acquisition of land to build the Keystone Pipeline does not fall within the confines of for the public’s well being.
The United States, from its inception had a lust for real estate. From the original chants of "manifest destiny" to the calls for the annexation of Indian territories, America has been driven to acquire land. In this country's youth, land was needed for economic expansion; however, by the end of the 19th century, the entire continental United States had been in possession and the citizenry of this country turned their eyes out to sea. The United States no longer sought new lands to farm and work nor did they need new areas for their geological resources; the motives had changed. The United States was now driven by the temptations of world power and political supremacy. The self-absorbed citizenry looked upon their intrusion into foreign areas as a moral obligation; to spread the words of democracy and Christ throughout the world.
Because of the amount of overdeveloped areas that are now vacant, the desire to renovate old vacant properties and land plots has all but disappeared. What if there was a beneficial solution to unused land plots in need of rehab and redesign? What if, instead of paving over every leftover inch of grass and dirt in urban areas to make room for more parking for our daily commuting polluters, we instead reinvent that land for a purpose that is both beneficial to our
Despite protecting millions of acres of wilderness, this act provided for the numerous groups of people affected by the establishment of this law. Stipulations regarding the use of protected lands by private landowners were made. People living inside the park lands were guaranteed the right to subsistence hunting and fishing, as well as the guaranteed access to their lands. This right of access is the main concern for this argument, as it is a major management issue for park officials and land owners alike.
The rezoning of 125th street has been a topic of controversy and has yet to be approved. The Department of City Planning believes rezoning of 125th street will bring positive economic changes. I personally believe that these changes would negatively affect the residents and business owners of Harlem. According to the New York City’s Planning Commission, the rezoning will bring new business and housing. Residents and business owners disagree because they believe this plays a bigger role in promoting further “gentrification.” I believe that Harlem should be able to keep its cultural heritage while still promoting and modifying economic growth.
...y which to govern it. The open frontier provided an outlet away from government and towards the individual, both politically and economically. On the most practical level, cheap land, requiring little capital investment, was always available in the territories and they offered a constant opportunity for economic advance as a result. Politically, the idea of frontier resonated with Americans as a place of almost anarchic individual freedom. The closing of the frontier symbolized both the end of the kind of unregulated economic growth and the distinct meaning of freedom that had been the hallmarks of the 19th Century.
Mr. Middleton, a journalist, compiled an article describing, in his opinion, the flaws of the Endangered Species Act. He then attempts to back his opinion with studied analyses, researched facts, and testimonies. To summarize Middleton’s (2011) perspective, “Rather than provide incentives for conservation and environmental stewardship, the Endangered Species Act punishes those whose property contains land that might be used as habitat by endangered and threatened species” (p. 79). This quote is broad and generalized yet draws in readers and forces Middleton to spend the rest of the article backing this statement with more logic based facts.
During the 18th and 19th centuries, what we now know as the western United States was under much contention with the federal government. This period was very difficult for the leaders of the government to decide how to divide up the vast regions of land in the west. It seems impossible to think of Silicon Valley, Oregon or even Washington as being barren, unsettled territory. But just a few centuries ago, those in power were making influential decisions that would effect us today.
I think that he is trying to say that wilderness is something to be cherished and loved, because it gives definition and meaning to his life. His whole life was spent looking after and trying to preserve the wilderness. This is a plea for the preservation. I think that Leopold believes one day a lot of what we have today and he want it to be preserved so that in the future people have the chance to see there cultural inheritance like our ancestors let us see by preserving things.
When the West opened up to new settlers, it was a huge change for all. The West was home to not only people but an abundance of resources that impacted us economically. Moving to The West for people was either a win or lose, to say the least. It seemed as though the development of The West brought promises to benefit individuals but not all. One particular program known as the “The Homestead Act, that granted 160 acres of federal land to any applicant and improved the property” (Henretta 475) seemed to be the big attraction for settlers in this area.
The American frontier is comprised of the geography, history, and cultural expression of life in this revolution of American westward expansion that began with English colonial settlements in the early 17th century and ended with the adoption of the last mainland territories as states in the early 20th century. Immense attention is primarily targeted towards the western part of the United States during the 19th century, a period widely known as the Old West, or the Wild West. I wanted to know more about the Wild West, so I decided to interview a farmer by the name of David Smith. I asked, “David, why did you decide to move to the West?” he replied, “I need better land to grow my produce. The land and soil back in the East has been stripped of its resources and nutrients. My family, along with many others can no longer live in an area like that, so we left.” After knowing this, I then asked him how the East got to this state so quickly, he tells me that “The east is also very overpopulated, especially where I live, Boston, Massachusetts. As a farmer with a large family, I need more living space and space to grow my crops to support my gradually growing family as well.” I finally asked him if there were any other reasons why he decided to move to the West and he tells me, “I have also received many letters from friends and family who tell me that life in the frontier is much better than life back in the East, especially for a farmer like me.” I realized that with the many risks that these people take, there also come many rewards. By living in the West, you essentially began a new life there; with the free land to use for farming and housing as well. As well as the gold that they were promised to find in the west, along with the cre...
Land Art is created by combining art and nature in a complex way. Land art is also known as Earth Art or Earthworks. This art is designed directly in the physical landscapes with the help of natural substances and organic media like leaves, stones, soil, rocks, water, logs, etc. Mechanical earth moving equipment is also used by few artists. Artists show their reaction against industrialization and urbanization through the land art. Before the origin of modern land art, it has been already created by artists for last centuries. But this land art movement became popular somewhere between 1960 and 1970 in America and soon adopted by the artists all over the world. The main part of this art is reforming and redesigning of the landscape. As it is created by moving things around, adding some available materials and imported substances to the landscape so it becomes impossible to move it from one place to another. It is only developed to make some beautiful change in the environment for sometime as in the end it just degenerates. Some land artworks are very short-lived; just stay for a few hours or days, while others just designed in open and left uncovered so that they can be deformed by erosion or wind over time.