Should property rights be suspended to preserve remaining forested land in and about major cities?

[wattekinson86]

Suspended if favor of preservation as nature preserves and city parks. U don't know what U got until it's gone!

[kalvin71]

Suspended if favor of preservation as nature preserves and city parks. U don't know what U got until it's gone!

You can't "suspend" property rights according to the US constitution.


You can use private money or allocate tax money to purchase such tracts of land under eminent domain. It is just a valid use of such law as using it to acquire land for military bases or strategic metal mining. Much more valid than the conservatives who wish to use it to build shopping malls.

[sampson]

What is the balance between individual rights, and the good of the collective?
If forested land belongs to the government, then it can be controlled by the majority or their elected representatives, but if the land belongs to individuals, then there is a problem with eminent domain seizing private land, for other than schools or necessary government buildings or roads.
When a group of people can control the private use of private property then individual rights no longer exist and the government has become something other than a true republic or democracy.

[ahanu]

It's not a suspension of property rights, it's called zoning. Where I live, they have a lot of laws limiting growth for the sake of preserving forest, parks, keep things from getting too crowded.

Something they should have done in the Southern California area where I used to live which is now pretty much just concrete and asphalt and smog.

Lots of cities are putting up growth restrictions, limiting how crowded housing is, and establishing preserves of forests, etc.

However, if they change zoning significantly - forcing property that could be built on to be nothing but a forest, then they would probably have to do eminent domain and take the property. But if the property is zoned for building, but they use the zoning to limit how much you can build on that property, then they probably don't have to pay for the land.