>Would it be possible to find/create an `overlay' map of sorts that would
>show where private mineral rights in Latah county are located? How much
>of the proposed wildlife habitat (if any) might someday be subject to the
>exercise of these mineral rights?
It would be possible, although with considerable research and expense.
The most basic of map coverages--that showing property ownership--does
not exist electronically for Latah County (at least not as of a
few years ago).
> While I agree that wildlife habitat concerns may be equal to those of
>farming, grazing or development, it doesn't seem fair to restrict the
>surface rights if the county has no jurisdiction to equally restrict the
>subsurface rights.
While the county cannot restrict subsurface rights per se, it can
control surface mining activities that attempt to exercise subsurface
rights. If I'm not mistaken, I think most surface mining/extraction
activities (for example,a rock quarry) would require the issuance
of a special use permit from the county since most land is zoned
Ag/Forestry. Thus, the county does have the de facto authority to
regulate mineral extraction.
> Another concern I had while reading the article; what prevents owners of
>land in these habitat areas from clear cutting (or even responsibly
>thinning) their land to the point that it is no longer wildlife habitat?
>How much control will it take to achieve these goals?
IMO, there isn't much to prevent the private landowner from
exercising his/her desire to clearcut the land. Idaho does have
a Forest Practices Act that requires private landowners to engage
in "best management practices" for forestry. The act, however,
is quite discretionary,and where it is not, it is difficult to
have enforced.
> Would tax incentives be a better tool to achieve and
> maintain healthy wildlife habitat in the county?
I think it would help. I keep coming back to the cleacut
on Paradise Ridge several years ago. Why was that necessary?
Some residents might have opted to provide tax
relief to the (absentee) landowner rather than endure that
ugly and poor example of forestry. On the other hand, some
people believe that government should protect us from such
practices through regulation and that we should not be
paying people to do the right thing. This is the classical
dilemma that manifests itself at all levels of government
in many different areas.
Incentives to promote conservation appear to work
reaonably well in agriculture with the CRP program,
although it is very costly. Idaho Dept. of Fish & Game
has an incentive program for landowners to create
and maintain wildlife habitat. I think that has worked
reasonably well. On the other hand, tax incentives
in California to protect Ag lands from encroaching
development have failed miserably. So, the answer,
as usual, is that it all depends...
-- Greg Brown (gregb@siu.edu) Assistant Professor,Dept. of Forestry Southern Illinois University Carbondale, IL 62901-4411 (618) 453-7465 FAX: (618) 453-7475