What Matt comments on makes come to mind the old stream issue: One guy wants
to do what he wants on his property, which for example may be an activity
which could lead to severe degradation of a stream....
Meanwhile, downstream, we have someone who has their property damaged from
the guy upstream... Upstream "Rights" are protected, but what about the
guy's rights downstream? (essentially, we all live "downstream")
I always thought this was more of a responsibility issue that people mistake
for "rights" The bottom line here... the environment always gets the short
end of the stick.
Ohio's "home-rule" laws need severe updating, and not just by boards or task
forces consisting of the development community.
Rob C.
Mahoning River drainage,
Ohio - N.A.
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------
/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes
/ Association (NANFA). Comments made on this list do not necessarily
/ reflect the beliefs or goals of NANFA. For more information about NANFA,
/ visit http://www.nanfa.org Please make sure all posts to nanfa-l are
/ consistent with the guidelines as per
/ http://www.nanfa.org/guidelines.shtml To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get
/ help, visit the NANFA email list home page and archive at
/ http://www.nanfa.org/email.shtml